Minimum wage 'opt out' rejected

---

MPs have rejected a private member's bill that would have allowed employers to "opt out" of the national minimum wage.

Christopher Chope's employment opportunities bill was defeated this afternoon by 5 votes to 33.

Chope told the House that his proposal "does not actually abolish the minimum wage".

"What it does is it enables freely-consenting adults to opt out of the minimum wage."

He claimed that the minimum wage, currently set at £5.93 an hour for those over 21, restricts people "from selling their own labour at a price of their own choosing".

"We discriminate against those who are young or inexperienced or seeking on the job training," Chope told MPs.

He argued that the national wage does not take into account regional variations.

Under his proposals people seeking asylum would be allowed to work.

Chope also claimed that the growth in unpaid internships is a result of a lack of flexibility in paying people either nothing or the minimum wage.

"We should be encouraging, facilitating, enabling these people to join the labour market rather than acting to exclude them from it," he said.

Philip Davies (Con, Shipley) backed the bill.

He said the "most vulnerable in society" are denied the chance to get on the first rung of the employment ladder by the minimum wage.

Davies suggested that people with disabilities could be employed on low wages by employers who want to give them a chance of work.

He told the House that what renumeration someone is willing to work for is "a private matter" between them and their employer.

Edward Leigh (Con, Gainsborough) asked why disabled people should work for less money than anyone else.

Davies said at present people with disabilities are penalised by the minimum wage, as an employer would choose an able-bodied candidate over a disabled candidate because the employer is compelled to pay them the same wage.

"If they feel that for a short period of time taking a lower rate of pay to help them get on their first rung on the jobs ladder, if they judge that's a good thing, I don't see why we should be standing in their way."

Shadow business minister Gareth Thomas said the national minimum wage had been "a huge success", raising the pay of two million people when it was introduced in 1999.

He said there were cases of people being paid as little as 80p an hour before the Labour government introduced the minimum wage.

He reminded the House that the Tories opposed it and claimed it would cost two million jobs, whereas in fact three million were created in the following years.

Thomas said that allowing rogue employers to pay less would mean the taxpayer would end up supporting low-paid workers through the benefits and tax credit systems.

He said there is a disparity in the relationship between worker and employer and this bill would leave people at risk from being "exploited by unscrupulous employers" who will undercut those who want to pay their staff the mandated minimum.

Opposition MPs also attacked the bill.

Nick Smith (Lab, Blaenau Gwent) condemned the "buy high, sell cheap" ethos of Chope's legislation, branding it "a miserable attempt to gouge down wages of workers across our country" and no way to help working families.

He added it would undermine the national nature of the minimum wage and encourage lower and lower wages.

Tony Lloyd (Lab, Manchester Central) said the bill showed the Tories are "a rotten, nasty party".

Business minister Mark Prisk told the House that the government's support for the minimum wage is enshrined in the coalition agreement.

He said Chope's bill would leave workers open to exploitation, and that the minimum wage "gives protection to low-income workers and provides incentives to work".

"Low-paid workers who may be very fearful of losing their jobs are unlikely to have that free choice, that equal position about whether or not they should accept a pay cut taking them below the national minimum wage," Prisk said.

Article Comments