Search results

A distinction must be drawn between a dismissal on the one hand, and on the other a repudiation of a contract of employment as a result of a breach of a fundamental term of that contract. When such a repudiation has been accepted by the innocent party then a termination of employment takes place. Such termination does not constitute dismissal (see London v. James Laidlaw & Sons Ltd (1974) IRLR 136 and Gannon v. J. C. Firth (1976) IRLR 415 EAT).

The purpose of this paper is to examine the factors explaining voluntary occupational health and safety disclosures (OHSDs).

Annual report disclosures of 223 Indonesia Stock Exchange listed companies for the year ending 2007 are analyzed. The OHSD components of the 2006 Global Reporting Initiative guidelines are used as the disclosure index checklist.

The results show that approximately 30 percent of Indonesian listed companies provide OHSD. The most disclosed item is health and safety programs. Logistical regression analysis reveals that industry type and international operations significantly influence the propensity to provide OHSD. These findings suggest that coercive isomorphism partially explains OHSD practices in Indonesia.

The main implications of the findings are that Indonesian listed companies generally have poor health and safety information disclosure sets and largely ignore the potential roles of their workers in any health and safety committees.

This paper provides insights into the disclosure practices of occupational health and safety issues, a vital subset of corporate social responsibility disclosure which is still under-researched. The paper also empirically investigates the key determinants of OHSD, an empirical test which is largely ignored in past OHSD-related studies.

The Equal Pay Act 1970 (which came into operation on 29 December 1975) provides for an “equality clause” to be written into all contracts of employment. S.1(2) (a) of the 1970 Act (which has been amended by the Sex Discrimination Act 1975) provides:

In the Covid-19 pandemic era, corporate responsibility and accountability for maintaining employee health and safety, particularly from this pernicious virus, have become a matter of major social and economic importance. From an accountability through action perspective, this study aims to set out to evaluate the potential occupational health and safety accountability consequences of the Covid-19 pandemic.

This paper is based upon purposive sampling of several sets of publicly available data including published research literature addressing corporate social responsibility and accountability, and the literature more specifically addressing occupational health and safety (OHS) and its reporting. Also included are recent Web-based reports and articles concerning Covid-19-related OHS government and industry sponsored guidelines for employers and their workplaces across the UK and Australia.

The findings of this research highlight that firstly, the extant literature on OHS has been predominantly functionalist in its approach and that accountability through action provides an opportunity to make employers more visibly accountable for their response to Covid-19. Secondly, the paper highlights that despite recent progress on OHS issues significant concerns remained in the pre-Covid-19 era and that emerging regulations and legal obligations on employees have the potential to make OHS issues a prominent part of corporate social responsibility research.

Disease and mental health statistics reveal the potential significance of their expansion in the Covid-19 environment, and regulatory and legal liability concerns emerge as potential drivers of renewed corporate as well as researcher attention to OHS issues. Implications for the emergence of a broader range of accountability forms and visibilities are also canvassed.

Knight's Industrial Law Reports goes into a new style and format as Managerial Law This issue of KILR is restyled Managerial Law and it now appears on a continuous updating basis rather than as a monthly routine affair.

In order to succeed in an action under the Equal Pay Act 1970, should the woman and the man be employed by the same employer on like work at the same time or would the woman still be covered by the Act if she were employed on like work in succession to the man? This is the question which had to be solved in Macarthys Ltd v. Smith. Unfortunately it was not. Their Lordships interpreted the relevant section in different ways and since Article 119 of the Treaty of Rome was also subject to different interpretations, the case has been referred to the European Court of Justice.

In the last four years, since Volume I of this Bibliography first appeared, there has been an explosion of literature in all the main functional areas of business. This wealth of material poses problems for the researcher in management studies — and, of course, for the librarian: uncovering what has been written in any one area is not an easy task. This volume aims to help the librarian and the researcher overcome some of the immediate problems of identification of material. It is an annotated bibliography of management, drawing on the wide variety of literature produced by MCB University Press. Over the last four years, MCB University Press has produced an extensive range of books and serial publications covering most of the established and many of the developing areas of management. This volume, in conjunction with Volume I, provides a guide to all the material published so far.

