Authority – direct government levers

Lever 1: Targeted campaign to raise awareness of fair work

Evidence

Targeted campaigns can deliver information and raise awareness of issues among an identified population as a first step to attitudinal and behavioural change. Increasing awareness of an issue – particularly one about which relatively little is known – is a critical first step. However, awareness alone is not necessarily impactful, unless it gets people to change how they think, feel or act.[8] Evidence suggests that awareness raising needs to be targeted to the right audience; avoid unintended harm or backlash; and identify what people should do differently – by defining “… actionable and achievable calls to action that will lead a specific group of people to do something they haven’t done before”.[9]

There is an extensive grey literature highlighting the practical steps and best practices around how to manage a successful campaign. Research on public interest communications identifies four essential elements for success: “target your audience as narrowly as possible; create compelling messages with clear calls to action; develop a theory of change; and use the right messenger”.[10]

However, robust and independent evaluations of whether specific campaigns are effective are less widely available. In other words, much more is written/known about how to maximise the impact of a campaign than about whether a campaign delivers on its aims. Nevertheless, these best practice literatures do suggest that campaigns can be important in increasing awareness and driving changes to policies, practices and cultures within organisations.

Potential to improve fair work adoption or practice

Applying the essential elements of a successful awareness raising campaign outlined above to fair work, the direct stakeholders of a fair work awareness raising campaign are employers, workers and unions, with other citizens as key indirect stakeholders. The compelling narrative of fair work in Scotland is its well-evidenced benefits for individuals, employers, the economy and society. The theory of change underpinning developments in fair work in Scotland has, to date, been to encourage workplace stakeholders to deliver and embed fair work, with supportive intervention from the Scottish Government and other stakeholders where relevant. Consequently, the ‘right messenger’ is workplace stakeholders who can convey clear messages about their experience of fair work.

There have been campaigns around fair work in Scotland. For example, the ‘4 Steps to Fair Work’ campaign is currently underway and promoted by the Coalition of Support Care Providers Scotland (CCPS).[11] The campaign focuses on pay inequality; ensuring fair pay for equal work; valuing staff; and delivering equality. While such campaigns might contribute to awareness raising, the CCPS campaign is aimed at encouraging Scottish Government to deliver fair work for social care sector workers.

Where evaluations of awareness raising campaigns have been conducted in a Scottish context, there is some evidence that they raise awareness, for example, around aspects of tackling specific forms of discrimination such as mental health stigma[12] or the rationale for workplace health strategies and fair work.[13] Such campaigns to promote fair work have potential, therefore, to raise awareness, and to contribute to the advance of fair work as part of a wider strategy to link awareness to endorsement and action, as discussed below.

Ownership of lever

The Scottish Government would be the key owner/enabler of a public awareness campaign on fair work, though partnership with other direct workplace stakeholders would also be crucial. An awareness campaign would target direct workplace stakeholders but might also impact on a wider stakeholder group such as future labour market participants and consumers.

Dependencies and constraints

The key dependency in delivering an effective awareness raising campaign beyond the elements of the campaign itself is the receptiveness of those to whom the campaign is targeted, both to participate in the campaign and to act on its message. Awareness raising can adapt over time from general awareness of fair work to specific issues or the experiences of specific groups.

The key immediate constraint in deploying this lever is the cost of a well-designed and effective awareness campaign. Beyond this, awareness raising is a first and necessary step towards advancing fair work, but it is not a sufficient condition for change. Moving from awareness to action is contingent on aligning increased awareness to additional information and support tailored to the needs of specific employers and workers. We discuss at Lever 4 the role of fair work champions in Scotland’s public agencies and public bodies in signposting to support for fair work, and at Levers 11 and 12, the need for a suite of appropriate support and tools, and a repository of information, to support practice. Awareness raising might also be usefully aligned with single issue campaigns (Lever 3) around fair work dimensions or specific practices.

Locus and reach

In the first instance, given that some workplace stakeholders have little awareness of the fair work policy agenda,[14] an effective awareness raising campaign is likely to be generic and economy-wide, giving significant potential reach. More industry-specific campaigns are also possible. While these inevitably have a narrower reach, their more specific locus could allow for more tailored information on fair work in industry context.

