The Experts below are selected from a list of 126798 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Samuel R Bagenstos - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
employment law and Social Equality
Michigan Law Review, 2013Co-Authors: Samuel R BagenstosAbstract:What is the normative justification for individual employment law? For a number of legal scholars, the answer is economic efficiency. Other scholars argue, to the contrary, that employment law protects against (vaguely defined) imbalances of bargaining power and exploitation. Against both of these positions, this Article argues that individual employment law is best understood as advancing a particular conception of Equality. That conception, which many legal and political theorists have called Social Equality, focuses on eliminating hierarchies of Social status. This Article argues that individual employment law, like employment discrimination law, is justified as preventing employers from contributing to or entrenching Social status hierarchies-and that it is justifiable even if it imposes meaningful costs on employers.This Article argues that the Social Equality theory can help us critique, defend, elaborate, and extend the rules of individual employment law. It illustrates this point by showing how concerns about Social Equality, at an inchoate level, underlie some classic arguments against employment at will. It also shows how engaging with the question of Social Equality can enrich analysis of a number of currently salient doctrinal issues in employment law, including questions regarding how the law should protect workers' privacy and political speech, the proper scope of maximum-hours laws and prohibitions on retaliation, and the framework that should govern employment arbitration.INTRODUCTIONLast fall, as the presidential election campaign raced to a conclusion, the New Republic reported that Murray Energy, a large coal mining company, "ha[d] for years pressured salaried employees to give to the [company's] political action committee (PAC) and to Republican candidates chosen by the company."1 According to that report, "[i]nternal documents show that company officials track who is and is not giving,"2 and that the company's CEO, Robert Murray, took an intense personal interest in which employees gave money.3 The report anonymously quoted two individuals who had worked as managers at the company to the following effect:"There's a lot of coercion," says one of them. "I just wanted to work, but you feel this constant pressure that, if you don't contribute, your job's at stake. You're compelled to do this whether you want to or not." Says the second: "They will give you a call if you're not giving. . . . It's expected you give Mr. Murray what he asks for."4When Governor Romney visited a coal mine operated by a Murray-owned company for a rally, a company official acknowledged that workers were told that attendance at the event "would be both mandatory and unpaid."5Are Murray Energy's activities, as reported by the New Republic, troubling? If so, why? In this Article, I argue that those activities are, indeed, troubling, and that understanding why reveals a high-level normative principle that can help us explain, justify, and critique the broad sweep of individual employment law.6The problem with Murray Energy's reported activities, I submit, is that they threaten Social Equality. Social Equality, as described by a number of scholars, seeks "a society in which people regard and treat one another as equals, in other words a society that is not marked by status divisions such that one can place different people in hierarchically ranked categories."7 Murray Energy's reported activities threaten Social Equality because they enable the company to transform its economic power over its employees into an additional voice in the political realm. And that additional voice enhances the company's political power while at the same time squelching the political power of its employees. To the extent that employment law limits activities like the ones in which Murray Energy reportedly engaged-and employment laws in many states do limit these activities-the law serves Social Equality. To the extent that the law does not limit those activities, a Social Equality perspective suggests that it should. …
-
employment law and Social Equality
Social Science Research Network, 2013Co-Authors: Samuel R BagenstosAbstract:What is the normative justification for individual employment law? For a number of legal scholars, the answer is economic efficiency. Other scholars argue, to the contrary, that employment law protects against (vaguely defined) imbalances of bargaining power and exploitation. Against both of these positions, this paper argues that individual employment law is best understood as advancing a particular conception of Equality. That conception, which many legal and political theorists have called Social Equality, focuses on eliminating hierarchies of Social status. Drawing on the author’s work elaborating the justification for employment discrimination law, this paper argues that individual employment law is justified as preventing employers from contributing to or entrenching Social status hierarchies — and that it is justifiable even if it imposes meaningful costs on employers.The paper argues that the Social Equality theory can help us critique, defend, elaborate, and extend the rules of individual employment law. It illustrates the point by showing how concerns about Social Equality, at an inchoate level, underlie some classic arguments against employment-at-will. It also shows how engaging with the question of Social Equality can enrich analysis of a number of currently salient doctrinal issues in employment law, including questions regarding how the law should protect workers’ privacy and political speech, the proper scope of maximum-hours laws and prohibitions on retaliation, and the framework that should govern employment arbitration.
Winnifred R Louis - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
doing democracy the Social psychological mobilization and consequences of collective action
Social Issues and Policy Review, 2013Co-Authors: Emma Thomas, Winnifred R LouisAbstract:Participating in collective actions, or acts of Social protest, is one of the primary means that citizens have of participating in democracy and seeking Social change. In this article, we outline the ways in which: Social identity provides a psychological foundation for collective actions; Social norms shape the mobilization and particular direction (disruptive vs. conventional) of that protest; and participating in collective actions is psychologically consequential and sociopolitically complex. We use this platform to put forward a series of practical implications for activists, Social movement and nongovernmental groups, and authorities, who seek to mobilize consequential collective action. We conclude that collective action is a fundamental tool in the battle for Social Equality and justice. To better understand, and engage with this phenomenon, policy makers and practitioners need to attend to its origins in collective, group-based psychology.
