The vulnerable worker in Britain and problems at work

This article investigates the experience of low paid workers without union representation. It reports on the findings of a recent survey of 501 low paid, non-unionized workers who experienced problems at work. The results demonstrate that problems at work are widespread and, despite a strong propensity to take action to try to resolve them, most workers failed to achieve satisfactory resolutions. In the light of these results, we argue that the current UK Government definition of vulnerability is too narrow because our results suggest that a large proportion of low paid, unrepresented workers are at risk of being denied their employment rights. Therefore we question the ability of the UK's current system of predominantly non-unionized employment relations to deliver employment rights effectively and fairly. © 2009 BSA Publications Ltd®

Transporting the European social partnership model to Australia

There has been a long tradition of debate over workplace democracy in Australia. Yet, workplace democracy remains one of the great unfulfilled promises of Australian labour law. While the current focus on enterprise bargaining in the workplace might encourage us to think about new information and consultation mechanisms at work, there are no legislative provisions imminent. We argue that the voluntary approach of recent Australian governments has failed to create a generally available right to information and consultation at work. In this article we therefore consider how information and consultation procedures could be introduced into Australia, drawing upon the European social partnership model and the Australian experience with employee consultation mechanisms. In particular, the article assesses employee consultation procedures in light of good workplace relations practices. The article examines how the Workplace Relations Act could be amended to incorporate a new model, and assesses its likely effectiveness in the current Australian industrial relations context.40 page(s

Public sector austerity cuts in the UK and the changing discourse of work-life balance

The relative importance of economic and other motives for employers to provide support for work- life balance (WLB) is debated within different literatures. However, discourses of WLB can be sensitive to changing economic contexts. This article draws on in-depth interviews with senior HR professionals in British public sector organisations to examine shifting discourses of WLB in an austerity context. Three main discourses were identified: WLB practices as organisationally embedded amid financial pressures, WLB practices as a strategy for managing financial pressures and WLB as a personal responsibility. Despite a discourse of mutual benefits to employee and employer underpinning all three discourses, there is a distinct shift towards greater emphasis on economic rather than institutional interests of employers during austerity, accompanied by discursive processes of fixing, stretching, shrinking and bending understandings of WLB. The reconstructed meaning of WLB raises concerns about its continued relevance to its original espoused purpose

Agency Working in Britain: Character, Consequences and Regulation

Debate over the nature of temporary agency work has intensified in recent times, spurred on by a proposed European directive and by speculation about links with the much heralded 'knowledge' economy. This paper examines the debate, focusing on the current character of agency work in Britain. Using data from the Labour Force Survey (LFS), we assess some of the claims commonly made about agency work, relating to the personal and employment characteristics of those engaged in such work, the motives of agency workers and the prospects for those who take up agency jobs. In considering the arguments surrounding regulatory change, we find there is a strong case for regulation, but that this rests on the continued disadvantage associated with agency work, with little evidence of an impact from the purported 'knowledge' economy. Copyright Blackwell Publishing Ltd/London School of Economics 2005.