judgment to a box-ticking role,” says Martin Warren at Eversheds, “I don’t think that’s in the interests or employers or employees.” Moving future steps onto a more flexible basis would allow this trend to be reversed. That doesn’t mean the government would be without tools to achieve key workplace aims. Existing law – reviewed to reduce bureaucracy without damaging outcomes – would still be in force. “Workers and employers together are more prepared to sort workplace issues out on a common sense basis,” says the CBI’s Cridland. “We don’t need the state telling us how to manage basic human relations.”


Common-sense basis


While this argument is gaining ground in the UK – and we have been encouraged


by some of the government’s thinking on reviewing the current stock of employment law – it does still face substantial headwinds from Brussels, where measures like the Agency Workers Directive threaten to undermine UK labour market flexibility. If the government accepts our argument, therefore, ministers should do more than implement it at home. They need to work with businesses to take this case to Brussels, where the tone of the debate is at its most old-fashioned. The European labour market can compete on the global stage, but it requires the flexibility of a more adult discussion about rights and responsibilities at work, led by individuals and their employers, not politicians. That will be a substantial change to how legislation is currently approached.


eLegal Challenges.


11


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12