Hello. I'm welcome to this Webinar in which we're going to talk about the good work plan. What I'm going to do is start off by explaining what the good work plan is, and then I'm going to work through it in three different sections. First of all, I'm going to look at things that were introduced some time ago. Secondly, I'm going to get things introduced on six of April 2020. And thirdly, I'm going to look at the things that are in there in the good work plan but have not yet been introduced. I'm going to take each of these topics in, Turn on, look at them in some detail. My name is Kathy Daniels, arm associate professor in employment law, Aston University in Birmingham, where I am also the associate provides Chancellor International. So let's start off and understand what the good work plan is. Back in the summer of 2017 Matthew Taylor published a report called Modern Working Practices. Matthew Taylor, who is the chief executive for the Royal Society for Arts, had been asked by the government to head up a commission to look at the way that we work today on toe identify areas where the law really wasn't quite working. Andi. It's worth just reflecting on the task that Taylor and his colleagues hard because a lot of law that we use in employment is quite old. So we refer quite regularly to the employment rights at 1996 24 years ago on the way that we work has changed in that time. 24 years ago, zero hour contracts were really known. The standard way of working was Monday to Friday 9 to 5. And yet we know that today's workforce is considerably different to that. And so what this review of modern working practices did was to look a different aspects of employment. Andi to recommend areas where changes needed to be made on to make proposals toe what those changes should be. If you have never read the report into modern working practices, I do strongly recommend that you read it. The start of it is a very interesting analysis of the employment market in the UK today on and includes a really useful data and then from that data, you can see why a number of these proposals have been made. So that was back in the summer of 2017 that it was published. The government then entered into a period of consultation of reviewing the various proposals that have been made on as a result came up with the good work plan. A mother good work plan does is implement most of the recommendations made in the Taylor report. There were one or two areas where the government has said no, but on the whole, the report has been taken on, it will be implemented and as I've already said, is going to be broadly implemented in these re sections of things that were implanted quite early, the raft of things on 6 May 2020 on. Then we look into the future as well. Hey is important because there are a lot of significant changes to employment law in the good work plan. So let's have a look at the changes that were made prior to the sixth of April 2020 on their two areas here, both of them relating to the use of employment tribunals and the first is addressing the situation. That is not as uncommon as we might want to think. When the Employment Tribunal finds in favor of the claimant on orders, employer to pay compensation or two put the employees back to where they should have been. For example, the employee has come along and said that they weren't paid the holiday pay that there are entitled to and the employment tribunal has agreed on. There is a significant number of situations where employees simply don't pay that money. Now. If the employer doesn't pay you the money, they can be named and shamed on their exempt. If they've paid at least £200 of the amount o a Andi, if they make payment within 14 days of being informed that they're about to be named and shamed, then they won't pay. Now this does require the claimant to do something because once the employment tribunal have made their conclusions and given their remedy, the employment tribunal does not then check. But the employee has paid. Now the claimant does have a root Teoh, a Sikh enforcement of payment by going to the High Court on the claimant, can also inform the employment tribunal. The payment has not been named, which then triggers this naming and shaming process, but it does put the responsibility away the onus for doing this back onto the claimant. The other area is aggravated breach on more. This, it refers to, is when the employer has behaved in a particularly aggravating way, either in the preparation for the employment tribunal and or at the employment tribunal itself in causing a militias Andi unacceptable way of carrying out the proceedings. Now this doesn't mean that an employer cannot ask demanding questions in the employment tribunal if witnesses, it doesn't mean that the employee cannot Rebus tli defend something that they think is completely right. What it does mean is that the employer cannot act him. A threatening way, cannot be malicious, cannot behave in a way that could threaten the claimant so they might feel uncomfortable with bringing proceedings or continuing with proceedings. Now we have had a penalty for aggravated breach around for some time, but the employment rights, miscellaneous amendments, regulations 2019 increases that maximum penalty from £5000 to £20,000. Now it is fair to say that we don't often see anything being awarded for aggravated reaches on. That is really because most employers do not behave in an unacceptable way in the employment tribunal. But it is that, and it has been increased from 5000 to £20,000. So they're the two items