IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/brjirl/v39y2001i1p119-138.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

New Labour’s Reform of Britain’s Employment Law: The Devil is not only in the Detail but in the Values and Policy Too

Author

Listed:
  • Paul Smith
  • Gary Morton

Abstract

The Labour government’s goal of social partnership embodies a particular view of the appropriate role of labour within the employment relationship, which requires the marginalization of trade unionism as an autonomous force. Its programme of employment law reform combines a dual focus: first, the reaffirmation of measures that weaken workers’ collective power through the exclusion of autonomous trade unionism, and second, initiatives to regulate the labour market, strengthen workers’ rights within the employment relationship, and include enterprise‐confined, cooperative unions as subordinate ‘partners’. However, the second policy dimension has been diluted because of the commitment to free‐market values.

Suggested Citation

  • Paul Smith & Gary Morton, 2001. "New Labour’s Reform of Britain’s Employment Law: The Devil is not only in the Detail but in the Values and Policy Too," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 39(1), pages 119-138, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:brjirl:v:39:y:2001:i:1:p:119-138
    DOI: 10.1111/1467-8543.00192
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8543.00192
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1467-8543.00192?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Miguel Martinez Lucio & Mark Stuart, 2005. "‘Partnership’ and new industrial relations in a risk society," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 19(4), pages 797-817, December.
    2. Robert Perrett, 2007. "Worker voice in the context of the re-regulation of employment: employer tactics and statutory union recognition in the UK," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 21(4), pages 617-634, December.
    3. Bengt Furåker & Mattias Bengtsson, 2013. "Collective and individual benefits of trade unions: a multi-level analysis of 21 European countries," Industrial Relations Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(5-6), pages 548-565, November.
    4. Lembcke, Alexander, 2014. "The impact of mandatory entitlement to paid leave on employment in the UK," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 60270, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    5. John Godard, 2003. "Labour Unions, Workplace Rights and Canadian Public Policy," Canadian Public Policy, University of Toronto Press, vol. 29(4), pages 449-467, December.
    6. Anna Pollert & Andy Charlwood, 2009. "The vulnerable worker in Britain and problems at work," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 23(2), pages 343-362, June.
    7. Jeremy Waddington, 2013. "The Views of Members towards Workplace Union Organization in Banking between 1999 and 2008," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 51(2), pages 333-354, June.
    8. Zagelmeyer, Stefan, 2003. "Die Entwicklung kollektiver Verhandlungen in Großbritannien: ein historischer Überblick," Discussion Papers 17, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Chair of Labour and Regional Economics.
    9. Chris Forde & Gary Slater, 2005. "Agency Working in Britain: Character, Consequences and Regulation," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 43(2), pages 249-271, June.
    10. Alex Bryson & Erling Barth & Harald Dale-Olsen, 2013. "The Effects of Organizational Change on Worker Well-Being and the Moderating Role of Trade Unions," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 66(4), pages 989-1011, July.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:brjirl:v:39:y:2001:i:1:p:119-138. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/lsepsuk.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.