Advertisement

Criminological reflections on the regulation and governance of labour exploitation

  • Jon DaviesEmail author
Article

Abstract

The regulation and governance of labour exploitation is a well-researched area across numerous disciplines. Common approaches towards regulating labour exploitation in businesses and supply chains include state interventions to tackle organised crime via the criminal justice system. However, due to strict criminal-legal definitions, these interventions are only possible when targeting severe exploitation. This emphasis means that a large amount of non-criminalised exploitation risks being overlooked. The purpose of this paper is to argue that non-state regulation is an important element in preventing routinised forms of labour exploitation, whereby a criminological perspective would help to understand and better prevent such practices. The paper examines state regulation, self-regulation of businesses, and trade union activity, which together addresses a wider range of labour exploitation. Semi-structured interviews from workers and supply chain stakeholders in the UK agri-food industry are used to inform this discussion. The governance of labour exploitation in relation to business activities has broader implications for the disciplinary areas of regulation and (corporate) criminology, whereby the former tends to prioritise restorative and persuasive approaches, whereas the latter focuses on deterrence and coercion. Ultimately, drawing together different strands of regulation into a hybrid approach is useful not only due to socio-political processes, but is arguably the most helpful in addressing routinised exploitation.

Keywords

Corporate crime Governance Labour exploitation Regulation Supply chains 

Notes

Acknowledgements

I would especially like to thank David Baker and Hanna Malik, as well as the anonymous reviewers, for reading earlier versions of this article. Any remaining errors are, of course, my own. I also appreciate Georgios Antonopoulos organising this collection of articles on labour exploitation, and for providing a platform to develop my discussion.

Funding

This project has received funding from the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (grant agreement No. 756672). Although the ERC did not fund the original research project, this later funding as part of my current position gave me the time and space to build on the original research, and to write this paper.

