Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

UK company law and precarious employment contracts

UK company law and precarious employment contracts <jats:sec><jats:title content-type="abstract-subheading">Purpose</jats:title><jats:p>This paper aim to examine the implication of section 172(1)(b) on employment rights, particularly on workers on precarious employment contracts. The aim of the paper is to analyse whether company directors have any liability for potential abuse of worker on precarious employment contracts. The paper examine the advantage of companies recruiting staff on precarious employment contracts and the effect of such contract on the worker.</jats:p></jats:sec> <jats:sec><jats:title content-type="abstract-subheading">Design/methodology/approach</jats:title><jats:p>The paper reviews case law, statutory provisions and academic opinions on precarious employment contracts and its advantages and disadvantages to the company and the worker. The paper critically reviews the impact of Section 172(1)(b) of the Companies Act 2006 on precarious employment contract workers.</jats:p></jats:sec> <jats:sec><jats:title content-type="abstract-subheading">Findings</jats:title><jats:p>The paper argues that companies benefit more from precarious employment contracts than workers do. The Companies Act 2006 is silent on whether directors should factor the interest of precarious employment worker when making company decision, thereby leaving these workers in a vulnerable position and at the mercy of the employers.</jats:p></jats:sec> <jats:sec><jats:title content-type="abstract-subheading">Originality/value</jats:title><jats:p>The paper offers a different argument about why the use of precarious employment contracts is on the rise in the UK. It highlights the silence of the Companies Act 2006 as a driver for the increase in the use of precarious employment contracts in the UK.</jats:p></jats:sec> http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png International Journal of Law and Management CrossRef

UK company law and precarious employment contracts

International Journal of Law and Management , Volume 59 (4): 571-583 – Jul 10, 2017

UK company law and precarious employment contracts


Abstract

<jats:sec><jats:title content-type="abstract-subheading">Purpose</jats:title><jats:p>This paper aim to examine the implication of section 172(1)(b) on employment rights, particularly on workers on precarious employment contracts. The aim of the paper is to analyse whether company directors have any liability for potential abuse of worker on precarious employment contracts. The paper examine the advantage of companies recruiting staff on precarious employment contracts and the effect of such contract on the worker.</jats:p></jats:sec>
<jats:sec><jats:title content-type="abstract-subheading">Design/methodology/approach</jats:title><jats:p>The paper reviews case law, statutory provisions and academic opinions on precarious employment contracts and its advantages and disadvantages to the company and the worker. The paper critically reviews the impact of Section 172(1)(b) of the Companies Act 2006 on precarious employment contract workers.</jats:p></jats:sec>
<jats:sec><jats:title content-type="abstract-subheading">Findings</jats:title><jats:p>The paper argues that companies benefit more from precarious employment contracts than workers do. The Companies Act 2006 is silent on whether directors should factor the interest of precarious employment worker when making company decision, thereby leaving these workers in a vulnerable position and at the mercy of the employers.</jats:p></jats:sec>
<jats:sec><jats:title content-type="abstract-subheading">Originality/value</jats:title><jats:p>The paper offers a different argument about why the use of precarious employment contracts is on the rise in the UK. It highlights the silence of the Companies Act 2006 as a driver for the increase in the use of precarious employment contracts in the UK.</jats:p></jats:sec>

Loading next page...
 
/lp/crossref/uk-company-law-and-precarious-employment-contracts-OW8mUtpurQ
Publisher
CrossRef
ISSN
1754-243X
DOI
10.1108/ijlma-04-2016-0043
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

<jats:sec><jats:title content-type="abstract-subheading">Purpose</jats:title><jats:p>This paper aim to examine the implication of section 172(1)(b) on employment rights, particularly on workers on precarious employment contracts. The aim of the paper is to analyse whether company directors have any liability for potential abuse of worker on precarious employment contracts. The paper examine the advantage of companies recruiting staff on precarious employment contracts and the effect of such contract on the worker.</jats:p></jats:sec> <jats:sec><jats:title content-type="abstract-subheading">Design/methodology/approach</jats:title><jats:p>The paper reviews case law, statutory provisions and academic opinions on precarious employment contracts and its advantages and disadvantages to the company and the worker. The paper critically reviews the impact of Section 172(1)(b) of the Companies Act 2006 on precarious employment contract workers.</jats:p></jats:sec> <jats:sec><jats:title content-type="abstract-subheading">Findings</jats:title><jats:p>The paper argues that companies benefit more from precarious employment contracts than workers do. The Companies Act 2006 is silent on whether directors should factor the interest of precarious employment worker when making company decision, thereby leaving these workers in a vulnerable position and at the mercy of the employers.</jats:p></jats:sec> <jats:sec><jats:title content-type="abstract-subheading">Originality/value</jats:title><jats:p>The paper offers a different argument about why the use of precarious employment contracts is on the rise in the UK. It highlights the silence of the Companies Act 2006 as a driver for the increase in the use of precarious employment contracts in the UK.</jats:p></jats:sec>

Journal

International Journal of Law and ManagementCrossRef

Published: Jul 10, 2017

There are no references for this article.