Low-paid workers to get 80% sick pay guarantee, says Labour
More than one million people on low wages will get improved sick pay conditions under new plans designed to boost living standards.
About 1.3 million people paid less than £123 per week in the UK will get guaranteed sick pay equivalent to 80% of their weekly salary as part of changes expected to come in next year.
Officials said the policy will keep more people off benefits because they will not need to quit their jobs while they recover.
They added that some people will be up to £100 better off per week, compared to the current system.
Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall said: 'For too long, sick workers have had to decide between staying at home and losing a day's pay, or soldiering on at their own risk just to make ends meet.
'No-one should ever have to choose between their health and earning a living, which is why we are making this landmark change.
'The new rate is good for workers and fair on businesses as part of our plan to boost rights and make work pay, while delivering our plan for change.'
The policy also means people will receive sick pay from their first day of illness, compared to the three consecutive days you must have been ill to qualify currently.
Research from the Resolution Foundation has shown the UK has one of the lowest rates of statutory sick pay of developed nations.
Currently, people who earn less than £123 per week do not get anything, while for better-paid full-time workers, statutory is just £116.75 per week, rising to £118.75 in April.
Under the new plans, low earners will get 80% of their average weekly pay or the new rate of statutory sick pay, whichever is lowest.
The policy was described as a 'fair compromise' by the British Chambers of Commerce, which represents businesses.
However, the trade body said bringing forward sick pay to the first day of absence could hit companies.
Jane Gratton, deputy director of public policy at the BCC, said: ' Employers often struggle to find shift cover at short notice, leading to disruption for customers.
'The Government's impact assessment did not produce compelling evidence on the day-one rights issue, so there may yet be unforeseen consequences.'
Paul Nowak, secretary-general of the Trades Union Congress, said the move 'shouldn't be the end of the story', saying the rate should be higher.
'We urge ministers in future to raise the replacement rate for the lowest earners beyond 80% and undertake a wider review of the statutory sick pay rate.'
It comes amid expected changes to the Government's employment rights Bill, including setting a nine-month probation period for new workers, rather than the six months previously announced.
Ministers are also reportedly planning to axe the right to 'switch off' outside work hours, which was a central part of Sir Keir Starmer's manifesto promise aimed at strengthening employment rights.
The policy would allow workers to ignore work-related emails and calls outside office hours, including the right to refuse to take on extra work at the weekends.
However, ministers are expected to say in the coming week that the policy has been dropped when they table a series of amendments to the Bill, according to the Sunday Times newspaper.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
2 hours ago
- Telegraph
Labour's plan for the NHS: more money plus vital reform
The commitments that the Government made to our NHS in the Spending Review were made in full recognition of the scale of the challenge we inherited and the bold reforms we're already implementing. While it is correct that NHS productivity has yet to return to pre-pandemic levels, it is wrong to imply that our response has been to throw more money at the problem, without an equal focus on productivity. Let's be clear: after 14 years of mismanagement, we found an NHS in crisis. Not just underfunded, but fundamentally broken in its structures and operations. The waiting list stood at 7.6 million people in September 2024. 10 per cent of patients were waiting more than 12 hours in A&E. Public satisfaction had dropped to record lows. This crisis demands not just investment, but radical reform. That's precisely what we're delivering. Take our decision to abolish NHS England. This isn't an ideological choice – it's a practical one that will cut duplication, remove unnecessary bureaucracy, and crucially, redirect hundreds of millions of pounds straight to frontline services. The bloated administrative structure created under the previous government hasn't delivered better care – it's created waste, confusion, and ultimately contributed to worse outcomes for patients. We are also tackling the scandalous spending on agency staff. Under the last government, one trust paid an agency £5,100 for a shift by a single doctor in 2022/23. We've cut almost £1 billion in agency spending and our ambition is to eliminate agency use entirely in the coming years. Those billions will be reinvested in permanent staff who provide better continuity of care. We've upgraded the NHS App so that it now sends appointment reminders and test results digitally instead of by post, saving £200 million on stamps, envelopes, and printing. We found an NHS drowning in targets – many contradictory, some counterproductive. We've halved the number of targets set for NHS trusts so that they can focus on what matters to patients: waiting times for operations, ambulances, A&E attendance, rebuilding general practice and dentistry, and improving mental health services. As a result, waiting lists are at a two-year low – but we know they need to fall further. Our Plan for Change outlines how 92 per cent of elective patients should wait less than 18 weeks. We're laser-focused on that goal. Similarly, we've halved the targets that GPs are measured on. The previous government even introduced a target measuring GPs' wellbeing, while simultaneously overwhelming them with bureaucracy. We're freeing doctors to focus on patients by bringing back the family doctor model and ending the 8am phone scramble. These are precisely the productivity measures which are needed by our NHS and by Britain. Last week's Spending Review delivered a £29 billion real terms increase for the healthcare system to 2029. But let's be clear – a lot of this money is linked to reform. Every penny we invest comes with expectations of reform and improved outcomes. We're cutting waste, streamlining bureaucracy, and empowering frontline staff to deliver better care. That's why we're developing a 10-Year Health Plan for publication in the coming weeks, built around three fundamental shifts: from hospital to community care, from analogue to digital systems, and from treatment to prevention. The problems in our NHS didn't develop overnight, and they won't be solved overnight either. But unlike our predecessors, we're not afraid of making difficult decisions and driving through the reforms our public services desperately need. Public service productivity does matter – that's why we're reforming the NHS to deliver better care at better value for taxpayers. Our plan combines investment with genuine radical change. After 14 years of decline, that's what real change looks like.