Lever 1 Insight: There is potential value in the Scottish Government leading the design, testing and evaluation of targeted awareness-raising campaigns communicating tailored messages on the importance of fair work to employers, industry representatives and other key stakeholder communities.

Lever 2: Embedding fair work in Scotland’s employability services

Evidence

Prior research identifies employability support as one area of opportunity to deliver in-work progression,[15] either by developing more innovative Active Labour Market Policy approaches to designing programmes for wage progression; improving careers information advice and guidance to enable effective career decision-making; working with employers to identify barriers and opportunities to progression as well as its benefits to business; and developing training support for sectoral career pathways.

There is increasing interest in welfare states across Europe in exactly such workplace-engaged approaches to employability services, given a realisation that a more interventionist and collaborative approach to working with providers, service users and employers has the potential to deliver more sustainable fair work outcomes.[16] There is also good reason for seeking such a pivot in employability services, given the legacy of a UK-level policy agenda in this space that has not prioritised fair work. Successive UK governments have overseen employability services that rely upon welfare conditionality to ‘encourage’ participation and use payment-by-results contracting to incentivise service providers to move people into jobs as quickly as possible. International comparative analyses have often characterised this approach as ‘work-first’, which experts see as less effective in delivering fair work when compared with policies in other countries [for example, some Nordic states] that place more emphasis on the quality of job outcomes and/or the opportunity to take up learning rather than/alongside paid employment.[17] The outcomes delivered by ‘work-first services’ have sometimes proved problematic in terms of limited security of hours, tenure and income; and limited opportunity for learning and progression. Indeed, the strengthening of in-work conditionality under Universal Credit reforms to some extent reflects an acknowledgement by UK Government that its existing employability services often deliver inadequate hours and income for those achieving ‘successful’ outcomes [the UK Government has chosen to address this by applying more punitive conditionality to vulnerable jobseekers rather than working with employers to promote fair work outcomes].[18]

Potential to improve fair work adoption or practice

Existing employability provision funded and supported by the Scottish Government could play an important role in achieving fair work outcomes, particularly in relation to the ‘Opportunity’ dimension, by facilitating the inclusion of people who might otherwise face exclusion from paid work, and especially by enhancing opportunity for potentially vulnerable client populations such as lone parents, disabled people, ex-offenders and care experienced young people. The payment-by-results regime for Fair Start Scotland incentivises this support for vulnerable groups, with providers achieving the greatest financial reward for achieving job entries for the ‘intensive’ support group facing substantial barriers to participation and in need of specialist support services.[19]

Funding and priority indicators for employability provision can also contribute – to some extent – to promoting the ‘Security’ dimension of Fair Work. Sustainment payments to Fair Start Scotland providers seek to encourage the insertion of people into secure jobs (35% of funding is triggered if the client is still in work after 26 weeks, with a further 50% paid for sustained job outcome at 52 weeks). Yet the extent to which existing employability provision delivers income/decent pay is more doubtful. A recent evaluation of Fair Start Scotland concluded that “based on wage rates, sectors, and contract types, it is evident that, on average, the jobs that Fair Start Scotland participants achieve are at the lower end of the quality and fair work spectrum”.[20]

However, employability services could offer more and different forms of support to encourage fair work outcomes, and there is scope for further mainstreaming of fair work as a priority and [measurable] outcome for Scotland’s employability services. Employability services that prioritise job entry for participants without fair work are deploying significant public resources in a sub-optimal manner. Funding arrangements and strategic agreements with Local Employability Partnerships and delivery partners under future iterations of the No One Left Behind (NOLB) approach could easily be recalibrated to emphasise, incentivise or require a broader range of fair work outcomes such as greater security or opportunities for in-work progression.

