Industrial Relations and the Environment in the UK

Author(s):  
Andrea Oates
Keyword(s):  
2018 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 373-389 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sissel Trygstad ◽  
Trine P Larsen ◽  
Kristine Nergaard

Industrial cleaning shares some common features across countries. Institutions for collective wage regulation are fragile, the market is highly price-sensitive and skewed competition has exerted pressure on wages and conditions. Increased cross-border mobility of labour and enterprises after EU enlargement brought new sources of competitive pressure, which was amplified by the subsequent economic crisis. We study changes in collective regulation in industrial cleaning in Denmark, Germany, Norway and the UK since the turn of the century, and find that the social partners have responded differently to the challenges. We discuss these responses in the light of national differences in industrial relations regimes and the regulatory tools available for the organized actors.


2001 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 227-257
Author(s):  
Denis Gregory

‘Partnership’ is a word that crops up with increasing frequency in government, trade union and management circles in the UK. For many it neatly embodies both the practice and sentiment of the so-called ‘third way’. In the workplace, a partnership approach to industrial relations has been offered as a neo-pluralist alternative to the unitarism of Human Resources Management. The Trades Union Congress (TUC) is an active proponent of partnership and the government has created a fund to support the development of partnership at the workplace. This article sketches some theoretical underpinning for the practice of partnership. To shed some light on the prospects for partnership it draws on recent UK experience and includes a case study of the development of a partnership between UNISON, the UK’s largest trade union, and Vertex Data Sciences, one of the fastest growing call centre operators in the UK.


2020 ◽  
pp. 095968012092913 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emma Hughes ◽  
Tony Dobbins

Few contemporary studies of change in industrial relations use Carter Goodrich’s classic concept of the ‘frontier of control’ (FoC), especially in cross-national comparative research. Our study maps FoC struggles in two public transport organizations in the UK and the Republic of Ireland. Qualitative methods generate significant insights into complex day-to-day workplace control patterns in these two cases. Despite changes in the frontier of control in both organizations over time, it is observed that employment relations in the Irish case are more cooperative than in the British. The frontier of control still matters, because workplace control regimes shape managerial ability to secure worker consent and are always potentially contestable terrains.


2018 ◽  
Vol 48 (3) ◽  
pp. 377-415 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alysia Blackham

Abstract Human dignity is often cited as a justification and foundation for equality law. However, it is also used in some contexts to justify detracting from equal treatment, including in relation to mandatory retirement ages in the UK. Drawing on interdisciplinary scholarship from legal theory and industrial relations, this article argues case law on retirement ages adopts a limited approach to the notion of ‘dignity’, which is grounded in age stereotypes. It considers how a re-conceptualisation of ‘dignity’ might inform the future development of the law on retirement ages and proposes alternative ways to secure individual dignity in employment that do not depend on mandatory retirement ages.


2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (1) ◽  
pp. 197-212
Author(s):  
Michael Gold

Hugh Clegg’s paper, ‘The Bullock Report and European Experience’, written in 1977, analyses the role of worker directors appointed to the boards of UK companies, a move which formed part of the then Labour government’s Social Contract with the trade unions designed to stem the country’s long-term industrial decline. My commentary argues that three aspects of the paper are likely to strike the contemporary reader most forcibly. Initially it seems alien as it describes a world of collectivist industrial relations that was erased by the Conservative government elected in 1979. Yet on closer reading its main theme - reforming corporate accountability - emerges as all too familiar, as worker exploitation and other corporate scandals have continued largely unchecked to the present. And we may reflect that more recent research into policy transfer has improved our contemporary understanding of the barriers to corporate governance reform since the 1970s. Clegg correctly cautioned against attempting to import institutions from countries such as Germany into the UK, a view that has since been refined by analysis of the contrasts between co-ordinated and liberal market economies. Reforming corporate governance requires tailor-made policies, not those transferred merely on grounds of success in their original host countries.


2020 ◽  
pp. 002218562095770
Author(s):  
Tony Dobbins ◽  
Emma Hughes ◽  
Tony Dundon

This article addresses debates in contemporary industrial relations about practical application of pluralism. We compare the potential efficacy of ‘radical-pluralism’ and ‘neo-pluralism’. Data comes from analysis of employment relationships in two unionised public transport sector organisations, in the comparative country contexts of the UK and Republic of Ireland. It is argued that radical-pluralist framing of the employment relationship is better equipped than neo-pluralism to provide deeper and contextually sensitive understandings of the realities of unequal employment relationships. Desired (pluralist) democratic values differ from real world application of joint regulation (praxis). This raises implications regarding constraints on state regulation and public policy goals institutionalising pluralism as fluid and uneven praxis.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document