that we've had in place for some time now and now we're going to move on to look at the changes made on the sixth of April 2020 on the first of these relates to involving employees. And again you see the employment rights. Miscellaneous Amendments Regulations 2019 will come across these regulations more than once through this webinar. Now employees have had the right through the information and Consultation of Employees Regulations 2000 and four to insist that their employer engages with them in talking about what's going on in the organization in consulting with him on this right has been there since 2000 full in the regulations that I just referred to the information consultation of employees often referred to as Sea Ice Rex, just an acronym that that works for those particular regulations now to force the employer to form some sort of body for the purposes of information consultation, it has to be a group of employees that make the request on what we have had is that at least 10% of employees in the area of the business that want the information and consultation body have had to make. The request on that has been reduced to 2%. But if the 2% is less than 15 employees, then there will be requirement toe have at least 15 employees making a request. So basically the requirement now is a minimum of 15 employees on and at least 2% of the work falls now. This wanted T things that are just worth noting that were in the ice rakes and still apply. First of all, this 2% of employees has to be 2% of the employees that would be covered by a body if it was set up. So let's taken organization that has two locations. One in Birmingham, one in Manchester. The organization operates those two sites fairly independently and on, and it's the Birmingham employees that is saying we want an information and consultation body on the information and consultation body. Well, just involved employees at Birmingham on will just involve informing and consulting about matters that affect those employees. It wound to address issues that are specific to Manchester in that situation, we would need to have at least 2% or little police, 15 off the employees and Birmingham making the request. Now, what about the situation where at this Birmingham solid? There is already an information consultation body on, Let's say, for the sake of argument that its unionized on the employer recognizes the trade union. But the union reps are very engaged on. The employees feel that the body isn't working the information and consultation body that there isn't working and they would rather set up a body. There is just employee representatives who really do want to be engaged in talking to the employer. That could not happen. If there is already an information and consultation body in place representing the employees a requesting representation, then a request cannot be made through the ICE regulations. If the information consultation body isn't working very effectively, then that is something to be dealt with separately. It's not dealt with by creating a new body through this route. Now the next area that changes on six of April 2020 is on you'll leave on. This is addressed by the employment rights, employment particulars and paid annual leave amendment regulations 2018 on this address is what we pay when employees are on annual leave at the moment or prior to the sixth of April 2020. If an employee received variable pay, then there is a requirement taken. An average of what has been learned on that has been calculated over 12 weeks from the sixth of April 2020. The requirement is to calculate holiday pay over the previous 52 weeks on. If the employee has not worked for the employer for at least 52 weeks, then is the average of what they have earned since they started work. Now, of course, if there is an employee who was paid a salary on, doesn't receive any additional money and that's just what they get, then their salary continues to be paid during annual leave. What we are thinking about here at the employees who receive a variable amount, maybe bonuses, overtime shift, pre mia commission, etcetera, etcetera. And in that situation that has been various case law that has shown that really we need to be including all financial elements of pay, putting them into the poor on taking the average. The reason for extending the average 2 52 weeks is that there are employees you have variable pay. There is quite seasonal on. Therefore, if they take annual leave in the quiet period where they are only less than they're getting less on on, you leave. And it is thought that that is unfair on that. What is paid on annual leave should reflect the average earnings of the employees over the year. It's worth just remembering that our entitlement annual leave comes from the working time regulations 1998. And they were introduced as a result of the U working time directive that has its roots in health and safety. So the rest see cap on the working week. The rules relating to annual leave that within those regulations are all about making sure that in please take the rest that they are entitled to on if employees are actually going to be financially worse off. By taking on your leave, they are going to be encouraged not to take on your leave on that goes against the principles of the working time regulations. So that is the thought behind this change. Now there's a couple of areas that changing relating toe agency workers on what we're talking about here are agency workers who are supplied toe work in an organization on a temporary basis, so they're probably