Compliance with ethical standards

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

References

  1. Allain J, Crane A, LeBaron G, Behbahani L (2013) Forced labour’s business models and supply chains. JRF, YorkGoogle Scholar
  2. Almond P, van Erp J (2018) Regulation and governance versus criminology: disciplinary divides, intersections, and opportunities. Regul Gov Epub ahead of print, 09 July 2018.  https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12202
  3. Alvesalo A, Whyte D (2007) Eyes wide shut: the police investigation of safety crimes. Crime Law Soc Chang 48(1–2):57–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ayres I, Braithwaite J (1992) Responsive regulation: transcending the deregulation debate. OUP, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  5. Balch A. (2015) 'Understanding and evaluating UK efforts to tackle forced labour’. In Vulnerability, exploitation and migrants. Ed. by Waite L., Craig G., Lewis H., and Skrivankova K. Basingstoke: Palgrave, pp.86–98Google Scholar
  6. BEIS (2018) Trade union membership 2017. BEIS, LondonGoogle Scholar
  7. Binford L (2009) From fields of power to fields of sweat: the dual process of constructing temporary migrant labour in Mexico and Canada. Third World Q 30(3):503–517CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Braithwaite J (2008) Regulatory capitalism. How it works, ideas for making it work better. Edward Elgar Publishing, CheltenhamGoogle Scholar
  9. CIOB (2015) Modern slavery: the dark side of construction. CIOB, BracknellGoogle Scholar
  10. CIOB (2018) Construction and the modern slavery act: tackling exploitation in the UK. CIOB, BracknellGoogle Scholar
  11. Citizens Advice (2017) Employment rights are only as strong as your ability to enforce them [online] available from https://wearecitizensadvice.org.uk/employment-rights-are-only-as-strong-as-your-ability-to-enforce-them-b4f070252b5e [6th March 2019]
  12. Clarke J (2008) Living with/in and without neo-liberalism. Focaal 51:135–147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Connolly H, Lucio MM, Marino S (2012) Trade unions and migration in the UK: equality and migrant worker engagement without collective rights. University of Manchester Business School, ManchesterGoogle Scholar
  14. Crane A, LeBaron G, Allain J, Behbahani L (2019) Governance gaps in eradicating forced labour: from global to domestic supply chains. Regul Gov 13(1):86–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Davies J (2018) From severe to routine labour exploitation: The case of migrant workers in the UK food industry. Criminol Crim Just 19(3):294–310Google Scholar
  16. Davies J, Ollus N (2019) Labour exploitation as corporate crime and harm: outsourcing responsibility in food production and cleaning services supply chains. Crime Law Soc Chang. Epub ahead of print, 21 May 2019.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10611-019-09841-w
  17. Davies J (forthcoming) Corporate harm and embedded labour exploitation in agri-food supply networks. Eur J CriminolGoogle Scholar
  18. EHRC (2012) Meat and poultry processing inquiry review: report of the findings and recommendations. EHRC, LondonGoogle Scholar
  19. FLEX (2018) Shaky foundations: labour exploitation in London’s construction sector. FLEX, LondonGoogle Scholar
  20. Foster J, Taylor S, Khan C (2015) The dynamics of union responses to migrant workers in Canada. Work Employ Soc 29(3):409–426CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. FRA (2015) Severe labour exploitation. FRA, ViennaGoogle Scholar
  22. France B (2016) Labour compliance to exploitation and the abuses in-between. LEAG, LondonGoogle Scholar
  23. FSA (2018) Consolidated annual report and accounts 2017/18. FSA, LondonGoogle Scholar
  24. Gadd D, Broad R, Craven J, Lightowlers C, Bellotti E (2017) Mapping the contours of modern slavery in greater Manchester. Centre for Criminology and Criminal Justice, The University of Manchester, ManchesterGoogle Scholar
  25. Ganji SK (2016) Leveraging the world cup: mega sporting events, human rights risk, and worker welfare reform in Qatar. J Migr Hum Secur 4(4):221–259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Geddes A, Craig G, Scott S, Ackers L, Robinson O, Scullion D (2013) Forced labour in the UK. JRF, YorkGoogle Scholar
  27. GLA (2015) Labour exploitation: spotting the signs. GLA, NottinghamGoogle Scholar
  28. Gobert J. (2014) ‘Country report: Finland’. In European developments in corporate criminal liability. Ed. By Gobert J., and Pascal A. Abingdon: Routledge, pp.234–239Google Scholar
  29. Gobert J, Punch M (2003) Rethinking corporate crime. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  30. Gunningham N., and Sinclair D. (2017) ‘Smart regulation’. In Regulatory theory: foundations and applications. Ed. by Drahos P. Acton: ANU Press, pp.133–148Google Scholar
  31. Holgate J (2005) Organizing migrant workers: a case study of working conditions and unionization in a London sandwich factory. Work Employ Soc 19(3):463–480CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Jessop B (2002) Liberalism, neoliberalism, and urban governance: a state-theoretical perspective. Antipode 34(3):452–472CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Khurana S (2017) Resisting labour control and optimizing social ties: experiences of women construction workers in Delhi. Work Employ Soc 31(6):921–936CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Lake Q, MacAlister J, Berman C, Gitsham M, Page N (2015) Corporate approaches to addressing modern slavery in supply chains: a snapshot of current practice. Hult International Business School, HertfordshireGoogle Scholar
