解决菲律宾劳资纠纷:多中心监管框架下的合法性和有效性

IF 1.9 3区 社会学 Q1 LAW
CAROLYN SUTHERLAND, AMANDA DARSHINI SELVARAJAH
{"title":"解决菲律宾劳资纠纷:多中心监管框架下的合法性和有效性","authors":"CAROLYN SUTHERLAND,&nbsp;AMANDA DARSHINI SELVARAJAH","doi":"10.1111/jols.70008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This article provides an empirically informed account of the processes for resolving labour disputes in the Philippines. Moving beyond earlier studies that have focused on the ineffectiveness of formal processes, we widen the scope of our inquiry to examine the labour dispute resolution regime as a polycentric regulatory framework. We focus on disputes about firms’ labour-hire practices to explore the roles of state-based and non-state-based regulatory actors and the interaction of formal and informal processes within the dispute resolution regime. Despite the failings of the formal dispute resolution system, we find that it provides a central focus for these disputes and that regulatory actors move fluidly between formal and informal processes to bolster their legitimacy claims and to overcome obstacles in the formal system. The strategic use of informal processes also allows workers’ representatives to influence the broader political and economic forces that underpin the widespread adoption of precarious working conditions.</p>","PeriodicalId":51544,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Law and Society","volume":"52 3","pages":"480-506"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jols.70008","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Resolving labour disputes in the Philippines: legitimacy and effectiveness in a polycentric regulatory framework\",\"authors\":\"CAROLYN SUTHERLAND,&nbsp;AMANDA DARSHINI SELVARAJAH\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jols.70008\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>This article provides an empirically informed account of the processes for resolving labour disputes in the Philippines. Moving beyond earlier studies that have focused on the ineffectiveness of formal processes, we widen the scope of our inquiry to examine the labour dispute resolution regime as a polycentric regulatory framework. We focus on disputes about firms’ labour-hire practices to explore the roles of state-based and non-state-based regulatory actors and the interaction of formal and informal processes within the dispute resolution regime. Despite the failings of the formal dispute resolution system, we find that it provides a central focus for these disputes and that regulatory actors move fluidly between formal and informal processes to bolster their legitimacy claims and to overcome obstacles in the formal system. The strategic use of informal processes also allows workers’ representatives to influence the broader political and economic forces that underpin the widespread adoption of precarious working conditions.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51544,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Law and Society\",\"volume\":\"52 3\",\"pages\":\"480-506\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jols.70008\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Law and Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jols.70008\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Law and Society","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jols.70008","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

这篇文章提供了菲律宾解决劳资纠纷过程的经验信息。超越早期关注正式程序无效的研究,我们扩大了调查的范围,以检查作为多中心监管框架的劳资纠纷解决机制。我们专注于关于公司劳动力雇佣实践的争议,以探索基于国家和非国家的监管行为者的角色,以及争议解决机制中正式和非正式程序的相互作用。尽管正式的争议解决系统存在缺陷,但我们发现,它为这些争议提供了一个中心焦点,监管行为体在正式和非正式程序之间流动,以支持其合法性主张,并克服正式系统中的障碍。战略性地利用非正式程序还使工人代表能够影响支持广泛采用不稳定工作条件的更广泛的政治和经济力量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Resolving labour disputes in the Philippines: legitimacy and effectiveness in a polycentric regulatory framework

This article provides an empirically informed account of the processes for resolving labour disputes in the Philippines. Moving beyond earlier studies that have focused on the ineffectiveness of formal processes, we widen the scope of our inquiry to examine the labour dispute resolution regime as a polycentric regulatory framework. We focus on disputes about firms’ labour-hire practices to explore the roles of state-based and non-state-based regulatory actors and the interaction of formal and informal processes within the dispute resolution regime. Despite the failings of the formal dispute resolution system, we find that it provides a central focus for these disputes and that regulatory actors move fluidly between formal and informal processes to bolster their legitimacy claims and to overcome obstacles in the formal system. The strategic use of informal processes also allows workers’ representatives to influence the broader political and economic forces that underpin the widespread adoption of precarious working conditions.

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
2.00
自引率
15.40%
发文量
59
期刊介绍: Established as the leading British periodical for Socio-Legal Studies The Journal of Law and Society offers an interdisciplinary approach. It is committed to achieving a broad international appeal, attracting contributions and addressing issues from a range of legal cultures, as well as theoretical concerns of cross- cultural interest. It produces an annual special issue, which is also published in book form. It has a widely respected Book Review section and is cited all over the world. Challenging, authoritative and topical, the journal appeals to legal researchers and practitioners as well as sociologists, criminologists and other social scientists.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信