Skip to main content

1-20 of 3,053 results for subject:"Conditions of employment"

Department X
Department for Exiting the European Union
Subject X
Conditions of employment

Type

House

Session

Year

Department

More
Department for Exiting the European Union (3,053)

Member

More

Primary member

More

Answering member

Legislative stage

Legislation

Subject

Conditions of employment (3,053)
More

Publisher


Show detailed: On Off
Results: 10 20 50 100
Sort by: Newest first Oldest first

To ask the Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, whether the Court of Justice of the European Union judgment, Williams and Others v British Airways plc of 15 September 2011, falls within the definition of retained EU case law in Article 26(1) of the Withdrawal Agreement Bill.

Asked by
Lisa Nandy (Labour)
Answering body
Department for Exiting the European Union
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Date
15 January 2020
Reference
988
House
House of Commons

To ask the Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, whether the Court of Justice of the European Union judgment of 27 October 1993 Enderby v Frenchay Health Authority and Secretary of State for Health falls within the scope of retained EU case law in Article 26(1) of the...

Asked by
Lisa Nandy (Labour)
Answering body
Department for Exiting the European Union
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Date
15 January 2020
Reference
985
House
House of Commons

To ask the Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, whether the Court of Justice of the European Union judgement Webb v EMO Air Cargo of 14 July 1994 falls within the scope of retained EU case law in Article 26(1) of the Withdrawal Agreement Bill.

Asked by
Lisa Nandy (Labour)
Answering body
Department for Exiting the European Union
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Date
15 January 2020
Reference
986
House
House of Commons

To ask the Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, whether the Court of Justice of the European Union judgment Dekker v BJV-Centrum of 8 Nov 1990 falls within the scope of retained EU case law in Article 26(1) of the Withdrawal Agreement Bill.

Asked by
Lisa Nandy (Labour)
Answering body
Department for Exiting the European Union
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Date
15 January 2020
Reference
984
House
House of Commons

To ask the Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, whether the Court of Justice of the European Union judgment Robinson-Steele v RD Retail Services Ltd and others of 16 March 2006 falls within the scope of retained EU case law in Article 26(1) of the Withdrawal Agreement Bill.

Asked by
Lisa Nandy (Labour)
Answering body
Department for Exiting the European Union
Type
Written questions
Status
Answered
Date
15 January 2020
Reference
987
House
House of Commons

My Lords, I thank the noble Baronesses, Lady Ludford and Lady Jones, and the noble Viscount, Lord Hailsham, for adding their names to this amendment. If passed, it would require the Government to bring forward versions of the Brexit legislation published but not passed during the last two parliamentary sessions.

During...

Member
Lord McNicol of West Kilbride (Labour)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
15 January 2020
Reference
801 cc770-1
House
House of Lords

Oh dear, it’s that man again. Amendment 35 concerns the level playing field. We have heard a lot about standards and regulation over the last day and a half. This is not about going through all those standards and regulations and whether they are being regressed or otherwise. It is...

Member
Lord Fox (Liberal Democrat)
Type
Proceeding contributions
Date
15 January 2020
Reference
801 cc802-4
House
House of Lords

What steps he is taking to implement the Istanbul Convention on action against violence against women and domestic violence.

Asked by
Mohammad Yasin (Labour)
Answering body
Department for Exiting the European Union
Oral questions - Lead
Status
Answered
Date
9 January 2020
Reference
900001; 669 cc588-590
House
House of Commons

What plans the Government has to negotiate for dynamic alignment with the EU on employment rights after the UK has left the EU.

Asked by
Liz Twist (Labour)
Answering body
Department for Exiting the European Union
Oral questions - Lead
Status
Answered
Date
9 January 2020
Reference
900005; 669 cc588-590
House
House of Commons

The Government have been clear that the future relationship will protect the UK’s sovereign right to regulate, and have no plans to align dynamically with EU employment legislation.

Answered by
Steve Barclay (Conservative)
Answering body
Department for Exiting the European Union
Type
Oral answers to questions
Date
9 January 2020
Reference
669 c589
House
House of Commons

Since October, the withdrawal agreement Bill has undergone major changes, including the stripping out of previous commitments to workers’ rights. Will the Secretary of State publish a revised impact assessment so that he can be honest with the public about what his Government have in store for them with their hard Brexit plan?

