![\"Angela](\"https:\/\/dailybusinessgroup.co.uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Angela-Rayner-Lorraine.png\")
A new law giving trade unions regular access to workplaces risks unnecessary disruption to businesses, according to a number of trade groups. <\/p>\n
The government confirmed on Wednesday that unions could communicate directly with workers in person or digitally at least once a week in firms with more than 21 members of staff. <\/p>\n
If employers do not allow this they could be fined \u00a375,000 for the first breach, rising to \u00a3150,000 and then up to \u00a3500,000 for a third breach.<\/p>\n
The change is part of the Employment Rights Act, which was steered through parliament by former deputy prime minister Angela Rayner. It also introduces enforcement officers for the new Fair Work Agency (FWA), which began work this week and will have powers of surveillance when investigating those suspected of breaching employment law.<\/p>\n
The FWA, which has a \u00a360 million budget, has been given a broad remit to enforce employment rights, including minimum wage, sick pay and holiday pay, and tackle modern slavery and labour exploitation.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Kate Shoesmith, the director of policy at the British Chambers of Commerce, said: \u201cSmaller firms fear that plans to give trade unions new rights of access to their premises will damage productivity at a time when they are already under significant pressure. <\/p>\n
\u201cGood employment relations?are?created by transparent and?direct contact between employers and their?teams. Inserting a third party?into that equation will be a complicating and unnecessary distraction for many companies.?\u201d<\/p>\n
Matthew Percival, CBI future of work and skills director, said:\u00a0\u201cGranting every union a right to access every workplace on a weekly basis risks adding disruption and distracting employers from their core focus of creating jobs and delivering economic growth, with little benefit for workers.<\/p>\n
\u201cBringing employers and unions together to agree how these rules should work is the only way to ensure a constructive and long-lasting outcome. If this were to have happened, businesses may have been willing to accept more targeted access rights, underpinned by clear safeguards to ensure powers were used responsibly.<\/p>\n
\u201cThis will be especially difficult to understand for businesses whose workforce is already represented by a union yet would still be required to grant access to other unions.\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u201cIt is welcome that the government has acknowledged that businesses need adequate time to consider and respond to access requests. But a truly balanced approach would ensure each party has a requirement to act reasonably, not place strict expectations on employers while trusting that unions will be reasonable.\u201d<\/p>\n
Helen Dickinson, chief executive at the British Retail Consortium, said: \u201cMany retailers have constructive relationships with unions but allowing weekly access to multi-site workplaces would be disruptive to service for customers, with no clear benefit to employees.<\/p>\n
\u201cWhile it\u2019s good news government has acknowledged that its timeframes for responding to trade union access requests were unworkable, weekly access is unnecessary, excessive, and disruptive.<\/p>\n
\u201cRetail is the UK\u2019s biggest private sector employer, so we are concerned that government is rushing through the accompanying Code of Practice, which defines how this will work in practice. It is critical government engages with the very businesses who will have to implement these reforms before rushing headlong into an inflexible and inappropriate approach.\u201d<\/p>\n
\t <\/div>\n