The evolution of worker voice
Worker voice represents more than traditional grievance channels or suggestion boxes. It encompasses the various mechanisms through which employees can influence organisational decisions, from strategic planning to operational improvements. While the concept is not new, its implementation has evolved significantly, shaped by changing workforce expectations, technological capabilities, and governance requirements. Tech giant Salesforce demonstrates this evolution in practice. Their "Ohana" culture includes a multi-layered feedback system combining digital platforms with traditional forums.
Similarly, the business case for robust worker voice mechanisms is compelling. Organisations with effective employee participation systems demonstrate higher engagement levels, above-average productivity, reduced turnover, and improved operational efficiency. Greater employee participation also appears to lead to improved levels of trust: the CIPD reported, for example, that B&Q's introduction of an employee forum has led to trust levels in the leadership increasing from 30% in the 2017 staff survey to 86% in the 2019 survey. It also leads to better insight from directors, and the quality of their decisions appears to improve – improved board level employee representation also leads to longer term management horizons. These advantages were recognised in Matthew Taylor's 2017 'Good Work: the Taylor Review of Modern Working Practices', in which the Government was encouraged to lower the thresholds required for recognising consultative bodies.
However, despite the strong arguments in favour of increased worker voice, many employers are still very resistant to it, and the Taylor Review's proposals were not fully implemented. It is true that some evidence suggests decision making can be made slower and radical innovation may be hampered by involving the workforce in decision making. But it is not at all clear whether these concerns are the real drivers behind the reluctance of employers to implement better mechanisms to improve dialogue with, and to introduce workers into, the upper echelons of management. It could simply be a deep-rooted unwillingness to allow voices outside the boardroom to be heard, or because the administrative burden of putting a consultative body in place is perceived as too great.
Corporate Governance Framework
The UK Corporate Governance Code was last updated in January 2024 and applies to listed companies with effect from 1 January 2025. This includes a requirement on businesses to engage with the workforce using one or a combination of the following methods:
- a director appointed from the workforce;
- a formal workforce advisory panel; or
- a designated non-executive director.
If the board has not chosen one or more of these methods, it should explain what alternative arrangements are in place and why it considers that they are effective.
In a recent study conducted by Professor Chris Rees and Patrick Brione and published in Economic and Industrial Democracy 2024 (Vol. 45(3) 816–834), it was found that almost a third (32%) of businesses had not adopted any of the three recommended methods, choosing instead to outline alternative or existing methods which they thought met the Code requirements. Some 40% of the businesses studied had decided to designate a non-executive director to take on the responsibility of representing the voice of the workers. Only one out of 280 firms appointed a director from the workforce. The authors concluded that firms were "falling some way short of achieving meaningful worker voice at board level".
The Wates Principles, first released in 2018, have emerged as a crucial framework for large private companies. Designed to enhance corporate governance, the six principles have been widely adopted across large private businesses. They have particular relevance to worker voice implementation. Principle One, focusing on Purpose and Leadership, emphasises the integration of worker perspectives into organisational purpose. As with the Corporate Governance Code, this alignment seeks to ensure that corporate objectives reflect the collective aspirations of all stakeholders, including employees, and Principle Six, addressing Stakeholder Relationships and Engagement, provides specific guidance on worker engagement mechanisms. It advocates for systematic approaches to understanding and incorporating employee views into decision-making processes.
However, the principles' effectiveness depends heavily on genuine commitment from leadership and appropriate implementation structures. The most recent survey, conducted in August 2024 on behalf of the Financial Reporting Council, found that just 5% of businesses discussed how dialogue with stakeholders (which would include employees) has impacted board decision-making. A similar percentage provided examples of how engagement has helped inform decisions at the board level.
It is also striking that businesses have not embraced the idea of improved mechanisms for enabling workers to participate in the management of businesses, given that this arguably touches on both the 'S' and the 'G' of many businesses' professed commitment to ESG (Environmental, Social and Governance) goals.
International governance standards offer valuable insights into alternative approaches. The German co-determination model, for example, mandating worker representation on supervisory boards, demonstrates the potential of institutionalised worker voice. While cultural and legal contexts vary, the model's success in promoting stable labour relations and long-term thinking provides valuable lessons for organisations worldwide.
Worker involvement: a changing tide?
However, the willingness of UK employers to introduce workers to the boardroom may well be about to change. While the Labour Party may have stepped back from its 2019 proposal that one third of board positions in large firms should be filled by workers, the current Employment Rights Bill contains really radical provisions that strengthen the power of the unions in ways that will seismically reset the relationship between employers and employees. Employers may well wish to start involving employees more in the way they manage their businesses, in order to offer workers a compelling alternative to representation by unions trying to influence matters from the outside.
