{"id":{"repo_id":"bradford","oai_identifier":"oai:bradscholars.brad.ac.uk:10454/20356"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/bradford/oai:bradscholars.brad.ac.uk:10454/20356","repository":{"repo_id":"bradford","name":"University of Bradford","base_url":"https://bradscholars.brad.ac.uk/oai/request"},"display":{"title":"‘Painting a Picture’ when ‘Putting in a Grievance’ Revelations and Reforms for Resolving Individual Grievances at the Town Hall","abstract":"This thesis is premised on a straightforward notion: personal labour for an employer is work, regardless of the individual’s contractual status, and the right to raise a grievance within the daily workplace is fundamental to such a relationship. Whilst English local authorities are avowedly committed to ‘building inclusive communities’, as a recent policy paper termed it, status differences revealed from within their own workforces have the potential to constrain this right. At a broader level, the expansion of the so-called ‘gig economy’ has forced the judiciary, through decisions involving major digital brands such as Deliveroo and Uber, as well as the Government itself, to consider the status implications, and the associated rights of directly employed workers and agency workers. These so-called ‘gig workers’, together with employees on casual contracts of employment, comprise today’s ‘legally vulnerable’ for the purpose of this thesis. For this marginalised cohort, reforms are posited. Preliminary findings from a review of the Employment Appeal Tribunal’s jurisprudence for this thesis confirmed, rather surprisingly, given the size and extent of the overall workforce, that grievance procedures are seldom raised in argument within the few local authority (‘town hall’) cases that reach it, and even if they are so raised little critical or meaningful judicial discussion ever takes place on them. Such a paucity of published decision-making has contributed to an overall deficit of knowledge on how procedures come to be as they are, how they are used to resolve differences, and how managers respond to grievance expression, especially from the more legally vulnerable constituency of each workforce. This thesis therefore, addresses two overarching questions: (i) how have the legal frameworks on workplace grievances and contractual status evolved?; and (ii) how do local authorities, through their procedural structures and operational practice, facilitate the resolution and inclusion of individual grievances?","abstract_html":"This thesis is premised on a straightforward notion: personal labour for an employer is work, regardless of the individual’s contractual status, and the right to raise a grievance within the daily workplace is fundamental to such a relationship. Whilst English local authorities are avowedly committed to ‘building inclusive communities’, as a recent policy paper termed it, status differences revealed from within their own workforces have the potential to constrain this right. At a broader level, the expansion of the so-called ‘gig economy’ has forced the judiciary, through decisions involving major digital brands such as Deliveroo and Uber, as well as the Government itself, to consider the status implications, and the associated rights of directly employed workers and agency workers. These so-called ‘gig workers’, together with employees on casual contracts of employment, comprise today’s ‘legally vulnerable’ for the purpose of this thesis. For this marginalised cohort, reforms are posited. Preliminary findings from a review of the Employment Appeal Tribunal’s jurisprudence for this thesis confirmed, rather surprisingly, given the size and extent of the overall workforce, that grievance procedures are seldom raised in argument within the few local authority (‘town hall’) cases that reach it, and even if they are so raised little critical or meaningful judicial discussion ever takes place on them. Such a paucity of published decision-making has contributed to an overall deficit of knowledge on how procedures come to be as they are, how they are used to resolve differences, and how managers respond to grievance expression, especially from the more legally vulnerable constituency of each workforce. This thesis therefore, addresses two overarching questions: (i) how have the legal frameworks on workplace grievances and contractual status evolved?; and (ii) how do local authorities, through their procedural structures and operational practice, facilitate the resolution and inclusion of individual grievances?","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Pitchford, Nigel"],"institution":"University of Bradford","degree_name":null,"degree_level":null,"degree_discipline":null,"degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":[],"advisors":["Elfving, Sanna","Van Hoorebeek, Mark"],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":null,"date_issued":"","date_published":null,"updated_at":"2026-07-24T01:14:32Z","subjects":["Individual grievances","Reforms","Resolving","Revelations","Town Hall","Employees","Workers","Casual contracts of employment","Legal position"],"languages":["en"],"rights":["\"Creative
The University of Bradford theses are licenced under a Creative Commons Licence."],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":"https://bradscholars.brad.ac.uk/handle/10454/20356","outbound_label":"Repository record","outbound_source":"dc:identifier.uri"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor.advisor","label":"Advisor","values":["Elfving, Sanna","Van Hoorebeek, Mark"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Pitchford, Nigel"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date.accessioned","label":"Dc Date Accessioned","values":["2025-04-09T12:53:16Z"]},{"key":"dc:date.available","label":"Dc Date Available","values":["2025-04-09T12:53:16Z"]},{"key":"dc:publisher.department","label":"Dc Publisher Department","values":["School of Law"]},{"key":"dc:publisher.institution","label":"Dc Publisher Institution","values":["University of Bradford"]},{"key":"dc:type","label":"Dc Type","values":["Thesis"]},{"key":"dc:type.qualificationlevel","label":"Dc Type Qualificationlevel","values":["doctoral"]},{"key":"dc:type.qualificationname","label":"Dc Type Qualificationname","values":["PhD"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["Individual grievances","Reforms","Resolving","Revelations","Town Hall","Employees","Workers","Casual contracts of employment","Legal position"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:language.iso","label":"Language (ISO)","values":["en"]},{"key":"dc:rights","label":"Dc Rights","values":["\"Creative
