Equity in the twenty-first century

Issues of equity and inequity have always been part of employment relations and are a fundamental part of the industrial landscape. For example, in most countries in the nineteenth century and a large part of the twentieth century women and members of ethnic groups (often a minority in the workforce) were barred from certain occupations, industries or work locations, and received less pay than the dominant male ethnic group for the same work. In recent decades attention has been focused on issues of equity between groups, predominantly women and different ethnic groups in the workforce. This has been embodied in industrial legislation, for example in equal pay for women and men, and frequently in specific equity legislation. In this way a whole new area of law and associated workplace practice has developed in many countries. Historically, employment relations and industrial relations research has not examined employment issues disaggregated by gender or ethnic group. Born out of concern with conflict and regulation at the workplace, studies tended to concentrate on white, male, unionized workers in manufacturing and heavy industry (Ackers, 2002, p. 4). The influential systems model crafted by Dunlop (1958) gave rise to The discipline’s preoccupation with the ‘problem of order’ [which] ensures the invisibility of women, not only because women have generally been less successful in mobilizing around their own needs and discontents, but more profoundly because this approach identifies the employment relationship as the ultimate source of power and conflict at work (Forrest, 1993, p. 410). While ‘the system approach does not deliberately exclude gender . . . by reproducing a very narrow research approach and understanding of issues of relevance for the research, gender is in general excluded or looked on as something of peripheral interest’ (Hansen, 2002, p. 198). However, long-lived patterns of gender segregation in occupations and industries, together with discriminatory access to work and social views about women and ethnic groups in the paid workforce, mean that the employment experience of women and ethnic groups is frequently quite different to that of men in the dominant ethnic group. Since the 1980s, research into women and employment has figured in the employment relations literature, but it is often relegated to a separate category in specific articles or book chapters, with women implicitly or explicitly seen as the atypical or exceptional worker (Hansen, 2002; Wajcman, 2000). The same conclusion can be reached for other groups with different labour force patterns and employment outcomes. This chapter proposes that awareness of equity issues is central to employment relations. Like industrial relations legislation and approaches, each country will have a unique set of equity policies and legislation, reflecting their history and culture. Yet while most books on employment and industrial relations deal with issues of equity in a separate chapter (most commonly on equity for women or more recently on ‘diversity’), the reality in the workplace is that all types of legislation and policies which impact on the wages and working conditions interact, and their impact cannot be disentangled one from another. When discussing equity in workplaces in the twenty-first century we are now faced with a plethora of different terms in English. Terms used include discrimination, equity, equal opportunity, affirmative action and diversity with all its variants (workplace diversity, managing diversity, and so on). There is a lack of agreed definitions, particularly when the terms are used outside of a legislative context. This ‘shifting linguistic terrain’ (Kennedy-Dubourdieu, 2006b, p. 3) varies from country to country and changes over time even within the one country. There is frequently a division made between equity and its related concepts and the range of expressions using the term ‘diversity’ (Wilson and Iles, 1999; Thomas and Ely, 1996). These present dilemmas for practitioners and researchers due to the amount and range of ideas prevalent – and the breadth of issues that are covered when we say ‘equity and diversity in employment’. To add to these dilemmas, the literature on equity and diversity has become bifurcated: the literature on workplace diversity/management diversity appears largely in the business literature while that on equity in employment appears frequently in legal and industrial relations journals. Workplaces of the twenty-first century differ from those of the nineteenth and twentieth century not only in the way they deal with individual and group differences but also in the way they interpret what are fair and equitable outcomes for different individuals and groups. These variations are the result of a range of social conditions, legislation and workplace constraints that have influenced the development of employment equity and the management of diversity. Attempts to achieve employment equity have primarily been dealt with through legislative means, and in the last fifty years this legislation has included elements of anti-discrimination, affirmative action, and equal employment opportunity in virtually all OECD countries (Mor Barak, 2005, pp. 17–52). Established on human rights and social justice principles, this legislation is based on the premise that systemic discrimination has and/or continues to exist in the labour force and particular groups of citizens have less advantageous employment outcomes. It is based on group identity, and employment equity programmes in general apply across all workplaces and are mandatory. The more recent notions of diversity in the workplace are based on ideas coming principally from the USA in the 1980s which have spread widely in the Western world since the 1990s. Broadly speaking, diversity ideas focus on individual differences either on their own or in concert with the idea of group differences. The diversity literature is based on a business case: that is diversity is profitable in a variety of ways for business, and generally lacks a social justice or human rights justification (Burgess et al., 2009, pp. 81–2). Managing diversity is represented at the organizational level as a voluntary and local programme. This chapter discusses some major models and theories for equity and diversity. It begins by charting the history of ideas about equity in employment and then briefly discusses what is meant by equality and equity. The chapter then analyses the major debates about the ways in which equity can be achieved. The more recent ideas about diversity are then discussed, including the history of these ideas and the principles which guide this concept. The following section discusses both major frameworks of equity and diversity. The chapter then raises some ways in which insights from the equity and diversity literature can inform employment relations. Finally, the future of equity and diversity ideas is discussed.

