Kemi Badenoch, the UK’s trade secretary and former business secretary, has sparked new controversy as she defends flexible working legislation in a conversation with renowned businessman James Dyson. This comes despite her outspoken opposition to the law during her Conservative leadership bid, in which she criticized the flexibility measures.

Minutes from a June meeting between Badenoch and Dyson reveal a heated exchange over the government’s flexible working bill. Dyson raised concerns about how the new regulations would impact his business, which requires all employees to be present in the office for collaborative product development and research.

Dyson reportedly warned that the legislation granting employees the right to request flexible working from the first day of employment would complicate his company’s ability to mandate in-office work.

Despite her opposition to the bill, Badenoch defended the legislation during the meeting, explaining that it was not solely about working from home. “Flexible working,” she said, “goes beyond working from home, such as the ability to work compressed hours.” She clarified that the law merely allows employees to “request these from day one of employment, not mandate companies into agreement.”

Dyson, however, was unconvinced. He argued that the bill would place unnecessary strain on his company’s operations, calling it “an additional HR burden” and questioning the need for legislation. According to documents released under freedom of information law, Dyson insisted there was “no need to legislate on this issue” and urged Badenoch to reconsider its impact.

Concerns Over Business Burden

Badenoch’s stance on the bill is part of her broader views on business regulation. Though it was a Conservative Party manifesto commitment to give workers the right to request flexible work from starting a new job, Badenoch has expressed reservations about the increasing burdens placed on small businesses.

Her opposition has extended to policies on maternity pay and the minimum wage, which she believes weigh heavily on business owners.

In a statement made last September, Badenoch criticized Labour’s stance on flexible working, arguing that “we need to get more people into the workplace” rather than encouraging remote work. She warned that home working risks eroding skills development, particularly among younger workers who are “not learning … at the same rate they used to.” Her stance contrasts sharply with Labour’s call for greater employee rights.

Badenoch’s opposition to various workers’ rights policies came under scrutiny at the Conservative Party conference, where she stirred controversy by referring to maternity pay as “excessive” when funded through taxation.

She also pointed to the closure of small businesses due to rising employment costs, citing a cafe in her constituency that closed after the owner could no longer afford to pay minimum wage or cover maternity leave.

Dyson’s Response

While Dyson has declined to publicly comment on the recent meeting with Badenoch, a source close to the company defended his arguments. The source said Dyson was right to raise concerns as an employer of thousands of UK scientists and engineers.

According to the source, Dyson’s business model relies on the collaborative nature of in-person work, where employees learn from each other and drive innovation through shared spaces. For Dyson, the new legislation presents a challenge to maintaining that dynamic.

The conversation between Badenoch and Dyson has prompted a sharp rebuke from Labour. Emily Thornberry, the former shadow attorney general, criticized Badenoch’s position, calling her track record on workers’ rights “appalling.”

Thornberry added that the Labour government is committed to boosting employee protections and accused Badenoch of failing to learn from the public’s rejection of 14 years of Conservative rule.

“This week, while the Tories debated scrapping maternity pay and minimum wage, the Labour government brought forward plans for the biggest boost to workers’ rights in a generation,” Thornberry remarked, emphasizing the growing divide between the two major parties on the issue of workers’ rights.

Despite the ongoing debate, the flexible working bill remains law, reflecting the government’s determination to offer employees greater autonomy. Badenoch, though critical, appears willing to defend the bill’s intent while acknowledging the valid concerns of business leaders like Dyson.