Times
3 hours ago
- Times
‘RFK Jr is a disaster': Staff describe chaos in ‘anti-science' regime
For the workers of Building 21, keeping a low profile is considered the best way to survive. Zoom meetings are avoided out of fear they are being secretly recorded. Conversations about budgets and policies are held in soundproof offices, as if they were matters of national security. Many employees carry small notebooks with them, jotting down notes instead of logging them on a computer. The desks of several sacked colleagues are empty — save for the few who have left family photos and possessions behind in case a judge rules they can return. It sounds like a scene out of Nineteen Eighty-four — yet this is the headquarters of the Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in Atlanta, Georgia. Here, staff do everything they can to avoid the twentysomething officials from the Department of Government Efficiency (Doge) who stalk the building's corridors, said a global health specialist at Building 21, who asked that his name not be used. 'There is a constant sense that we're being watched and monitored,' the source said. 'Doge leadership are located several floors above but they have this omnipotent presence … We're counted when we swipe our badges into the building.' Ever since Robert F Kennedy Jr was appointed health secretary in February, more than 10,000 staff — many with decades of experience — have been fired. Now, the tens of thousands of health workers and scientists still employed by the US government feel like their lives have been turned upside down, according to ten current and former staff at the CDC, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and National Institutes of Health (NIH), speaking to The Times. Under instruction from Kennedy and Doge, health priorities have been reset, longstanding scientific norms disrupted and thousands of research programmes cancelled because of their perceived 'wokeness', officials said. 'RFK Jr is a disaster,' said one CDC grant specialist who joined the agency within the past five years. 'He is completely dismantling things to the point where the damage is going to become irreparable.' • Tom Whipple: Trump's tragic war on science could be an opportunity for Britain Kennedy's vision to 'make America healthy again' has sparked the most significant transformation of the country's health infrastructure in generations. And the health secretary's allies argue this reform is long overdue. But in interviews with The Times, sources describe scenes of dysfunction and chaos that threaten to make America sicker. Decades-old research centres dedicated to preventing chronic diseases like cancer and heart disease are being shuttered, one source said. Another claimed that layers of bureaucracy had been added to the approval process for grants, even though Doge's stated aim is to improve government efficiency. A third source said funding was so short that staff were rifling through others' desks for stationery: 'We are literally going through the offices of our fired colleagues to scavenge supplies like paper and pens as we no longer have the ability to buy those types of things.' Asked to comment on the claims, Andrew Nixon, director of communications at the US Department of Health and Human Services, said: 'Secretary Kennedy was appointed to drive bold, necessary reforms in a system long plagued by inefficiency and complacency. 'Streamlining outdated programmes, ensuring fiscal discipline and demanding transparency are not attacks on science — they are a defence of it. Secretary Kennedy remains committed to evidence-based leadership that serves the American people — not the preservation of status-quo bureaucracies.' Kennedy's crusade to overhaul America's vaccine policies has generated the most controversy. Earlier this month he abruptly fired all 17 members of the advisory committee on immunisation practices (ACIP), a group that has reviewed vaccine trial data and advised the government on which jabs to approve for more than six decades. The former independent presidential candidate, who has claimed for years that some vaccines are unsafe and could cause autism, said the committee was hobbled by conflicts of interest. Firing its members en masse, he said, would 're-establish public confidence in vaccine science'. Days later he hired eight new advisers, including a Covid conspiracy theorist and prominent critic of pandemic-era lockdowns. Dr Charlotte Moser, one of the 17 sacked experts, said vaccines were being 'politicised' under Kennedy. 'My fear at this moment is for the health of the people of the United States if vaccines become less available,' she told The Times in her first public interview since her dismissal. She pointed to the removal of Covid-19 vaccines from the list of jabs recommended for pregnant women and children — a decision that was made last month without any input from Moser and her colleagues, and which 'does not align with the science', she said. Dr Yvonne Maldonado, another former committee member, warned that 'the firings, disruption and the chaos' of Kennedy's administration were 'incredibly damaging' and unlikely to benefit public health. 'I can't think that these downstream impacts are going to be good ones,' she said in her first public comments. month Kennedy announced 'Generation Gold Standard' — a $500 million initiative to develop vaccines using technology dating from the 1950s. Scientists fear it marks a step back from newer, more innovative vaccine technologies like the mRNA platform, which was used for several highly effective Covid vaccines but has been demonised by antivaxers, including the organisation that Kennedy once chaired, Children's Health Defence. An NIH source with knowledge of the initiative said the senior leadership had bypassed all the 'typical internal scientific review, discussions and grant-making processes' to launch the programme. The source said Kennedy was 'fixated on a link between vaccines and autism' and described the programme as a 'waste of money'. 