Organizationally sensible versus legal‐centric approaches to employment decisions

Roehling, Mark V.; Wright, Patrick M.

doi:10.1002/hrm.20134

Cited by 19 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 25 publications

(27 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Organizations that discourage or prohibit workplace romances are concerned about sexual harassment lawsuits (Parks, 2006;Pearce, 2010) and thus have legal-centric HR practices (Roehling and Wright, 2006). Despite organizations' fears, relatively few harassment lawsuits stem from workplace romances (Pierce et al, 2008).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Role of workplace romance policies and procedures on job pursuit intentions

Pierce

Karl²,

Brey³

2012

Journal of Managerial Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:573577 [] For AuthorsIf you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information. About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.comEmerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation. AbstractPurpose -This paper seeks to examine experimentally the effects of stipulations in an organization's workplace romance policy and procedures on individuals' perceptions of fairness, workplace fun, person-organization (P-O) fit, organizational attraction, and intent to pursue employment in the organization. Design/methodology/approach -A total of 103 business students and 79 casino employees assumed the role of a job seeker. They read one of five versions of a vignette that describes an organization's romance policy and consensual relationship agreement, and completed measures of dependent and control variables. Findings -An organization's type of romance policy has an effect on individuals' perceptions of fairness of the policy and degree to which the organization would be a fun place to work, and its type of consensual relationship agreement has an effect on individuals' perceptions of the degree to which the organization treats its employees fairly. The results also indicate that individuals' perceptions of the fairness of the type of romance policy and relationship agreement are positively associated with the degree to which they perceive the organization to be a fun place to work and their perceived P-O fit. Individuals' perceptions of the organization being a fun place to work and P-O fit are, in turn, positively associated with their organizational attraction, which, in its turn, is positively associated with their job pursuit intentions. Practical implications -Perceived fairness of stipulations in an organization's romance policy and procedures may signal to job seekers the degree to which the organization would be a fun place to work, provide P-O fit, and be attractive to pursue as an employer. Thus, with respect to managing workplace romances proactively via policies and procedures, organizations should consider the fairness perceptions of job seekers and not just organizational members. Originality/value -This is the first study to show that workplace romance policies and procedures may play a role in job pursuit intentions.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Role of workplace romance policies and procedures on job pursuit intentions

Pierce

Karl²,

Brey³

2012

Journal of Managerial Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It would be helpful to know more about the point at which it is financially beneficial to invest in employees rather than expending resources trying to minimize or eliminate the employment relationship (i.e., Tsui and Wu 2005). This approach is consistent with the position advocated by Roehling and Wright (2006), trying to identify the course of action that makes the most sense for the organization overall rather than simply trying to minimize a perceived legal risk at all cost.…”

Section: Future Research and Conclusionmentioning

confidence: 91%

Who is an Employer in the Triangular Employment Relationship? Sorting Through the Definitional Confusion

Wears

Fisher

2012

Employ Respons Rights J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Employers in the United States are increasingly utilizing staffing firms, employee leasing firms, temporary employment agencies and other third parties to help manage contingent labor in their organizations. The use of such triangular relationships creates complexities in the rights and responsibilities of each party, partially due to the variation in how U.S. employment law defines employers and employees across statutes. We analyze the various definitions of employee and employer across key U.S. employment statutes (e.g., Civil Rights Act of 1964, ADA, FMLA, FLSA), tests used by the courts in their decision making, and IRS regulations and evaluate the impact of these definitions on the use of contingent employees in triangular relationships. We review existing case law relevant to discrimination and nondiscrimination statutes and identify key areas of risk and responsibility for both the individuals employed as contingent workers and firms that use contingent labor. Finally, we offer recommendations for strategically managing contingent labor in the current legal context.

show abstract

“…Many still judge the function by its effectiveness in delivering administrative services and keeping the company out of trouble with regulatory agencies. Many managers and human resource professionals limit the scope of HR by pursuing a 'legalcentric approach' rather than an 'organizationally sensible' approach (Roehling and Wright 2006). In similar vein, Lawler and Mohrman (2003) advance two explanations for the slow evolution of HR.…”

Section: Conventional Hr As a Hindrance In Managing Knowledgementioning

confidence: 97%