  35. Lawrence F (2016) Gangmasters agree to pay more than £1m to settle modern slavery claim [online] available from <https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/dec/20/gangmasters-agree-1m-payout-to-settle-modern-slavery-claim> [24th January 2019]
  36. Lazer D (2005) Regulatory capitalism as a networked order: the international system as an informational network. Ann Am Acad Polit SS 598(1):52–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. LeBaron G, Howard N, Thibos C, Kyritsis P (2018) Confronting root causes: forced labour in global supply chains. SPERI, SheffieldGoogle Scholar
  38. Lever J, Milbourne P (2017) The structural invisibility of outsiders: the role of migrant labour in the meat-processing industry. Sociology 51(2):306–322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Liberty (2017) Campaigning on the Trade Union Act 2016 [online] available from <https://www.liberty-human-rights.org.uk/campaigning/trade-union-act-2016> [28th February 2019]
  40. Lloyd A. (2018) Working for free illegal employment practices, “off the books” work and the continuum of legality within the service economy. Trends Organ Crime. Epub ahead of print, 15 September 2018.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12117-018-9351-x
  41. Lord N (2014) Regulating corporate bribery in international business: anti-corruption in the UK and Germany. Ashgate, SurreyGoogle Scholar
  42. Lord N, Spencer J, Bellotti E, Benson K (2017) A script analysis of the distribution of counterfeit alcohol across two European jurisdictions. Trends Organ Crime 20(3–4):252–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Matos M, Gonçalves M, Maia  (2018) Human trafficking and criminal proceedings in Portugal: discourses of professionals in the justice system. Trends Organ Crime 21(4):370–400CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. McManus O (2009) Environmental Regulation. Elsevier Ltd., SydneyCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Muncie J (2005) Book review: ‘beyond criminology: taking harm seriously’. Crime Law Soc Chang 43(2):199–201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Nelken D (2012) White-collar and corporate crime. In: Maguire M, Morgan R, Reiner R (eds) The Oxford handbook of criminology, 5th edn. OUP, Oxford, pp 623–659Google Scholar
  47. New S (2015) Modern slavery and the supply chain: the limits of corporate social responsibility? Supply Chain Manag 20(6):697–707CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Newman J (2014) Landscapes of antagonism: local governance, neoliberalism and austerity. Urban Stud 51(15):3290–3305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. OSCE (2018) Model guidelines on government measures to prevent trafficking for labour exploitation in supply chains. OSCE, ViennaGoogle Scholar
  50. Paoli L, Greenfield VA (2015) Starting from the end: a plea for focusing on the consequences of crime. Eur J Crime Cr L Cr J 23(2):87–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Paoli L, Vander Beken T (2014) Organized crime: a contested concept. In: Paoli L (ed) The Oxford handbook of organized crime. OUP, Oxford, pp 13–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Peck J (2010) Constructions of neoliberal reason. OUP, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Potter M, Hamilton J (2014) Picking on vulnerable migrants: Precarity and the mushroom industry in Northern Ireland. Work Employ Soc 28(3):390–406CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Ruhs M, Anderson B (2010) Semi-compliance and illegality in migrant labour markets: an analysis of migrants, employers and the state in the UK. Popul Space Place 16(3):195–211Google Scholar
  55. Scott S (2017) Labour exploitation and work-based harm. Policy Press, BristolCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. SEDEX (2019) Why join SEDEX? [online] available from https://www.sedexglobal.com/about-us/why-join-sedex/ [6th March 2019]
  57. Shamir H (2012) A labor paradigm for human trafficking. UCLA Law Rev 60(1):76–136Google Scholar
  58. Skrivankova K (2010) Between decent work and forced labour: examining the continuum of exploitation. JRF, YorkGoogle Scholar
  59. Snider L (1991) The regulatory dance: understanding reform processes in corporate crime. Int J Sociol Law 19(2):209–236Google Scholar
  60. Snider L., and Bittle S. (2014) ‘The challenges of regulating powerful economic actors’. In European developments in corporate criminal liability. Ed. by Gobert J., and Pascal, A. Abingdon: Routledge, 53-69Google Scholar
  61. Spencer J, Davies J (forthcoming) Vulnerabilities in dairy supply chains on the Island of Ireland. FSAI, DublinGoogle Scholar
  62. Tombs S (2016) Social protection after the crisis. Policy Press, BristolGoogle Scholar
  63. Tombs S, Whyte D (2007) Safety crimes. Willan Publishing, CullomptonGoogle Scholar
  64. Tombs S, Whyte D (2015) The corporate criminal: why corporations must be abolished. Routledge, AbingdonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. TUC (2016) Tackling labour exploitation in the labour market: TUC response to BIS/Home Office consultation. TUC, LondonGoogle Scholar
  66. Turner T, Cross C, O’Sullivan M (2014) Does union membership benefit immigrant workers in “hard times”? J Ind Relat 56(5):611–630CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Vander Beken T, Van Daele S (2008) Legitimate businesses and crime vulnerabilities. Int J Soc Econ 35(10):739–750CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. von Elgg JW (2016) Hidden in plan sight: modern slavery in the construction industry. LexisNexis, New York CityGoogle Scholar
  69. Walters D, James P (2009) Understanding the role of supply chains in influencing health and safety at work. IOSH, WigstonGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Tel Aviv UniversityTel AvivIsrael

Personalised recommendations