Anything goes? Exploring the limits of employment law in UK hospitality and catering

Gregoris Ioannou,Ruth Dukes

doi:10.1111/irj.12329

Abstract

AbstractThrough a case study of the UK hospitality and catering sector, this article explores the limits of employment law as a means of protecting workers from ill or unfair treatment. Finding microbreaches of the law to be common practice in the sector—akin to industry norms or ‘custom and practice’—it considers the routinisation of these microbreaches as an instance of conflict between formal legal rules and social norms. The conflict is problematic because it means that workers are less likely to perceive breach of their legal rights as an injustice worthy of challenge. The industry norms observed have been formed under the influence of an asymmetrical distribution of information and power, including organisational control over the labour process. If employment law is to be made effective, a realignment of legal rules with social norms is needed and, at the same time, the correction of this asymmetry.

Highlights

Given the prevalence of low-paid, precarious employment in hospitality and catering, the sector constitutes a privileged entry point from which to examine the effectiveness of employment law
When the employment relation was examined in the round, areas of ‘greyness’ and uncertainty became apparent in respect of the workers' legal rights
Twentieth-century ideas regarding the desirability of opening up formal law to social norms, and to the particular conceptions of justice that may be shared across groups, sectors or occupations, are of enduring force

Summary

Introduction

Given the prevalence of low-paid, precarious employment in hospitality and catering, the sector constitutes a privileged entry point from which to examine the effectiveness of employment law. In 1998, the Working Time Regulations created potentially important new rights to breaks and paid holidays, but weak enforcement mechanisms, almost wholly reliant on the willingness and ability of individual workers to bring claims before employment tribunals, significantly compromised the effectiveness of the rules (Hurrell, 2005).

Results

Conclusion