referred to his temps in the organization. But we're not thinking about situations where an employment agency is commissioned by an employer to go and fill a permanent position. Andi does the advertising on the initial selection. We are thinking here about individuals who are placed temporarily in on organization. On the relevant legislation is the Agency Workers Amendment regulations 2019 on The first thing is that the sweetest irrigation is removed. So what is Swedish delegation? The Swedish interrogation allowed agency agents seize and employers some flexibility around the requirements is to set up in the agency Worker Regulations 2010. Now what these regulations say is that once an agency worker has been placed in an organization for 12 continuous weeks, the agency worker is entitled to parity off pay in terms and conditions with with some exclusions, wit to a permanent employees in the organization who is doing similar work. Now that protection doesn't help the agency worker if they are placed to do a unique job because the requirement is that they've got to be able to point to an employee in the organization and say I'm doing the same job as him or her on. Therefore, I should have the same pay in terms and conditions now. If the agency paid employees or paid their workers between, um assignments, then they didn't have to pay this parity. So one of the difficulties for agency workers is lack of certainty because they are put into an assignment on then they just be told At the end of the day, you're not leading tomorrow, but if an agency said well, we will carry on paying you before and we get the next assignment for you then that was referred to us, a Swedish delegation on in return there was no requirement to give parity of terms. Now that is a concern about this, because it could have been that an agency worker was being paid quite badly in comparison to permanent employees and say it has been decided that that Swedish interrogation goes, and anyway, agency workers who have been appointed on the basis that Swedish delegation will apply need to be told by the 30th of April 2020 that the Swedish irrigation does no longer apply on that they do have equality of treatment. Asset how in the agency Worker Regulations 2000 and 10. There was another change to agency workers that comes about as a result of the conduct of employment agencies and employment businesses. Amendment Regulations 2019 On this requires an agency worker to be given a key information document when they start in a placement on the idea here is that agency work. It should not be in a situation where they go off Teoh start work on a placement without knowing exactly what they're going to be paid when they're going to be paid on other terms relating to the assignment. So there is a requirement now for agency work is to be given a key information document on this must give the identity of the employer the type of contract that the agency worker is being assigned on. So is this. A rolling day on a day off will tell you at the end of every day, whether we need you the next day. Is it a three month contract? Is it a six month contract? What is it also the rate of remuneration that the agency worker will get Andi if there are any additional amounts. So over time commission bonuses, anything that the agency worker will be entitled to. And that should be explained also their holiday entitlement, what their entitlement actually is in terms of the days off that they can take on the associative pay and any deductions or fees there is going to be taken from this money that before they receive it. So this key information document is going to require cooperation between the employment agency on the employer, but it should be given to the agency worker when they start a placement. Now. Another important change on the sixth of April 2020 relates to the written statement of initial employment particulars, and this is contained in the employment rights, employment particulars and paid on your leave amendment regulations. 2018. Now the employment rights at 1996 required employers to provide and please with a written statement off their initial employment particulars within the 1st 2 months of them starting work on, there was a list of items that should be included in that written statement. It's not a lister is particularly surprising, so it requires such things as the terms relating to sickness. The hours of work, the place of work on your leave pay, the sort of things that probably most employers would include in a written contract anyway. But they're awesome. Three particular differences. First of all, there is now a requirement. Give that recent statement from Day one of employment so no longer is the root their requirement to do it with in the 1st 2 months. Now a lot of employers will not find that they've got to change their practices here because a lot of employers use the written statement as the offer letter, working on the basis that the items that are included in the written statement are the things that the perspective employees wants to know about when they're making a decision, whether to accept the job or not. But he's got to be given on day one of employment. There is an entitlement for both employees, Onda workers to receive this written statement. Aunt. Thirdly, there are additional items that now need to go into that written statement on within that there are items that previously could be included by reference toe other documents that now need to be in the main statement. So let let's take those first. So in this main