This paper explores the everyday lives of low-paid, low-skilled EU migrant workers living in and around Great Yarmouth in the East of England both pre- and post-Brexit. It considers the legal problems they face, especially around employment law, and how those problems may be resolved. It draws on the results of quantitative and qualitative research to examine the reach of law into the everyday lives of vulnerable EU migrants. We term our research ‘pragmatic law’ (PL) because our experience is that most legal issues, at least with the groups we are working with, do not enter any formal legal resolution pathway at a community level. They are addressed in the everyday, often by first-tier generalist (and sometimes volunteer) advisers with no formal legal training, who make no express reference to ‘the law’. This access to advice and problem resolution at a street level can be a lifeline to those living at the margins of the workforce.

Using data from Understanding Society and the British Household Panel Survey, this article explores the relationship between working part-time and progression out of low pay for male and female employees using a discrete-time event history model. The results show that working part-time relative to full-time decreases the likelihood of progression out of low pay, defined as earning below two-thirds of the median hourly wage. However, part-time workers who transition to full-time employment experience similar rates of progression to full-time workers. This casts doubt on the idea that part-time workers have lower progression rates because they have lower abilities or work motivation and reinforces the need to address the quality of part-time jobs in the UK labour market. The negative effect of working part-time is greater for men than for women, although women are more at risk of becoming trapped in low pay in the sense that they tend to work part-time for longer periods of time, particularly if they have children. Factors such as childcare policy and Universal Credit (UC) incentivise part-time employment for certain groups, although in the right labour market conditions UC may encourage some part-time workers to increase their working hours.

This article reports the results of a case study on the introduction of the living wage. Three employers in the City of York became living wage employers. Using data derived from a sample survey of their employees and qualitative interviews, this article explores what impact the receipt of the living wage had on poverty and deprivation. It found that not all living wage employees were income poor or deprived, although those on living wage rates were more likely to be poor and deprived than those on even higher wages. The more important determinant of the employees’ living standards was the household they lived in, and there were a high proportion of living wage employees living in multi-unit households. Also important were the number of earners in the household and the hours worked by the living wage employee. Lone parent families and single people appeared to be most vulnerable to poverty and deprivation. In addition, whether the employee took up their entitlement to in-work benefits was critical and, using benefit checks by welfare rights experts, it was found that some were not.

This article examines the theoretical underpinning of living wage campaigns. The article uses evidence, derived from the UK Quarterly Labour Force Survey from 2005 to 2008, to examine the extent to which a living wage will address low pay within the labour force. We highlight the greater incidence of low pay within the private sector and then focus upon the public sector where the living wage demand has had most impact. The article builds upon the results from the Quarterly Labour Force Survey with analysis of the British Household Panel Survey in 2007 in order to examine the impact that the introduction of a living wage, within the public sector, would have in reducing household inequality.

The National Employment Savings Trust (NEST) is a new pension scheme that will be introduced for employees on modest incomes in the UK from 2012. This paper draws out the implications of the NEST, focusing upon low-paid employees and their employers using data from the Annual Survey of Hours and Earnings. The results suggest that the NEST will increase labour costs by between 0.6 and 0.8 per cent on average, and have a disproportionate effect on low pay industries and private sector firms employing fewer than 25 employees. The analysis highlights the potential role of the minimum wage to shield low pay workers from paying a share of the subsidies that the NEST will afford to its members.