'He's dropping half a billion dollars on God knows what,' said the NIH source, who asked not to be named because he is still working for the agency. • Meet the antivax whisperer fighting the vaccine slump Preventing chronic disease is one of the cornerstones of Kennedy's mission. In proposals that are widely supported, he has pledged to improve the quality of American produce, crack down on ultra-processed foods, detoxify the environment, diminish people's dependence on drugs and promote cleaner, healthier lifestyles. But insiders say the teams of experts needed to achieve these aims are being dismantled. 'He's shooting himself in the foot,' said a federal worker who was recently fired from the CDC's global health centre. Earlier this year the CDC's childhood lead-poisoning prevention programme was shuttered — despite one in two American toddlers showing detectable levels of lead, a neurotoxin that can cause cognitive impairments and developmental issues, in their blood. No reason was given for the programme's closure. It meant the CDC was unable to help when Wisconsin requested formal aid to tackle a growing lead-contamination crisis in its schools in March. 'Due to the complete loss of our lead programme, we will be unable to support you with this,' the CDC said in response. Kennedy later said the lead programme's 26-person team would be rehired, but one CDC source close to the situation told The Times: 'Those folks are not back yet.' It is also understood that the Prevention Research Centres (PRC) programme — a network of 20 research hubs dedicated to chronic disease prevention in poorer communities in the United States — is to be closed after its team of federal scientists was fired in April. 'They're saying that they're just going to cancel the entire programme,' a CDC source with knowledge of discussions said. Universities and clinics partnered with the PRC programme, like Georgia State University and the Arkansas Centre for Women's Health, have been 'left in the dark about what happens next, with no one available to answer their questions'. Established in 1984 and renewed last year for another five years, the programme is likely to have prevented thousands of premature deaths from obesity, addiction, diabetes and cancer. 'It's one of the country's most vital and important research programs,' the CDC source said. At the FDA, experts responsible for inspecting factories to ensure food products are safe have been hamstrung by the mass firing of project managers, administrators and communication specialists, according to one source from the agency's human foods programme. 'These are the people who keep the day-to-day operations running,' the source said. Inspectors are now expected to book flights and hotels for assignments using their own credit cards, but because it can take weeks to get reimbursed many are reluctant to travel, the FDA source said. He added that a hiring freeze and funding constraints had made it harder for laboratories to analyse samples, further slowing the inspection process. 'The erosion of the oversight will eventually result in [food producers] cutting corners, maybe not being caught as quickly,' said the source, who asked to remain anonymous. 'As a result, things are going to slip and people will get sick.' • RFK Jr and Dr Oz are on a mission to save Canadian ostriches With Kennedy unable to pursue his vision of reform amid the disruption, questions are being raised over who really is in charge of the nation's health. One source speculated that it is Russell Vought, the director of the White House Office of Management and Budget, who is calling the shots. 'It's unclear to me how much RFK is actually in charge versus other Trump appointees, like Vought,' said a CDC programme co-ordinator with more than ten years at the agency. 'Kennedy clearly has certain ideas he's interested in but at this point it seems more about cutting programmes than anything else.' Despite the push to save money and improve efficiency, three sources criticised Kennedy's team of Doge officials for adding extra layers of bureaucracy to the processing of CDC grants. Every time a grant recipient wishes to make a drawdown from their funding allocation they must now fill out a questionnaire, which gets sent to Doge for final approval. Previously, grant recipients who had been meticulously assessed and cleared for funding could access their money whenever they wanted. 'It's the exact opposite of efficiency,' the CDC grants specialist said. Among staff who have been fired — but whose contracts remain in limbo as federal judges review whether Kennedy's mass terminations are lawful — many said they had no desire to return to an administration they accused of being anti-science. 'There's been a number of different steps that we could take to potentially get back into the agency and I haven't taken any of them,' said the worker fired from the CDC global health centre. 'What this administration is doing, whether it's RFK, Trump or Doge, is so antithetical to my own values that I can't work there any more.' As for those continuing to labour under Kennedy's regime, there is not much hope for the future. 'It's the perpetual anxiety, it's the lack of knowing anything that is going on. There is no plan in place,' said the global health specialist in Building 21. 'This will have real consequences for people both here in America and overseas. It breaks my heart.'