Fabian Schuppert - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
if you care about Social Equality you want a big state home work care and Social egalitarianism
Juncture 23 (2) pp. 138-144. (2016), 2016Co-Authors: Emily Mcternan, Martin Oneill, Christian Schemmel, Fabian SchuppertAbstract:Justified scepticism about distant bureaucracies and transactional politics mutated into a wholesale retreat from the state on the left – but to create a just and egalitarian society, say Emily McTernan, Martin O'Neill, Christian Schemmel and Fabian Schuppert, we need a powerful, democratic ‘big state’.
-
non domination non alienation and Social Equality towards a republican understanding of Equality
Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy, 2015Co-Authors: Fabian SchuppertAbstract:The republican ideal of freedom as non-domination stresses the importance of certain Social relationships for a person’s freedom, showing that freedom is a Social-relational state. While the idea of non-domination receives a lot of attention in the literature, republican theorists say surprisingly little about Equality. My aim in this paper is therefore to carve out the contours of a republican conception of Equality. In so doing, I argue that republican accounts of Equality share a significant normative overlap with the idea of ‘Social Equality’. However, closer analysis of Philip Pettit’s account of ‘expressive egalitarianism’ (which he sees as inherently connected to non-domination) and recent theories of Social Equality shows that republican non-domination – in contrast to what Pettit seems to claim – is not sufficient for securing (republican) Social Equality. In order to secure Social Equality for all, republicans would have to go beyond the ideal of freedom as non-domination.
-
Social Equality on what it means to be equals
Social Equality: On What It Means to Be Equals. Edited by: Fourie Carina; Schuppert Fabian; Wallimann-Helmer Ivo (2015). Oxford New York: Oxford Unive, 2015Co-Authors: Carina Fourie, Fabian Schuppert, Ivo WallimannhelmerAbstract:This volume brings together a collection of ten original essays which present new analyses of Social and relational Equality in philosophy and political theory. The essays analyze the nature of Social Equality, and its relationship with justice and with politics. Is Equality valuable? This question dominates many discussions of Social justice. These discussions tend to center on whether certain forms of distributive Equality are valuable, such as the equal distribution of primary Social goods. They tend to neglect what is known as Social or relational Equality. Social egalitarians often argue that this form of Equality is a more fundamental notion of Equality than distributive Equality. Rather than being primarily about distribution, Equality, they claim, is foremost about relationships and interactions between people. When we appeal to the value of Equality, we primarily mean the value of egalitarian and non-hierarchical relationships, and not of distributions. The ideal of Social Equality features heavily in the history of the development of Equality as an important part of political theory, and a number of contemporary philosophers have written about the significance of this form of Equality. It has also played an important role in real-life egalitarian movements. However, as it has been relatively neglected – it requires much more theoretical attention. This collection is an attempt to help to redress this neglect by providing in-depth analyses on the nature and distinctiveness of Socially egalitarian relationships.
Emma Thomas - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
doing democracy the Social psychological mobilization and consequences of collective action
Social Issues and Policy Review, 2013Co-Authors: Emma Thomas, Winnifred R LouisAbstract:Participating in collective actions, or acts of Social protest, is one of the primary means that citizens have of participating in democracy and seeking Social change. In this article, we outline the ways in which: Social identity provides a psychological foundation for collective actions; Social norms shape the mobilization and particular direction (disruptive vs. conventional) of that protest; and participating in collective actions is psychologically consequential and sociopolitically complex. We use this platform to put forward a series of practical implications for activists, Social movement and nongovernmental groups, and authorities, who seek to mobilize consequential collective action. We conclude that collective action is a fundamental tool in the battle for Social Equality and justice. To better understand, and engage with this phenomenon, policy makers and practitioners need to attend to its origins in collective, group-based psychology.
James D Anderson - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
eleventh annual brown lecture in education research a long shadow the american pursuit of political justice and education Equality
Educational Researcher, 2015Co-Authors: James D AndersonAbstract:This article examines the historical relationship between political power and the pursuit of education and Social Equality from the Reconstruction era to the present. The chief argument is that education Equality is historically linked to and even predicated on equal political power, specifically, equal access to the franchise and instruments of government. Following the Civil War and the collapse of the slaveholding aristocracy, the nation faced an unusual opportunity to reinvent itself by incorporating a new concept of equal citizenship in the postbellum Constitution. Despite the new constitutional guarantees of due process and equal protection under the law, Congress failed to establish equal access to the instruments of government. Following a protracted and intense debate over race, Equality, and voting rights, the leaders of the Reconstruction Congress decided not to establish the most important guarantee of Equality, that is, equal access to the elective franchise protected by federal constitutiona...