Inciting the social imagination to realising the dream : An unfolding story of reform in a low-socioeconomic school

This paper presentation addresses design-based research that became a catalyst for social change among a disadvantaged school community. The aim of the longitudinal research was to protoype an evidence-based model for whole school digital and print literacy pedagogy renewal among students from low socioeconomic, Indigenous, and migrant backgrounds. Applying Anthony Gidden’s principle of the “duality of structure”, the paper presentation interprets how the collective agency of researchers and the school community began to transform the structural properties of the institution in a two-way dynamism, so that the structural properties of the school were not outside of individual action, but were implicated in its reproduction and transformation.

From deep North to global governance exemplar : Fitzgerald's impact on the International Anti-corruption Movement

In pre-Fitzgerald Queensland, the existence of corruption was widely known but its extent and modes of operation were not fully evident. The Fitzgerald Report identified the need for reform of the structure, procedures and efficiency in public administration in Queensland. What was most striking in the Queensland reform process was that a new model for combating corruption had been developed. Rather than rely upon a single law and a single institution, existing institutions were strengthened and new institutions were instituted to create a set of mutually supporting and mutually checking institutions, agencies and laws that jointly sought to improve governmental standards and combat corruption. Some of the reforms were either unique to Queensland or very rare. One of the strengths of this approach was that it avoided creating a single overarching institution to fight corruption. There are many powerful opponents of reform. Influential institutions and individuals resist any interference with their privileges. In order to cause a mass exodus from an entrenched corruption system, a seminal event or defining process is needed to alter expectations and incentives that are sufficient to encourage significant numbers of individuals to desert the corruption system and assist the integrity system in exposing and destroying it. The Fitzgerald Inquiry was such an event. The article also briefly addresses methods for destroying national corruption system where they emerge and exist.

Adam Smith's dinner

In 1961, the East German government erected what they claimed was an anti-capitalist barricade. In 1989, this barricade was dismantled by those whom it was supposed to keep apart: the forces it was intended to contain had overwhelmed it. In the aftermath, the victims of Stalinist oppression and the planned economy opted for radical change. Some might have hoped that they would intellectually march resolutely westwards towards the forms of social democracy that had proven so successful in their nearest neighbours – Scandinavia, Germany and Austria – and stop when they had reached a point on the political spectrum with which they felt comfortable, and which worked for them. Unfortunately, they went to the opposite end of political economy. That choice was celebrated by those theorists who wanted our own countries to move in the same direction. Eastern Europe suffered a decline of 50% in its GDP. Much earlier in 1653, Peter Stuyvesant had erected an earth and wooden wall to protect the westernmost settlement of a great commercial nation from those they imagined to be barbarians. In 1699 Stuyvesant’s barrier was dismantled by the British, who replaced it with a street named after the wall. So it came to be that one of the most inconsequential walls in history became one of history’s most famous streets. I am not sure if the Dutch had left some tulip bulbs on either side of the wall, perhaps as a reminder of capitalism’s first bubble, and an inspiration to later bubbles. However, many of the victims of the latest burst bubble are pretty keen to tear down that Wall.1 As in 1989, they want to take action against the guardians of the system that failed them. And the more they suffer, the more likely it is that they will demand radical change, and the more likely that the resulting change will go too far – as seems to have been the case in Eastern Europe after the terminal crisis of communism, and in the majority of democracies that fell in the dozen years following the Great Crash. The current reaction is so strong that some are even wondering what role there will be for markets. I was invited to address a conference in the EU Parliament last November on the topic ‘Capitalism: Quo Vadis?’, where I apologized to the international audience that the topic was posed in a dead European language because the answer to this question is not going to be determined by the west alone. The problems we have been addressing emerged in the west and have affected the rest. However, the answers will not come, solely from the west, and may even come primarily from the south and the east.

Professions without borders : global ethics and the international rule of law

The emergence of strong sovereign states after the Treaty of Westphalia turned two of the most cosmopolitan professions (law and arms) into two of the least cosmopolitan. Sovereign states determined the content of the law within their borders – including which, if any, ecclesiastical law was to be applied; what form of economic regulation was adopted; and what, if any, international law applied. Similarly, states sought to ensure that all military force was at their disposal in national armies. The erosion of sovereignty in a post-Westphalian world may significantly reverse these processes. The erosion of sovereignty is likely to have profound consequences for the legal profession and the ethics of how, and for what ends, it is practised. Lawyers have played a major role in the civilization of sovereign states through the articulation and institutionalisation of key governance values – starting with the rule of law. An increasingly global profession must take on similar tasks. The same could be said of the military. This essay will review the concept of an international rule of law and its relationship to domestic conceptions and outline the task of building the international rule of law and the role that lawyers can and should play in it.

