Corporate Social Responsibility policies and practices on unvaccinated employees during the COVID-19 pandemic: case studies of Israel and United States

IF 1.2 4区 法学 Q3 POLITICAL SCIENCE
Lilach Litor
{"title":"Corporate Social Responsibility policies and practices on unvaccinated employees during the COVID-19 pandemic: case studies of Israel and United States","authors":"Lilach Litor","doi":"10.1108/pap-02-2022-0011","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PurposeThe article addresses the tension between Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and the right to work in times of the COVID-19 pandemic. Accordingly, it explores the operation of corporations in adopting policies of mandatory vaccination and the role of the courts regarding these CSR patterns.Design/methodology/approachThe article examines court case studies of CSR practices regarding unvaccinated employees during the COVID-19 pandemic in Israel and the United States.FindingsThe findings show that the Israeli system adopted the regulating for individual discretionary CSR approach, whereas the American system adopted the regulating for ethical-public CSR approach. Adopting the latter infringes upon the right to work of unvaccinated employees. While in Israel, the possibility of compelling employees to vaccinate is denied, in the American model, mandatory vaccination is possible. As opposed to the American model, in the Israeli model, there is an obligation to consider proportionate measures to isolate the employees while allowing them to continue working.Originality/valueThe article introduces two possible notions of regulating CSR in times of the pandemic – regulating for individual discretionary CSR which is labor-oriented and regulating for ethical-public CSR which is focused on public aspects. While the former posits that corporations should advance individual interests of employees and their right to work, the latter claims that corporations should advance the public interest in health. Following the problems resulting from the Israeli and American cases, the article draws on the lines for a suggested approach that courts should embrace.","PeriodicalId":34601,"journal":{"name":"Public Administration and Policy-An Asia-Pacific Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Public Administration and Policy-An Asia-Pacific Journal","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/pap-02-2022-0011","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"法学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

PurposeThe article addresses the tension between Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and the right to work in times of the COVID-19 pandemic. Accordingly, it explores the operation of corporations in adopting policies of mandatory vaccination and the role of the courts regarding these CSR patterns.Design/methodology/approachThe article examines court case studies of CSR practices regarding unvaccinated employees during the COVID-19 pandemic in Israel and the United States.FindingsThe findings show that the Israeli system adopted the regulating for individual discretionary CSR approach, whereas the American system adopted the regulating for ethical-public CSR approach. Adopting the latter infringes upon the right to work of unvaccinated employees. While in Israel, the possibility of compelling employees to vaccinate is denied, in the American model, mandatory vaccination is possible. As opposed to the American model, in the Israeli model, there is an obligation to consider proportionate measures to isolate the employees while allowing them to continue working.Originality/valueThe article introduces two possible notions of regulating CSR in times of the pandemic – regulating for individual discretionary CSR which is labor-oriented and regulating for ethical-public CSR which is focused on public aspects. While the former posits that corporations should advance individual interests of employees and their right to work, the latter claims that corporations should advance the public interest in health. Following the problems resulting from the Israeli and American cases, the article draws on the lines for a suggested approach that courts should embrace.
2019冠状病毒病大流行期间未接种疫苗员工的企业社会责任政策和做法:以色列和美国的案例研究
本文探讨了2019冠状病毒病大流行时期企业社会责任(CSR)与工作权之间的紧张关系。因此,它探讨了企业在采取强制性疫苗接种政策方面的运作以及法院在这些企业社会责任模式方面的作用。设计/方法/方法本文考察了以色列和美国在COVID-19大流行期间未接种疫苗的员工的企业社会责任实践的法庭案例研究。研究结果表明,以色列制度采用的是对个人自由裁量的社会责任监管方式,而美国制度采用的是对伦理公共社会责任的监管方式。采用后者侵犯了未接种疫苗的雇员的工作权利。虽然在以色列,强迫雇员接种疫苗的可能性被否认,但在美国模式下,强制接种疫苗是可能的。与美国模式相反,在以色列模式中,有义务考虑适当的措施,隔离雇员,同时允许他们继续工作。本文介绍了大流行时期社会责任监管的两种可能理念——以劳动为导向的个人自由裁量型社会责任监管和以公共层面为重点的伦理公共型社会责任监管。前者认为企业应促进雇员的个人利益及其工作权利,后者则认为企业应促进公共健康利益。根据以色列和美国案例所产生的问题,本文提出了法院应该采用的建议方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
7.10%
发文量
30
审稿时长
8 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信