From an employment law perspective, the most attractive method of introducing a mechanism for including employees in the decision-making process may be to institute a formal workforce advisory panel (the second of the methods recommended in the Code). The panel could also serve a dual purpose as a staff consultative committee for the purposes of statutory consultation such as collective redundancies, changes to pension arrangements, and transfers under the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006 ("TUPE"). Having such a body in place would eliminate the need for ad hoc elections of employee representatives when such situations arise, thereby streamlining the consultation process, saving time, and maintaining confidentiality at a point when businesses may be very sensitive to leaks of confidential information.
Staff Consultative Committees: Practical implementation and case studies
To qualify as appropriate representatives for the purposes of certain statutory requirements, SCCs must:
- Be properly elected or appointed;
- Have clear terms of reference; and
- Represent all affected employees adequately.
It is also best practice to ensure that proper minutes of meetings are kept, and appropriate training and resources are given to the committee members to enable them to properly perform their duties.
Structural Framework
The success of SCCs depends heavily on their practical implementation. Leading organisations typically structure their committees with:
- Size: Usually 8-12 members for medium enterprises, scaling up for larger organisations
- Composition: While the majority of the committee should be elected, it is also possible to have some members appointed
- Term limits: Usually 2-3 years, with staggered rotation to maintain continuity
- Meeting frequency: Monthly for full committee, with sub-committees meeting as needed
It may also be appropriate in larger organisations to consider having local committees that meet (say) monthly, but with regional meetings held quarterly and national committees meeting every six months.
Practical Operations
Effective SCCs require robust operational support:
Meeting management
In order to have meaningful meetings, management should circulate pre-meeting information packs approximately 5 working days ahead. This will enable the committee members time to consider any proposals and come up with suggestions in advance. Businesses should also provide support with minute-taking, although many AI tools now make this easier.
Communication channels
To enable the SCC to communicate with their constituents and to properly represent the interests of the workforce, employers should consider providing them with a dedicated intranet space, and facilitating digital suggestion schemes. Regular newsletters and feedback mechanisms for the wider workforce will raise the profile of the SCC and help it to gain the trust of those it represents.
Resource allocation
Giving some training to the SCC members in matters such as basic employment law, meeting management and financial literacy, providing them with meeting room facilities, and allowing them time off from their normal duties could, in the medium to long term, be beneficial for employers.
However, in order for the SCC to be truly effective as a way of reducing risk for the employer and improving relations with the workforce, it is important that the employer tracks and publicises the effectiveness of the SCC. Employees need to see that they are being effectively represented and heard. Businesses can do this by publishing KPIs such as:
- Implementation rates of employee suggestions;
- Time-to-resolution for raised issues;
- Employee satisfaction with voice mechanisms;
- Participation rates in voice initiatives; and
- Cost savings from employee-initiated improvements.
Strategic benefits beyond compliance
Well-functioning SCCs often serve as an effective alternative to union recognition. When employees feel their voices are genuinely heard and their interests represented through a robust internal mechanism, they may be less likely to seek external representation. However, this requires the SCC to demonstrate real influence and effectiveness, not merely serving as a symbolic gesture.
Recommendations
For organisations beginning their worker voice journey:
- Establish SCCs with clear constitutional documents that meet the requirements for appropriate representatives under UK employment law;
- Invest in training for SCC members at the appropriate time, particularly regarding their role in TUPE and redundancy situations;
- Maintain detailed records of SCC proceedings and elections/appointments; and
- Ensure SCCs have genuine influence to build credibility with the workforce
For mature organisations:
- Regularly review SCC constitutions to ensure continued compliance with legal requirements and fitness for purpose within the organisation;
- Monitor effectiveness through both formal metrics and informal feedback;
- Consider expanding the SCC's remit beyond minimum legal requirements to build deeper engagement; and
- Maintain appropriate balance between the SCC's effectiveness and union relation
Conclusion
Effective worker voice mechanisms represent a crucial element of modern corporate governance. Success requires more than establishing formal structures; it demands genuine commitment to employee participation, supported by appropriate resources and mechanisms for measuring impact.
As organisations navigate increasingly complex stakeholder expectations, those that excel in fostering meaningful worker voice will likely find themselves better positioned to attract talent, drive innovation, and create sustainable long-term value. The challenge lies not in recognising the importance of worker voice, but in implementing systems that deliver genuine engagement and measurable business benefits. With the increased likelihood of employers being forced to open their doors to trade unions if they ignore the voice of their workforce, it may well be time to start listening.