Reconceiving the good life : the key to sustainable globalisation

Resource-intensive, high-carbon, Western lifestyles are frequently criticised as unsustainable and deeply unsatisfying. However, these lifestyles are still attractive to the majority of Westerners and to a high proportion of the developing world’s middle classes. This paper argues that the imminent threat of catastrophic climate change constitutes an immediate political, economic and ethical challenge for citizens of the developed world that cannot be tackled by appeals to asceticism or restraint. There can be no solution to climate change until sustainable conceptions of the good life are developed that those in the west want to live and which others might want to live. While the ultimate solution to climate change is the development of low carbon lifestyles, it is important that government initiatives, governance arrangements and economic incentives support rather than undermine that search. Like the global financial crisis, the climate change crisis also demonstrates what happens when weaknesses in national, corporate and professional governance are exacerbated by weaknesses in global governance. In tackling the latter, it is critical the mistakes now evidenced in the former are avoided – including a rethinking of carbon market and carbon tax alternatives. It is also critical that individuals must take responsibility for their actions as consumers, voters and investors.

Parliament, political ethics and national integrity systems

Papers on Parliament No. 55 February 2011 Charles Sampford "Parliament, Political Ethics and National Integrity Systems*" Prev | Contents |

Capitalism Quo Vadis?

Transcript: Workshop 3 – Capitalism Quo Vadis Conference on Ethics in Business – Corporate Culture & Spirituality European Parliament, Brussels 14th November 2008

School system as axiological medium : the state's primary macro-proposing context and its expanding moral role in Australia

This paper analyses the Australian Values Education Program (VEP) within the framework of late-classical political economy. using analytical methods from systemic functional linguistics and critical discourse analysis, we demonstrate that the VEP is an unwitting restatement of the principles of ideology as developed by the likes of Destutt de Tracy and the Young Hegelians. We conclude that the sudden shock of globalisation and the post-national cultures this has entailed is in many ways similar to the shock of formal nationalism that emerged in the late-Seventeenth and early- Eighteenth centuries. The overall result of the VEP for the Australian school system is a massive procedural burden that is unlikely to produce the results at which the program is aimed.

From national integrity systems to global integrity systems

The primary focus of corruption studies and anti-corruption activism has been corruption within sovereign states. However, over the last twenty years ‘globalization’, the flow of money, goods, people and ideas across borders, has threatened to overwhelm the system of sovereign states. Much activity has moved outside the control of nation states at the same time as nation states have ‘deregulated’ and in so doing have transferred power from those exercising governmental power at the nominal behest of the majority of its citizens to those with greater wealth and/or greater knowledge in markets in which knowledge is typically asymmetric. It is now recognized that many governance problems have arisen because of globalisation and can only be addressed by global solutions. It must also be recognized that governance problems at the national level contribute to governance problems and the global level and vice versa. Nevertheless, many of the lessons learned in combating corruption at the national level are relevant to a globalized world – in particular, the need for ethics and leadership in addition to legal and institutional reform; the need to integrate these measures into integrity systems; and the awareness of corruption systems. These are applied to areas of concern within sustainable globalisation raised by the conference – including peace and security, extractive industries, climate change and sustainable banking.

World Ethic Forum Conference Proceedings

World Ethics Forum conference proceedings : the joint conference of The International Institute for Public Ethics (IIPE) and The World Bank : leadership, ethics and integrity in public life : 9-11 April 2006, Keble College, University of Oxford UK /

An assessment of Georgia's National Integrity System : the GNISA project

Georgia’s ‘National Integrity Systems’ are the institutions, laws, procedures, practices and attitudes that encourage and support integrity in the exercise of power in modern Georgian society. Integrity systems function to ensure that power is exercised in a manner that is true to the values, purposes and duties for which that power is entrusted to, or held by, institutions and individual office-holders. This report presents the results of the Open Society Institute / Open Society – Georgia Foundation funded project Georgian National Integrity Systems Assessment (GNISA), conducted in 2005–2006 by Caucasus Institute for Peace, Democracy and Development, Transparency International Georgia, Georgian Young Lawyers Association, in close cooperation with Griffith University Institute for Ethics, Governance and Law (Australia), and Tiri Group (UK), into how different elements of integrity systems interact, which combinations of institutions and reforms make for a strong integrity system, and how Georgia’s integrity systems should evolve to ensure coherence, not chaos in the way public integrity is maintained. Nevertheless all participants of the research may not share some conclusions given in the GNISA report.

From Greek temple to bird's nest : mapping, assessing and understanding national integrity systems

In this paper, I would like to outline the approach we have taken to mapping and assessing integrity systems and how this has led us to see integrity systems in a new light. Indeed, it has led us to a new visual metaphor for integrity systems – a bird’s nest rather than a Greek temple. This was the result of a pair of major research projects completed in partnership with Transparency International (TI). One worked on refining and extending the measurement of corruption. This, the second, looked at what was then the emerging institutional means for reducing corruption – ‘national integrity systems’