There are many factors that may contribute to being able to regulate MNCs. On the one hand there are difficulties due to the ability of MNCs to move their operations and investments between countries, which puts pressure on systems of regulation thus encouraging them to take a more minimalist approach. There may be very complex structures of governance that mean that a subsidiary of a MNC may not be able to act against the interests of its head offices and may not be able to pursue a more socially responsible approach, for example. However, and on the other hand, much depends on the nature of the MNC. Some may be more amenable due to their country of origin or general organisational culture to developing a more receptive approach to regulation. There may be factors that make the subsidiary of a MNC less mobile and more committed to the host country, allowing for a deeper engagement with social responsibility issues and local political systems. There may be a product or service produced or offered which is more amenable to a more socially value added approach. What is more the national context where a subsidiary is located may have more effective systems of regulation and a greater emphasis on worker participation, as in the case of coordinated market economies.

The gig economy is a complex area and set of developments, it can present challenges in terms of regulation for various reasons. Companies such as Uber claim they provide an online platform to bring together service users and service providers. The provider of the service is not a direct employee of the firm. The worker is deemed as being self-employed, for example, which means that labour rights may not be easily enforced. Defining the operations of such companies in sectoral terms, which is often the basis for regulation, also creates challenges. Companies may bypass more traditional systems of regulation, such as taxi licensing, and employ a more transient and vulnerable workforce. This makes the enforcement of worker rights much more challenging as people may be dismissed more easily or employed on a basis which makes collective organisation by trade unions much more difficult. The challenges for collective organisation are exacerbated by the nature of the work reinforcing individualisation. What is more, systems of performance management based on feedback from customers may be used to discipline the workforce in a more direct manner, so that problems the service delivery are linked to the worker and not the organisation as a whole.

In terms of the chances of a greater form of governance and regulation, we see that over time international labour standards are becoming more common and more visible. There are various organisations, as outlined in the chapter, which are developing labour standards and recommendations which are working their way into the activities or at least conversations of MNCs and their management systems. We have seen more transnational collective agreements, for example, which are becoming benchmarks and points of reference for companies hoping to include their workforce internationally into a broader dialogue and involvement over social agendas. The question may be one of time. However, the enforcement of such standards remains an issue and the general uncertainty around world trade and its regulation means that it is unclear how a more socially oriented form of governance will develop. There are, however, a range of standards and these are entering into the common practices of various firms. Much may depend on whether leading firms choose to champion such standards and pioneer a more supportive approach or whether they remain evasive. What is more, much depends on how the international trade union movement develops its presence and capacity.

Such organisations have a very important role to play. They are already leading key campaigns on child labour and on health and safety in such sectors as textiles. They are highly organised. Organisations such as Oxfam or War on Want tend to be at the forefront of campaigns and, indeed, negotiations with companies on labour standards and codes of conduct. Even international LGTB organisations such as Stonewall are organising with various companies to support their internal equality practices. Many of these organisations are able to organise because they are not always caught up with, or held back by, the competition between national interests as seen in trade unions who may at times be concerned that jobs will leave their national context if there are too many pressures placed on MNCs. So NGOs are sometimes more flexible and more focused. Also, NGOs may sometimes squeeze out other actors or be unable to connect together a range of organisations around a specific campaign. Much depends on the NGO in question as some are more independent from governments or employers, and more resourced, than others.

In theory stronger forms of regulation with greater powers of enforcement are superior. The national governments are much more effective in their regulation of companies due to the sanctions available to them to force companies to engage with the worker rights. In the end, voluntary codes of conduct are just that, voluntary. However, at the transnational level there is not much choice but to actually work through a voluntary system. What is more, as the chapter outlines, over time such voluntary codes may in fact facilitate a greater awareness of labour standards and their importance: they may also allow companies to feel that they are not threatened by such developments and hence engage with them in a more positive manner over time. Management education may increasingly include the role of the CSR and voluntary codes in their programmes, and this may facilitate a more proactive and progressive approach in future. Voluntary codes lack sufficient sanctions but over time they may become more binding as their influence leads to MNCs internalising the message and adapting practices. The ability of unions to hold MNCs to account over adherence to these codes is crucial. Much depends on how specific firm based agreements of a transnational nature between trade unions and management are developed and underpin these voluntary codes.

There are many ways this can be done. Firstly, there could be a greater attention paid to the teaching of CSR and to the ethical dimension of management and organisations in various modules such as business history, business and society and others. The importance of these issue can be given more emphasis throughout the modules taught. Secondly, more could be taught on matters related to work and the way work is changing. The issue of work and employment is important to all organisations and this means that the fair treatment of the workforce is of paramount importance. Therefore, degrees could have a compulsory element of work, employment and regulation/representation. A greater awareness of the role of NGOs and trade unions could also be encouraged. Thirdly, the role of law is important and this is especially the case in relation to employment law. The rights workers have, and how legal systems work, is essential to organisations, and especially for MNC managers who will engage with different systems throughout their career if they have a high degree of mobility internationally. Teaching content should include modules which deal with national and international systems of regulation. Finally, the social, economic and political context is important as it shapes the actions and nature of businesses. Courses on the business environment are one way of outlining these issues. In terms of the approach to teaching, the use of case studies such as the Rana Plaza incident and others can help students reflect on matters of responsibility and social rights in a more engaging manner.