A study of political activism in labour courts

Booth, James; Freyens, Benoit

doi:10.1016/j.econlet.2014.03.024

Cited by 8 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These findings show that the commissioners are not operating in a vacuum, that their judgement is constrained by the institutional environment they operate in (rules) and influenced by their own background (values). The findings also confirm the presence of social value (compositional) effects found by Booth and Freyens (2014) in a much smaller sample of cases.…”

Section: The Resultssupporting

confidence: 84%

“…We found no significant party appointment effects in our four full specification models. Although significant effects had been found in a previous pilot study of 1,004 dismissal cases (Booth & Freyens 2014) we note that they had only been found in partial specifications. Importantly, interacting Labour party appointment with legal regimes reveal that Labour party appointees decided significantly more in favour of dismissed employee under the employeeadverse WCH regime than in the other two legal regimes, suggesting possibly that these judges found it their duty to compensate claimants through their decisions for the adversity of the law in that particular context.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 51%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Dismissal Laws in Australia: Reforms and Enforcement by Labour Courts

Freyens

Gong

2015

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: The Resultssupporting

confidence: 84%

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 51%

Dismissal Laws in Australia: Reforms and Enforcement by Labour Courts

Freyens

Gong

2015

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…A recurring theme in our investigation of the claims and payouts is that the institutional details and administrative procedures matter, a finding also of Colvin (2006). The effects of changes in the Commission's composition and procedures analysed by Booth and Freyens (2014) and Freyens and Gong (2017, 2020) appear to have had a greater impact on reported claimant success rates at arbitration than any of the politically contentious changes in unfair dismissal laws. The invariance of compensation amounts to large changes in unfair dismissal rules, and their bunching around particular amounts under all three regimes is another example.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…We believe the explanation given in the main text for the fall in the reported success rate to be more important because the trend began before the introduction of the Code. 7 The effect on decisions of procedure and the composition of court personnel has been previously analysed in Booth and Freyens (2014) and Freyens and Gong (2017). 8 The kernel graphs in Figure 3 were built by selecting pre-recorded routines in R (Wessa, 2011) to assign weights to all observations in the vicinity of each compensation value and derived the conditional expectation graph for our relative measure of compensatory payment.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The impact of unfair dismissal regulation: Evidence from an Australian natural experiment

Freyens

Oslington

2021

Labour

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper assesses the outcomes of a unique Australian natural experiment with dismissal regulation introduced in 1996, radically reformed in 2006 and reregulated in 2009. Drawing on a large database of unfair dismissal cases, we assess the impact of dismissal regulation on unfair dismissal claims, how they are resolved, and on the determination of compensation amounts. Regulatory changes affect claims and success rates, but there is little change in compensation payments across the three regimes as legal conventions about their calculation were unaffected by the regulatory changes. One theme through all our findings is the large impact of administrative procedures on outcomes.

show abstract

“Peer effects” or “quasi-peer effects” in Spanish labour court rulings

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The current work seeks to ascertain whether rulings on dismissal cases issued by labour courts in Spain are influenced by whether incumbent judges are acting alone in their own court or sharing duties with other judges such as replacement judges, support judges or incumbent judges from other courts. In the approach used, more than one judge acting in a court is considered to be a treatment, and an analysis is conducted into the effect said treatment has had on the percentage of cases in which the judge has found in favour of the dismissed worker. The data used in the research are taken from the information recorded at court level provided by the statistics kept by the General Council of the Spanish Judiciary. A total of 2,888 observations were available, corresponding to the period spanning 2004 to 2012, and the information is the result of constructing a data panel from all the labour courts in Spain. As regards the findings, the percentage of cases ruled in favour of workers increases in line with the unemployment rate. More cases are also ruled in favour of workers during the crisis and in areas where the construction and industrial sector play a greater role. With regard to treatment as the central analysis variable, it may be concluded that there is a significant positive impact on the number of dismissal cases ruled in favour of workers when incumbent judges are not acting alone in their court.JEL CODES: J65; K31; K41

show abstract

A study of political activism in labour courts

Cited by 8 publications

References 3 publications

Dismissal Laws in Australia: Reforms and Enforcement by Labour Courts

Dismissal Laws in Australia: Reforms and Enforcement by Labour Courts

The impact of unfair dismissal regulation: Evidence from an Australian natural experiment

“Peer effects” or “quasi-peer effects” in Spanish labour court rulings

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About