‘Good Jobs’ podcast: What will industrial relations reforms really mean for NI employers?

In this episode, Paul Gillen is joined by David Hopper – both of them partners in the employment team here at Lewis Silkin – to talk about Theme C of Northern Ireland’s proposed “Good Jobs” Employment Rights Bill.

From union access and lower recognition thresholds to e-ballots, while the seven-day industrial action notice stays put – this episode explores what’s likely to change now, what’s for later and practical takeaways on regulations and timelines in early 2026.

Transcript

Paul Gillen 

Hello everybody and welcome back to our Northern Ireland Good Jobs mini series podcasts. I'm Paul Gillen, a partner in the employment team here in Belfast and today we're looking at theme C of the Northern Ireland Good Jobs Employment Rights Bill consultation. This is about voice and representation and the proposed changes to collective employment law landscape in Northern Ireland. If you haven't already listened to our previous episodes covering earlier themes, I encourage you to go back and check them out. 

With me today is my colleague, David Hopper. David's a partner in the employment team and a specialist in industrial relations. David, great to have you here today. 

David Hopper 

Thanks Paul, there sure is lots here that will shape industrial relations in Northern Ireland. 

Paul Gillen 

Yes, absolutely. Before we get into the detail, just to let you know, it's very much ‘finger in the air’ time in relation to the proposals that we'll cover today. What exactly will happen and when is very much unknown as we still need executive agreement and assembly approval. Draft legislation is pending, but for now, these are just potential changes on the horizon. 

So today we'll look through the potential impact on some of these changes that will have on employers in Northern Ireland and David will offer us some insight into the experience in Great Britain where there have been similar if not identical changes that have already taken effect in GB.  

So David, the first major proposal is in relation to trade union access to the workplace. And at the minute in Northern Ireland, there's very few statutory rights to access. And this includes access for disciplinary and grievance hearings, but no general right to access as it stands. So, as part of the consultation, the department was clear that it perceives that there to be an imbalance and sought views on how to access for trade unions was to be increased. And the official response document now proposes that a new statutory right for trade unions to request access to workers, including digital access, which is to address barriers for remote and gig workers. Now, access wouldn't be automatic, but employers would not be able to unreasonably refuse it. Now, it will have to take place at reasonable times and also in compliance with health and safety protocols. So David, in terms of the new access rights, if this gets to go ahead, how do you think this could play out for employers in real time in Northern Ireland? 

David Hopper  

Thanks Paul. I think the first point to highlight is that this proposal is premised on the basis that if workers knew more about trade unions, more of them would choose to join them and that that would result in improved workspaces. However, we already live in an age where information is more accessible than ever. So, if workers wish to learn about their rights at work, a simple online search will quickly take them to a relevant trade union for their own occupation. For example, the TUC even offers a tool specifically designed for this purpose. 

I think the key point, therefore, is that unless unions actually have a sufficient value proposition that they can offer to workers once they get in front of them, increased access alone isn't actually going to be a game changer. 

Paul Gillen 

Yes, and I think we've got to look at the trade union density issues as well. So, although Northern Ireland reports the highest trade union density in the UK, it too has experienced a decline in membership numbers and that's consistent with the overall downward trend across the UK. So, I suppose the real question mark, about this is if it has a great impact on business at all. 

David Hopper 

Absolutely, that's exactly right. I the second point to make is that like all organisations, union have limited resources and they don't have a reserve of officials just waiting for legal reform like this to be able to deploy those officials to every workplace in the country. So, while the right would be extremely helpful if a union wishes to target a particular employer, it's unlikely that every business in Northern Ireland is suddenly going to have a union official banging on their door seeking access. While the right to request 

digital access will make life easier for unions than purely physical access, especially with accessing those remote workers like in the gig economy, as you say. Workers might also be less inclined to start spending money on membership of an organisation if that organisation hasn't itself invested resources by coming to visit them in person. And finally, for employers and unions alike, 

right of access, I think, risks destabilizing existing relationships. 