Employability providers could be asked to work more intensively with employers to identify opportunities for progression and learning post-job entry, and to consider a broader range of flexible working opportunities that might assist people with caring responsibilities and/or managing disability/health conditions to enter work. Evidence from other welfare states suggests that where employability providers engage employers as active partners in adjusting the workplace to the needs and capabilities of job seekers, then sustainability and progression rates tend to improve.[21] Providers could be asked to report on the extent to which workplaces that provide the destination for participants are unionised or offer other effective voice mechanisms. Entry into and/or progression to better paid employment could be incentivised to promote income security. Hours sufficiency could be prioritised by asking providers to engage with employers to ensure that employability participants transitioning to work do not experience under-employment.

Ownership of lever

The Scottish Government has full powers over, and funds, employability provision (outwith the basic services provided by the UK Government’s Jobcentre Plus network). This means direct authority over its national employability programme, contracting with providers to deliver ‘Fair Start Scotland’ and agreeing priorities with local providers delivering complementary local provision under Local Employability Partnership structures. Networks of regional/local public, private and third sector providers are responsible for the delivery of provision. The NOLB approach has driven progress towards the improved integration of local employability services and, from 2024, will see Fair Start Scotland replaced with a more fully integrated programme of local collaborative services.

The next phase of NOLB integration will see further coherence and integration of service offers for different groups at the local level. Clearly, constructive partnership-working with employers proving opportunities for labour market entry are important to achieving fair work outcomes. While the achievement of fair work outcomes for vulnerable groups is likely to remain a significant challenge, the recalibration of priorities, rewards and priorities towards fair work in Scotland’s employability services could be relatively straightforward.

Dependencies and constraints

Designing employability services that better embed fair work will depend on the Scottish Government and partners in local government and service provider communities (including the third sector) building upon strong and established collaborative relationships to embed fair work outcomes into the objectives and incentives for employability provision. Crucially, delivering more from employability support is likely to require broader and deeper engagement with employers, which may require some resourcing/incentivisation of employers to engage. Many fair work outcomes might be challenging to gather data on without sufficient additional resource for local providers. Of course, a key constraint is that Scottish Ministers have no legislative power to require employer co-operation with employability service providers. Nevertheless, there is scope for the Scottish Government and partners to explore including additional fair work targets and indicators as part of the priorities and targets for, or even contractual requirements of, the delivery of future employability services.

Locus and reach

Employability services target opportunities for labour market inclusion in all sectors. However, low valued added service sector opportunities make up a relatively high proportion of outcomes for programme participants. Therefore, it is likely that there would be a need for future programmes to be resourced to engage employers in these sectors to advocate for and facilitate fair work outcomes.

The reach of employability provision is significant. More than 80,000 people (mostly jobseekers from vulnerable groups) have participated in Fair Start Scotland or services under the NOLB approach in the past five years. Action to promote a broader range of fair work outcomes therefore has the potential to deliver positive impacts for a substantial number of vulnerable people in the labour market.

Lever 2 Insight: There is potential value in the Scottish Government, Local Employability Partnerships and partners testing how fair work outcome indicators can be further prioritised and measured as a means of assessing the performance of Scotland’s employability services in supporting fair work. There is also potential value in considering how employability funding can be used to incentivise and reward the achievement of fair work outcomes for service users.

Lever 3: Support for Real Living Hours

Evidence

The Living Wage campaign (now referred to as the real Living Wage or rLW) emerged from community-based action in 2001, with the first rLW rate introduced by the Living Wage Foundation (LWF) in 2011. Since, the rLW has resulted in subsequent gains in hourly pay for over 400,000 workers in the UK and most notably for those in elementary roles and on part-time contracts.[22] Some of the accredited rLW employers have reported business benefits in terms of reputational gains, improved workplace relations and performance, and commercial gains through attracting more contracts and/or new customers. Moreover, there are almost no reports from employers that the introduction of the rLW required a balancing or trade-off with other terms and conditions to manage the higher payment.[23]

While the volume of businesses seeking accreditation as rLW employers is growing, the volume of employers is small relative to the business population in the UK[1]. There is evidence, however, of a ripple effect which has the potential to reach other employers with a form of ‘instrumental motivation’ to sign-up to compete for talent (i.e. employers are motivated to match competitors‘ commitment to paying the rLW in order to attract staff).[24] [25] Moreover, while institutional motivation through pressure from campaign groups, politicians or trade unions has been less effective in motivating employers to support the rLW, there is evidence that more focused place-based campaigning has been important.[26]

