Employer breaches of New Zealand’s minimum employer standards and other forms of worker exploitation have been increasingly recognised as a significant problem. This affects migrant workers in particular, and among them those working without documentation or on various types of non-resident visas. Exploitation has become particularly embedded in a number of industries: fishing, hospitality and tourism, and in some sectors of agriculture, particularly those dependent on seasonal labour. Initially, government action to mitigate these problems was slow and reluctant but over the last decade, culminating in the reforms of 2016, there has been a more focussed effort to provide a strong legislative framework to support minimum employment standards. This article describes the background to those reforms, analyses the reforms themselves and goes on to consider whether they are adequate to ensure access to justice by disadvantaged workers.

Despite substantial endeavours of international institutions and governments around the world to promote decent work, recent years have witnessed resurgence of non-standard and precarious labour practices. This article scrutinises one of the most recently described types of non-standard work, which is known as quasi-formal or under-declared employment. Companies relying on this illegitimate strategy, which is particularly prevalent in Europe, deliberately misreport the take-home pay of their formally employed workers. Alongside the officially declared wage, a quasi-formal worker thus receives an additional cash-in-hand payment which remains untaxed. To explore why so many European Union workers accept quasi-formal jobs in spite of obvious limitations, we report the evidence from interviews with 616 workers who were surveyed within the Special Eurobarometer 284/Wave 67.3. A two-level cumulative logistic regression emphasises tax morale and the exact function of the cash-in-hand payment as the key factors in this respect. On the other hand, neither perceived detection risk nor expected penalties are found to affect the readiness of quasi-formal workers to keep obeying an illegitimate arrangement with their employer. These findings therefore endorse recent studies on the matter, which illuminate low trust in the state and fellow citizens as the main reason for many workers to voluntarily misreport their income.

Internships are prevalent in new media industries and have become the focus of news reports and popular writings in recent years. This article addresses the gap between intern research and digital labour research. It asks: How are these interns working and living? What are the power dynamics behind interns’ experiences? To what extent can digital labour theories be applied to explore these experiences? Based on empirical research conducted at two Chinese Internet companies, this article shows that interns in Chinese Internet industries experience poor working conditions and difficult living conditions. These are caused by power dynamics within the companies, such as tensions between interns and full-time Internet workers, and power dynamics within Chinese society, such as those between Chinese universities and Internet companies involved in these internships. The article argues that such difficult conditions are caused by Internet companies and the Chinese higher education system, both of which engage in forms of coercion and alienation. Digital labour theories need to take greater account of intern labour and of interns’ experiences of precarious work in the new media industries.

The rise of wages in China would seem to indicate that the demographic dividend has reached its end. A more refined approach reveals, however, that the situation of Chinese workers has not really improved: even though real wages are rising, the share of wages in the nation’s wealth has not kept pace. The reason for this is China’s position within global value chains, where the employment relationship is not solely governed by the employer–employee power relationship, but by contractual relations established between ‘lead firms’ and subcontractors. This situation echoes labour institutional economist JR Commons’ concept of ‘competitive menace’ and analyses of the structural imbalance of power in the employer/employee relationship. We argue that despite the Chinese government’s desire for industrial upgrading and its intention to develop internal labour markets, Chinese labour institutions have shown significant resistance to change making it hard to envisage any shift towards a Fordist regime of capital accumulation based on a virtuous cycle of mass production and mass consumption.

Judicial interpretation of statute law in common-law countries means that the judiciary may mediate the social impact of legislation. In the case of the protection of labour rights in India, this article examines the extent to which the judiciary acts independently from the government of the day, and the extent to which court judgements are swayed by prevailing administrative policies. Specifically, to what extent have economic liberalisation and labour market flexibility policies influenced court decisions in cases challenging worker dismissals? Drawing on a review of 270 judgements delivered by the Supreme Court of India and the state High Courts between 1950 and 2010, a relationship is traced between a shifting pattern of Courts’ judgements and policy changes initiated by the Indian government in response to economic conditions. The objective of the study is to understand the effect of a structural shift in the economy on the cases of consented and contested decrees related to dismissal of workers under the relevant laws in India. It is found that the specific statute has not greatly changed through legal reforms, but the judiciary’s interpretations of it have changed over six decades based on dominant socio-political currents, in tune with government economic policies. This raises profound questions about judicial independence in defence of labour rights.

This review article provides a critique of Marilyn Lake’s Progressive New World, a monograph that postulates that Australian/Australasian transpacific exchange shaped the development of American progressivism. The review outlines the major contours of her claim, notes her ambivalence concerning her overall position, and critiques her decision to not explain/examine differences in the political culture of the United States of America and Australia. The review seeks to overcome this problem by examining key differences in the cultural history of both societies and draws on the insights of Alexis de Tocqueville’s Democracy and America. The review (a) develops a model which provides a means to understand how one society can impact another; (b) contrasts the origins of progressivism in the United States of America and Australia; (c) examines the work of the Australian scholar Michael Roe, who postulated that American progressivism was the independent factor impacting Australian developments; (d) distinguishes between two types of progressivism – racist conceit, pure and simple, and broader social reforms, which may or may not entrench racist conceit; and (e) examines various dimensions of progressivism which Marilyn Lake has used in developing her claim.