The Taylor Review and Its After-Effects

by | Feb 7, 2018

The modern employment conditions and the work fashion of the same in the United Kingdom saw a major conflict of thoughts post the publishing of the Taylor’s Review. RSA Chief Executive Mathew Taylor published his review on the employment landscape of UK which came in light after a lot of conflicts and issues as a lot of authorities disapproved of it even before the publishing or viewing of the PDF. An initiative hoping to bring in transparency in the work laws and the employment conditions, in order to make the employees aware of their rights, the results of their work and several other work factors came into light, post the publishing of the review. Though it wasn’t received warmly by all the individuals of the industry and the government, Taylor’s review has now become the talk of the town, with people still unsure about the impact of it.

A lot of arguments about the pros and cons have been doing the rounds with people listing out its consequences with respect to various aspects of employment.

The review has covered several different aspects like the issue of job security, the gig economy, usage of the zero-hour contract, workers’ rights, the employment status of the employee in the respective organisation, business models, ideal representation, career progression & training, fraudulent self-employment, payment issues, daily wage worker rights and so on.

The reception of the review saw mixed reactions and the country is still debating about the surety of a positive outcome and are doubtful about the after-effects of the same. The government has announced that the review’s objective will be implied in certain aspects to ensure a good amount of transparency to the employers while some of them might not be possible as its implication would conflict with a few already existing norms. Meanwhile, there are certain factors that might be put in effect but would require a good amount of time and analysing to make sure that they are enforced without leaving loopholes to avoid the possibility of any wrong practices.

The review has also worked well for certain organizations as the review not only talks about an employee’s rights but also their responsibility in the field and the degree to which their work will be monitored to ensure they are working effectively and are deserving of their wages. For instance, daily wage workers shall have their hours of working printed on their pay slip, if they work by the hour. Nevertheless, this shouldn’t cause any hinderance to the employer as it is vital for them to keep a record of their income for the purpose of payroll.

The response by the industry of employment also saw a fair share of support as the review aided the post Brexit scene by giving an entirely new perspective about the future of employment where the quality of the work will be valued as much as the quantity is. The industry had been hoping for better clarity on this contract for long and are now gladly welcoming what they refer to as ‘work ensuring fairer treatment for the gig economy workers.’

There were also responses that were tones of being impressed but slightly worried about the implication. Though the review had been longed for in the industry, a lot of them believe that it needs much stronger framework to ensure that the workers aren’t discouraged to exercise their flexibility with job roles that might give them better and more appropriate opportunities.

A bigger lot hoped for a much bolder review and suggested that it could have had a better effect if implied on traditional sectors like retailing and social services. A lot has been said about the Taylor Review which has made a breakthrough in the industry and has a lot of people banking on it for a better future in the employment world.