The University of Bradford theses are licenced under a Creative Commons Licence."]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier.uri","label":"Identifier URI","values":["https://bradscholars.brad.ac.uk/handle/10454/20356"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["This thesis is premised on a straightforward notion: personal labour for an employer is work, regardless of the individual’s contractual status, and the right to raise a grievance within the daily workplace is fundamental to such a relationship. Whilst English local authorities are avowedly committed to ‘building inclusive communities’, as a recent policy paper termed it, status differences revealed from within their own workforces have the potential to constrain this right. At a broader level, the expansion of the so-called ‘gig economy’ has forced the judiciary, through decisions involving major digital brands such as Deliveroo and Uber, as well as the Government itself, to consider the status implications, and the associated rights of directly employed workers and agency workers. These so-called ‘gig workers’, together with employees on casual contracts of employment, comprise today’s ‘legally vulnerable’ for the purpose of this thesis. For this marginalised cohort, reforms are posited. Preliminary findings from a review of the Employment Appeal Tribunal’s jurisprudence for this thesis confirmed, rather surprisingly, given the size and extent of the overall workforce, that grievance procedures are seldom raised in argument within the few local authority (‘town hall’) cases that reach it, and even if they are so raised little critical or meaningful judicial discussion ever takes place on them. Such a paucity of published decision-making has contributed to an overall deficit of knowledge on how procedures come to be as they are, how they are used to resolve differences, and how managers respond to grievance expression, especially from the more legally vulnerable constituency of each workforce. This thesis therefore, addresses two overarching questions: (i) how have the legal frameworks on workplace grievances and contractual status evolved?; and (ii) how do local authorities, through their procedural structures and operational practice, facilitate the resolution and inclusion of individual grievances?"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["‘Painting a Picture’ when ‘Putting in a Grievance’ Revelations and Reforms for Resolving Individual Grievances at the Town Hall"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor.advisor":["Elfving, Sanna","Van Hoorebeek, Mark"],"dc:creator":["Pitchford, Nigel"],"dc:date.accessioned":["2025-04-09T12:53:16Z"],"dc:date.available":["2025-04-09T12:53:16Z"],"dc:description.abstract":["This thesis is premised on a straightforward notion: personal labour for an employer is work, regardless of the individual’s contractual status, and the right to raise a grievance within the daily workplace is fundamental to such a relationship. Whilst English local authorities are avowedly committed to ‘building inclusive communities’, as a recent policy paper termed it, status differences revealed from within their own workforces have the potential to constrain this right. At a broader level, the expansion of the so-called ‘gig economy’ has forced the judiciary, through decisions involving major digital brands such as Deliveroo and Uber, as well as the Government itself, to consider the status implications, and the associated rights of directly employed workers and agency workers. These so-called ‘gig workers’, together with employees on casual contracts of employment, comprise today’s ‘legally vulnerable’ for the purpose of this thesis. For this marginalised cohort, reforms are posited. Preliminary findings from a review of the Employment Appeal Tribunal’s jurisprudence for this thesis confirmed, rather surprisingly, given the size and extent of the overall workforce, that grievance procedures are seldom raised in argument within the few local authority (‘town hall’) cases that reach it, and even if they are so raised little critical or meaningful judicial discussion ever takes place on them. Such a paucity of published decision-making has contributed to an overall deficit of knowledge on how procedures come to be as they are, how they are used to resolve differences, and how managers respond to grievance expression, especially from the more legally vulnerable constituency of each workforce. This thesis therefore, addresses two overarching questions: (i) how have the legal frameworks on workplace grievances and contractual status evolved?; and (ii) how do local authorities, through their procedural structures and operational practice, facilitate the resolution and inclusion of individual grievances?"],"dc:identifier.uri":["https://bradscholars.brad.ac.uk/handle/10454/20356"],"dc:language.iso":["en"],"dc:publisher.department":["School of Law"],"dc:publisher.institution":["University of Bradford"],"dc:rights":["\"Creative
The University of Bradford theses are licenced under a Creative Commons Licence."],"dc:subject":["Individual grievances","Reforms","Resolving","Revelations","Town Hall","Employees","Workers","Casual contracts of employment","Legal position"],"dc:title":["‘Painting a Picture’ when ‘Putting in a Grievance’ Revelations and Reforms for Resolving Individual Grievances at the Town Hall"],"dc:type":["Thesis"],"dc:type.qualificationlevel":["doctoral"],"dc:type.qualificationname":["PhD"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-24T01:14:32Z"}