Abstract
| Language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages | 263-278 |
| Number of pages | 16 |
| Journal | Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy |
| Volume | 27 |
| Issue number | 2 |
| Early online date | 27 Jan 2009 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - Apr 2009 |
Fingerprint
Keywords
- employment regulation
- UK small firms
Cite this
}
Perceptions and experience of employment regulation in UK small firms. / Carter, S.L.; Mason, C.M.; Tagg, S.K.
In: Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, Vol. 27, No. 2, 04.2009, p. 263-278.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
TY - JOUR
T1 - Perceptions and experience of employment regulation in UK small firms
AU - Carter, S.L.
AU - Mason, C.M.
AU - Tagg, S.K.
PY - 2009/4
Y1 - 2009/4
N2 - The view that excessive regulation constrains small business growth has been a persistent theme within business and policy communities, although recent studies have demonstrated the actual effects of regulation to be relatively modest. A prior small-scale study proposed four reasons why employment legislation does 'not damage' small firms. We attempt to assess the robustness of these propositions in a large-scale survey of 16 779 small firms. Results provide empirical support for three propositions. Firstly, perceived dissatisfaction masks actual effects. Secondly, competitive conditions mediate regulatory effects; however, even resource-constrained firms reported few negative effects. Thirdly, informality eases regulatory impact. Results failed to confirm that older laws are 'routinised'. Length of time as a business owner was found to be more influential than age of regulation, with owners who have been in business for many years having a longer 'window of exposure' increasing their likelihood of experiencing negative and positive effects.
AB - The view that excessive regulation constrains small business growth has been a persistent theme within business and policy communities, although recent studies have demonstrated the actual effects of regulation to be relatively modest. A prior small-scale study proposed four reasons why employment legislation does 'not damage' small firms. We attempt to assess the robustness of these propositions in a large-scale survey of 16 779 small firms. Results provide empirical support for three propositions. Firstly, perceived dissatisfaction masks actual effects. Secondly, competitive conditions mediate regulatory effects; however, even resource-constrained firms reported few negative effects. Thirdly, informality eases regulatory impact. Results failed to confirm that older laws are 'routinised'. Length of time as a business owner was found to be more influential than age of regulation, with owners who have been in business for many years having a longer 'window of exposure' increasing their likelihood of experiencing negative and positive effects.
KW - employment regulation
KW - UK small firms
U2 - 10.1068/c07106b
DO - 10.1068/c07106b
M3 - Article
VL - 27
SP - 263
EP - 278
JO - Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy
T2 - Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy
JF - Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy
SN - 1472-3425
IS - 2
ER -