We have had the shouting and the brawling. There have been whoops of joy and tears of disappointment. I am not talking about the ELA conference – which was, of course, a fabulous event – but the general election. I am writing this on the day of the Queen’s Speech, in ignorance of what is about to be unleashed on the public as the Government’s programme for not one but two years, due to the Brexit negotiations and associated legislation.

I had suggested that employment law issues might feature strongly in the election campaign. Protecting and enhancing workers’ rights; the ‘gig economy’; and the just about managing were all marked out battlegrounds, the main parties offering something on each. In the event, these issues seemed to be squeezed to the edge.

But these issues have not gone away and will no doubt rebound as politics settles down to whatever can be considered normal when the Government has lost its majority and members of the Prime Minister’s own party describe her as a ‘dead woman walking’. Big, structural and novel issues are interesting and do demand a thoughtful response. It is easy, however, to get carried away with these and forget some of the more basic and fundamental issues of employment laws.

Middlesex University has published an interim report, ‘The weighted scales of economic justice’, which will shock many employment lawyers, or at least confirm to them why they are in the profession. The report is based on the research and findings of the Unpaid Britain project, established at the Middlesex University Business School and co-funded by Trust for London. Unpaid Britain’s aim is to look at issues relating to the non-payment of wages in the UK and it makes for uncomfortable reading.

At its most basic, employment is a transaction where one person gives their time and service in exchange for wages. Service and pay are the two fundamental elements of the relationship. According to this research and interim report, an estimated £1.2 billion of wages and a further £1.5 billion of holiday pay remain unpaid each year. One in 12 workers does not receive a payslip and one in 20 reports receiving no paid holidays.

On 23,000 occasions a year, the result of unpaid or delayed wages is that the worker is left without food. This is in Britain, the fifth richest country in the world, out of 196 countries. Never mind cheese imports; this is a disgrace.

The report shows a widespread culture of non-compliance, abuse of people’s time and rights, dissolved companies and unaccountable directors.

Even the most junior employment lawyer will be able to explain the fundamental protections that the law provides in respect of deductions and failure to pay wages; the provision of holiday pay; the right to receive an itemised pay statement and so on. Traditionally, the tribunals and courts have taken a very protective stance towards workers and employees in relation to these matters, as they are at the heart of the employment relationship.

With abuse clearly taking place, yet against a backdrop of strong legal protection, it asks the question as to why this is so widespread. The answer suggested by the report is the obvious one: enforcement. Why do these employees and workers, so taken advantage of, not go to the employment tribunals to seek redress? Yet again, as so often in the past, we return to the issue of fees. It is a matter of common sense that an employee not paid, say, £200, is unlikely to invest £160 in a tribunal issue fee and then a further £250 hearing fee to recover their wages. And that is before one gets on to the issue of enforcement.

Before we get on to the big structural issues in employment law, surely we need to look again at the routine, day-to-day practice of the law and how it actually works for those seeking to enforce their basic rights.

Alex Lock, DAC Beachcroft LLP