Search results

Knight's Industrial Law Reports goes into a new style and format as Managerial Law This issue of KILR is restyled Managerial Law and it now appears on a continuous updating basis rather than as a monthly routine affair.

Discusses the long existing and confusing problems of establishing the relationship of who is, and who if not, a dependent worker. Reflects developments which have occurred in British law as it affects the employment field, plus an evaluation and analysis of some of the different types of employment relationships which have evolved by examining, where possible, the status of each of these relationships. Concludes that the typical worker nowadays finds himself in a vulnerable position both economically and psychologically owing to the insecurity which exists.

Modern employment legislation invests the employee with important rights resulting in a greater degree of job security and improved legal protection in his employment. These rights or entitlements which are all personal in nature are divisible, for the sake of convenience, into four parts. Firstly, individual rights. These include guarantee payments, medical suspension, maternity, time off for specified activities, and the employer's insolvency. These rights are by no means exhaustive. Other rights of an individual nature as for example the right not to belong to a trade union where a closed shop is in operation; rights in connection with trade union membership; written reasons for dismissal; and so on, will be treated in the context of the discussion which will take place under the appropriate heading. Secondly, it is proposed to examine the employees right not to be discriminated against in employment on grounds of race and sex, thirdly, his right not to be unfairly dismissed will be analysed, to be followed finally by his right to redundancy payments. In this monograph, it is proposed to examine the first of these personal rights, namely the employee's individual rights. Each of the others will be discussed in subsequent monographs. It should be noted that unlike the common law terms implied into the contract of employment which consist of duties imposed on both the employer and the employee and which can be contracted out of by an express term in the contact of employment the statutory conditions of employment cannot be dispensed with in that manner. Like the implied terms at common law, the statutory conditions of employment too form another source of contract of employment though of course they are independent in that they neither form part of the contract of employment nor of the common law rights.

The issue of employment status lies at the heart of much conflict in the gig economy, with many gig economy workers effectively excluded from statutory employment protection because of it. Establishing employment status continues to be the gateway to accessing most UK statutory employment rights, a fact which makes the exclusion of casual workers from much statutory protection seem arbitrary and unjust. Employment status has been historically determined by common law conceptions of the contract of employment. This creates particular difficulties for casual workers, who have typically had to prove a requirement to perform personal service and to show that the contract was based on mutual obligations in order to be recognised as employees. The advent of the gig economy has seen the concept of employment status evolve as courts and legislators have struggled to adapt to a more flexible labour market. Likewise, gig economy employers have gone to considerable lengths to try to circumvent the legal protections available to their workers. This chapter will examine the evolving role of common law doctrine in defining employment status and the emergence of the category of ‘worker’ as an definition of employment status for those who work in the gig economy. It will analyse prominent cases involving gig economy employers (such as Uber BV v Aslam) and explore how these cases have re-defined contractual doctrine. Finally, the chapter will analyse the Taylor Review (2017) and examine the viability of a conceptual uncoupling of statutory employment protection from contractual doctrine.

The National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) creates rights for covered employees, defines conduct that violates those rights, and deems that conduct an unfair labor practice. But while given broad remedial powers under the Act, the Board's options were curtailed by the Supreme Court's limit on the use of deterrence as an express remedial justification. The Board was left with a strongly make-whole, i.e., ex-post, focus to undo the consequences of a violation.

Put differently, the current NLRA remedies reflect a pay-or-play philosophy. The goal is restoration after the fact, using ex-post remedies to give parties the benefit or status quo that they expected. An actor willing to pay may use a cost–benefit analysis and strategically choose to violate the Act, accepting the make-whole remedies later. But the Act created ex-ante statutory rights, not agreed-upon contractual terms. By statutory enactment, employees are given something of value deemed worthy of protection. Assigning value to compliance with the law in the first instance not only prevents sometimes irreparable harm but also reaffirms the inherent value of the right itself.

The impact of the Board's limited remedies is therefore a broad value-driven one. Without ex-ante deterrence, the available ex-post make-whole remedial options make a normative statement about individuals' rights under the Act: those rights may not be inherently worth enough to incentivize legal compliance. The make-whole focus can imply that financial compensation for the portion of harm that can be calculated and “undoing” some nonfinancial effects is sufficient. There is little drive to deter infringement before the fact. By examining the remedial philosophy behind contrasting approaches in the common law of torts and contract, this Article asserts that the current remedial strictures and framework undermine both the Act and the worth of its rights in the eyes of the public and the employees who hold them.

In this chapter, we explore the legal framework of AGMs in seven Member States (Austria, Belgium, Germany, France, Ireland, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom) of shareholder decision-making rights. We find that, since only a small part of the decision-making rights is harmonized at the European level, there are numerous differences in shareholder rights among national laws. These decision-making rights are usually about the topics director (re-)elections, pay matters, share capital, amendments to articles of association, annual accounts, etc. To be able to conduct empirical research in the remaining chapters, we develop a categorization framework of 15 voting items.

This paper aims to examine the recent jurisprudence of the Supreme Court concerning the registration of land as a town or village green (TVG). This area of law has proved contentious over the past decade and shows no sign of relenting. Most recently, in April 2014, the Supreme Court was asked to determine whether use that is pursuant to a statutory right could be qualifying use for the purposes of village green registration, which requires 20 years use “as of right”.

The paper starts by summarising the law relating to the registration of land as a TVG and identifies the current problem that the courts are grappling with, namely the “by right” defence. After analysing the two leading authorities in relation to this point, the paper makes a judgment on the operation and conceptual underpinning of the “by right” defence.

The paper concludes that the “by right” defence in the context of village green registration is a functioning concept that prevents the registration of land as a town and village green whenever the use relied upon is indulged in pursuant to a statutory right. Furthermore, the defence should also be construed with the pre-existing test for use “as of right” rather than being recognised as an additional limb to this test.

The value of this paper is that it seeks to clarify an area of planning and property law that is fraught with conceptual uncertainty, and seeks to re-align the law of town and village greens with its prescriptive underpinnings.

This book is a policy proposal aimed at the democratic left. It is concerned with gradual but radical reform of the socio‐economic system. An integrated policy of industrial and economic democracy, which centres around the establishment of a new sector of employee‐controlled enterprises, is presented. The proposal would retain the mix‐ed economy, but transform it into a much better “mixture”, with increased employee‐power in all sectors. While there is much of enduring value in our liberal western way of life, gross inequalities of wealth and power persist in our society.

In the Equal Opportunities Commission Annual Report for 1987 Joanna Foster, the Chairman, stated that, “Equal opportunities is no longer a marginal issue. Forward‐looking employers are responding to the changing needs of a changing workforce by introducing equal opportunity programmes and they are recognising that under‐using or discriminating against women — nearly half the workforce — is bad business.”

As we have indicated in the introductory section, the employment protection legislation was drafted principally with full‐time, permanent employees — so called “core workers”— in mind. The legislation of the mid‐70s which established the “statutory floor of employment rights” effectively excluded millions of workers from its protections because they were considered to be self‐employed, or failed to qualify through lack of continuity of employment. Indeed, it may well be argued that, if the policy behind the legislation was to protect those workers which collective bargaining could not reach, the groups who were excluded — the “peripheral workers” — were the ones in the greatest need of protection.