Abstract: The objective of this article is to examine the extent to which the common law systems of the US and the UK contain principles or rules which are principally designed to curb or eradicate the abuse of unfettered employer or employee power or discretion (actions and omissions) in the context of the contract of employment. This will be achieved by differentiating between the US concept of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing and the UK implied term of mutual trust and confidence which are applicable to the interpretation of US and UK employment contracts respectively. In compiling the results of such a comparative study, the recognised comparative law method will be employed. In addition, where possible, an attempt will be made to delimit briefly the historical, economic and social contexts surrounding the nature, content, source and application of the implied covenant and the implied term in a bid to facilitate a basic understanding of the development of these respective concepts. In analysing the results of the comparative exercise, an assumption will be made that the jurisdictions of the US and UK both acknowledge that there is considerable merit in encouraging and propagating a unitary, conciliatory approach towards modern employment relations in the 21st century. Adopting this presupposition as a basis for presenting the results of the comparative study, various conclusions will be drawn as to what both jurisdictions perhaps have to learn from the other as a means of strengthening both of the respective concepts.
International Journal of Comparative Labour Law and Industrial Relations