Ms Patricia King:

There may be something in the drafting of the Bill that alludes to something unintended. That is often the case in a Bill. The basis of the Bill, however, is that if one's contract is different from one's pattern or work, one has the opportunity to make a claim. In most organised employments it does not arise because, for the reasons Mr. Douglas has outlined, there are already collective agreements. The labour inspectorate and its current rules, for instance, already require employers to meet certain standards in respect of information to employees. Indeed the labour inspectorate can already require the employer to comply by putting up notices, if they do not already do so, in respect of certain aspects of the employment. That is already a feature anyway. I am quite sure employers would say they would find it burdensome to do so in a number of languages, but that is all that is required. They must ensure, as part of the labour inspectorate's rules, that the employees understand the message of compliance notices and so on. I am not sure that there is anything substantive in the claim that there would be unintended consequences that would then cause them a great burden, which I think is the point employers may have been making.