The bill in question – the Workers (Definition and Rights) Bill 2017-2019, introduced by Chris Stephens MP for Glasgow South West in October – is to have its second reading in the House of Commons at a date yet to be confirmed ahead of going through to Committee stage, a report stage and finally a third reading before heading to the House of Lords ahead of receiving Royal Assent and passing into law. The draft bill was due to have its second reading last Friday (19 January).

Explaining the aim of the bill, Dr Sybille Steiner, partner solicitor at law firm Irwin Mitchell, told Recruiter that under this draft bill, a worker could only be employed on zero-hours terms where there was a specific agreement with their trade union. This goes further than recommendations made in Matthew Taylor’s ‘Good Work: The Taylor Review of Modern Working Practices’, she added.

“Time will tell whether the proposed bill will proceed to the Committee stage and whether the ban of zero-hour contracts will feature as part of the final bill.  

“The bill aims to provide more clarity on the recent gig-economy case law decisions, which have created uncertainty for employers and recruiters regarding the status of workers. If the bill passes both Houses, it would shift the commercial risk for flexible workers from workers to employers.”

Phillippa Canavan, senior associate at law firm Squire Patton Boggs, also told Recruiter it will have a particular affect on businesses that engage staff on zero-hour contracts and cannot, due to the nature of their business, provide seven days’ notice requests or cancellations, as proposed by the draft bill.

“When those employers ask their staff to perform work at short notice (less than seven days), they will be forced to pay 200% of their usual rate due to the short notice given. An employer will not be able to avoid the 200% rate by using agency workers. As a result, such employers are likely to veer away from the zero/minimal hours model so that they have sufficient internal resource (paid at their usual rates) to deal with the peaks and troughs of work. Such employers’ use of agency workers is likely to drop considerably.

“The bill is effectively designed to get more people into relatively stable and secure employment. It therefore goes out of its way to attack the zero-hours model; not banning it but simply making it wholly unworkable where staffing peaks and troughs occur at short notice, which is of course exactly why many employers use that model! Agencies whose businesses are based on the supply of people at short notice will therefore be very seriously prejudiced if the bill were to become law in its current form.

“Agencies will need to amend their payment terms with hirers to ensure they do not end up footing the bill for 200% of their own workers’ pay (plus other costs potentially eg. childcare/travel costs) where a hirer requires or cancels an assignment with less than seven days’ notice.”

• Comment below on this story. You can also tweet us to tell us your thoughts or share this story with a friend. Our editorial email is [email protected]