Consultation on Review of the Role of the Scottish Agricultural Wages Board: Findings from the Analysis of Consultation Responses

Who responded to the consultation

Of the 56 responses received, 71% (40 responses) were from employers or their representative bodies. As detailed in Table 2, below, of these 40 responses, 38 (68%) were from employers in agriculture and two were from employers' organisations. Of the 56 responses received overall, 9% were from workers/workers' organisations (5 responses). One response was received from a worker in agriculture and four responses were received from workers' organisations. The remaining 20% of responses were received from other individuals and organisations (11 responses). Six of these responses were received from other organisations while the remaining five were from other individuals (neither workers nor employers).

Table 2. Summary of responses by respondent type.

As per the Table 3, below, the majority of the responses favouring the abolition of the SAWB (option C) came from employers and employers' organisations (37 responses out of 41), with the remaining four responses for option C coming from one worker and three other organisations. Responses favouring the retention of the SAWB (option A) came from organisations representing workers (4 responses) and other organisations (the Law Society of Scotland, the Scottish Living Wage Campaign, and Sustain: The Alliance for Better Food and Farming). Responses favouring option A were also received from two employers and four other individuals. Only one response favoured option B (retaining the SAWB, but as an advisory body, giving the Scottish Government the discretion to fix minimum wage rates and other conditions based on advice given by the SAWB); this response was received from an individual (neither a worker nor an employer).

Table 3. Summary of responses by option (A, B, C or none of the above) and respondent type.