The policy position announcement by Minister Caoimhe Archibald on the Good Jobs Bill is a significant and pragmatic step toward addressing some of Northern Ireland’s most pressing labour market issues.
The measures proposed by the Department of Economy are the product of extensive consultation and careful reflection on evidence gathered over recent months.
When Minister Conor Murphy initiated work on a Good Jobs Bill, he promised that reform would be grounded in evidence but co-designed with stakeholders. Today’s announcement by Minister Caoimhe Archibald makes clear that this commitment was a serious one and she is committed to same.
The policy position now being taken forward is the product of extensive consultation, reflection, and balancing of interests. It is not a maximalist vision, but a pragmatic response to real problems in the labour market in Northern Ireland - an effort to strengthen protections where necessary, while preserving flexibility where it is genuinely valued by workers and employers alike. The proposals strike an exceptional balance of being pro-business and pro-worker.
This is political economy done properly. The Minister moved on the basis of substantive evidence, done serious consultation, engaged extensively with stakeholders and turned it into a balanced, workable policy. She's reflected the reality of how the labour market works - protecting good flexibility for workers and businesses, but also stepping in where exploitation needs to be stopped.
This shows a Minister who’s serious about delivery, serious about getting the Bill through the Executive, and serious about building a stronger economy with better jobs with a labour market that is fair, flexible, and fit for the future. It’s a big and important step forward.
In total, these reforms represent a pragmatic, balanced response to the issues identified in the labour market. This approach reflects a serious understanding of political economy: how labour markets operate in reality, and how political change must be built through careful navigation of competing priorities to achieve balanced proposals. The Minister’s policy stance — ambitious but measured - appears designed not just to generate headlines, but to actually make it through the Executive and onto the statute book.
Stakeholders across the table will welcome publication of the policy position. Of course, there has been criticism on specific elements until now, and that is to be expected. This is complex, contested territory. It would also be idealistic to pretend that there will not be some criticism following the announcement of the policy position. Stakeholders will, naturally, play to character, raising concerns that reflect their established and starting positions. But the real test for them now is not about just making noise and stating their positions - it is about leadership. It’s time for all stakeholders to step up, to engage with the evidence and guide who they represent through the reality of compromise and collaboration.
It’s time for all stakeholders - whether employers, trade unions, or others - to step away from entrenched positions and recognise that the priority here is securing a better economy for everyone. Having engaged with all of the stakeholders, they are keen to embark on this task.
The Executive has a real opportunity here. Delivery of this Good Jobs Bill will not only fulfil a promise to modernise employment rights made back in New Decade, New Approach back in 2020. It will also demonstrate that Northern Ireland’s institutions are capable of delivering serious, evidence-based reforms that improve lives and strengthen the economy.
This Bill is not trying to solve every issue in the labour market, and nor should we expect any single piece of legislation to do so. But it is making meaningful progress across a range of areas where reform is badly needed. Some of the most high-profile elements include action to end exploitative zero hours contracts, a strengthening of trade union rights, and the introduction of day-one rights to request flexible working. These are important, evidence-backed interventions which, taken together, represent a serious and meaningful advance in shaping a fairer and more dynamic labour market that works better for workers, for employers, and for the economy as a whole.
The proposals reflect an attempt to navigate the complexity of the issue, balancing different interests. This is a moment that demands collaboration and courage from all parties to ensure these reforms take shape and benefit workers, businesses, and the economy as a whole. It is an important step forward - but attention will rightly remain on the detail of implementation and the ongoing negotiations ahead.
Zero hours contracts have been one of the most high-profile and contested issues in this process. The Department’s policy position reflects the real complexity of the issue but delivers a measured and evidence-based response. It is clear that serious thought has gone into balancing the flexibility that a narrow proportion of our economic activity needs, with the need to prevent exploitation of workers.
The problems associated with zero hours contracts are well-documented in academic and policy research. Workers on such contracts with unpredictable and uncertain hours and income means that it is difficult to plan finances, get a mortgage, plan childcare, or balance work and family life. This instability not only impacts their wellbeing and mental health but also tends to depress productivity and motivation in the workplace. For businesses, while extreme flexibility may offer short-term advantages, the longer-term consequences include higher staff turnover, reduced employee engagement, and lower organisational performance.
