header-logo header-logo

The Taylor Review: good work or could do better?

11 August 2017 / Stephen Levinson
Issue: 7758 / Categories: Features , Employment
printer mail-detail
01_levinson

Stephen Levinson puts the Taylor Review recommendations under the spotlight & finds them wanting

  • Suggesting new policies is relatively easy. Implementing them is not.

The Taylor Review was commissioned by the Prime Minister in October 2016 to examine how employment practices need to change in order to keep pace with modern business models. The report was published on 11 July. The team of people appointed was chaired by a former policy adviser to Tony Blair (Mr Taylor) and consisted of an employment lawyer from a City practice, a successful entrepreneur (and former investor in Deliveroo) and an ex-policeman who is the current chief executive of the Gangmasters Licensing Authority. The Review team contained plenty of experience of the world of work from a policy, managerial and regulatory perspective but lacked any trade union or other obvious ‘worker’ oriented presence. So though it has been described frequently as ‘independent’ it was not as balanced a group to examine the labour market as many would have expected.

The principal conclusion

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Pillsbury—Lord Garnier KC

Pillsbury—Lord Garnier KC

Appointment of former Solicitor General bolsters corporate investigations and white collar practice

Hall & Wilcox—Nigel Clark

Hall & Wilcox—Nigel Clark

Firm strengthens international strategy with hire of global relations consultant

Slater Heelis—Sylviane Kokouendo & Shazia Ashraf

Slater Heelis—Sylviane Kokouendo & Shazia Ashraf

Partner and associate join employment practice

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll