In this chapter the authors review pertinent themes in existing voice scholarship with a view toward proposing areas for future research. They examine definitional disagreements present in the literature and challenge the assumption that voice needs to lead to something for it to be legitimate, as well as that voice is only directed upwards. They continue by exploring exit and silence as alternatives to voice, and review research which questions how much voice workers actually desire. The authors also argue that voice is tethered to how one conceptualizes the nature work and provide a number of alternatives to that end. They then consider more recent workforce trends such as the rise of gig and platform work, social media and financialization in order to problematize how they might affect the future of voice.
Browse by title
You are looking at 91 - 100 of 89,925 items
Senia Kalfa and John W. Budd
The General Anti-Avoidance Rule (‘GAAR’) included in Article 6 ATAD is a unique EU provision, not only because it is the first EU law that generally targets abuse of the Member States’ national tax law, but also because of its challenging structure and complex language, which is intended to provide a ‘one-size fits all’ EU-level guide to preventing abuse of national tax law and cross-border tax rules. This contribution provides an in-depth, holistic analysis of Article 6 in order to deliver an interpretative guideline regarding the application thereof. Article 6, it seems, constitutes the maximum – rather than a minimum – standard for preventing abuse of tax law and, thus, compromises legal foreseeability for the sake of deterring taxpayers from entering into abusive practices. In light thereof, the chapter proffers a way to think about the new EU GAAR and its goal of preventing tax avoidance via abusive practices while still preserving reasonable tax planning.
The ATAD is the most significant EU legislative measure for the harmonization of Member States’ corporate tax law in 30 years. It is also the first piece of EU tax legislation that directly imposes a burden on corporate taxpayers, heralding a paradigm shift in EU direct tax policy, raising fundamental questions of the ATAD’s positioning within the EU Legal Order. These questions concern the EU’s competence to adopt those measures, its relationship with primary EU law, the importance of the ATAD’s scope and objective for the implementation and interpretation of national implementing measures, as well as the wider impact for tax treaties and EU fundamental rights.
Brian Christopher Jones
Today, the idea of a contemporary founding or political transition not incorporating a written constitution would be almost unthinkable. One long-standing criticism of the British system is that it is archaic and refuses to change with the times, as most states now possess a written constitution incorporating entrenched constitutional law. Connected to this is an idea that perpetuates constitutional idolatry: that a ‘good’ constitution is essential to state survival. Get that right and this may produce a healthier or better equipped constitutional state. Such ideas have been propagated in the constitutional scholarship. But in reality many states with unorthodox—perhaps even what some experts would describe as ‘insufficient’ or ‘poor’—constitutional arrangements have not just survived, but flourished. This chapter sets out to muddle and complicate the notion of what a ‘good’ constitution is or should be, including what role written constitutions play in the operation of constitutionalism and the protection of rights. Indeed, it is extremely difficult to classify what a ‘good’ constitution is compared to an average or poor constitution. Some constitutions that contemporary scholars would describe as flawed or perhaps even poor come from countries that have long-standing commitments to democracy, human rights and constitutionalism, and are performing well on international democracy and human rights indicators. Ultimately, the success of these vastly important governmental elements is far more complex than the ‘cleverness’ or ‘quality’ of the written constitution itself.
Edited by George Saridakis and Marc Cowling
Edited by Adrian Wilkinson, Jimmy Donaghey, Tony Dundon and Richard B. Freeman
Edited by Gert de Roo, Claudia Yamu and Christian Zuidema
Since the 1990s, ‘high-performance work systems’ (HPWS) has come to prominence as a way of conceptualising links between human resource management and organisational performance. Employee voice as a pathway from management practices to performance, via employee outcomes, is central to many accounts of HPWS. The emphasis has been on direct forms of voice, for example via job design, and less often on representative forms of voice in the form of unions and/or collaborative approaches to labour-management relations. While there has been a good deal of research showing positive associations between HPWS and performance, there are relatively few which single out voice mechanisms, and more work is required to tease out causal paths via employees. The role of representative voice has received even less attention in empirical research and the results appear mixed and inconclusive.
Matthew M.C. Allen
The notion of ‘voice’ plays an important role in many studies of human resource management, often drawing on Hirschman’s voice concept. He largely applied the concept to customers within competitive markets and ‘customer-members’ of organizations, such as clubs. Using the concept in relation to employees within organizations means that the issue of power becomes important, as consumer and employees have different levels of power. This chapter discusses voice, power and the employment relationship to highlight the need for studies of employee behaviour to include not just voice, exit and loyalty within analyses, but ‘neglect’ as well. Employees with very limited power to voice their views or exit the firm may be neglectful. By adopting an exit-voice-loyalty-neglect analytical framework, studies will provide a systematic and nuanced treatment of employee responses to workplace policies and practices. The chapter also highlights the importance of including organizations’ strategic objectives and their institutional context in analyses.
Chapter 3 studies the history of history-writing, from political history, through social history, to economic history, and decides that history-writing is the construction of narratives influenced by contemporary agendas and backed up by evidence. Questions are then set: Is the history of Citizen’s Basic Income a subdiscipline of history, or of social history, or of economic history? What are the agendas that historians bring to their history-writing? What are the data that they seek to back up their arguments? Should the history be of the idea of a Citizen’s Basic Income, of policy debates, or of practical experiments? To what extent should the history be located in the broader history of existing tax and benefits systems? To what extent should ‘close cousins’, such as Negative Income Tax, be included? Five histories of Citizen’s Basic Income are then evaluated against these questions, and conclusions are drawn.