statement in this written statement that gives is given to the employee or worker on day one, it must stay when the job will end. If it's for a fixed term, it must explain the notice that the employer worker will be required to give if they want to terminate their employment. On also the notice that the employer is required give if the employer terminates the employment on it must explain the rules relating to sick leave and pay. But there are also some additional items that need to be added into this written statement. The first of these is details of any paid leave. Now, the requirements that we've had in place for many years required the employer to explain annual leave. But now there is a requirement to explain any paid leave that the employees might be entitled to. So this could be maternity paternity. It could be that the employer has particular rules relating to paid leave for particular training. It could be relating Teoh compassionate leave or some employers allow a few days off each year paid leave to do voluntary work. It doesn't matter what it is. The any paid leave that the employee is entitled to should be explained. The second is a probationary period. Now there is no legal requirement to add in a probationary period. But if a probationary period is going to be used, then there is a requirement to explain how long it's going to last on what the terms are associate ID with this probationary period. So a probationary period is the initial period of employment, when UN employees has got to meet certain standards on the usual terms that an employer will have. There is. If the employee does not meet the required standards, then their employment could be terminated without going through the company disciplinary and dismissals procedure. So what this addition to the written statement is requiring is that that is spelled out to the employees. So if they're not going to go through the disciplinary of dismissals procedure, their employment could just be terminated. This should be made clear. The notice that they will receive should be made clear if the employer has a specific probation process. So some employers have put in a process that if the employee does not meet the required standard, there'll be a meeting to set new targets. There won't be a review meeting, maybe within two weeks. If if there is one of those processes, then that has got to be explained to the employees. The length of the probationary period is not specified in law, so it can be whatever the employer wants it to be. As long as that is reasonable, there is then a new requirement to explain remuneration and benefits on, not just pay. So the requirement that has been in place for some time is that the employer will explain what the employee is going to be paid when they're going to be paid on how that pay is calculated. The requirement now is to do that, but to also explain any benefits. So this could be company car, gym membership, private health insurance, private dental insurance, discounted company goods. We could go on and on because they the list of benefits that employers give is quite fair it and can be quite imaginative. So those have got to be explained. If there are eligibility criteria associated with those benefits, then that's also got to be explained now there's been a requirement to include the hours of work for right since written statements were required. But he is just the hours of work so an employer could write in a written statement prior to the sixth of April 2020. At the hours of work off a minimum of 35 hours, we a week Teoh be completed when we tell you to complete them or much better English than that. Now the requirement is to give more detail to the employees. So if there are specific days that the employee is always going to be quite work, that should be specified. If there are specific hours that should be specified. If the employee is going to work a variable working pattern, this should be made clear. But if there are parameters within that variation, then those promises parameters should be stated. So if, for example, the employee is going to work shifts from Monday to Saturday, the earliest the shift is gonna start is six in the morning. The latest is going to end is 10 at night. That should be made clear, Andi. It should also be made clear, wet how and when the employees will get detail about what they're working each week. And then finally, there is a requirement to include a section on training entitlement, any training requirements for the job on what the employer pace ful. Now, of course, and please continue to have training throughout their career on it's probably not possible to say what training the employees might get in five years time. The focus here is on what training the employees needs to do their job and how that is going to be provided, and that needs to be explained. And if there is anything that the employee has got pay for, that's got to be clear on if the employer is going to pay. But claw back some of the payment if the employed leaves within a set period of time but should also be spelled out in the written statement. So they're the changes for the six of April 2020 on. Now we're going to look at the changes that yet come now with all of these. The indication from the government is that these changes will be made. What is not clear is the exact detail off them or when they will be implemented. But as we look a t change, I'll explain to you what is known at present. So the first is looking a redundancy protection. Now this is a new, interesting area, uh, that