Nature of the relationship between international expansion and performance: The case of emerging market firms

Assessment of Creativity

Eastman Kodak Co.

Experiencing flow with instant messaging and its facilitating role on creative behaviors

Risky business? The survival implications of exploiting commercial opportunities by nonprofits

Sexual Harassment in the European Union: The Dawning of a New Era

European Union policymakers have taken a courageous step toward outlawing sexual harassment as a form of gender‐based discrimination throughout the EU with the recent passage of the amended equal treatment directive. While the edict seeks to harmonize member states' laws regarding the equal participation of men and women in the labor market, a number of public policy issues will arise as individual member states formally implement the directive. This article begins by identifying the principal components of the directive. It then focuses on two likely areas of intense public policy debate: operationalizing the definition of “sexual harassment,” and protecting employers from liability under certain circumstances. Where appropriate, the article draws upon corollaries and parallels in US law that may provide guidance to policy makers on these issues. The article concludes by offering practical suggestions for employers who would like to take the initiative in creating workplace reforms consistent with the principles underlying the directive.

Prohibiting sexual harassment in the European Union

COMMERCIAL NONPROFITS, UNTAXED ENTREPRENEURIALISM, AND "UNFAIR COMPETITION" In August 1986, delegates to the White House Conference on Small Business alleged that "unfair competition" was being waged by nonprofit and governmental organizations that provide commercial services in direct competition with the private sector. Delegates called for the prohibition of (or, at minimum, protection from) such practices and demanded the passage of new legislation embodying a strict governmental policy of reliance on private enterprise for the performance and provision of commercial activities.(1) More recently, in the summer of 1987, the Subcommittee on Oversight of the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Ways and Means held hearings to review the federal tax treatment of the commercial activities of tax-exempt organizations. The controversy stems from the alleged inherent unfairness of business competition when one group of competitors enjoys a government-subsidized competitive advantage. In this case, the competitive advantage in question is the tax-exempt status enjoyed by most nonprofit organizations. The income tax exemption is a crucial competitive issue when nonprofit organizations pursue commercial (i.e., for-profit) activities--"untaxed entrepreneurialism"--in direct competition with private enterprise. The current spirited debate over "unfair competition" involves emotional rhetoric on both sides. On the one hand, the small business community and its lobbyists (e.g., Office of Advocacy, Small Business Administration; Business Coalition for Fair Competition) (1)R. Blackman and J.H. Thompson, "The 1986 White House Conference on Small Business," Journal of Small Business Management (January 1987), pp. 3-10. Dr. Gomes is an assistant professor of management in the Department of Management, College of Business, California State University, Chico. Dr. Owens is an associate professor of business law in the Department of Management at the same university. claim that nonprofit organizations are destroying the very fabric and strength of the domestic economy by taking unfair advantage of existing public policy.(2) The nonprofit sector and its lobbyists (e.g., Independent Sector), on the other hand, claim that nonprofit organizations contribute important and indispensable services that would not be provided if public policy did not support and protect nonprofit enterprise through tax exemptions and other privileges.(3) To claim that competition is "unfair" immediately raises legal and ethical questions. What constitutes unfair competition? Does present public policy unfairly provide nonprofit organizations with an artificial competitive advantage over for-profit organizations? If so, what public policy changes are required? If not, how can present public policy be justified? To clarify these issues, this article: . briefly surveys the legal interpretation of "unfair competition" and traces the statutory response to it; . examines the economic role of nonprofit organizations, including the increasing commercialization of their activities; . identifies rationales for tax exemption and the implications of tax-favored status; and (2)See e.g., U.S. Small Administration, Office of Advocacy (hereafter cited as SBA), Unfair Competition by Nonprofit Organizations with Small Business: An Issue for the 1980s, 3rd ed. (Washington, D.C. Office of the Chief Counsel for Advocacy, U.S. Small Business Administration, 1984); SBA, "Ideas in Action...The States and Small Business," Conference Handbook, The Sixth National Conference for State and Local Officials on Small Business, San Diego, California, December 5-7, 1984; K. Burch, Unfair Competition in the States (Washington, D.C.; Business Coalition for Fair Competition, 1985); T.J. DiLorenzo, "Crowding Out Small Business: The Unfair Competition of Nonprofits," Contemporary Issues Series 24 (St. Louis: Center for the Study of American Business, 1987). …

Commercial Nonprofits, Untaxed Entrepreneurialism, and "Unfair Competition"

Title VII retaliation cases have become a larger part of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) caseload, and this development should be a growing concern for business. By addressing the question of exactly when a prohibited retaliatory action has been taken against an employee, the United States Supreme Court’s June 2006 decision in Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. Sheila White ended a significant disagreement among the various appellate courts on the issue. The Supreme Court answered two specific questions regarding retaliation for raising a claim of sexual discrimination. First, the Court decided that the retaliatory conduct need not take place within the employment setting; and, second, it held that a materially adverse action requires only that a reasonable employee would be deterred from making, filing, or supporting a claim of workplace discrimination to the EEOC, the courts, or the employer. Employers need to revise and update their internal policies and procedures to ensure that their firms comply with these new standards.

Broadening the Definition of Unlawful Retaliation Under Title VII

This article examines the unintended consequences of an organization’s decision to outsource investigations of sexual harassment following a claim of wrongdoing. United States Supreme Court decisions have affirmed an employer’s “vicarious liability” for failing to take reasonable care to prevent or correct promptly sexually harassing behavior. Organizations not possessing in-house expertise to conduct such investigations will likely seek expert assistance from knowledgeable and experienced attorneys or private investigators from outside the firm. According to a recent ruling by Federal Trade Commission staff, such externally conducted investigations fall under the provisions of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, thus placing additional compliance burdens on firms attempting to rid the workplace of gender-based discrimination. This article reviews these developments, offers advice on managing the investigative process, and suggests ways in which business might lobby for changes in public policy to ease this newest burden. After sexual harassment took center stage during the 1991 confirmation hearings of Clarence Thomas as associate justice of the United States Supreme Court, the number of harassment charges filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) rose substantially. Concomitantly, lawsuits claiming violations of federal and state sexual harassment laws became commonplace. The growth of harassment filings has increased liability risks for all organizations, 123

http://www.csuchico.edu/mgmt/gomes/IEVol9Issue2.pdf

James M. Owens

Papers

Sexual Harassment in the European Union: The Dawning of a New Era

Prohibiting sexual harassment in the European Union

Commercial Nonprofits, Untaxed Entrepreneurialism, and "Unfair Competition"

Broadening the Definition of Unlawful Retaliation Under Title VII

The unintended consequences of outsourcing sexual harassment investigations