Complements or Substitutes? Taxation, Social Welfare and Labour Market Regulation: An Industrial Relations Perspective on the ‘Five Economists’ Plan

2000 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 8-45
Author(s):  
Julien Barbara ◽  
Peter Gahan

The purpose of this paper is to critically appraise the assumptions and proposals put forward in the Five Economists' plan to change the balance between social welfare, taxation and labour market regulation. The core theme developed here is that the proposal is based on questionable assumptions about the nature of employment relationships and labour market processes. An alternative framework is advanced. Using the Dutch case, it is argued that a more appropriate balance between these policy instruments, which requires an account of the distribution of risk between workers, firms and the state, provides a better theoretical basis on which linkages between taxation, social welfare and labour market regulation can be recast. ‘Let me say, at the outset, that you should be sceptical of anyone who suggests that there are any easy solutions. Solutions which most economists would agree could enable a return to “full employment” or very low unemployment, are either socially or politically unacceptable, or we do not know how to Implement them. The best solution is to achieve a large increase in the rate of economic growth.’ (Dawkins 1996: 16)

2019 ◽  
Vol 33 (4) ◽  
pp. 682-699 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jens Arnholtz ◽  
Bjarke Refslund

Transnational workers on large-scale construction projects are often poorly included in national industrial relations systems, which results in employment relations becoming trapped in vicious circles of weak enforcement and precarious work. This article shows how Danish unions have, nonetheless, been successful in enacting existing institutions and organising the construction of the Copenhagen Metro City Ring, despite initially encountering a highly fragmented, transnational workforce and several subcontracting firms that actively sought to circumvent Danish labour-market regulation. This is explained by the union changing their organising and enforcement strategies, thereby utilising various power resources to create inclusive strategies towards transnational workers. This includes efforts to create shared objectives and identity across divergent groups of workers and actively seeking changes in the public owners’ attitude towards employment relations.


2020 ◽  
Vol 31 (3) ◽  
pp. 347-363
Author(s):  
Peter Waring ◽  
Azad Bali ◽  
Chris Vas

The race to develop and implement autonomous systems and artificial intelligence has challenged the responsiveness of governments in many areas and none more so than in the domain of labour market policy. This article draws upon a large survey of Singaporean employees and managers (N = 332) conducted in 2019 to examine the extent and ways in which artificial intelligence and autonomous technologies have begun impacting workplaces in Singapore. Our conclusions reiterate the need for government intervention to facilitate broad-based participation in the productivity benefits of fourth industrial revolution technologies while also offering re-designed social safety nets and employment protections. JEL Codes: J88, K31, O38, M53


2020 ◽  
pp. 0143831X2090914
Author(s):  
Alan Hall ◽  
Rebecca Hall ◽  
Nicole Bernhardt

Individual worker complaints continue to be the core foundation of employment standards enforcement in many Western jurisdictions, including the Canadian province of Ontario. In the contemporary labour market context where segments of the labour force may be disproportionately impacted by rights violations, and employment relationships are more diverse and often more tenuous than previously, the continued reliance on individual claims suggests a need to better understand the challenges associated with the investigation and resolution of claims involving ‘vulnerable workers’ in precarious employment situations. Using interviews with front-line Ontario employment standards officers (ESOs), this article examines the extent to which certain worker characteristics and employment situations perceived by officers as ‘vulnerable’ are identified by officers as significant constraints or barriers to investigation processes and outcomes, and documents whether and how officers address these constraints and barriers. The analysis also identifies the perceived influence of policy, resource and legislative requirements in shaping how officers deal with the more difficult and challenging cases, while also considering the extent to which the officers’ actions are understood by them as discretionary and guided by their particular orientations or concerns. In so doing, this article reveals challenges to the resolution of claims in precarious employment situations, the very place where employment standards are often most needed.


2011 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter G. Gahan ◽  
Richard James Mitchell ◽  
Sean Cooney ◽  
Andrew Stewart ◽  
Brian Cooper

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document