Interview with Luigia Ingianni
Silvia Tozzoli
Legance, Milan
stozzoli@legance.it
Veena Gopalakrishnan
Trilegal, Bangalore, Karnataka
Veena.Gopalakrishnan@Trilegal.com
Patricia Mederios Barboza
CGM Advogados, São Paulo
patricia.barboza@cgmlaw.com.br
As labour markets continue to evolve, lawyers and policymakers must reflect on whether the current legal framework is suitable for the new trends, needs, opportunities and challenges of the world of work or needs to align.
Economic insecurity, income inequality, talent shortage, digital revolution (or disruption?), globalisation, demographic changes and economic exclusion are making the headlines.
Striking the balance between the new workers’ approach to work – more focused on work-life balance and wellbeing – and the companies’ short-term profits and long-term responsibilities to their stakeholders in the face of the persistently slow productivity and increasing labour cost is not an easy job.
In such a rapidly changing world of work, heavily impacted also by net-zero transition and (environmental, social, governance) ESG requirements, policymakers and institutions need to analyse and rethink the traditional framework, and design alternative policies that align with the evolving needs of the labour markets and promote a just transition – decent work, inclusiveness and equal opportunities – to allow employees and employers to thrive and achieve sustainable prosperity for all.
We had the great pleasure to discuss these topics with Luigia Ingianni, who leads the Employment Standards Office of the Qatar Financial Centre (QFC) and is an Adjunct Professor at the Hamad Bin Khalifa University – College of Law.
Luigia has transformed the labour law landscape in Qatar, designing innovative legislation and policies with particular focus on management of conflict in the workplace, gender equality, decent work, harassment and violence in the workplace, justice and partnerships – UN Sustainable Development Goals 5, 8, 16 and 17 – and is also a member of the World Health Organization (WHO) working group on the world of work dialogue.
She shared with us her views on how employment rules and policies can be designed and implemented through patterns and ideas that were not in the traditional ‘tool kit’ of policymakers, but which can now be more adequate to address the needs of an integrated economy that impacts different countries and cultures at a global level.
Q: What is, in your experience at the QFC, the role of unions in the policy review and in implementing the social dialogue?
Although in the jurisdiction of the QFC – which is independent from the jurisdiction of the State of Qatar and has its own laws and courts – we do not have unions, we strongly believe in the International Labour Organization (ILO) social dialogue principle and have implemented a tripartite mechanism of consultation and collaboration where employers and employees are actively involved in the discussion and drafting of new policies.
We believe it’s very important that employers and employees affected by new legislation or policy have a voice in the decision-making process. As such, consultation and exchange of ideas (including, for example, suggestions on ways to mitigate the business impact of the new policy) not only support the Employment Standards Office in defining the most appropriate way to balance the different interests of the parties – be it productivity and the business needs of employers, fairness for employees and the need for fair labour standards for employment institutions – but also to facilitate compliance, given that the final piece of legislation or policy is the result of a common discussion, negotiation and agreement.
The main goal of the social dialogue process is to promote consensus building and participation among the main stakeholders; in the ILO’s words ‘successful social dialogue process is vital to address important economic and social issues, encourage good governance, advance social and industrial peace and stability and boost economic progress’.
In pursuing that goal, the mechanism implemented within the QFC is surely different from the traditional and somehow conflictual approach that characterizes collective representation in certain countries or in certain historical phases. This different approach can lack the ‘stamina’ that led to the surge of employment rights – for example, in Europe in the 1970s and 1980s – but can also be more sustainable in the long term and, for example, when the scarcity of economic resources leaves less space to antagonistic actions, that are not always able to build consensus.
Another way our institution ensures workers’ protection is through a confidential complaint-mechanism where individuals may report contraventions of the employment regulations and opt for conciliation, mediation and adjudication of the dispute, with adequate protection for whistleblowers.
Q: In which ways do the new forms of work affect the dynamics of employment relationships?
The great resignation, quiet quitting, ‘yolo’ economy and the turnover crisis we have witnessed in the recent years show how digital disruptions, generative artificial intelligence (AI), climate change and energy transition, multigenerational and aging workforces have prompted a stronger need for a deeper sense of purpose, heavily influencing the employees’ approach to work.
The long-term post-pandemic impact has imposed a reflection on ‘how’ we work – from different places, in different time zones, virtually connected; ‘why’ we work – the purpose and meaning of our careers; and ‘what’ we prioritise between working and personal lives.
The talent shortage – especially in STEM-related, healthcare, and other high-skill professions – has also changed labour dynamics, giving employees stronger bargaining powers to negotiate their working conditions and ensure a better work-life balance.
The increase of satellite employees, digital nomads and hybrid work has created a shift in the roles and responsibilities of employers and employees.
Employers have to redefine their expectations towards people working remotely, delegate more and give them freedom and autonomy to step outside the comfort zone and try new approaches. They have to assign their employees meaningful work, focusing on the results instead of the ‘working hours’. [They have to] give their employees permission to make mistakes and manage their own tasks in a flexible way, putting the employees’ basic needs at the core of the relationship and fostering autonomy, sense of purpose, sense of belonging and accomplishment.
Recognition, appreciation, clear communication, trust and corporate values aligned with individual values are also crucial tools to retain talent, boost engagement and enhance business productivity and profit.
Q: Are traditional labour standards still adequate with the new ways of work and ESG requirements?
The changes in the employer-employee dynamics have led to a significant shift in obligations, responsibilities and rights of employers and employees. Control and supervision over performance, occupational safety and health measures, working hours, just to mention a few, are no longer ‘employers’ affairs’ and are delegated to the employees’ active commitment and accountability, which someone defined as a transition from ‘management of human resources’ to ‘development of resourceful humans’.
The question, in my view, is whether the binary model between depended employment and self-employment, on which legal systems have been traditionally based, is still relevant despite the increasingly blurred boundaries between traditional employment, gig economy, digital nomads and satellite employees, among others.
Laws are not unchangeable formulas like mathematical equations, but dynamic constructs reflecting the values, beliefs and needs of a society at a given time.
Because of their dynamic nature and interconnection with the societal context in which they are made, laws must adapt to the evolving needs of labour markets and address new challenges, changing values and advancements in knowledge and technology.
If the purpose of the traditional legal framework and the ‘S’ part of the ESG aim to ensure decent work for all, policymakers may take the opportunity to reflect on a set of mandatory rights applicable to all categories of workers – ie, minimum wage, daily, weekly and annual rest, sick and maternity leave (safety and health), social security and social shock-absorbers – leaving other details of the employment relationship – place, time, performance, results – to the collective bargaining or, where such mechanism does not exist, to written agreement between the parties.
Thanks to this dynamic evolution and adaptation, laws remain relevant and effective in serving the society they govern.
As IBA employment lawyers, we need to create partnerships that transcend national borders, to update the international legal framework and create inclusive policies to foster economic prosperity for all, where business, workforce, policymakers and institutions work collaboratively, not against each other.