Perceptions of high involvement work practices and burnout: investigating the mediating role of procedural justice and role overload and the moderating role of colleague support

Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to investigate the impact of employees’ perceptions of high involvement work practices (HIWPs) on burnout (emotional exhaustion and depersonalisation) via the mediating role of role overload and procedural justice. Further, perceived colleague support was hypothesised to moderate the effects of role overload and procedural justice on these outcomes.

Design/Methodology
The study was conducted on a random sample of unionised registered nurses (RNs) working in the Canadian public health care sector, stratified by mission and size of the institution to ensure representativeness. Of the 6546 nurses solicited, 2174 returned a completed questionnaire, resulting in a response rate of 33.2%. To test our hypotheses we conducted structural equation modelling (SEM) in Mplus version 6.0 (Muthen and Muthen, 1998 – 2010) with Maximum Likelihood (ML) estimation.

Results
The results showed that procedural justice and role overload fully mediated the influence of HIWPs on burnout. Moreover, colleague support moderated the effects of procedural justice and role overload on emotional exhaustion but not depersonalisation.

Limitations
The study used a cross-sectional research design and is conducted among one occupational group (i.e. nurses).

Research/Practical Implications
The findings question the dark side of HRM in the health care context. They also contribute to the lack of theoretical and empirical work dedicated to understanding the ‘black box’ problem (Castanheira and Chambel, 2010).

Originality/Value
The study employs a well-known theoretical perspective from the occupational health psychology literature to the HR field in order to contribute to the lack of theorising in the HR-well-being link.

Reframing Public Inquiries as 'Procedural Justice' for Victims of Institutional Child Abuse: Towards a Hybrid Model of Justice

As the number of high profile cases of institutional child abuse mounts internationally, and the demands of victims for justice are heard, state responses have ranged from prosecution, apology, and compensation schemes, to truth commissions or public inquiries. Drawing on the examples of Australia and Northern Ireland as two jurisdictions with a recent and ongoing history of statutory inquiries into institutional child abuse, the article utilises the restorative justice paradigm to critically evaluate the strengths and limitations of the inquiry framework in providing ‘justice’ for victims. It critically explores the normative and pragmatic implications of a hybrid model as a more effective route to procedural justice and suggests that an appropriately designed restorative pathway may augment the legitimacy and utility of the public inquiry model for victims chiefly via improving offender accountability and ‘voice’ for victims. The article concludes by offering some thoughts on the broader implications for other jurisdictions in responding to large-scale historical abuses and seeking to come to terms with the legacy of institutional child abuse.

Procedural Justice in International Criminal Courts: Assessing Civil Parties’ Perceptions of Justice at the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia

Procedural justice advocates argue that fair procedures in decision making processes can increase participant satisfaction with legal institutions. Little critical work has been done however to explore the power of such claims in the context of mass violence and international criminal justice. This article critically examines some of the key claims of procedural justice by exploring the perceptions of justice held by victims participating as Civil Parties in the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (ECCC). The ECCC has created one of the most inclusive and extensive victim participation regimes within international criminal law. It therefore provides a unique case study to examine some of claims of ‘victim-centred’ transitional justice through a procedural justice lens. It finds that while procedural justice influenced civil parties’ overall perceptions of the Court, outcomes remained of primary importance. It concludes by analysing the possible reasons for this prioritisation.

The justice-workplace health relationship:The mediating role of emotions

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to examine the mediational effects of positive and negative emotions in the relationship between organisational justice and health. Design/methodology/approach - This cross-sectional research obtained data from 206 workers employed within the financial/banking, manufacturing, and retail industries in Barbados. Findings - Structural equation modelling analyses revealed that positive and negative emotions completely mediated the effects of relational justice (but not procedural justice) on overall health. Research limitations/implications - Research was cross-sectional, and relied on self-report measures. The findings suggest that employers must properly evaluate their health and safety policies and practices in the organisation to ensure that aspects of the psychosocial work environment are being properly implemented, managed, and monitored, to ensure that individuals' health and well-being are not at risk. Originality/value - The paper represents a first attempt to investigate the roles of positive and negative emotions in the justice-health relationship in a different cultural context such as the Caribbean. Justice has been rarely researched as a psychosocial work stressor. The study described in the paper focused on multiple health outcomes. Copyright © 2012 Emerald Group Publishing Limited. All rights reserved.

