Similarity or Variation? Employee Representation and Consultation Approaches Amongst Liberal Market Economy Multinationals

This paper engages with the varieties of capitalism literature to investigate the employee representation and consultation approaches of liberal market economy multinational companies (MNCs), specifically Australian, British and US MNCs operating in Australia. While the literature would suggest commonality amongst these MNCs, the paper considers whether the evidence points to similarity or variation amongst liberal market headquartered MNCs. The findings contribute to filling a recognized empirical gap on MNC employment relations practice in Australia and to a better understanding of within category varieties of capitalism similarity and variation. Drawing on survey data from MNCs operating in Australia, the results demonstrated that UK-owned MNCs were the least likely to report collective structures of employee representation. Moreover, it was found that Australian MNCs were the most likely to engage in collective forms of employee representation and made less use of direct consultative mechanisms relative to their British and US counterparts. In spite of the concerted individualization of the employment relations domain over previous decades, Australian MNCs appear to have upheld more long-standing national institutional arrangements with respect to engaging with employees on a collective basis. This varies from British and US MNC approaches which denotes that our results display within category deviation in the variety of capitalism liberal market economy typology. Just as Hall and Soskice described their seminal work on liberal market economy (LME) and coordinated market economy (CME) categories as a “work-in-progress” (2001: 2), we too suggest that Australia’s evolution in the LME category, and more specifically its industrial relations system development, and the consequences for employment relations practices of its domestic MNCs, may be a work-in-progress.

Delineating human resource management practice in domestic and foreign owned multinational enterprises in Australia

To date there is an absence of any systematic and extensive data on Australian multinational enterprises (MNEs). This research paper fills the information gap and leads to a discussion of the human resource management (HRM) practices of Australian MNEs in the global arena and whether there is a distinctive national identity associated with these practices. We report on the profile of Australian-based multinational enterprises (MNEs). Drawing on a systematic database developed by the authors in 2010–11 we are able to identify the numbers of Australian MNEs and their characteristics and compare them against a representative sample of foreign-owned MNEs operating in Australia.

A systematic review of evidence-based assessment practices by allied health practitioners for children with cerebral palsy

AIM: The routine use of psychometrically robust assessment tools is integral to best practice. This systematic review aims to determine the extent to which evidence-based assessment tools were used by allied health practitioners for children with cerebral palsy (CP).

METHOD: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis protocols 2015 was employed. A search strategy applied the free text terms: 'allied health practitioner', 'assessment', and 'cerebral palsy', and related subject headings to seven databases. Included articles reported assessment practices of occupational therapists, physiotherapists, or speech pathologists working with children with CP aged 0 to 18 years, published from the year 2000.

RESULTS: Fourteen articles met the inclusion criteria. Eighty-eight assessment tools were reported, of which 23 were in high use. Of these, three tools focused on gross motor function and had acceptable validity for use with children with CP: Gross Motor Function Measure, Gross Motor Function Classification System, and goniometry. Validated tools to assess other activity components, participation, quality of life, and pain were used infrequently or not at all.

INTERPRETATION: Allied health practitioners used only a few of the available evidence-based assessment tools. Assessment findings in many areas considered important by children and families were rarely documented using validated assessment tools.