For example, if an employer already recognizes, say, union A, and it has good access to the workforce, is it actually going to be in the interest of workers if union B, so a competing union, can then come along and demand access and, in effect, start what we might call a turf war? All of that said, this reform would certainly worry employers, given the additional legalistic bureaucracy that might be involved in responding to requests and then having to actually give access to the union. 

But exactly how businesses can prepare for that won't be known, unfortunately, until we actually have the detailed legislation on this once it's published. 

Paul Gillen 

That's great David, some good points in there that will put the listeners minds at ease. Now in relation 

the access to workplaces, the consultation at the start considered possible exemptions from micro and small employers and those are the employers that make up a large part of the workforce in Northern Ireland. But when we got the response, it didn't point out any exemptions. 

that would be put in place. So, it's unlikely that there'd be exemptions for those small or micro businesses. Can you offer any reassurance to those types of employers? 

David Hopper 

Thankfully, yes, I think I can because it's important to remember that unions are keen to attract new members principally because they rely on monthly membership subscriptions for their own funding. So, I think it's reasonable for a business employing say only a small number of people to assume that on balance it's much less likely to be a priority target for union recruitment than larger businesses which have more potential employees that can be recruited into membership.  

So long as officials of trade unions only have a finite amount of time available to them to go and visit workplaces, I think it's highly likely that they'll concentrate their efforts on employees where they can get in front of the largest number of people at any one time. 

Paul Gillen  

Now if we move on to recognition of trade unions for collective bargaining purposes, the headline proposal is to lower the minimum workforce threshold for statutory recognition application. And this reduces from currently 21 employees down to 10. 

Do you think that will have a practical impact? And do you expect that there will be a lot more applications for recognition or not? 

David Hopper 

I think this is where we're going to have to split the theory from potentially what's going to happen in practice. So in theory, I think that could be a big shift as recognising a trade union does very much change how an employer has to approach its employee relations. But in reality, unions are by far most prevalent in businesses where employees feel their voice isn't otherwise heard. 

So whilst applications might be made for small bargaining units, so where that would only affect a small number of people in say a particular team, it's my experience that applications themselves are only really made against the largest employers. I think that's as much as anything because as long as an employer has good employee relations, a request in the workplace where everyone knows each other and regularly engages with each other is just much less likely in practice. But as for all employers, even these small businesses, should also do their best to avoid what we might call a trigger event that might lead to employees wanting to unionise, good examples of that being say a badly handled redundancy exercise, and also try and make sure that there is an alternative mechanism in place so that whatever your size and in whatever way is appropriate to your size there is a way for employees to have their voice heard one way or another without having to resort to a trade union to deliver that. 

Paul Gillen 

So, what I hear from that is that the key to lesser impact is to continue having good employee relations to begin with. Moving on, because there was a big question that we did consider may have come out in the consultation and that was sectoral bargaining. In Northern Ireland, there's no real meaningful sectoral in the private sector. 

Despite this being in the initial consultation, there has been no commitment to bring this in. So instead, what will happen is the stakeholders and the Labor Relations Agency will consult and 

They will look at a wider collective bargaining framework and how this could operate. But David, in GB, the Employment Rights Bill is bringing in fair pay arrangements and this is in the adult care sector. So although not in the consultation at the minute. Should NI employers be concerned about something similar in the longer term? 

David Hopper 

I think the key message here is there's no need to panic. So the department is signalling intent, but as you say, not actually announcing any immediate changes. I think this means that employers in Northern Ireland are in all likelihood going to have a chance to see how mandatory sectoral bargaining for the adult social care sector plays out in GB before anything similar might then happen in Northern Ireland. 

Personally, I'm also somewhat sceptical of how that is going to work out. The reality is that adult social care is mostly funded by taxpayers. And so unless the national government provides more money for the sector, raising costs by improving conditions and pay for workers working in the sector could end up actually putting private sector employers out of business. And ultimately, because of the nature and the importance of adult social care, local government may then just have to step in and cover the costs. 