The concept of living hours was initially developed to capture the increasing segmentation between standard and non-standard low-waged work (Ilsøe, 2017) in which the experience of living on a low income for the latter is exacerbated by volatility in the number of hours worked and the scheduling of work. Unpredictable hours impact on planning life outside of work. Over half of those on insecure contracts in the UK receive less than 1 weeks’ notice of their shifts,[27] creating challenges for child and other care. Volatility of working hours can drive income insecurity and poorer wellbeing.[28] Insecure hours contracts can also create a higher financial outlay for workers (often already navigating life on a low income) as short notification of shifts can mean higher travel or childcare costs.[29]

The Living Wage Foundation launched the Living Hours (LHs) scheme in the UK in 2019 to tackle insecure forms of work. Accreditation is only available to employers already certified as rLW employers[30] as the combination of a living wage and living hours is rightly seen as fundamental to tackling in-work poverty and providing a secure and reasonable standard of living.[31] The scheme commits employers to providing a minimum of 16 hours per week (unless the worker requests otherwise), a contract that reflects the hours generally worked and four weeks’ notice of shifts (or payment for shifts cancelled within this notice period).

To achieve LHs accreditation, employers are required to collate information on all types of contracts offered and use this data to complete the diagnostic tool developed by the LWF which shows the extent of existing LH contracts in the organisation. Thereafter, employers are required to participate in workshops that support them to move to providing LHs across all contracts. Accreditation is awarded on successful completion of the above steps.

Other campaigns touch on the issue of hours insufficiency and unpredictability. The STUC’s Better than Zero campaign started in 2015 to address the exploitative use of zero hours contracts. Other jurisdictions have also addressed the broad area of living hours. In Ireland, where an employee's contract does not reflect the reality of the hours they generally work (over a 12-month period), they can request a banded hours contract which subsequently provides the employee with right to work an average of their banded hours for the next 12 months. The Northern Ireland Assembly has also previously shown interest in adopted such a banded hours system.

Potential to improve fair work adoption or practice

The Scottish Government has supported the adoption of the rLW and the delivery of the Scottish campaign since 2016, delivering funding to support awareness raising and administering of the accreditation as well as advocating the standard by signing up to it.[32] It has taken significant steps to ensure the payment of the rLW as a minimum in the Scottish public sector; required payment of the rLW to all adult social care workers and ELC workers delivering public commissioned services; required payment of the rLW in the Scottish Business Pledge (so that only employers that pay the rLW can be signatories to the Pledge); introduced the RLW as a condition of contract within procurement contracts and a condition of grant funding where it is relevant to do; and has embedded payment of the rLW as a condition within Fair Work First. The government has therefore used its authority to adopt, promote and encourage payment of the rLW, thus supporting fair work by enhancing the income security of low paid workers.

While there is some inference of a positive causal link between Scottish Government support and the reduction in the proportion of employees working for less than the rLW (decreasing from a persistent 18-20% of workers between 2012-2016 to a record low of 9% in 2023),[33] isolating the impact of this support from other influences and environmental factors is particularly challenging. Despite this, there are identifiable real effects of the Scottish Government’s approach: wages in adult social care and early learning and childcare are a direct consequence of their policy. This is also true for wider public sector pay policy and for those in firms who contract with the Scottish Government. Robust rLW requirements for grant funding will also start having an impact in third sector organisations delivering services that are publicly funded. These elements of direct delivery also contribute to momentum around the wider campaign. In addition, it seems evident that the Scottish Government’s support for the rLW has raised the profile of the standard as something clear and tangible that employers can do.