Asked by
Mohammad Yasin (Labour)
Answering body
Department for Exiting the European Union
Oral questions - 1st Supplementary
Status
Answered
Date
9 January 2020
Reference
669 c589
House
House of Commons

The reality is that we actually go beyond Europe in many areas of workers’ rights, including maternity and paternity leave, and we should be proud of that. The hon. Gentleman asks specifically about the change to the withdrawal agreement Bill, but it does not affect the rights of workers. It should be for this Parliament to set the standards. In our manifesto, we committed to having high standards. The real question that should be asked is why a number of member states do not meet the standards set here in the United Kingdom.

Answered by
Steve Barclay (Conservative)
Answering body
Department for Exiting the European Union
Type
Oral answers to questions
Date
9 January 2020
Reference
669 c589
House
House of Commons

So far, the Prime Minister has taken workplace rights out of the withdrawal agreement in October and the withdrawal agreement Bill in December. What confidence can we have that workplace rights will be protected under this Government?

Asked by
Liz Twist (Labour)
Answering body
Department for Exiting the European Union
Oral questions - 1st Supplementary
Status
Answered
Date
9 January 2020
Reference
669 c589
House
House of Commons

The hon. Lady says that as if she supported the Bill in October, but she did not. She did not support it when those things were in the clause, and now she is lamenting that they are out of the clause that she did not support. The reality is that the purpose of the withdrawal agreement Bill is to implement the international agreement that the Prime Minister has reached with the European Commission. Of course it is for the House, in the course of its business, to determine what standards it wants on workers’ rights, the environment and other areas. The Prime Minister was clear in the manifesto that we are committed to high standards in those areas. I think that is something that the hon. Lady and I can agree on.

Answered by
Steve Barclay (Conservative)
Answering body
Department for Exiting the European Union
Type
Oral answers to questions
Date
9 January 2020
Reference
669 c589
House
House of Commons

Does the Secretary of State agree that, contrary to what the hon. Member for Bedford (Mohammad Yasin) said, we need dynamic alignment like a hole in the head? The purpose of Brexit is to enable us to make our own laws and rules, set our own taxes and chart our own course.

Asked by
Richard Bacon (Conservative)
Answering body
Department for Exiting the European Union
Oral questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Date
9 January 2020
Reference
669 c589
House
House of Commons

My hon. Friend has championed Parliament’s taking control of these issues for many years, and he is absolutely right: it is for this House to determine the standards, and we should have confidence in its ability to do so.

Answered by
Steve Barclay (Conservative)
Answering body
Department for Exiting the European Union
Type
Oral answers to questions
Date
9 January 2020
Reference
669 c589
House
House of Commons

I thank the Secretary of State for his answer on dynamic alignment. As his Department winds up, I thank him personally for leading it with such professionalism, and I thank his team at DExEU.

On dynamic alignment, I ask my right hon. Friend to reflect on the fact that the Brexit vote was about this House being sovereign. For me, as a Welsh Member, that is the Union of the United Kingdom, and this House being sovereign over our alignment.

Asked by
Craig Williams (Conservative)
Answering body
Department for Exiting the European Union
Oral questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Date
9 January 2020
Reference
669 c589
House
House of Commons

I extend a particularly warm welcome to my hon. Friend on his return to the House, and I thank him for his contribution to the Department during his tenure. He is right both in having confidence in this House setting high standards on workers’ rights and the environment, and in emphasising the importance of that from a Union perspective. Of course, Wales supported leaving, just as England did.

Answered by
Steve Barclay (Conservative)
Answering body
Department for Exiting the European Union
Type
Oral answers to questions
Date
9 January 2020
Reference
669 c590
House
House of Commons

Will the Secretary of State give an absolute guarantee that post Brexit, under a Conservative Government, there will never be a point at which workers in the EU27 enjoy stronger employment rights than they do here?

Asked by
Nick Thomas-Symonds (Labour)
Answering body
Department for Exiting the European Union
Oral questions - Supplementary
Status
Answered
Date
9 January 2020
Reference
669 c590
House
House of Commons

I am absolutely clear that we will deliver on our manifesto—[Interruption.] Members seem surprised that the Government want to deliver on our manifesto. The manifesto says that we are committed to having high standards. As I said earlier, the real issue is that, in a number of areas, EU standards are lower. The UK has three times the maternity entitlement: it has 52 weeks of maternity leave, 39 of which are paid, whereas the EU requires only 14 weeks of paid leave. That is the area that I urge the hon. Gentleman to focus on.

Answered by
Steve Barclay (Conservative)
Answering body
Department for Exiting the European Union
Type
Oral answers to questions
Date
9 January 2020
Reference
669 c590
House
House of Commons