Purpose The endless manifestation of employee misbehaviours can be classified according to Robinson and Bennett’s (1995) employee deviance typology. Using this typology, the purpose of this paper is to examine the level of “judicial” tolerance for offences committed by employees across Australian workplaces that culminated in an arbitration hearing before the country’s federal industrial tribunal. Design/methodology/approach A content analysis was performed on 565 misbehaviour related, unfair dismissal arbitration decisions made by Australia’s federal industrial tribunal between July 2000 and July 2010. Using the count data that resulted, a logistic regression model was developed to determine which unfair dismissal claim characteristics influenced whether or not a dismissal was deemed to be an appropriate course of disciplinary action. Findings The results suggest that an arbitrator’s gender, experience and background have influence on his or her decision. Significance tests also verified that personal aggression, production deviance, political deviance and property deviance were all considered unacceptable in Australian workplaces. Importantly, the results enable the ordering of the range of tolerance. From this ordering, a picture emerged as to what factor may be framing the extremities of the arbitrators’ tolerance for the misbehaviours: the target (or victim) of the behaviour. Research limitations/implications Unfair dismissal claims that are settled through private conciliation, as they occur off the public record, could not be included in the analysis. Practical implications Society’s implicit stakeholder interest in what constitutes appropriate workplace behaviour is further testament to the HRM obligation to facilitate sustainable workforces. Management should consider whether dismissing a misbehaving employee is a reactionary approach to broader organisational issues associated with employee well-being and cultural norms. In order to contribute to sustainable workforces, HRM policies and actions should focus on limiting triggers that drive misbehaviour, particularly behaviours that result in harm to individuals as a matter of priority, followed closely by triggers to behaviours that result in harm to organisational profitability. Originality/value This paper presents new insights about the degrees to which various forms of employee misbehaviour are accepted in the workplace.

Publically funded biobanking initiatives and genetic research should contribute towards reducing inequalities in health by reducing the prevalence and burden of disease. It is essential that Maori and other Indigenous populations share in health gains derived from these activities. The Health Research Council of New Zealand has funded a research project (2012-2015) to identify Maori perspectives on biobanking and genetic research, and to develop cultural guidelines for ethical biobanking and genetic research involving biospecimens. This review describes relevant values and ethics embedded in Maori indigenous knowledge, and how they may be applied to culturally safe interactions between biobanks, researchers, individual participants, and communities. Key issues of ownership, privacy, and consent are also considered within the legal and policy context that guides biobanking and genetic research practices within New Zealand. Areas of concern are highlighted and recommendations of international relevance are provided. To develop a productive environment for "next-generation" biobanking and genomic research,"‘next-generation" regulatory solutions will be required.

A growing body of literature critical of ethics review boards has drawn attention to the processes that determine the ethical merit of research. Citing criticism on the bureaucratic nature of ethics review processes, this literature provides a useful provocation for (re)considering how the ethics review might be enacted. Much of this criticism focuses on how ethics review boards deliberate, with particular attention given to the lack of transparency and opportunities for researcher recourse that characterise ethics review processes. Centered specifically on the conduct of ethics review boards convened within university settings, this paper draws on these inherent criticisms to focus its analysis on the ways that ethics review boards might enact more communicative deliberative practices. Outlining a set of principles against which ethics review boards might establish strategies for engaging with researchers and research communities, this paper draws attention to how Deliberative communication, Engagement with researchers and the Distribution of responsibility for the ethics review might be enacted in the day-to-day practice of the university human ethics review board. This paper develops these themes via a conceptual lens derived from Jürgen Habermas' (1984) articulation of 'communicative action' and Nancy Fraser's (1990) consideration of 'strong publics' to cast consideration of the role that human ethics review boards might play in supporting university research cultures. Deliberative communication, Engagement with researchers and the Distribution of responsibility provide useful conceptual prompts for considering how ethics review boards might undertake their work.

The COVID-19 pandemic triggered a migration of workforces to work from home. A key issue for academics was the implications for the ability to carve out 'thinking time' to engage in what we term sustained knowledge work, the type of work essential for producing research. We administered an employee survey to academics from seven Australian and seven Canadian Universities, receiving over 3000 responses. We report on both quantitative and qualitative findings from the survey, with a particular emphasis on the latter. The two countries displayed broadly similar patterns in responses, but these patterns were gendered in specific ways. We distinguished between episodic and sustained knowledge work and found the shift of the location for sustained knowledge work from the workplace to the home affected academics unevenly, with disproportionate negative impacts on women. There are implications for all knowledge workers: while gendered, domestic norms continue to exist, the sustained knowledge work that is critical to career advancement can become especially problematic for women knowledge workers.

Drawing on interviews conducted with a sample of 27 senior women leaders from across Australian industries, this study found that legitimate workplace structures disrupt and challenge the subliminal status effects of gender on perceived task or role performance. This related to structures such as increased opportunities for promotion into higher status roles and opportunities to participate in unstructured group-task roles. These findings were in stark contrast to traditional workplace structures where senior women leaders relied on their ability alone to reach the top. Our findings have significant implications for organizations wishing to legitimize and replicate HRM policy levers that help to formalize workplace structures of equality and counter prevailing gender stereotypes.

Inequities in pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) experiences will impede HIV epidemic elimination among gay and bisexual men (GBM). Ethnicity is a strong marker of inequity in the United States, but evidence from other countries is lacking. We investigated experiences on-PrEP to 12 months follow-up in a prospective cohort of 150 GBM in Auckland, New Zealand with an equity quota of 50% non-Europeans. Retention at 12 months was 85.9%, lower among Māori/Pacific (75.6%) than non-Māori/Pacific participants (90.1%). Missed pills increased over time and were higher among Māori/Pacific. PrEP breaks increased, by 12 months 35.7% of Māori/Pacific and 15.7% of non-Māori/Pacific participants had done so. Condomless receptive anal intercourse partners were stable over time. STIs were common but chlamydia declined; 12-month incidence was 8.7% for syphilis, 36.0% gonorrhoea, 46.0% chlamydia, 44.7% rectal STI, 64.0% any STI. Structural interventions and delivery innovations are needed to ensure ethnic minority GBM gain equal benefit from PrEP.Clinical trial number ACTRN12616001387415.

Ethics review processes are frequently perceived as extending from codes and protocols rooted in biomedical disciplines. As a result, many researchers in the humanities and social sciences (HASS) find these processes to be misaligned, if not outrightly obstructive to their research. This leads some scholars to advocate against HASS participation in institutional review processes as they currently stand, or in their entirety. While ethics review processes can present a challenge to HASS researchers, these are not insurmountable and, in fact, present opportunities for ethics review boards (ERBs) to mediate their practices to better attend to the concerns of the HASS disciplines. By highlighting the potential value of the ethics review process in recognising the nuances and specificity across different forms of research, this article explores the generative possibilities of greater collaboration between HASS researchers and ERBs. Remaining cognisant of the epistemic and methodological differences that mark different disciplinary formations in turn will benefit the ethical conduct of all researchers.

No abstract