It is against this evidence that the Department has proposed a series of proportionate measures to address exploitative practices, while preserving flexibility in those limited cases where certain business models continue to depend on it. These measures include the right to request a 'banded hours' contract after a qualifying period, reasonable notice of shifts, compensation for shifts cancelled at short notice, and a ban on exclusivity clauses where incomes are low. This allows workers on low-income or unpredictable contracts the freedom to seek additional work and earn a fair wage, rather than being forced to rely on a single employer that doesn't provide enough work. Workers who choose to remain on flexible contracts will still be able to do so.
These are small, calibrated measures. The proposal here is not to ban zero-hours contracts. The proposals don’t intend to restrict flexible working where it’s genuinely mutual. They simply give workers who have worked up a period of time where they consistently and regularly work these hours anyway to have a banded contract which reflects this.
The evidence also clearly supports the need to modernise worker voice and collective bargaining frameworks to reflect today’s labour market realities. A wide body of research shows that effective worker representation — including through trade unions — is linked to better pay, improved job security, more opportunities for training and skills development, and more stable workplace relations. For employers, stronger worker voice can support earlier dispute resolution, reduce absenteeism, and contribute to better organisational performance.
Acknowledging that unions not only have a place at the table but also make a meaningful, constructive contribution is a positive development. When fulfilled this will bring about a positive shift in the employment relations landscape - one where trade union rights are strengthened, and collective relations are a key lever for transitioning to a high-road economic model. A high-road economic model focuses on boosting productivity, creating secure, well-paid jobs, and ensuring sustainable growth. It’s about fostering a fairer economy where both businesses and workers thrive, contributing to long-term social and economic stability.
When fulfilled this will bring us into line with the norm of thinking, across many advanced economies, including Scotland, Wales and soon to be England, which recognises the role of worker voice in building stronger economies.
The most recent evidence from the Skills and Employment Survey further underscores the urgency of this reform. It reveals that worker involvement in effective forms of organisational participation - including voice and representation mechanisms - has declined in recent years. This trend has a direct negative impact on both employee well-being and employee motivation, which in turn affects productivity. Lower levels of organisational participation correlate with lower levels of employee satisfaction and engagement, which are crucial drivers of performance in the workplace.
This decline is particularly concerning given that many workers, especially those in non-unionised organisations, have expressed a strong desire for greater union representation. Over a third of employees in non-unionised workplaces across the UK have said they would vote to establish a union if given the opportunity. This figure rises significantly among younger workers, with half of those aged 20-29 reporting unmet demand for union representation. These figures highlight the gap between the current state of worker representation and what many workers clearly want and need.
Given this evidence, it is welcome to see that the Department’s proposals to modernise Northern Ireland’s trade union framework to include measures that respond to this gap. They recognise that strong, fair, and contemporary mechanisms for worker voice are not only crucial for workers’ well-being but also for building a competitive and fair labour market. The detail of implementation will be important, but the direction - modernising outdated systems to better support both workers and businesses - is consistent with evidence-based good practice.
And finally, on the day one right to request flexible working. For too long, so-called ‘flexible employment’ has been synonymous with insecure, low-quality work. That’s precisely what has driven so many women — especially mothers — out of the labour market altogether.
The issue isn’t that women don’t want to work. It’s that too many jobs still operate on the assumption that workers are available full-time, full-intensity, with no competing responsibilities. Meanwhile, the types of flexibility on offer - tend to come with poorer pay, weak rights, less security and a lack of opportunity for skills and training provision and career progression.
This policy marks a crucial shift: it begins to build real flexibility into the standard employment relationship — not by lowering standards, but by raising expectations. Giving workers a day-one right to request flexible working, allowing two requests per year, and removing unnecessary hurdles doesn’t undermine the employment contract — it modernises it.
If we want to bring more women back into the labour market — and stop losing skilled workers after they become parents — this kind of structural change is essential. It's not just about giving people the option to stay in work, it’s about making work compatible with the realities of their lives.