Rethinking the Very Idea of Egalitarian Markets and Corporations: Why Relationships Might Matter More than Distribution

Abstract

ABSTRACT:What kinds of markets, market regulations, and business organizations are compatible with contemporary egalitarian theories of justice? This article argues that any thoughtful answer to this question will have to draw on recent developments in political philosophy that are concerned not only with the equality of the distribution of core goods (or as John Rawls famously put it, with the “distribution of the benefits and burdens of social cooperation”) but also with the requirements for equality of status, voice, and so on, in the relations between individuals and within organizations. The dominance of theories of distributive justice in egalitarian political philosophy since Rawls may have contributed, on the one hand, to the oft-recognized gulf between these theories and their theorists and, on the other, to discussions of corporate governance and business ethics. The main purpose of this article is to introduce business ethicists to some of the less-familiar features of recent relational theories of justice and equality, and to suggest that some of these notions may help bridge the gap between business ethics and political philosophy more generally.

Are Rawlsian Considerations of Corporate Governance Illiberal? A Reply to Singer

“…Yet various new critiques still see liberal egalitarian accounts of firms’ governance as limited, notably failing to flesh out a detailed account of the type of corporate governance that would be required in a just society. For instance, from thorough reviews of recent literature in business ethics and political philosophy, Norman and Néron both conclude that liberal egalitarians have had “little to say” about the governance structure of the firm (Norman, 2015: 29; Néron, 2015: 116). Singer concurs and lists several corporate governance issues that remain unaddressed, for instance, whether shareholders should enjoy “greater democratic powers” in addition to the possibility of selling their shares, or whether workers should hold “more democratic control” (Singer, 2015: 65).…”

“…Néron offers a different explanation for what he sees as meager liberal egalitarian conclusions about corporate governance. In his view, this failure results from a focus on the distribution of primary goods, which “blind[s] egalitarian theorists to many forms of injustice that might be hardwired into the institutions and processes themselves,” particularly within firms (Néron, 2015: 100). Néron notes that egalitarians will not be able to establish whether some “reform of corporate law and governance” might further a more equal distribution of primary goods unless they look inside the firm.…”

Workplace democracy—The recent debate

“…While economists often assume that individuals can always exit employment relations and therefore cannot be said to be dominated by employers, many writers from the neo‐republican and relational egalitarian camp point out that this is an unrealistic assumption. After all, most employees need an income and are often also tied to specific locations (e.g., Anderson, ; Néron, ). Even if employees can leave one specific job, they often cannot leave the sphere of hierarchical employment (e.g., by becoming self‐employed), because they need an income and many jobs can be done only in the context of large‐scale organizations .…”

Justice, genre et entreprise

“…Enfin, il tend à gommer les enjeux normatifs liés aux structures hiérarchiques et aux relations d'autorité à l'intérieur de celles-ci. En effet, si les cadres agissent de manière vertueuse, il y a moins de raisons de se pencher sur le caractère épineux des relations hiérarchiques de subordination qui caractérisent les organisations économiques et le contrat de travail (Néron, 2015 ;.…”

“…Pour un bon portrait de la littérature récente, voir Fourie (2012). Un des coauteurs du présent texte a tenté dans divers articles d'utiliser les outils de la théorie relationnelle pour penser les configurations d'institutions économiques comme les marchés et les entreprises à la lumière de l'approche relationnelle (Néron, 2015 ; maître-esclave, elles devraient tout de même faire sourciller les partisans de l'égalité relationnelle (Anderson, 2008 ;. Car, comme le notent Richard Wilkinson et Kate Pickett (2010), si l'entreprise est bien le lieu où se créent des écarts de richesses importants, elle représente aussi le lieu où les individus sont le plus explicitement placés en situation de subordination, en rangs et en classements hiérarchiques, divisés entre supérieurs et inférieurs, et ainsi de suite.…”