sometimes employees fine draw this strange. At present, there is a requirement if an employee is made redundant whilst on maternity leave to consider if there is any suitable alternative employment that could be appropriate for that woman on if there is to give her her that suitable alternative employment ahead of anyone else, even if they are not the best person for the job now, it's important to nay that there was only a requirement Teoh give work or suitable alternative employment if the woman could do it. So we're not saying that the woman is on the turn t leave. She's been made redundant on. Now we have to find her some work. No, if there is no suitable alternative employment, then she leaves due to redundancy. But if there is on, let's say there are four people who could do the job. A woman, two men on the woman on maternity leave, then she has to be given the job ahead of the others, even if one of the others would be better on the whole thought Behind this is that if a woman is made redundant, Barnsdall maternity leave, it is more difficult for her to find a new job with a new employer than for someone who is not on maternity leave. Now the proposal is to extend this benefit all this protection. So currently it just applies to women on maternity leave. The proposal is it to extend it to pregnant women women who have returned from maternity leave in the last six months. Those who are are taking the adoption leave on those who have returned from from adoption leave in the last six months on those taking shared parental leave. Now the government is consulting about how this should be implemented. Um, on we wait to see, first of all, whether these proposals go ahead in exactly the way I've explained on also, we wait for an implementation date. The government has confirmed that it does plan to make these changes, so it is worth just thinking about how this might affect your organization. There is also some additional areas of family protection that the government is looking at on. It has committed to, ah, high level review of the gender division of parental leave on really, what the government is saying here is that we have shared parental leave. Shared parental leave allows a woman on maternity leave or in a doctor to end their maternity or adoption leave early on to share the remainder of their leave with their partner on what this does is it allows men time off to look after Children in an area that has always been predominantly women taking time off to look after Children. But the reality is that even though we do have shared parental leave, it hasn't had a big take up. Some would argue that the rules surrounding it's quite complicated, and maybe that's the reason. Others would argue that there are still those stereotypical family rolls on, and society has moved away from that and changing the law won't, uh, causes to move away from that. But the government has said that there is a time to look again at the family leave options that there are available to employees Andi to see if they are fit for purpose. So we look forward to seeing the output of that high level review. There is also the proposal that new leave Andi pay will be introduced for parents where they've given birth to a baby on the baby is, um well and needs neonatal care. At present, it is likely that the woman who has given birth to the child will be on maternity leave anyway. So she will be having leave and on can care for the child uring the neonatal care but at some stage will have to go back to work on the baby might still be a well. But of course, the partner of the woman who has given birth doesn't necessarily have any entitlement to any leave. So the plan is to introduce, leave and pay for parents of babies that need near natal care on. Of course, we need a few more specific definitions of exactly what that means. How long that leave would last four. Andi, how well the baby has to be for that leave to come to an end. So we look forward for more detail on that now, there has been a write request, flexible working for many years now. Initially the right was introduced for those with Children aged up to five years. Then it was extended to Children under 18 years on. Now we have a process whereby any employee with at least 26 weeks service can make a request toe work flexibly if they have not made a similar request in the last 12 months. But the government is proposing that we go a step further than that on that the employer will have a duty to consider if a job can be done flexibly rather than waiting for an employee. Eat to request flexibility on the employer when advertising a job will be required to think. Can this job be done flexibly on if it can tow advertise accordingly. So we wait to see more details about that on our the grounds that we currently have for refusing flexible working, going to apply Teoh all say, saying where, Actually, I'm not going to advertise that this job can be done flexibly because it can't with the same reasons apply. So there is a small detail we need around this, but the expectation is that employers will be requires Teoh to start from the basis of can this job be dumped flexibly rather than start from the basis of the job is what it is. And if you request to work flexibly, I'll think about it then. Now, another area that I think many employers will be very relieved to know is on the list is to look again at employment status. On if you do read the Taylor report into modern working practices is I recommended at the start of this weapon on you, say, Very interesting section, looking