Activating employers: the politics of regulation in the UK, the US and Australia

The lack of good jobs in high growth, low pay service sectors in contemporary labour markets has been identified as a recurrent problem by policy makers and academics, as well as trade union and business leaders, especially in Anglo-American countries like the UK, the US and Australia. In the UK, the government of Boris Johnson has encouraged employers to invest in workers and pay them a decent salary. In the US, President Joe Biden has campaigned on the promise to create, restore and sustain 'middle class, unionised jobs' in various sectors of the economy, particularly in social care. In Australia, whilst the Liberal government of Scott Morrison is pursuing a deregulatory agenda that relaxes labour standards, individual states such as Victoria and New South Wales have pursued social procurement policies to support good jobs creation in the service and construction sector.

This project seeks to address the following question: do policymakers continue to put the onus on jobseekers and benefit claimants to fill labour market shortages in low-paid service sectors, or, on the contrary, do they put pressure on employers to improve the quality of employment? Our starting point is that the new politics of employers' activation clashes with the 'old' politics of activating jobseekers. These conflicting policy agendas and priorities lead to several U-turns and contradictory statements at various levels of national and subnational government in all three countries. The research investigates how this tension is being addressed at different government levels. It examines what the guiding principles, underlying strategies and mechanisms are for the development of good jobs and demand side policies in the UK, the US and Australia. Specifically, it will ask:
What are the incentives (carrots) and sanctions (sticks) that are being deployed to encourage employers to implement inclusive HRM practices in high growth low-paid service sectors?
What are the views of employers on the use of social procurement to improve the quality of jobs?

The project will deliver the following outputs:
1. Consolidate the knowledge base on good jobs vs work-first agendas in the UK, the US and Australia through the production of an evidence and gap map
2. Produce a systematic review on the use of procurement contracts and community benefit agreements in the UK, the US and Australia
3. Obtain an in depth, granular analysis of ongoing regulatory reforms in employment and welfare to work programmes through a dialogue with relevant stakeholders (policymakers, practitioners and programme administrators)
4. Assess whether labour shortages post-Covid 19 are being leveraged to foster changes in business models to increase the sustainability of employment or whether policymakers are still wedded to a work-first agenda

The research will take place over a 24 month period and will comprise three stages: first, a systematic review of evidence regarding regulatory initiatives and programme interventions in all three countries; second, a series of pilot interviews with policymakers and stakeholders regarding what they think is working, for whom and in what circumstances, and third, a series of case studies in selected localities.

The project will benefit policymakers, labour market intermediaries, employers and those looking for work. This research complements and adds to existing and previous ESRC investments because of its strong comparative dimension, its focus on regulatory tools and legislation, and its analysis of standard setting activities by public authorities. These are new areas of research that will strengthen policy learning from the US/Australia in the field of employment and welfare policies.