Precarious work is increasingly considered the new 'norm' to which employment and social protection systems must adjust. This article explores the contradictions and tensions that arise from different processes of normalisation driven by social policies that simultaneously decommodify and recommodify labour. An expanded framework of decommodification is presented that identifies how the standard employment relationship (SER) may be extended and flexibilised to include those in precarious work, drawing examples from a recent study of precarious work across six European countries. These decommodification processes are found to be both partial and, in some cases, coexisting with activation policies that position precarious work as an alternative to unemployment, thereby recommodifying labour. Despite these challenges and contradictions, the article argues that a new vision of SER reform promises greater inclusion than alternative policy scenarios that give up on the regulation of employers and rely on state subsidies to mitigate against precariousness.

Through a cross-national comparative study of local government "best practice cases" of socially responsible procurement in Denmark, Germany and the UK, this article critically examines the role of labour clauses in addressing issues of low wages and precarious work in public supply chains. It provides new insights on the negotiations and outcomes of labour clauses across different stages of the policy process, including implementation and monitoring. The analysis demonstrates the importance of pragmatic alliances of progressive local politicians, unions, and employers in ensuring that socially responsible procurement moves beyond rhetoric, along with supportive national and sectoral employment regimes. Labour clauses can compensate for weak systems of labour market regulation by setting higher standards for outsourced workers, while they play a complementary role in more regulated labour markets by levelling up wages and working conditions to prevailing collectively agreed standards.

No abstract

Through a dynamic analysis of the interplay between structure and agency, this article explores the factors shaping an inclusive approach to labour market activation for clients who experience multiple barriers to work. While previous studies argue that ‘street-level bureaucrats’ (SLBs), such as advisers and job coaches, have minimal agency to shape the services they deliver, the pilot programme that is the focus of this article allowed SLBs greater discretion to support clients and to use their entrepreneurial skills to build relationships with local employers. However, the unresolved tension between personalisation and swift labour market insertion meant that SLBs often reverted to engrained employability interventions that simply prepare clients to compete for low-wage entry-level jobs. We argue that the ‘policy closure’ around a work-first model of activation in the UK constrains social innovation among SLBs, and limits the freedoms of citizens to navigate their own transitions into paid work.

While sector-level collective bargaining can provide the institutional leverage to sustain and improve employment standards, a proliferation of disorganised local settlements may reduce its effectiveness. This article examines this proposition for local government in the UK, highlights the risks of a 'destructive' disorganisation of employment relations and calls for a renewal of articulation mechanisms between sector and local levels of collective bargaining.

If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information. About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.comEmerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation. Implementing the living wage in UK local government Mathew JohnsonAlliance Manchester Business School, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK Abstract Purpose -The purpose of this paper is to understand the impact of living wages on organisational pay systems. Design/methodology/approach -The research draws on 23 semi-structured interviews with HR managers, trade union representatives, and politicians at four UK local government case study sites. Findings -The findings suggest that living wages can have a positive impact on directly employed workers in cleaning, catering and care services, but the research also finds that the localised adoption of living wages can lead to significant wage compression, resulting in a broad band of "low skill-low wage jobs". Originality/value -The theoretical contribution is twofold. In-line with earlier research the "first-order" effects of living wages are clear: hourly wages for a large number of women in part-time roles increased sharply. However, this is only part of the story as "second-order" effects such as ripples and spill-overs are less extensive than suggested by other studies. This is due to the limited scope for trade unions to restore wage differentials through collective bargaining, the slow progress in extending the living wage to contracted staff, and parallel processes of downsizing and outsourcing.

This article critically evaluates the mixed fortunes of the Living Wage in the UK since its introduction in London nearly 20 years ago. The evidence shows that the gains in hourly pay have been significant, and have been achieved at little or no cost to jobs or working hours. An adequate living wage is therefore a necessary factor in reducing labour market inequality and eradicating in-work poverty. However, the UK case demonstrates that a living wage is not a sufficient factor in the absence of both a coordinated approach for universal implementation and linkages with effective collective bargaining. Poor coordination explains the very low proportion of low-wage workers covered by a voluntary Living Wage. Weak links with collective bargaining mean that even where a Living Wage is introduced by a low-wage employer, further positive wage ripple effects (e.g. by sustaining wage differentials) are rare. The argument advanced here is that while employers increasingly perceive voluntary accreditation with the Living Wage Foundation as an important symbol of ‘business ethics’, the Living Wage remains a relatively isolated wage-setting instrument in the UK. This is the result not only of the voluntarist nature of the campaign but also of the limited scope for direct interaction with other wage-setting mechanisms in the UK, despite evidence of positive complementarity between a living wage and collectively bargained pay structures. The article concludes by exploring different mechanisms through which the Living Wage could be extended and embedded across low-wage labour markets.

No abstract