Luke Evans: Labour’s self-defeating Employment Rights Bill creates a huge NHS problem

Dr Luke Evans MP is Shadow Minister for Health and Social Care.

In a statement to the Commons on the latest wave of proposed industrial action by England’s Resident Doctors, Health Secetary Wes Streeting spoke with striking clarity – rightly condemning the strikes as “unreasonable, unnecessary and unfair.”

He pointed to a 28.9 per cent pay uplift awarded under this Government. He refused to reopen negotiations, stating firmly: “We simply cannot afford to.” His case was, in many ways, correct.

A strike – especially one of this scale – must be both morally and practically justifiable, and the BMA’s latest move fails that test.

But beyond the Commons chamber and the punchy headlines, there’s something else going on — something deeply troubling and, ironically, self-defeating: the Employment Rights Bill being pushed through by this Labour Government.

While ministers have talked tough on strikes, their legislation quietly makes striking easier, undermining the very principles they claim to defend.

Clause 61 of the Employment Rights Bill repeals the Strikes (Minimum Service Levels) Act 2023 in full. That Act allowed the Secretary of State to set safe staffing levels during strikes in sectors like health, education, fire services and border control. It also allowed employers to issue “work notices” to ensure some critical coverage.

That protection is now gone.

In the Government’s own explanatory notes, this repeal is clear:

“All associated powers, regulations and defined terms related to minimum service levels will also fall away completely.”

So under Labour’s new law, there is now no legal way to guarantee basic patient safety or minimum staffing during a healthcare strike — even in emergency care. Ministers have stripped themselves of the very tools that could contain damaging industrial action.

But it doesn’t stop there.

The Bill also dismantles key safeguards introduced in the Trade Union Act 2016. The 50 per cent turnout threshold in strike ballots? Gone. The 40 per cent support requirement in key public services (like health)? Also gone.

Now, a union needs only a simple majority of those voting – no matter how low the turnout – to call a legal strike.

This week’s Resident Doctor ballot proves the point. Of those who voted, 90 per cent did indeed vote to strike, but Streeting argued in the House that they didn’t have a mandate as a majority of doctors didn’t vote — and still, a five-day national strike has been declared.

Previously, this might not have met the legal threshold. But, under Labour’s own legislation, it will.

Wes Streeting told the Commons:

“Despite failing to get a majority of their members to vote for strike action… they are still proposing to lead their members out.”

That is true, but it is also a direct consequence of his Party’s own legislation.

The Shadow Health Secretary Ed Argar was right to highlight that Streeting’s decision last year to hand over above-inflation pay awards without conditions set a dangerous precedent. He said:

“We warned the Government that caving in to union demands for above-inflation pay rises without any conditions or strings attached would set a dangerous precedent.

It would send a message that the Government were weak, and we warned that the unions would simply come back for more. Unfortunately, events in recent days have shown that we were right.”

In February 2023, Streeting told the then-Conservative Health Secretary:

“The power to stop these strikes is in the Government’s hands.”

Well, that power is now in his hands.

And yet the very actions of this Labour Government – in law – have weakened the ability of any future Government to stop harmful strikes, to enforce safe staffing and, most importantly, to protect patients.