Search results

The purpose of this paper is to examine generational differences in attitudes toward careers in China. Generational differences are quite apparent in Chinese society. People who were born in the 1960s experienced the Cultural Revolution in their childhood. Those born in the 1970s witnessed the dramatic and profound social changes after China's open‐door policy was enforced. The generation born in the 1980s is believed to be the spoiled generation that highly values materialism and self‐realization, due to being the only child in the family as a result of the “One Child” policy.

The authors surveyed Chinese people between 20 and 50 years old about their career attitudes to explore six hypotheses based on predicted patterns of generational change.

The paper found more differences in desired attributes of their manager than in their perception of themselves. Some career attitudes and abilities vary across the three generations but, given the historical and common assumptions of generational change, extensive differences were not found.

The authors' sample of 277 can only provide general insights into Chinese attitudes, given the size and diversity of the Chinese population. The study hopes to spur further research into generational differences in China and elsewhere.

The paper provides insight into how the generational groups in China currently in the workforce think about their careers. Generational clashes in the workplace are also discussed.

No previous projects directly use the studies method or concepts in China. It builds on past work examining work values and career attitudes in China to contribute insights into generational differences within China.

The purpose of this paper is to survey the landscape of recent federal securities class actions filed in state court and explore arguments for removal of those cases to federal courts under the Securities Litigation Reform Act (SLUSA) or the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA).

The paper discusses: US Congressional legislation designed to bring the bulk of securities class actions back into federal courts, including the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act (PSLRA) and SLUSA; CAFA, another law designed to redirect class action litigation away from state courts; recent cases that have tested the limits of SLUSA and CAFA for removal from state to federal courts; and arguments for removal under SLUSA and CAFA.

Legislative history for both SLUSA and CAFA suggests that these statutes should be read as evidence of Congressional intent to return most securities class actions to federal court. Nonetheless, plaintiffs have continued to devise legal schemes to litigate class actions in what they perceive to be friendlier forums in state courts.

Although the arguments discussed in this paper are not exhaustive, they are a starting point for defendants seeking removal once litigation arises.