工作自治和工作场所民主:两个工作世界中工作自治的两极化

IF 1.6 Q2 ECONOMICS REVIEW OF SOCIAL ECONOMY Pub Date : 2020-07-02 DOI:10.1080/00346764.2019.1690671
Chi Kwok
{"title":"工作自治和工作场所民主:两个工作世界中工作自治的两极化","authors":"Chi Kwok","doi":"10.1080/00346764.2019.1690671","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Political theorists have been framing the problems of unfreedom and domination at work as inconsistent with the requirements of political democracy, undermining the democratic potential of the workplace and inducing psychological and status harm. Although these are important insights, political theorists are often unwilling to frame the hierarchical workplace as an issue of distributive justice. This paper, by bringing in the empirical literature on work autonomy, offers a framework to explicate the relationship between freedom at work and the distribution of essential goods at paid work. Through such framework, the paper argues that procedural and substantive freedom at work are essential to the fair distribution of the goods of work. By examining the empirical literature, the paper further argues that there exists a polarization of the goods of work between high-skilled and low-skilled labor, and the polarization offers a pro-tanto justification of workplace democracy for the least advantaged workers.","PeriodicalId":46636,"journal":{"name":"REVIEW OF SOCIAL ECONOMY","volume":"78 1","pages":"351 - 372"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2020-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/00346764.2019.1690671","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Work autonomy and workplace democracy: the polarization of the goods of work autonomy in the two worlds of work\",\"authors\":\"Chi Kwok\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/00346764.2019.1690671\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Political theorists have been framing the problems of unfreedom and domination at work as inconsistent with the requirements of political democracy, undermining the democratic potential of the workplace and inducing psychological and status harm. Although these are important insights, political theorists are often unwilling to frame the hierarchical workplace as an issue of distributive justice. This paper, by bringing in the empirical literature on work autonomy, offers a framework to explicate the relationship between freedom at work and the distribution of essential goods at paid work. Through such framework, the paper argues that procedural and substantive freedom at work are essential to the fair distribution of the goods of work. By examining the empirical literature, the paper further argues that there exists a polarization of the goods of work between high-skilled and low-skilled labor, and the polarization offers a pro-tanto justification of workplace democracy for the least advantaged workers.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46636,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"REVIEW OF SOCIAL ECONOMY\",\"volume\":\"78 1\",\"pages\":\"351 - 372\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-07-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/00346764.2019.1690671\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"REVIEW OF SOCIAL ECONOMY\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/00346764.2019.1690671\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"REVIEW OF SOCIAL ECONOMY","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00346764.2019.1690671","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

摘要政治理论家们一直认为,工作中的不自由和支配问题与政治民主的要求不符,破坏了工作场所的民主潜力,并导致心理和地位伤害。尽管这些都是重要的见解,但政治理论家往往不愿意将分级工作场所定义为分配正义的问题。本文通过引入有关工作自主性的实证文献,提供了一个框架来解释工作自由与有偿工作中基本物品分配之间的关系。通过这样的框架,本文认为工作中的程序和实质自由对于工作成果的公平分配至关重要。通过考察实证文献,本文进一步认为,高技能和低技能劳动力之间存在劳动产品的两极分化,这种两极分化为最弱势工人的工作场所民主提供了充分的理由。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Work autonomy and workplace democracy: the polarization of the goods of work autonomy in the two worlds of work
ABSTRACT Political theorists have been framing the problems of unfreedom and domination at work as inconsistent with the requirements of political democracy, undermining the democratic potential of the workplace and inducing psychological and status harm. Although these are important insights, political theorists are often unwilling to frame the hierarchical workplace as an issue of distributive justice. This paper, by bringing in the empirical literature on work autonomy, offers a framework to explicate the relationship between freedom at work and the distribution of essential goods at paid work. Through such framework, the paper argues that procedural and substantive freedom at work are essential to the fair distribution of the goods of work. By examining the empirical literature, the paper further argues that there exists a polarization of the goods of work between high-skilled and low-skilled labor, and the polarization offers a pro-tanto justification of workplace democracy for the least advantaged workers.
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
2.60
自引率
10.00%
发文量
18
期刊介绍: For over sixty-five years, the Review of Social Economy has published high-quality peer-reviewed work on the many relationships between social values and economics. The field of social economics discusses how the economy and social justice relate, and what this implies for economic theory and policy. Papers published range from conceptual work on aligning economic institutions and policies with given ethical principles, to theoretical representations of individual behaviour that allow for both self-interested and "pro-social" motives, and to original empirical work on persistent social issues such as poverty, inequality, and discrimination.
期刊最新文献
Detaching ‘neoliberalism’ from ‘free markets’: monopolistic corporations as neoliberalism’s ideal market form A political economy analysis of changes and continuities in Iran–Africa trade relations: a case of South–South dependency? Financialization and the social economy The rise and fall of Britain’s Golden Cohort: how the remarkable generation of 1925–1934 had their lives cut short by austerity The understructure of market production
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1