scholarly journals Nonstandard Work Arrangements in Japan and the United States: A Legal Perspective

2004 ◽  
pp. 389-422
Author(s):  
Noriaki Kojima ◽  
Keiko Fujikawa
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Work Arrangements ◽  
Nonstandard Work ◽  
Legal Perspective ◽  
Nonstandard Work Arrangements

scholarly journals The Rise and Nature of Alternative Work Arrangements in the United States, 1995–2015

ILR Review ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 72 (2) ◽  
pp. 382-416 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lawrence F. Katz ◽  
Alan B. Krueger
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Alternative Work Arrangements ◽  
Independent Contractors ◽  
Contract Workers ◽  
Work Arrangements ◽  
Us Economy ◽  
Contingent Worker ◽  
The Us ◽  
Alternative Work

To monitor trends in alternative work arrangements, the authors conducted a version of the Contingent Worker Survey as part of the RAND American Life Panel in late 2015. Their findings point to a rise in the incidence of alternative work arrangements in the US economy from 1995 to 2015. The percentage of workers engaged in alternative work arrangements—defined as temporary help agency workers, on-call workers, contract workers, and independent contractors or freelancers—rose from 10.7% in February 2005 to possibly as high as 15.8% in late 2015. Workers who provide services through online intermediaries, such as Uber or TaskRabbit, accounted for 0.5% of all workers in 2015. Of the workers selling goods or services directly to customers, approximately twice as many reported finding customers through off-line intermediaries than through online intermediaries.

Non-Standard Work in Two Different Employment Regimes

2004 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 321-348 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karen M. Olsen ◽  
Arne L. Kalleberg
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Public Sector ◽  
The United States ◽  
Institutional Factors ◽  
Temporary Workers ◽  
The Public ◽  
Work Arrangements ◽  
Standard Work ◽  
The Us ◽  
Hiring And Firing

This article examines organizations’ use of non-standard work arrangements - fixed-term employees hired directly by the organization, workers from temporary help agencies (THA), and contractors - in the United States and Norway. Our analysis is based on information obtained from surveys of 802 establishments in the US and 2130 in Norway. We find that Norwegian establishments make greater use of non-standard arrangements than the US establishments; we argue that this is due in part to the greater overall restrictive labour market regulations on hiring and firing regular workers, and greater demand for temporary labour resulting from generous access to leaves of absence, in Norway. We also find that certain institutional factors have a similar impact in both countries. First, establishments in the public sector are more likely to use direct-hired temporary workers and less apt to use contractors and THAs; this pattern is particularly striking in Norway, but is also evident in the United States. Second, highly unionized establishments tend to have the lowest use of non-standard arrangements in both countries.

scholarly journals Deploying Nonstandard Workers

2016 ◽  
Vol 4 (10) ◽  
pp. 261-273
Author(s):  
Kumudinei Dissanayake
Keyword(s):  
Organizational Structure ◽  
Empirical Evidence ◽  
Organizational Structures ◽  
Work Organizations ◽  
Work Arrangements ◽  
Nonstandard Work ◽  
Structural Arrangements ◽  
Nonstandard Work Arrangements

Ample writings on organizational structure have devoted to theorization and empiricism-based discussions of structural arrangements for standard (or regular) workers in organizations.However, theorizations, debates and discussions on organizational structural arrangements for nonstandard (or non-regular) workers seem to be rare. Aim of this study is to bring out structural possibilities for deploying nonstandard workers while reviewing the literature on newly emerging organizational structures and with the support of empirical evidence in the Japanese workplace. Present study recognizes that the nonstandard work arrangements can be facilitated by the emerging new structures of work organizations. Such arrangements predict the possibility of deploying nonstandard workers in numerous ways still allowing them the freedom to adapt a flexible and agile career of their own. Thus, the structures alike virtual, networked, process-based, team-based etc. would provide the stage for both workers and the organizations to fulfill their expectations.

Improving informed consent by enhancing the role of nurses

2020 ◽  
pp. 096973302095637
Author(s):  
Daniel A Wilkenfeld ◽  
Grace Campbell
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Informed Consent ◽  
The United States ◽  
Medical Intervention ◽  
Epistemic State ◽  
Minimal Time ◽  
Legal Perspective ◽  
Asking Questions ◽  
Trust In Physicians

From a legal perspective, before a physician engages in a serious medical intervention they must obtain informed consent. In this paper, we argue that there are serious deficits in our processes of obtaining informed consent; it is often seen as just a bureaucratic hurdle, and people agree to interventions without being in an appropriate epistemic state. We explore some possible reasons for this, including ignorance, trust in physicians’ authority, and the minimal time physicians spend with patients. We trace many of these issues to one central cause, which is that in the United States obtaining informed consent is the purview of physicians. We argue that a simple shift in how we obtain informed consent can help to ameliorate these issues. Specifically, we argue that obtaining informed consent should be the responsibility of nurses rather than physicians. While there are several reasons for this, the central ideas are that (1) since nurses are the ones who know the patient, they will be in better position to tell when patients are genuinely informed, and (2) patients will be more comfortable asking questions and admitting ignorance to nurses rather than physicians. While we focus on US law, our conclusions are more broadly applicable.

Foreign Policy and Fidelity to Law: The Anatomy of a Treaty Violation

1976 ◽  
Vol 70 (4) ◽  
pp. 802-808 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Morton Moore
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Policy Process ◽  
The United States ◽  
Coast Guard ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Legal Perspective ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Law ◽  
High Seas

On April 13 President Ford signed a bill unilaterally to extend the fisheries jurisdiction of the United States from the present 12-mile limit to 200 miles onto the high seas (and even thousands of miles at sea with regard to salmon) effective March 1, 1977. Barring a sudden breakthrough in the law of the sea negotiations, as of March 1, 1977 the Coast Guard may begin arresting vessels on the high seas pursuant to this act in violation of the treaty obligations of the United States. This action again exposes the inadequacy of the present foreign policy process for taking an international legal perspective into account. It may also prove the greatest mistake in the history of U.S. oceans policy.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document