scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
JournalISSN: 2693-9681

Journal of Law and Political Economy 

eScholarship Publishing
About: Journal of Law and Political Economy is an academic journal published by eScholarship Publishing. The journal publishes majorly in the area(s): Politics & Computer science. It has an ISSN identifier of 2693-9681. Over the lifetime, 41 publications have been published receiving 26 citations. The journal is also known as: JLPE.

Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper , the authors show that it is possible to involve workers in workplace decision-making in ways that, if anything, weakly improve firm performance while also plausibly benefiting workers, but the representation arrangements for which they possess the most credible evidence do not involve very substantial restrictions on employer discretion.
Abstract: decisively confirm or reject the important claim, implicit in American corporate law, that employers must retain exclusive discretion over firm governance or else economic performance will suffer. On the one hand, the existing evidence shows it is possible to involve workers in workplace decision-making in ways that, if anything, weakly improve firm performance while also plausibly benefiting workers. However, the representation arrangements for which we possess the most credible evidence do not involve very substantial restrictions on employer discretion. Causal evidence on the economic performance effects of shared governance arrangements that more substantively limit employer discretion—such as powerful German works councils or parity codetermination in German iron, coal, and steel sector firms—remains scarce. In sum, codetermination laws may perform valuable functions even if they do not substantially affect the balance of power in workplaces.

7 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper , Anderson argues that most people in the United States and other liberal societies spend their working lives under the kind of autocratic rule we would normally associate with communist dictatorships, and the legal framework and economic realities surrounding employment are such that exit is viable for only a small minority.
Abstract: : In Private Government: How Employers Rule Our Lives (and Why We Don’t Talk About It), Elizabeth Anderson argues that most people in the United States and other liberal societies spend their working lives under the kind of autocratic rule we would normally associate with communist dictatorships. They are forced to work in oppressive environments, deprived of many freedoms, and given practically no say over working conditions. Even in their nonworking lives workers are frequently subjected to employer scrutiny and sanction. And the legal framework and economic realities surrounding employment are such that exit is viable for only a small minority. Anderson’s work has generated great interest and, along with it, several criticisms that take exception to her observations, economic assumptions, and conclusions. This paper delineates the various economic claims made against Private Government so as to facilitate further inquiry of these issues.

2 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The theory of racial capitalism offers insights into the relationship between class and race, providing both a structural and a historical account of the ways in which the two are linked in the global economy as discussed by the authors .
Abstract: The theory of racial capitalism offers insights into the relationship between class and race, providing both a structural and a historical account of the ways in which the two are linked in the global economy. Law plays an important role in this. This article sketches what we believe are two key structural features of racial capitalism: profit-making and race-making for the purpose of accumulating wealth and power. We understand profit-making as the extraction of surplus value or profits through processes of exploitation, expropriation, and expulsion, which are grounded in a politics of race-making. We understand race-making as including racial stratification, racial segregation, and the creation of sacrifice zones, which reflect the strategies and outcomes of profit-making. The structural features of racial capitalism thus are mutually constitutive: profit-making processes create and reinforce the making of racial meaning, while race-making, underwritten by white supremacy, structures and facilitates the economic processes of profit-making. Together, they constitute a global system dependent on the unbridled extraction of wealth from both humans and nature.

2 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article , the authors present observational evidence that historically disadvantaged groups have systematically lower quit elasticities, indicating that they face even greater employer power, which can be a useful metric for judging the health of the labor market.
Abstract: : One common metric of monopsony power is the quit elasticity, measuring how much more likely a worker is to quit a job in response to a wage change. Experimental and quasi-experimental variation in wages across workers within a given job results in quit elasticities in the 2-3 range, implying that a 10% reduction in wages increases the probability of quitting by 20-30%. In a model with monopsonistic employers, a quit elasticity of 2-3 also implies that workers are paid about 80-85% of the value they produce. These results indicate that employer power is pervasive. We present observational evidence that historically disadvantaged groups have systematically lower quit elasticities, indicating they face even greater employer power. Because monopsony power comes from an inability of workers to voluntarily switch jobs, the quit rate and especially the quit elasticity can be a useful metric for judging the health of the labor market. Pervasive employer power alters the analysis of labor market policy in a number of important ways.

2 citations

Performance
Metrics
No. of papers from the Journal in previous years
YearPapers
202313
202231