So in other words, the government collectively could then find itself in a position where it's both increasing costs through the new sectoral arrangements, then also having to then pay those higher rates, which it might itself have to set if the unions and the employers cannot actually reach agreement between themselves, which I think is also quite likely if in reality the unions, the Marlins are going to be unrealistic. While the approach might be politically acceptable in the quasi-public sector, which I think is how we can fairly describe the adult social care sector. I'd really sort of reflect on a wider policy question here, which is, is the Northern Ireland government really going to want to, in effect, set a new and higher minimum wage for certain parts of the private sector, with all the implications that might then have in due course? 

Paul Gillen 

So as you say, if there is sectoral bargaining, if it came down or there was agreement in terms of that, then the higher rates that may push up would then impact on the economic competitiveness. So one to keep an eye on, but it's likely this will be kicked down the road for a longer period of time in Northern Ireland.  

Now, there were a changes proposed to balloting and notice and the department consulted on shortening the notice period to employers before ballots on industrial action, but also sought views on whether the system for industrial action notice is fit for purpose. The outcome of all of that is that the seven day notice period for industrial action will remain, a sigh of relief from employers, no doubt David. 

David Hopper 

Yeah, a big relief for employers here. They'll keep the week long window to implement their existing contingency plans that they've already or should already have made before they receive a formal notice of action, such as to allow them to send prepared communications to their customers, suppliers, employment agencies and other parties and so on to really make sure that they can mitigate the impact that any industrial action will actually have on their business. 

Paul Gillen 

And that reduction from seven days to five days could have had a huge impact for all of that. So absolutely a 

relief. But we're also going to see a move from postal ballots to electronic balloting. And I'm not sure that there's an awful lot of issues with that. And if in a modern age, surely that's to be expected. Is that right? 

David Hopper 

Yeah, I mean, this, as you say, you know, this is about modernising and, it is still worth bearing in mind that it does come with some risks though. Taking a step back, postal balloting, as opposed to say a workplace ballot with sort of a show of hands in a factory car park, was designed to stop people from being pressured at work into voting yes to action. So, it was designed to give them that privacy in their own home. So, the risk I think is going to return as if you can then vote electronically, workers may well then be able to vote in their workplace and that then opens up the issue of being pressured or coerced by their colleagues into voting yes, such as being asked to do that in front of them or being asked for evidence, e.g. a screenshot of their phone as to how they did vote. 

I think it's otherwise hard to argue against moving to balancing practice that clearly reflect the 21st century. For example, we've had prime ministers elected as the leader of their party and therefore as prime minister through electronic balloting. So even if the byproduct is that unions might be able to run their ballots faster, I think it's difficult to say that this isn't a step forward, even if it might mean less time for employers to do their contingency planning, because ballots no longer will need to take the time to allow things to actually turn up through the post, which we all know isn't necessarily as instantaneous as we might hope. 

Paul Gillen 

That’s interesting. I didn't know that point on the purpose for postal ballots as opposed to just paper ballots which could have that element to it in the workplace. Now the other area is abolishing the 12-week time limit on protection against dismissal for employees who take industrial action. But do you think that's likely to be an issue or will it have any impact on employers? 

David Hopper 

I think the impact here is going to be really limited. In practice, it's extremely rare in my experience for an employer to even consider, never mind actually go ahead and dismiss employees due to protracted industrial action taking place. So, I think it's really better looking at this as something that's long been on unions' wish li/st. And it's really there for a totemic significance as opposed to a real practical significance for employers. 

Paul Gillen 

And we've looked at some of the detail in this, but one of the overarching areas is about facilitating productive workplace relationships more broadly. And this takes me back to the 90s of talking about partnership agreements and all of that wonderful stuff. And there's currently no common guide for expected behaviours between employers and trade union officials in Northern Ireland. 

And the department has said that it plans to work with the Labour Relations Agency, but also other stakeholders on developing a code of practice to support respectful and effective workplaces. Do you think that's likely to create a culture of participation or will the code in itself become a source of conflict? 

