Skip to main content

The Guardian view on the gig economy: rights need enforcing | Editorial

Proper patrolling of workers’ rights is welcome. If the losers in the gig economy are to be helped, ministers must be tougher

The increased level of intervention by the government in the labour market since Theresa May became prime minister is both rational and humane. The UK economy is too reliant on low-wage, low-skilled jobs, many of which are also insecure. While unemployment remains low, and in-work poverty is a serious problem, there is no good reason for ministers not to apply pressure to employers. Figures published by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation this month suggest one in eight workers (4 million people) are now classified as poor. Working conditions and low pay are causing real suffering, with ambulances called to Amazon’s UK warehouses 600 times in three years. DPD delivery driver Don Lane died after missing medical appointments because he feared being fined for taking time off work.

The review of the gig economy by thinktanker Matthew Taylor last year produced 53 recommendations, 51 of which ministers accept. Higher fines for employers who mistreat staff, and plans to inform workers of their rights on day one of any new job, are sensible. So is the repeal of a rule that allows employers to pay agency workers less than full-time staff. But a new right for zero-hours workers to request regular hours falls far short of union demands that they be entitled to them as a right. And details of the agency tasked with investigating and punishing abuses, and naming and shaming employers who fail to pay out after employment tribunals, remain vague. As with all regulation, the devil is in the detail of who, with which resources, has the power to do what. At the moment, workers in the UK bear a greater share of the burden of enforcement than in most European countries, with tribunals often the only recourse once an employer’s internal processes have been exhausted. It is almost two years since the economist David Metcalf was given the task of overseeing labour market enforcement, but his empire is small. It takes in a small team of employment agency inspectors, gangmaster licensing and the minimum wage (health and safety is separate). Given the scandalous scale of unpaid wages (estimated at £3.1bn in 2016, much of it holiday pay), and other failures highlighted by the Low Pay Commission and others, this regime is recognised as inadequate. But just as the government did not accept all of Mr Taylor’s recommendations, it has not accepted all those contained in Mr Metcalf’s first full annual report. Among measures rejected in December was a call for increased penalties for non-compliance.

Continue reading...

from The Guardian http://bit.ly/2AjtMIT

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

REPORT: Furious Spike Lee Paces Aisle, Turns Back To Stage...

REPORT: Furious Spike Lee Paces Aisle, Turns Back To Stage... (Top headline, 5th story, link ) Related stories: REVIEW: Hostless Show Starts With Rock & Rolls Off Rails... Actor knocks borders, walls during speech in Spanish... Stage designed to look like Trump hair? 'GREEN BOOK' OVERCOMES BACKLASH, NABS BEST PICTURE... Top Critics Fume... LIST: WINNERS... Advertise here from Drudge Report Feed https://ift.tt/2SUpIKy

Tiny Love Stories: ‘Who Was I to Deprive Him of Joy?’

By Unknown Author from NYT Style https://ift.tt/2UV7YAG

The Ugly History of Dual-Loyalty Charges

When Representative Ilhan Omar recently complained about “the political influence in this country that says it is okay to push for allegiance to a foreign country,” many noted accurately that she had deployed a trope—dual loyalty—that had been used against Jews for years. But this accusation has a broader history in the United States, having been used against several religious minorities—including Muslims like Omar. Indeed, many battles over religious freedom have revolved around dual-loyalty claims. [ Read: Ilhan Omar just made it harder to have a nuanced debate about Israel ] In the 19th century, many attacks on Catholics stressed that these immigrants were pawns of a foreign power. In the 1830s, Samuel Morse—then a prominent painter and later the inventor of the telegraph—urged Americans to build “walls” and “gates” to keep out Catholic immigrants, who would always be loyal to Rome. Because these Catholic immigrants were decrepit —“halt, and blind, and naked”—they were easy to co...