Rethinking Prison Disciplinary Processes: A Potential Future for Restorative Justice

The movement for restorative justice (RJ) has struggled with marginalization on the soft end of the criminal justice system where the threat of net widening and iatrogenesis looms large. To realize the full potential of RJ as an alternative philosophy of justice, restorative practices need to expand beyond the world of adolescent and small-level offences into the deeper end of the justice system. Disciplinary hearings inside of adult prisons may be a strategic space to advance this expansion. This paper presents findings from a study of prison discipline in four UK prisons. The findings strongly suggest that in their current form, such disciplinary proceedings are viewed by prisoners as lacking in legitimacy. Although modelled after the adversarial system of the criminal court, the adjudications were instead universally derided as ‘kangaroo courts’, lacking in the basic elements of procedural justice. Based on these findings, we argue that restorative justice interventions may offer a viable redress to these problems of legitimacy which, if successful, would have ramifications that extend well beyond the prison walls.

The police officer's terrorist dilemma: Trust resilience following fatal errors

Suicide attacks have raised the stakes for officers deciding whether or not to shoot a suspect ('Police Officer's Terrorist Dilemma'). Despite high-profile errors we know little about how trust in the police is affected by their response to the terrorist threat. Building on a conceptualisation of lay observers as intuitive signal detection theorists, a general population sample (N= 1153) were presented with scenarios manipulated in terms of suspect status (Armed/Unarmed), officer decision (Shoot/Not Shoot) and outcome severity (e.g. suspect armed with Bomb/Knife; police shoot suspect/ suspect plus child bystander). Supporting predictions, people showed higher trust in officers who made correct decisions. reflecting good discrimination ability and who decided to shoot, reflecting an 'appropriate' response bias given the relative costs and benefits. This latter effect was moderated by (a) outcome severity, suggesting it did not simply reflect a preference for a particular type of action, and (b) preferences for a tough stance towards terrorism indexed by Right-Wing Authoritarianism (RWA). Despite loss of civilian life, failure to prevent minor terror attacks resulted in no loss of trust amongst people low in RWA. whereas among people high in RWA trust was positive when police erroneously shot all unarmed suspect. Relations to alternative definitions of trust and procedural justice research are discussed. Copyright (C),. 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Large‐scale wind deployment, social acceptance

The public is typically in agreement with the renewable energy targets established in many national states and generally supports the idea of increased reliance on wind energy. Nevertheless, many specific wind power projects face significant local opposition. A key question for the wind energy sector is, therefore, how to better engage local people to foster support for specific projects. IEA Wind Task 28 on Social Acceptance of Wind Energy Projects aims to facilitate wind energy development by reviewing current practices, emerging ideas, and exchanging successful practices among the participating countries. It also aims to disseminate the insights of leading research to a nontechnical audience, including project developers, local planning officials, and the general public. The interdisciplinary approach adopted by Task 28 enables an in-depth understanding of the nature of opposition to wind projects and a critical assessment of emerging strategies for social acceptance. Task 28 has analyzed a range of key issues related to social acceptance of wind energy, including the impacts on landscapes and ecosystems, on standard of living and well-being, the implementation of energy policy and spatial planning, the distribution of costs and benefits, and procedural justice. It is clear that although wind energy has many benefits; however, specific projects do impact local communities. As such the concerns of the affected people have to be taken seriously. Moreover, as opposition is rarely without foundation, it is in the interests of developers and advocates to engage local people and to improve projects for the benefit of all.

Considering Just-World Thinking in Counter-Terrorism Cases: Miscarriages of Justice in Northern Ireland

Recent literature has drawn a parallel between the discriminatory application of counterterrorism legislation to the Irish population in the United Kingdom during the Northern Ireland conflict and the targeting of Muslims after September 2001. Less attention has been paid to lessons that can be drawn from judicial decision making in terrorism-related cases stemming from the Northern Ireland conflict. This Article examines Northern Ireland Court of Appeal (“NICA”) jurisprudence on miscarriages of justice in cases regarding counterterrorism offenses. In particular, the Article focuses on cases referred after the 1998 peace agreements in Northern Ireland from the Criminal Cases Review Commission (“CCRC”), a relatively new entity that investigates potential wrongful convictions in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland. Although the NICA’s human rights jurisprudence has developed significantly in recent years, the study of CCRC-referred cases finds that judges have retained confidence in the integrity of the conflict-era counterterrorism system even while acknowledging abuses and procedural irregularities that occurred. This study partially contradicts contentions that judicial deference to the executive recedes in a post-conflict or post-emergency period. Despite a high rate of quashed convictions, the NICA’s decisions suggest that it seeks to limit a large number of referrals and demonstrate a judicial predisposition to defend the justness of the past system’s laws and procedure. This perspective is consistent with what social psychologists have studied as “just-world thinking,” in which objective observers, although motivated by a concern with justice, believe—as a result of cognitive bias—that individuals “got what they deserved.” The Article considers other potential interpretations of the jurisprudence and contends that conservative decision making is particularly dangerous in the politicized realm of counterterrorism and in light of the criminalization of members of suspect communities.

