Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T20:53:19.887Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Future Prospects for Labour Law — Lessons from the United Kingdom

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2023

Keith D. Ewing
Keith D. Ewing*
Affiliation:
King's College, University of London
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Globalisation presents major challenges for governments, and some are now looking to the United Kingdom as an example of how to create global competitiveness, economic efficiency and labour market flexibility in a way that also responds to demands for fairness at work. But what the British approach conceals behind its alluring synthesis of regulation and deregulation is the changing nature of labour law, which is now principally a tool of economic policy, and as such less concerned with its historic mission of promoting social justice. Labour law is thus increasingly concerned principally with the re-commodification of labour, rather than the protection of workers; with promoting the flexibility of labour, rather than the security of citizens; and with controlling rather than encouraging labour organisation as an instrument of industrial democracy (a term about which little is now heard).

Type
Research Article
Information
The Economic and Labour Relations Review , Volume 18 , Issue 2: Beyond Work Choices: Remaking Industrial Relations in Australia , May 2008 , pp. 103 - 111
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s) 2008

References

Bercusson, B. (2007) ‘European Laws: Help or Hindrance?, in Ewing, K. D. (ed) The Right to Strike: From the Trade Disputes Act 1906 to the Trade Union Freedom Bill 2006, Institute of Employment Rights.Google Scholar
Chamberlain, A. (2003) ‘The Truth about Friction: The Role of the “Eight Week Rule” in the Friction Dynamics Dispute’ The Lawyer, 3 November 2003. p E7.Google Scholar
DTI (1998) Department of Trade and Industry, Fairness at Work, Cm 95, 1998.Google Scholar
Employment Tribunal Service (2007) Employment Tribunal Service, Annual Statistics 2006–2007.Google Scholar
Ewing, K. D. (2000) ‘Trade Union Recognition and Staff Associations: A Breach of International Labour Standards?’, Industrial Law Journal, 29(3), pp. 267–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ewing, K (2002) The EU Charter of Fundamental Rights: Waste of Time or Wasted Opportunity?, Institute of Employment Rights.Google Scholar
Ewing, K. D. (2005) ‘The Function of Trade Unions', Industrial Law Journal, 34(1), pp. 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
HC (2005) House of Commons Trade and Industry Committee, UK Employment Regulation, HC 90, 2004–2005.Google Scholar
HC (2007) House of Commons European Scrutiny Committee, European Union Inter-governmental Conference, HC 1014, 2006–2007.Google Scholar
Hendy, J. (2004) The Future of Employment Law, Institute of Employment Rights.Google Scholar
HL (2007) House of Lords European Union Committee, Modernising European Union Labour Law: Has the UK Anything to Gain?, HL 120, 2006–07.Google Scholar
JCHR (2004) Joint Committee on Human Rights, The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, HL 83/HL 1188, 2003–2004.Google Scholar
Lockwood, G. (2007) ‘Taff Vale and the Trade Disputes Act 1906’, in Ewing, K. D. (ed) The Right to Strike: From the Trade Disputes Act 1906 to the Trade Union Freedom Bill 2006, Institute of Employment Rights.Google Scholar
Milner, S. (1995) ‘The Coverage of Collective Pay-Setting Institutions in Britain 1895–1990’, British Journal of Industrial Relations, 33(1), pp. 69–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
OECD (1994) OECD, Employment Outlook 1994, OECD, Paris.Google Scholar
Thompsons, (2003) Thompsons Solicitors, ‘Striking a Dynamic Victory’, Labour and European Law Review, 76.Google Scholar