David Hopper 

So I think it's important to bear in mind that codes matter, especially if they have legislative significance, so courts and tribunals can have regard to them. But in my experience, they often really just have a flavour of motherhood and apple pie, even if the guidance still can be useful for employers, particularly, say, the SMEs that we were talking about a few moments ago, which have limited resources and particularly limited experience of having to engage with unions. But I think it's actually worth taking a step back and just going, what really matters if an employer has to recognise a trade union?  

Is that it invests in building a constructive and effective relationship with it, establishing clear expectations for how that engagement is going to take place through having, a well-drafted collective agreement, and then making sure it honours those commitments rather than necessarily having any, for example, tick-box mentality approach or we need to read this code and there are seven paragraphs on that and therefore we need to go through it item by item. It's the overall relationship that needs to be built. 

Paul Gillen 

And a final recommendation that was made in relation to voice representation was in relation to the information and consultation regulations. So, listeners will know those as the ICE regulations. But for those who aren't familiar, they do give employees in larger companies the right to be kept in the loop about what's happening in the company. 

So this means that employers have to share information about the company's financials, any big changes or decisions which may affect jobs or staffing and so on. And the department is proposing to make it easier for employees to request information and consultation by broadening the coverage into smaller employers and offices by lowering thresholds for initiating requests. Now it's been largely overlooked and I'm not sure if a lot of employers are familiar with the ICE regulations, but are these changes likely to ignite interest from employees and from employers 

David Hopper 

I think it's fair to say that this change if it goes ahead would certainly make it much easier for employees to request the establishment of a standing information and consultation body. But in practice, frankly, the vast overwhelming majority of employees will never have heard of these regulations. Many employers are already engaging with their workers through their own tailored appropriate employee voice mechanism. And frankly many unions have a philosophical objection to such bodies because they see it is undermining trade unionism. So while some unions do push for these kind of bodies, many actually sort of are objecting to them on the basis that it undermines their own role. So I think it's telling that if we look at a similar reform that was enacted in GB just a few years ago, in my experience, there's actually been almost no practical significance to that reform having been made. And I really wouldn't be surprised if the outcome is therefore essentially the same in Northern Ireland, if and when this does come through as well. 

Paul Gillen 

And having said that, and now that we've got you here, I suppose we can bend your ear a bit on the differences that may be coming down the track from the GB employment rights bill. Is there any significant differences that NI employers with employees or operations in GB should be aware of? 

David Hopper 

It’s important to remember that whilst in many areas the law is extremely similar in GB and NI, there are some critical differences though. So, for example, while GB will be going ahead with reducing the minimum notice period before industrial action, it's doing so from 14 to 10 days. Whereas in Northern Ireland, the notice period is already below that. 

So, a one size fits all approach to contingency planning, so the notifications to suppliers and so on that we talked about earlier, is unlikely to be the best option for employers. The rules in GB are generally more favourable to employers, so for example, more notice of industrial action. So, I think it's fair to say that the consequences are greater for a GB employer that overestimates the time available to prepare in Northern Ireland than necessary for Northern Ireland businesses which might need to prepare for action over in GB. 

That said, I think it really is important that given the subtle but really important differences, businesses really do keep an eye on both what's happening in GB and in Northern Ireland, especially if it's going to be a moving picture in both jurisdictions over the years ahead. 

Paul Gillen 

David, thanks very much for all of that and breaking down Theme C for our listeners and giving some practical insights from across the UK, but also some practical insights into what the impacts may be coming down the line for employers in Northern Ireland. Before we wrap up, just a quick timeline and process reminder. As I said at the start, these are departmental proposals as set out in the official consultation response, and that's called ‘The Way Forward’. 

They are not yet confirmed changes are set in stone and still need executive approval and passage through the assembly. So we are waiting on draft legislation and hopefully we will see this by early 2026 and for drafts of the codes of practice as well. 

Just say thanks for joining and giving your insights. 

David Hopper 

Thanks for having me, Paul.  

Paul Gillen 

And thanks to our listeners. If you would like tailored advice on anything that we've discussed, then certainly you can get in contact with me, David, or your usual Lewis Silkin contact. And don't forget to check out the Lewis Silkin Good Jobs dashboard on our website. 

But for now, until next time, thanks for listening.