Realising Justice for victims before the International Criminal Court

The International Criminal Court (ICC) has been celebrated for its innovative victim provisions, which enable victims to participate in proceedings, avail of protection measures and assistance, and to claim reparations. The impetus for incorporating victim provisions within the ICC, came from victims’ dissatisfaction with the ad hoc tribunals in providing them with more meaningful and tangible justice.1 The International Criminal Tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda (ICTY/R) only included victim protection measures, with no provisions for victims to participate in proceedings nor to claim reparations at them. Developments in domestic and international law, in particular human rights such as the 1985 UN Declaration on Justice for Victims and the UN Guidelines on Remedy and Reparations, and transitional justice mechanisms, such as truth commissions and reparations bodies, have helped to expand the notion of justice for international crimes to be more attuned to victims as key stakeholders in dealing with such crimes.

With the first convictions secured at the ICC and the victim participation and reparation regime taking form, it is worth evaluating the extent to which these innovative provisions have translated into justice for victims. The first part of this paper outlines what justice for victims of international crimes entails, drawing from victimology and human rights. The second section surveys the extent to which the ICC has incorporated justice for victims, in procedural and substantive terms, before concluding in looking beyond the Court to how state parties can complement the ICC in achieving justice for victims. This paper argues that while much progress has been made to institutionalise justice for victims within the Court, there is much more progress needed to evolve and develop justice for victims within the ICC to avoid dissatisfaction of past tribunals.

Sporting Justice: An Arbitrator's Perspective

Drawing on my experience of a number of sports dispute resolution tribunals in the UK and Ireland (such as Sports Resolutions UK; Just Sport Ireland; the Football Association of Ireland’s Disciplinary Panel and the Gaelic Athletic Association’s Dispute Resolution Authority) I intend to use this paper to review the legal arguments typically made in sports-related arbitrations. These points of interest can be summarised as a series of three questions: the fairness question; the liability question; the penalty question.

In answer to the fairness question, the aim is to give a brief outline on best practice in establishing a "fair" sports disciplinary tribunal. The answer, I believe, is always twofold in nature: first, and to paraphrase Lord Steyn in R v Secretary of State For The Home Department, Ex Parte Daly [2001] UKHL 26 at [28] "in law, context is everything" – translated into the present matter, this means that in sports disciplinary cases, the more serious the charges against the individual (in terms of reputational damage, economic impact and/or length of sanction); the more tightly wrapped the procedural safeguards surrounding any subsequent disciplinary hearing must be. A fair disciplinary system will be discussed in the context of the principles laid down in Article 8 of the World Anti-Doping Code which, in effect, acts as sport’s Article 6 of the ECHR on a right to a fair trial.

Following on from the above, in the 60 or so sports arbitrations that I have heard, there are two further points of interest. First, the claim before the arbitral panel will often be framed in an argument that, for various reasons of substantive and procedural irregularity, the sanction imposed on the appellant should be quashed ("the liability"). Second, and in alternative, that the sanction imposed was wholly disproportionate ("the penalty").

The liability issue usually breaks down into two further questions. First, what is the nature of the legal duty upon a sports body in exercising its disciplinary remit? Second, to what extent does a de novo hearing on appeal cure any apparent defects in a hearing of first instance? The first issue often results in an arbitral panel debating the contra preferentum approach to the interpretation of a contested rule i.e., the sports body’s rules in question are so ambiguous that they should be interpreted in a manner to the detriment of the rule maker and in favour of the appellant. On the second matter, it now appears to be a general principle of sports law, administrative law and even human rights law that even if a violation of the principles of natural justice takes place at the first instance stage of a disciplinary process, they may be cured on de novo appeal. Authority for this approach can be found at the Court of Arbitration for Sport and in particular in CAS 2009/A/1920 FK Pobeda, Aleksandar Zabrcanec, Nikolce Zdraveski v UEFA at para 87.

The question on proportionality asks what, aside from precedent found within the decisions of the sports body in question, are the general legal principles against which a sanction by a sports disciplinary body can be benchmarked in order to ascertain whether it is disproportionate in length or even irrational in nature?

On the matter of (dis)proportionality of sanction, the debate is usually guided by the authority in Bradley v the Jockey Club [2004] EWHC 2164 (QB) and affirmed at [2005] EWCA Civ 1056. The Bradley principles on proportionality of sports-specific sanctions, recently cited with approval at the Court of Arbitration for Sport, will be examined in this presentation.

Finally, an interesting application of many of the above principles (and others such as the appropriate standard of proof in sports disciplinary procedures) can be made to recent match-fixing or corruption related hearings held by the British Horse Racing Authority, the integrity units of snooker and tennis, and at the Court of Arbitration for Sport.