at employment status and looking at some of the difficulties that there are with the current definitions of employee worker on the self employed. Okay, those definitions, if we look at the definition in the employment rights at 1996 of an employee and a worker do know, really reflect the ways that people work today on. Therefore, the the use of those definitions is limited. The proposal from the government is that they will first of all, align the employment and tax definitions as much as possible. It is possible to be defined as an employee for employment purposes and self employed for tax purposes. On this just causes confusion. So the government is going to look out what the differences are. The definitions are usually different, but they are sufficiently different. But that scenario I've just given could happen. So the government's going to look again at a look at whether things can be brought into line on then to look again at the way we define implement status on to see if greater clarity can be given. It's probably unreasonable to expect that we will get definitions that are so clear cut that we can look at anybody on. Just apply that definition and say, Yes, you're an employee. Your worker yourself employed on that is because there is so much variety in the way that people work. But what would be good is toe have more certainty when we're looking at an individual as to whether they are an employee work or self employed. Now, the moment with the employment status definitions we applied the multiple test, which asks if the individual is under the control of the employer. If the individual has to do work personally on if there is any term inconsistent with employment and we also apply the Mutual Obligations test, which asks if the employer is obliged to offer work And if the individual is obliged to do any work that is offered now, the emphasis there is is very much on the right to substitution on. If you look at some of the many rulings that have been in recent times looking at employment worker and self employed status, the focus on the requirement to do work personally is quite strong. And if somebody is required to do work personally, then it's likely there. An employee or worker on the government has suggested that actually having this emphasis on the right to do work personally and therefore by default Europe the right to substitute your work by somebody else doing it for you, um, probably isn't. The right emphasis on the suggestion is that there will be more emphasis on the level of control that the employer has now. Employment status rears its head time and time again. There are a number of good minds that have tried to find that definition that is always going to work on. We haven't quite got there yet, but there is a commitment from the government to address this so it will be great to see what they come up with. We then have the issue of flexible work. Pathan's I'm one is the topical issues that there has been over recent years has been the concern about the way that zero hour contracts he used zero hour contracts or contracts where the employer agrees that they will offer the individual some work but doesn't agree a minimum amount of work. So the individual is in effect, recruited into a pall of individuals on will be offered work if and when it becomes available. Now. Politically, there has been a lot of discussion about Sarah our contracts. Andi. The big concerns are the lack of security that it gives to individuals because, quite simply, they don't know whether they've got any work tomorrow and therefore the lack of security of income. Andi. It makes it difficult, if not impossible. To do such things is is get a mortgage or a loan, but also it makes it very difficult for those on zero hour contracts to plan financially. But there is also a place for zero hour contracts. Individuals who want flexibility in their work quite like zero hour contracts, so it's not necessarily that they're a bad thing, but it is true that employees work or individuals working on them. What very unlikely to be employees because they won't meet the requirement. The mutual obligations tests. I just explained. They just do not have security on the proposal is that those who work on a non regular working pattern will be able to request a fixed working pattern after they have worked for at least 26 weeks under a flexible pattern for the same employer. Now we wait to see exactly how this is going to work. The suggestion is that it will be similar to making a flex a flexible working request. So at the moment, individuals with at least 26 weeks service can make a request toe work flexibly on that request can be turned down by an employer on a number of grounds. The employer has treatments to consider the request. The suggestion is that the process for managing a request toe have a fixed working pattern will be similar to that, but we wait and see. We then have the issue surrounding continuity of service. At present, if an individual has a gap between two periods of work of a week, they maintain continuity of service So let's say for, for example, an individual is asked to work Monday in Tuesday. They do work Monday and Tuesday for the employer on then there. No asked to work Wednesday, Thursday, Friday, but they are asked where the following Monday, Then they would have continuity of service because the gap between those periods of work is less than a week. But a week is not very long, and the proposal is that this is going to be extended to four weeks. So this will particularly be beneficial to