A just transition for labour:how to enable collective voice from the world of work

This article addresses the ways in which domestic, regional and international collective labour norms may need to be revisited, if those at work are to have any meaningful voice in the design of ‘just transitions’. It is argued that these transitions can be understood as dynamic processes, the outcomes of which cannot be simply pre-determined or their justice merely assumed. It therefore makes sense for associated procedures and mechanisms to be as inclusive as possible, representing interests of the wider ‘world of work’ in the project of recrafting the manufacture of goods and delivery of services to meet environmental needs, including the reduction of carbon emissions. Participatory engagement is likely to lead to better policy design, ensuring effectiveness and commitment. This approach also follows from appreciation of the dignity of labour and the legitimate concerns of those at work with the welfare of the communities in which they work and live. Moreover, the nature of ecological harms require attention to not merely one locality (the workplace or the community) but potential for transborder effects. The case for labour representation in just transitions is now accepted in many quarters, including the European Union (EU), and receives international recognition in the Paris Agreement, but is only likely to be realisable if national level collective labour law is changed accordingly. In Europe, that may require prompts from the International Labour Organization (ILO), but also the European Court of Human Rights. This article argues that an appropriate beginning for any process of revision and remodelling would have three dimensions. Firstly, I advocate addressing the identity of collective voice at work, reconsidering the legitimate objectives of collective bargaining and industrial action, and rethinking the methods by which collective voice can be exercised in the realisation of sustainable development. The potential implications of such changes are considered here

Exploring a Human Rights Approach to 'decent' Digital Work:What happens when Freedom of Association and Expression are Combined?

This article explores how a human rights approach could assist in the translation of ‘digital work’ to ‘decent work’. In so doing, the ubiquity of the digital in the contemporary world of work is acknowledged, as almost all working arrangements are likely to be affected by new technologies whether directly or indirectly. In this sense, a human rights approach is appealing as a way in which to overcome the employment status problem, but also to recognise the universal character of the relevance of the digital in working lives. The article examines the pros and cons of a regulatory strategy which relies on human rights protections, as regards access to such issues as algorithmic management and design, utilisation of and generative artificial intelligence (AI), while also considering the effects of changes to location of the workplace. The limitations of strategic human rights litigation are recognised, which must be complemented by other forms of mobilisation to be effective. In particular, the article observes the significance of the ‘right to have rights’ and the potential ‘architectonic’ role played by freedom of association and expression when combined. The article goes on to analyse recent jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights which regards these freedoms of speech and association as mutually reinforcing rather than conflicting, but also places significant constraints on their application. It is suggested that a richer vision of a European human rights approach to digital work would be advisable