In-work poverty can be a consequence of low pay, insufficient paid hours or a combination of both. The Scottish Government has provided financial support for the delivery of the Living Hours Accreditation Scheme since 2021 and identifies accreditation as good practice within its Fair Work First conditionality for public sector contracts. It has the authority to broaden and deepen its support for LHs and lead the way in supporting this progressive workplace practice. Government support can help raise awareness, support campaigning organisations and bring government’s influence to bear on employers to tackle hours and associated income instability. While the Scottish Government continues to advocate for the rLW, at present only 9% of workers in Scotland do not earn it, meaning that the pool of employees to impact is decreasing and is likely to constitute some of the most difficult to reach sectors and businesses. There is, however, an existing pool of employers with rLW accreditation who might be receptive to engaging with the Scottish Government to deliver LH. While LH accreditation is voluntary by employers, government support may have a significant impact, and researchers have pointed to the need for greater coordination of LHs to improve its reach and impact.[34]

LHs may also deliver benefits beyond improved income security as greater hours predictability can better support employees to access training and opportunities for career progression.[35] Moreover, the LHs scheme requires dialogue between the parties to discuss their respective needs and agree on minimum hours which could, in turn, improve worker voice.

Ownership of lever

LH Accreditation is managed by the Living Wage Foundation for the UK, and by the Poverty Alliance in Scotland. The Scottish Government has provided financial support to the Poverty Alliance for LH accreditation since 2021. Further promotion of LH would require facilitation by Scottish Government of the lever in the context of formal ‘ownership’ of the accreditation by the Poverty Alliance.

Dependencies and constraints

One possible constraint on embedding LHs is the need for an hours calculation system and more developed workforce planning that might challenge smaller organisations without an in-house HR function. This is an area, however, where government information, tools and support (see later levers) might play a positive and crucial role.

Locus and reach

The concept of LHs is relatively new so there is no significant evidence base on its impact. However, 6.1m workers across the UK are in insecure work[2] which includes 17% of workers in Scotland.[36] There are so far 89 accredited Living Hours accredited employers in the UK[37] and, encouragingly, half of rLW accredited employers report a likelihood of seeking LHs accreditation.[38]

The locus of an intervention to support LH spans those industries where hours’ instability is a feature. While the LHs campaign attempts to reach all industries, particular low-wage industries and occupations like hospitality, social care and retail are identified as promising the greatest potential benefit. The hospitality sector in particular is reported to have a disproportionately high share of workers on insecure contracts[39] and zero hours contracts (29% of employees).[40]

Lever 3 Insight: There is potential value in the Scottish Government providing further financial, policy and campaigning support for Living Hours, and for further evaluation of the impact of such a campaign. Specifically, there is potential value in the Scottish Government working with relevant partners to support the development of accessible Living Hours tools and support that might enable employers and employees to assess the extent to which different workplaces and jobs provide sufficient hours (see Lever 11).

Lever 4: Creating fair work champions in the Scottish Government, public sector, public agencies, public bodies and Industry Leadership Groups (ILGs)

Evidence

Workplace ‘champions’ are key agents of change dedicated to improving a specific area of practice. Champions can be employees or managers who combine enthusiasm for the role with a desire to promote and improve people’s experience in the workplace.[41] Champions are change agents who tend to operate in focussed areas, including skills and training, mental health, physical health, productivity; innovation; equality, diversity and inclusion (EDI); and wellbeing. Champions can work on their own or in tandem with a network of those in similar or allied roles. Evidence suggests that EDI champions, for example, are a growing presence in public (e.g., further and higher education, and in healthcare settings) and third sector organisations. Champions are a key part of driving awareness and changes to policies, practices and cultures within organisations.

Positive assessments of the effectiveness of workplace champions are stronger in grey or practitioner literatures,[42] where there is extensive discussion of key practical lessons for diversity management.[43] [44] [45] What research does exist[46] suggests that named individuals with specific responsibility for change initiatives leading or “championing” inclusion initiatives can enhance the efficacy of organisational diversity efforts,[47] though some researchers caution against the risks of ‘ghettoising’ dedicated gender equality activity.

