薪酬歧视诉讼:经验教训

IF 1.2 Q4 MANAGEMENT
Leana Diedericks, Anita Bosch
{"title":"薪酬歧视诉讼:经验教训","authors":"Leana Diedericks, Anita Bosch","doi":"10.4102/sajhrm.v21i0.2090","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Orientation: We investigated the reasons for success or failure of pay discrimination claims in South Africa.Research purpose: To learn from reasons for judgements in equal pay litigation to clarify pertinent legal concepts and principles related to equal pay, towards improved pay practices.Motivation of the study: To clarify the concepts of justifiable and unfair pay discrimination. To make recommendations preventing unnecessary breakdown of the employer-employee relationship, curtailing unproductive pay discrimination legal action.Research approach/design and method: Content analysis was used to categorise the reasons for the success or failure of 22 pay discrimination litigation cases brought before the CCMA, Labour Courts, and the Labour Appeal Court (1999–2020). Cases were examined prior to and after amendments Section 6(4), of the Employment Equity Amendment Act 47 of 2013.Main findings: Contrary to the expectation of more positive outcomes for employees after changes to the EEA came into effect, 21 out of 22 cases were unsuccessful. Legal reasons are detailed in the findings. Claimants were from the lower income bands. Case arguments often misguided. Union representation seems ineffectual.Practical/managerial implications: There is a lack of understanding of the requirements to argue unfair pay discrimination before a court. Organisations should mediate in cases where employees claim unfair discrimination, to prevent the irretrievable breakdown or the employer–employee relationship resulting in litigation. Organisations should refrain form intentional or unintentional unfair discrimination.Contribution/value-add: This study demonstrates that employees and their representatives lack knowledge of pay discrimination legislation. We provide explanation of pertinent concepts and principles when judging the merits of a pay discrimination case.","PeriodicalId":21526,"journal":{"name":"Sa Journal of Human Resource Management","volume":"61 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Pay discrimination litigation: Lessons learned\",\"authors\":\"Leana Diedericks, Anita Bosch\",\"doi\":\"10.4102/sajhrm.v21i0.2090\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Orientation: We investigated the reasons for success or failure of pay discrimination claims in South Africa.Research purpose: To learn from reasons for judgements in equal pay litigation to clarify pertinent legal concepts and principles related to equal pay, towards improved pay practices.Motivation of the study: To clarify the concepts of justifiable and unfair pay discrimination. To make recommendations preventing unnecessary breakdown of the employer-employee relationship, curtailing unproductive pay discrimination legal action.Research approach/design and method: Content analysis was used to categorise the reasons for the success or failure of 22 pay discrimination litigation cases brought before the CCMA, Labour Courts, and the Labour Appeal Court (1999–2020). Cases were examined prior to and after amendments Section 6(4), of the Employment Equity Amendment Act 47 of 2013.Main findings: Contrary to the expectation of more positive outcomes for employees after changes to the EEA came into effect, 21 out of 22 cases were unsuccessful. Legal reasons are detailed in the findings. Claimants were from the lower income bands. Case arguments often misguided. Union representation seems ineffectual.Practical/managerial implications: There is a lack of understanding of the requirements to argue unfair pay discrimination before a court. Organisations should mediate in cases where employees claim unfair discrimination, to prevent the irretrievable breakdown or the employer–employee relationship resulting in litigation. Organisations should refrain form intentional or unintentional unfair discrimination.Contribution/value-add: This study demonstrates that employees and their representatives lack knowledge of pay discrimination legislation. We provide explanation of pertinent concepts and principles when judging the merits of a pay discrimination case.\",\"PeriodicalId\":21526,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Sa Journal of Human Resource Management\",\"volume\":\"61 3\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Sa Journal of Human Resource Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4102/sajhrm.v21i0.2090\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sa Journal of Human Resource Management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4102/sajhrm.v21i0.2090","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

研究方向:研究目的:了解同酬诉讼判决的原因,澄清与同酬相关的法律概念和原则,从而改进薪酬做法:研究动机:澄清合理和不公平薪酬歧视的概念。提出建议,防止雇主与雇员之间的关系出现不必要的破裂,减少无益的薪酬歧视法律诉讼:研究采用内容分析法,对提交给加拿大消费者委员会、劳工法院和劳工上诉法院(1999-2020 年)的 22 起薪酬歧视诉讼案件的成败原因进行分类。对2013年第47号《就业公平修正法案》第6(4)条修订前后的案件进行了研究:在《就业平等法》修订生效后,员工有望获得更积极的结果,但与此相反,22 起案件中有 21 起败诉。法律原因详见调查结果。申请人来自低收入阶层。案件论据经常被误导。工会代表似乎不起作用:对在法庭上论证不公平薪酬歧视的要求缺乏了解。各组织应在雇员声称受到不公平歧视的情况下进行调解,以防止劳资关系因诉讼而不可挽回地破裂。组织应避免有意或无意的不公平歧视:本研究表明,雇员及其代表缺乏对薪酬歧视法规的了解。在判断薪酬歧视案件的是非曲直时,我们提供了相关概念和原则的解释。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Pay discrimination litigation: Lessons learned
Orientation: We investigated the reasons for success or failure of pay discrimination claims in South Africa.Research purpose: To learn from reasons for judgements in equal pay litigation to clarify pertinent legal concepts and principles related to equal pay, towards improved pay practices.Motivation of the study: To clarify the concepts of justifiable and unfair pay discrimination. To make recommendations preventing unnecessary breakdown of the employer-employee relationship, curtailing unproductive pay discrimination legal action.Research approach/design and method: Content analysis was used to categorise the reasons for the success or failure of 22 pay discrimination litigation cases brought before the CCMA, Labour Courts, and the Labour Appeal Court (1999–2020). Cases were examined prior to and after amendments Section 6(4), of the Employment Equity Amendment Act 47 of 2013.Main findings: Contrary to the expectation of more positive outcomes for employees after changes to the EEA came into effect, 21 out of 22 cases were unsuccessful. Legal reasons are detailed in the findings. Claimants were from the lower income bands. Case arguments often misguided. Union representation seems ineffectual.Practical/managerial implications: There is a lack of understanding of the requirements to argue unfair pay discrimination before a court. Organisations should mediate in cases where employees claim unfair discrimination, to prevent the irretrievable breakdown or the employer–employee relationship resulting in litigation. Organisations should refrain form intentional or unintentional unfair discrimination.Contribution/value-add: This study demonstrates that employees and their representatives lack knowledge of pay discrimination legislation. We provide explanation of pertinent concepts and principles when judging the merits of a pay discrimination case.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
18.20%
发文量
54
审稿时长
22 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