This research investigates whether firms that voluntarily publish environmental reports to supplement their annual financial statements disclose significantly more sustainability data than others. A matched-pair sample of companies, drawn from the EPA’s list of the 500 largest (volumetric basis) U.S. polluters, that published such environmental reports during 2001 or 2002 is used to assess the type and level of non-environmental social accounting disclosures in five different areas: employee safety/health, workforce and supplier diversity, product safety, community involvement, and energy usage. Fifty-two environmental report producers were matched with non-reporters based on total asset size and SIC. Content analysis was used to assess the substance of sample firm reporting. The results show highly significant differences in social accounting reporting, with the environmental report publishers disclosing more sustainability data in a wider range than their matched counterparts.

The purpose of this paper is to analyse how an influential supplier of electronics manufacturing services (i.e. Foxconn) discloses its labour practices.

The analysis is conducted through the theoretical lens of legitimacy and impression management. This particular firm is selected as it provides a rich case on labour practice disclosures in a setting where significant labour malpractice incidents occurred from 2009 to 2011. The sample period covers 12 years of the firm's labour practice disclosures (2008–2019) to match with publicly available information that is used to construct expert comparative accounts on the disclosures. The authors corroborate the comparative accounts with sociological studies and responsibility reports from the major customer (i.e. Apple).

The authors found that the disclosures become more detailed over successive years. Occupational health and safety issues are predominantly reported, followed by issues relating to vocational guidance and training and then employment policy. Regarding impression management strategies, defensive strategies embedded in the disclosures are rarely detected and assertive strategies are persistently used from 2008 to 2019 to maintain legitimacy. The comparative accounts show the persistent use of one defensive strategy (i.e. omission) to maintain and regain legitimacy. In other words, as an economic strategy, material labour practice issues are persistently omitted in the disclosures. The incidents discernibly affect how Foxconn discloses labour practices.

The authors’ study contributes to the limited extant research on suppliers' labour practice disclosures from the perspective of legitimacy theory and impression management. The results will be of great interest to researchers, investors, assurers and other stakeholders.

This review compares the primary occupational safety and health (OSH) laws of the ASEAN members against the major provisions of the primary OSH laws of the United Kingdom (UK) and United States (US) grouped under the themes for OSH law adopted by the International Labour Organization (ILO).

This review employs the 11 themes for OSH law adopted by the ILO as the basis of comparison. As the themes lack specificity in terms of their respective contents, specific facets of the themes are drawn from the review of the primary OSH laws of the UK and the US.

The review shows that primary OSH laws of the ASEAN members encompass the fundamental aspects of the ILO OSH themes particularly the regulatory framework, scope, roles of authorities, duties of employers and employees as well as safety inspection and enforcement. The review demonstrates a lack of provision of worksite consultation by the authorities, the emphasis on research, experiment and demonstration by the government as well as certain aspects of training.

OSH in many developing members of the ASEAN is still evolving to advocate the basic rights of employees, protect the safety of the public and ensure the welfare, safety and health of employees are upheld at workplaces. There is an obvious disparity in the coverage of the primary OSH laws of the nations, resulting in widely varied OSH implementation. This study contributes to advancement of the primary OSH laws in developing ASEAN members by highlighting areas of their primary OSH laws that can be improved. Improvement of the primary OSH laws is crucial to subsequent improvement and development of subsidiary laws to provide for adequate protection at workplaces.

Most studies of OSH laws in the ASEAN are country-specific and often theme-specific. There is currently no study which compares the primary OSH laws of ASEAN nations using themes derived from the ILO as well as primary OSH laws of the UK and the US. This review is one of its kinds to use such an approach in providing a comparative overview of the primary OSH laws of all ASEAN nations.