There is also direct evidence about the efficacy of appointing champions in areas such as workplace wellbeing (mental and physical). Two positive early evaluations come from studies in England and Australia in healthcare settings that highlight the positive role played by champions in helping to improve levels of physical activity at work.[48]

While distinct from the role of champions, Non-Executive Directors (NEDs) can play an important governance role in public bodies and are required to be independent, impartial and bring experience/expertise, oversight, scrutiny and challenge into boards. They are required to act in the interests of wider society. NEDs in the public sector are governed by the UK Corporate Governance Code for Central Government Departments, and two recent reports of NEDs in Central UK Government Departments point to them performing wider roles in non-board assigned areas[49] or in areas not publicly documented or defined.[50]

While there is evidence detailing the positive link between the presence of independent NEDs and firm-level financial performance in the UK and internationally,[51] research on their organisational and operational effectiveness in public bodies and governance is limited. One illustration of the impact and effectiveness of NEDs focuses on their role in Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR[3]).[52]

Potential to improve fair work adoption or practice

These evaluations give reasons for optimism regarding the likely impact of fair work champions in Scotland. Champions have a role to play in raising awareness of fair work as a workplace issue and in influencing the understanding of, adoption of, and outcomes of fair work practices, and are most likely to be effective where they operate within a wider network of champions (see Lever 9).

For example, a fair work champion may identify opportunities to raise the awareness of EDI issues; support the design and development of fair work policy; ensure that local or frontline issues inform fair work priorities; monitor progress and develop actions to address gaps; share best practice and signpost workers to appropriate policies and supports.

While distinct from the role of champions, independent non-executive directors (NEDs) in public bodies in Scotland may provide another avenue for embedding a dedicated fair work role and responsibility. NEDs on public boards with specific responsibility for fair work may provide a mechanism for greater strategic engagement with fair work in the public sector.

Ownership of lever

The Scottish Government has direct authority to encourage and sponsor the identification, appointment, training and development of fair work champions across its own employees, public agencies, public bodies and parts of the wider public sector. Local government in Scotland also has ownership of this lever as it applies in parts of the public sector for which they are responsible. The Scottish Government also plays a role in public appointments of NEDs in Scotland and is responsible for the operation of Industry Leadership Groups (ILGs). ILGs bring together sector stakeholders to provide a strategic interface between specific industries and government with a view to progressing industry ambitions, reinforce industry cohesion, foster strategic partnership around shared priorities, and provide leadership and a collective voice for the sector in question. While there has been some recent experimentation with fair work structures in ILGs in Scotland (for example, the Fair Work Sub-group of the Retail ILG), embedding fair work expertise and responsibility in the specific priorities and operation of ILGs is the exception rather than the rule. There is a role for the Scottish Government to ensure that fair work is an embedded responsibility in all ILGs.

Dependencies and constraints

The effectiveness of attempting to develop dedicated capacity around fair work in public organisations, public boards and ILGs is likely to be highly contingent on buy-in from relevant public sector workplace stakeholders, notwithstanding the Government’s and local authorities’ formal authority. Starting with the public sector and public bodies allows the Scottish Government to ensure that fair work is better understood and embedded in Scottish public life, and to pilot, deploy and evaluate champions in ways that that may generate significant lessons for employers and workers in the wider Scottish economy, enhancing the potential reach of this lever in the longer term. Training to support this dedicated capacity and networks to connect them are also key dependencies (see levers 7 and 10).

Constraints on the development of a fair work champions approach are likely to arise from orientation, capability and capacity concerns. An effective champions’ programme requires identification of those individuals – including those at a senior level – willing to advocate for fair work within their organisations. It also requires investment in training and skills development to support that role (see Lever 8). Crucially, public organisations face increasing capacity constraints that may limit the time available to champion fair work activities.

Locus and reach

There is considerable potential in developing specialist fair work expertise across public sector bodies and public sector-led processes in Scotland that are in the direct or indirect authority of the Scottish Government and of local government. Given the size of the public sector, employing approximately 594,000 people across Scotland, this lever would have significant reach. Moreover, in the delivery of public services to individuals and organisations, the public sector itself has a lever to cascade its own fair work expertise more widely across Scotland’s economy and society.

Lever 4 Insight: There is potential value in the Scottish Government and local authorities supporting the training of, and evaluating the impact of, workplace champions with expertise in specific fair work components and practices. There may also be value in a parallel and complementary training and support for NEDs to become advocates for fair work. This lever is specific to public agencies, public bodies and the public sector. Not only does this cover a significant proportion of employees in Scotland, all of these organisations closely with other workplace stakeholders in the private and third sectors.