individuals who have this zero hour contract approach or some other work pattern that is not regular. Where they could have a gap between assignments of more than a week on, therefore, are not building up continuity of service, so extending it to four weeks will give broader protection to these that have a more flexible working pattern. There is also, um, a proposal to ban employers from making deductions from tips. This has been there for for some time as a topic of concern that employees sometimes keep tips or that they take the tips, deduct a certain amount, and then the individual that has earned the tip doesn't see the full amount that will no longer be lawful at some day to be determined. We then have a number of issues around sickness on statutory sick pay refer to as SSP. The first issue is surrounding reasonable adjustments. At present, if a ninja vigil is disabled as defined in the equality at 2010 there is a requirement on the employer to consider what reasonable adjustments could be made toe help that individual overcome any disadvantage that they experience as a result of the disability. But that right to have reasonable adjustments made only applies if the individual is disabled as defined in the equality at 2010 on. That could be an individual who is struggling toe work because of ill health or struggling to return to work following a period of ill health who is not disabled as defined in the equality at 2010. But it's still struggling on DSO. The proposal is that the requirement to make reasonable adjustments will be extended to cover those that are are struggling with ill health. On, we wait to see exactly what that requirement is, what the requirement on the adjustments on also who will be covered by this. There is also the proposal to strengthen the statutory guidance for employers. Teoh encourage and support them to help employees to get back to work before contemplating dismissal on the grounds of ill health. The fought behind this is the employees genuinely gah ill. There's no question about that on. If employees have been absent for some period due to ill health, it can be difficult for them to get back to the workplace, particularly. It can be difficult to get back to full time work very quickly. Andi. So the government is looking at ways that it can offer better guidance and support to employers in helping individuals to get back to work. There is also a plan to reform statutory sick pay to simplify the current provisions to allow for flexibility to return to work while still receiving some secretary sick pay. This would apply if the individual was not replying, returning to their normal hours of work. So they're doing a partial return so that there would be a access to maybe partial SSP and to also look at the enforcement of statutory sick pay, probably in a similar way to the enforcement of the national minimum and living wage. There is also the proposal to improve the access to advice that employees and in please have in large organizations. There is typically occupational health. There in the background may be employed by the organization or an occupational health organization that the employer can refer employees to. But in smaller organizations, there isn't the same occupational health support there, so the government is looking at how that could be improved. There was also looking at a redesign of statutory sick pay rebates for small and medium sized businesses. Onda will say the requirement for there to be automatic reporting off sickness, absence through payroll. So quite a lot of areas there where the raise a lot of questions is to exactly how this is going to work. And so we do wait for further details here and then finally, there is a proposal to have fairer enforcement of the law. So one of the things we know is that just for example, because there is a national minimum wage, it doesn't mean the little employers pay that on. Therefore, we do need enforcement bodies, but we do have a number of different bodies enforcing different things. So, for example, we have the HMRC. We have the employment agency standards in Spectra. We have the gangmasters on labor abuse authority dealing with issues relating to modern slavery. So we have a number of different bodies who are all doing important work. But the government is questioning whether it would be more effective if there was a single body who was coordinating enforcement action. Andi understood more broadly what was going on. So if there was a business that wasn't complying, for example, with the national minimum wage on at the same time wasn't complying with the payment of the correct annual leave payments, then one body would see that this employer was a ring in two areas where when we have lots of bodies, we don't have that that pulled intelligence in the same way. It also want Paul re sourcing, which could make the bodies mawr effective in the actions that they're able to take. So a single market enforcement body consultation was launched in July 2019. It closed in October 2019 on, we looked to see what proposals the government may for a new single enforcement body, so that is the good work plan. As you'll see it does involve a lot of significant changes to employment law across the range of different areas. I think we can also see make some very useful reforms de keep an eye out for the inflammation. Tae shin dates for these areas that we don't know a date yet on other say I do recommend to you the Taylor report on modern employment practices because it is a very interesting read. Thank you for listening.