title: Labour law without labour law: The United Kingdom’s labour market response to COVID-19
metadata.name: dc.contributor.author
metadata.value: Mason, Luke
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.date.accessioned
metadata.value: 2022-09-29T13:12:08Z
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.date.available
metadata.value: 2022-09-29T13:12:08Z
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.date.issued
metadata.value: 2022
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.identifier.citation
metadata.value: Mason, Luke. 2022. “Labour law without labour law: The United Kingdom’s labour market response to COVID-19”. Russian Journal of Labour & Law 12: 54–62. https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu32.2022.105
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.identifier.other
metadata.value: https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu32.2022.105
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.identifier.uri
metadata.value: http://hdl.handle.net/11701/37991
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.description.abstract
metadata.value: The United Kingdom’s response to the COVID-19 crisis with respect to labour law and protecting
  workers and working relationships had several idiosyncratic aspects that distinguished it
  from ostensibly similar attempts to protect jobs during the pandemic. The UK approach was
  striking, in comparative terms, due to its lack of engagement with any process of social dialogue
  at the national, sectoral, and enterprise levels. The structures of worker representation of this
  type are so weak in the UK, due in part to a particular tradition of collective bargaining, that any
  such involvement would possibly not even have been feasible given the short time frame without
  the creation of new ad hoc infrastructure. While most other advanced economies made use of
  relatively familiar methods of labour law, alongside macroeconomic intervention and state support,
  the UK’s response was largely devoid of any traditional labour law content, and did not
  make use of labour law categories or methods, in particular the placing of obligations on the
  employer. This meant that the UK’s approach reflected a form of “labour market” regulation
  which aimed, unusually, at solidifying rather than deregulating the labour market. While this
  approach comes with many significant complexities and risks, it provides a potential model for
  future interventions which do not rely on sometimes tired or outdated labour law categories.
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.language.iso
metadata.value: en
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.publisher
metadata.value: St Petersburg State University
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.relation.ispartofseries
metadata.value: Russian Journal of Labour & Law;Volume 12
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: COVID-19
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: protection
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: labour law
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: new categories of workers
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: Job Retention Scheme
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.title
metadata.value: Labour law without labour law: The United Kingdom’s labour market response to COVID-19
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.type
metadata.value: Article
metadata.lang: en_GB
resources.filename: 54-62.pdf
resources.url: https://dspace.spbu.ru/bitstream/11701/37991/1/54-62.pdf
resources.format: Adobe PDF
resources.size: 621,32 kB