书评:《员工参与的双重性质》。《经济与人权问题》Sára Hungler著

IF 1.5 Q3 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Marco Biasi
{"title":"书评:《员工参与的双重性质》。《经济与人权问题》Sára Hungler著","authors":"Marco Biasi","doi":"10.1177/13882627211050651","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"neration would no longer be determined by demand and supply on the labour market, but by the government or some other kind of centralised institution (on what criteria?). While it is certainly true that markets too often fail to produce a fair distribution of income, it should not be overlooked that the price mechanism underlying free markets fulfils an important coordinating function, attracting labour supply to the economic sectors where it is needed most. This coordinating function would be thwarted if pay rates were set by the state. The arguments in favour of equal pay are presented in the fourth part of the book. It is argued that rewards other than money could be used to incentivise activities and professions that have a positive impact on society. The authors advocating equal pay for all refer, above all, to solidarity, pointing to the fact that the amount of pay earned by workers often depends on factors for which workers are not accountable, such as health or certain physical abilities. A possible objection to this argument is that ‘equal’ and ‘just’ are not necessarily synonymous terms. As known since Aristotle’s time, only like cases are to be treated alike. Thus, the equal treatment of unequal cases is unjust. Can all works performed really be said to be equal or of equal value? Moreover, granting an equal rate of pay may not result in equal economic treatment of all workers, since some individuals may have greater needs than others due to disease or other natural disadvantages, for example. In my view, the authors supporting equal pay for all could have discussed these aspects more thoroughly. What these considerations show is that an equal rate of pay is neither sufficient nor necessary to achieve an egalitarian system of wealth distribution. This fact is acknowledged by the authors of the second and third parts of the book, which – in my opinion – contain the most convincing contributions. Here, various regulatory alternatives to equal pay that are designed to reduce income disparities are discussed, such as a minimum income for all citizens or pay ratios (i.e., provisions requiring that the highest wages in an organisation or profession cannot be x times greater than the wages of the lowest-paid workers). Compared with the idea of an equal pay rate for all workers, these regulatory proposals seem much more practicable and may be of actual interest for policymakers. In sum, the book offers many different views and perspectives by experts from a wide array of disciplines. It is absolutely worthwhile reading for lawyers, philosophers, economists, social scientists, and policymakers alike.","PeriodicalId":44670,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Social Security","volume":"23 1","pages":"393 - 395"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Book review: The Dual Nature of Employee Involvement. An Economic and Human Right Issue by Sára Hungler\",\"authors\":\"Marco Biasi\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/13882627211050651\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"neration would no longer be determined by demand and supply on the labour market, but by the government or some other kind of centralised institution (on what criteria?). While it is certainly true that markets too often fail to produce a fair distribution of income, it should not be overlooked that the price mechanism underlying free markets fulfils an important coordinating function, attracting labour supply to the economic sectors where it is needed most. This coordinating function would be thwarted if pay rates were set by the state. The arguments in favour of equal pay are presented in the fourth part of the book. It is argued that rewards other than money could be used to incentivise activities and professions that have a positive impact on society. The authors advocating equal pay for all refer, above all, to solidarity, pointing to the fact that the amount of pay earned by workers often depends on factors for which workers are not accountable, such as health or certain physical abilities. A possible objection to this argument is that ‘equal’ and ‘just’ are not necessarily synonymous terms. As known since Aristotle’s time, only like cases are to be treated alike. Thus, the equal treatment of unequal cases is unjust. Can all works performed really be said to be equal or of equal value? Moreover, granting an equal rate of pay may not result in equal economic treatment of all workers, since some individuals may have greater needs than others due to disease or other natural disadvantages, for example. In my view, the authors supporting equal pay for all could have discussed these aspects more thoroughly. What these considerations show is that an equal rate of pay is neither sufficient nor necessary to achieve an egalitarian system of wealth distribution. This fact is acknowledged by the authors of the