Employment Adjudication: Comparisons and Anomalies

Susan Corby and Pete Burgess
Additional contact information
Susan Corby: University of Greenwich
Pete Burgess: University of Greenwich

Chapter 2 in Adjudicating Employment Rights, 2014, pp 20-43 from Palgrave Macmillan

Abstract: Abstract The country chapters in this study highlight the diversity in national arrangements for adjudicating employment disputes within a relatively small group of countries, but also point to some common features. This chapter aims to explore how this diversity and commonality might be explained. In particular, it considers whether it is possible to draw on broad social models that have a determinate effect on institutions within them and which might assist in understanding the origins, persistence or change of these institutions. We argue that such models can play a helpful role in comparing adjudicative systems and might usefully direct research into their legal and social history. Some caution, however, is in order. Abstract models still need to leave some ‘allowance for the unexpected’ (Hirschman, 1987: 188), and anomalies can be instructive.

Keywords: Industrial Relation; Path Dependency; Legal Origin; Civil Court; Social Partnership (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2014
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

There are no downloads for this item, see the EconPapers FAQ for hints about obtaining it.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:pal:palchp:978-1-137-26920-1_2

Ordering information: This item can be ordered from
http://www.palgrave.com/9781137269201

DOI: 10.1057/9781137269201_2

Access Statistics for this chapter

More chapters in Palgrave Macmillan Books from Palgrave Macmillan
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().