劳动法的和解工程

IF 0.7 4区 社会学 Q2 LAW
Supriya Routh
{"title":"劳动法的和解工程","authors":"Supriya Routh","doi":"10.3138/utlj-2023-0071","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:Historically, in Canada, labour law has not only failed to protect Indigenous working people from the exclusionary logic of (colonization-induced) market capitalism but also marginalized (peripheral and vulnerable) working people among the settlers. In spite of the Canadian judiciary's attempt to articulate a broader vision of labour law through the values of justice, liberty, equity, and participatory democracy, the foundational private contractual rationale of labour law acts as a constraint on the judiciary's ability to develop a broader– and more inclusive–regulatory justification. In this article, I suggest that this tension between expansive normative values and narrow (exclusionary) regulatory justification of labour law could be usefully addressed by employing the idea of reconciliation, originally conceived to fashion the relationship between Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples in Canada. I argue that an appropriately formulated idea of reconciliation should be able to promote a more inclusive conceptual foundation of labour law, one that is receptive of non-Eurocentric world-views in its foundational narrative and democratic in its continued execution. In so aiding labour law, the reconciliation perspective can close the gap between normative values and regulatory justification of the discipline.","PeriodicalId":46289,"journal":{"name":"University of Toronto Law Journal","volume":"73 1","pages":"238 - 256"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Reconciliation Project of Labour Law\",\"authors\":\"Supriya Routh\",\"doi\":\"10.3138/utlj-2023-0071\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract:Historically, in Canada, labour law has not only failed to protect Indigenous working people from the exclusionary logic of (colonization-induced) market capitalism but also marginalized (peripheral and vulnerable) working people among the settlers. In spite of the Canadian judiciary's attempt to articulate a broader vision of labour law through the values of justice, liberty, equity, and participatory democracy, the foundational private contractual rationale of labour law acts as a constraint on the judiciary's ability to develop a broader– and more inclusive–regulatory justification. In this article, I suggest that this tension between expansive normative values and narrow (exclusionary) regulatory justification of labour law could be usefully addressed by employing the idea of reconciliation, originally conceived to fashion the relationship between Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples in Canada. I argue that an appropriately formulated idea of reconciliation should be able to promote a more inclusive conceptual foundation of labour law, one that is receptive of non-Eurocentric world-views in its foundational narrative and democratic in its continued execution. In so aiding labour law, the reconciliation perspective can close the gap between normative values and regulatory justification of the discipline.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46289,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"University of Toronto Law Journal\",\"volume\":\"73 1\",\"pages\":\"238 - 256\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"University of Toronto Law Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3138/utlj-2023-0071\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"University of Toronto Law Journal","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3138/utlj-2023-0071","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要:从历史上看,在加拿大,劳动法不仅未能保护土著劳动人民免受(殖民化引发的)市场资本主义的排斥逻辑的影响,而且还将定居者中的(边缘和弱势)劳动人民边缘化。尽管加拿大司法机构试图通过正义、自由、公平和参与式民主的价值观来阐明对劳动法的更广泛愿景,但劳动法的基本私人合同理由制约了司法机构制定更广泛、更具包容性的监管理由的能力。在这篇文章中,我建议,通过采用和解的理念,可以有效地解决劳动法的广泛规范价值观和狭隘(排他性)监管理由之间的紧张关系,和解最初是为了塑造加拿大土著和非土著人民之间的关系。我认为,一个适当制定的和解理念应该能够促进劳动法的一个更具包容性的概念基础,一个在其基本叙事中接受非欧洲中心世界观并在其持续执行中民主的概念基础。在帮助劳动法的过程中,和解视角可以缩小规范价值观和纪律的监管正当性之间的差距。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Reconciliation Project of Labour Law
Abstract:Historically, in Canada, labour law has not only failed to protect Indigenous working people from the exclusionary logic of (colonization-induced) market capitalism but also marginalized (peripheral and vulnerable) working people among the settlers. In spite of the Canadian judiciary's attempt to articulate a broader vision of labour law through the values of justice, liberty, equity, and participatory democracy, the foundational private contractual rationale of labour law acts as a constraint on the judiciary's ability to develop a broader– and more inclusive–regulatory justification. In this article, I suggest that this tension between expansive normative values and narrow (exclusionary) regulatory justification of labour law could be usefully addressed by employing the idea of reconciliation, originally conceived to fashion the relationship between Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples in Canada. I argue that an appropriately formulated idea of reconciliation should be able to promote a more inclusive conceptual foundation of labour law, one that is receptive of non-Eurocentric world-views in its foundational narrative and democratic in its continued execution. In so aiding labour law, the reconciliation perspective can close the gap between normative values and regulatory justification of the discipline.
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
1.70
自引率
16.70%
发文量
26
×
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