second and third parts of the book, which – in my opinion – contain the most convincing contributions. Here, various regulatory alternatives to equal pay that are designed to reduce income disparities are discussed, such as a minimum income for all citizens or pay ratios (i.e., provisions requiring that the highest wages in an organisation or profession cannot be x times greater than the wages of the lowest-paid workers). Compared with the idea of an equal pay rate for all workers, these regulatory proposals seem much more practicable and may be of actual interest for policymakers. In sum, the book offers many different views and perspectives by experts from a wide array of disciplines. It is absolutely worthwhile reading for lawyers, philosophers, economists, social scientists, and policymakers alike.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44670,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Social Security\",\"volume\":\"23 1\",\"pages\":\"393 - 395\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-10-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Social Security\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/13882627211050651\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Social Security","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13882627211050651","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

收入将不再由劳动力市场的需求和供应决定,而是由政府或其他类型的中央机构决定(根据什么标准?)。诚然,市场往往无法实现收入的公平分配,但不应忽视的是,自由市场的价格机制发挥了重要的协调作用,将劳动力供应吸引到最需要的经济部门。如果工资标准由国家制定,这种协调职能将受到阻碍。本书第四部分介绍了赞成同工同酬的论点。有人认为,金钱以外的奖励可以用来激励对社会产生积极影响的活动和职业。主张人人同工同酬的作者首先提到了团结,指出工人的工资数额往往取决于工人不负责任的因素,如健康或某些身体能力。对这一论点的一个可能的反对意见是,“平等”和“公正”不一定是同义词。正如亚里士多德时代以来所知,只有相似的情况才能得到同样的对待。因此,平等对待不平等案件是不公正的。真的可以说所有作品都是平等的还是价值相等的?此外,给予同等的工资可能不会导致所有工人得到平等的经济待遇,因为例如,由于疾病或其他自然劣势,一些人可能比其他人有更大的需求。在我看来,支持同工同酬的作者本可以更彻底地讨论这些方面。这些考虑表明,同工同酬既不足以也不必要实现平等的财富分配制度。这一事实得到了本书第二和第三部分作者的承认,在我看来,这两部分包含了最令人信服的贡献。在这里,讨论了旨在减少收入差距的各种同工同酬的监管替代方案,例如所有公民的最低收入或工资比率(即要求一个组织或职业的最高工资不能是最低工资工人工资的x倍的规定)。与所有工人同工同酬的想法相比,这些监管建议似乎更可行,政策制定者可能会真正感兴趣。总之,这本书提供了来自广泛学科的专家的许多不同观点和观点。对于律师、哲学家、经济学家、社会科学家和政策制定者来说,这本书绝对值得一读。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Book review: The Dual Nature of Employee Involvement. An Economic and Human Right Issue by Sára Hungler
neration would no longer be determined by demand and supply on the labour market, but by the government or some other kind of centralised institution (on what criteria?). While it is certainly true that markets too often fail to produce a fair distribution of income, it should not be overlooked that the price mechanism underlying free markets fulfils an important coordinating function, attracting labour supply to the economic sectors where it is needed most. This coordinating function would be thwarted if pay rates were set by the state. The arguments in favour of equal pay are presented in the fourth part of the book. It is argued that rewards other than money could be used to incentivise activities and professions that have a positive impact on society. The authors advocating equal pay for all refer, above all, to solidarity, pointing to the fact that the amount of pay earned by workers often depends on factors for which workers are not accountable, such as health or certain physical abilities. A possible objection to this argument is that ‘equal’ and ‘just’ are not necessarily synonymous terms. As known since Aristotle’s time, only like cases are to be treated alike. Thus, the equal treatment of unequal cases is unjust. Can all works performed really be said to be equal or of equal value? Moreover, granting an equal rate of pay may not result in equal economic treatment of all workers, since some individuals may have greater needs than others due to disease or other natural disadvantages, for example. In my view, the authors supporting equal pay for all could have discussed these aspects more thoroughly. What these considerations show is that an equal rate of pay is neither sufficient nor necessary to achieve an egalitarian system of wealth distribution. This fact is acknowledged by the authors of the second and third parts of the book, which – in my opinion – contain the most convincing contributions. Here, various regulatory alternatives to equal pay that are designed to reduce income disparities are discussed, such as a minimum income for all citizens or pay ratios (i.e., provisions requiring that the highest wages in an organisation or profession cannot be x times greater than the wages of the lowest-paid workers). Compared with the idea of an equal pay rate for all workers, these regulatory proposals seem much more practicable and may be of actual interest for policymakers. In sum, the book offers many different views and perspectives by experts from a wide array of disciplines. It is absolutely worthwhile reading for lawyers, philosophers, economists, social scientists, and policymakers alike.
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
European Journal of Social Security
European Journal of Social Security PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION-
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
14.30%
发文量
28
×
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