‘Cashless pay, deductions from wages, and the repeal of the Truck Acts in Great Britain, 1945-1986’
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article examines the public debate between 1945 and 1986 in Great Britain over repealing the Truck Acts. Advocates of repeal hoped that it might encourage workers to accept wage payment by cheque or electronic transfer, which most manual workers opposed. This article will evaluate the arguments that the Truck Acts, which protected employees’ right to be paid in the current coin of the realm and defended them against unfair deductions from wages, had become ‘obsolete’ and hindered contractual arrangements that could be beneficial. The 1986 Wages Act, which repealed all of the Truck Acts and the 1960 Payment of Wages Act, passed over the strong objections of the TUC and a number of organizations that provided legal advice to the poor. The 1986 Act was introduced to allow employers to impose convenient cashless pay. Like much of the legislation under the Thatcher government, this Act was sold as the repeal of outdated and burdensome regulations, which would allow businesses to lower costs and become more competitive. However, I will argue that the repeal of the Truck Acts removed some very real protections for workers, and left employees more exposed to unfair deductions from wages than before.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".