South Wales Guardian
4 hours ago
- South Wales Guardian
Assisted dying law closer but MPs' support narrows in historic vote
Kim Leadbeater described backing for her Bill in the Commons as 'a convincing majority', after the number was slashed from 55 in November to 23 on Friday. The Labour MP declared 'thank goodness' after the result, but hospices are among those warning of the 'seismic change' for end-of-life care. Staunch supporter Dame Esther Rantzen, who is terminally ill but has said a new law is unlikely to come in time for her, thanked MPs for doing their bit to protect terminally ill people from a 'bad death'. She told the PA news agency: 'This will make a huge positive difference, protecting millions of terminally ill patients and their families from the agony and loss of dignity created by a bad death. 'Thank you, Parliament.' While 314 MPs voted for the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill at third reading, 291 voted against. Some 14 MPs switched from voting in favour to against, while only one MP – Labour's Jack Abbott – switched from voting no to voting yes. The proposed legislation will now move to the House of Lords for further debate and votes, although one peer has already urged her colleagues they 'must oppose a law that puts the vulnerable at risk'. Bishop of London Dame Sarah Mullally, a former chief nursing officer for England, said instead work is needed to better fund access to 'desperately needed palliative care services'. Her sentiment was echoed by a range of end-of-life care organisations including Marie Curie, which said legalising assisted dying will make it 'more crucial than ever' for governments across the UK 'ensure that there is palliative care available for anyone who needs it'. Ahead of the vote, MPs approved a change to the Bill, which will require ministers to assess within a year of any new law coming into effect the quality and distribution of palliative care services currently available and the impact of an assisted dying service on them. The charity said while it welcomed the change, 'this will not on its own make the improvements needed to guarantee everyone is able to access the palliative care they need'. Ms Leadbeater said the vote result was one that 'so many people need', insisting her Bill has enough safeguards and will 'give dying people choice'. Asked about the narrower gap between supporters and opponents, Ms Leadbeater said she knew there would be 'some movement both ways' but insisted the vote showed a 'convincing majority'. She told reporters: 'The will of the House (of Commons) will now be respected by the Lords, and the Bill will go through to its next stage.' Acknowledging those who remain opposed to the Bill, she said she is 'happy to work with them to provide any reassurance or if they've got any questions about the Bill that they want to talk through with me, my door has always been open and remains open'. Conservative MP Danny Kruger, who opposes the Bill, said support 'is ebbing away very fast', telling of his disappointment the Bill passed but adding: 'The fact is, their majority's been cut in half.' Campaigners wept, jumped and hugged each other outside Parliament as the vote result was announced, while some MPs appeared visibly emotional as they left the chamber. Others lined up to shake hands with Ms Leadbeater, the Bill's sponsor through the Commons, with some, including Home Office minister Jess Phillips, stopping to hug the Spen Valley MP. Before a Bill can be signed into law, both the Lords and the Commons must agree the final text. Thanks to the four-year implementation period, it could be 2029 – potentially coinciding with the end of this Government's parliament – before assisted dying is offered. Encouraging or assisting suicide is currently against the law in England and Wales, with a maximum jail sentence of 14 years. Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer remained supportive of the Bill, voting yes on Friday as he had done last year. Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch, who had urged MPs to vote against the legislation, describing it as 'a bad Bill' despite being 'previously supportive of assisted suicide', voted no. During an hours-long date on Friday, MPs on both sides of the issue recalled personal stories of loved ones who had died. Conservative former minister Sir James Cleverly, who led the opposition to the Bill in the Commons, spoke of a close friend who died 'painfully' from cancer. He said he comes at the divisive issue 'not from a position of faith nor from a position of ignorance', and was driven in his opposition by 'concerns about the practicalities' of the Bill. MPs had a free vote on the Bill, meaning they decided according to their conscience rather than along party lines. The proposed legislation would allow terminally ill adults in England and Wales, with fewer than six months to live, to apply for an assisted death, subject to approval by two doctors and a panel featuring a social worker, senior legal figure and psychiatrist.
