Informacja

Drogi użytkowniku, aplikacja do prawidłowego działania wymaga obsługi JavaScript. Proszę włącz obsługę JavaScript w Twojej przeglądarce.

Wyszukujesz frazę "moral rights" wg kryterium: Temat


Wyświetlanie 1-2 z 2
Tytuł:
Partycypacja pracowników w zarządzaniu - model UE i Polski
Workers’ Participation in Management - Its Model in the European Union and the Polish Model
Autorzy:
Gruszecki, Tomasz
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/1835041.pdf
Data publikacji:
2020-05-12
Wydawca:
Katolicki Uniwersytet Lubelski Jana Pawła II. Towarzystwo Naukowe KUL
Tematy:
przedsiębiorstwo państwowe
partycypacja pracowników w zarządzaniu
współzarządzanie
rada pracownicza
Dyrektywa Unii Europejskiej
partycypacja pracowników w polskim prawie
osoba ludzka
godność
prawa człowieka
prawa moralne
wartość uniwersalna
bezrobocie
state enterprise
worker's participation in management
co-management
workers council
EU Directive
worker's participation in polish law
human person
dignity
human rights
moral rights
universal value
unemployment
Opis:
The article is devoted to the origin of the concept of the workers’ participation in the management, and then to its implementation in the EU and in Poland. The history of implementing common principles of workers’ self-management in the EU is quite complex; the participation model, the so-called Mitbestimung introduced after World War II in Germany (the act was passed in 1976) was then slowly and in a limited range (informing and consulting) introduced on the basis of the EU Directive of 1977 into the legislation of particular member states. Implementation became quicker when the EU decided to establish, as one of variants, the so-called European Company. In this model the European company committee was provided for. The directive was implemented in Polish legislation by the act of 2002; in companies acting in more than one country there is an obligatory company committee. Similarly, there should be a company committee in the so-called European Company and European Economic Interest Grouping. The European Company is an alternative legal form of company, the same on the territory of the whole EU. The history of workers’ participation in management in Poland, broadly discussed in the article, is much more complex. It started in 1981, under the pressure of the “Solidarity” trade union, with introducing the acts on the state company and the workers’ self-management in the state company. These acts, although they are included in the participation current, broadly outlined the rights of the workers’ committee and of the workers’ (delegates’) general meeting, actually granting them part of the rights to make decisions, that in fact belong to the owner (e.g. dividing the profit, sometimes electing the manager). The intention of these solutions was to introduce a reformed model of an independent company in a still planned economy, and they started a broad current of discussion on efficiency of these solutions and limitations of workers’ participation not only in managing, but also in ownership after 1989. The model of the state company of 1981 (actually, in the practice of the 1980’s significantly reduced by the martial law authorities) turned out to be a temporary one and under the conditions of market economy was substituted by a form that made it possible to introduce direct or indirect privatization. However, it is characteristic that Poland has, independent of the EU, its own ample experience and traditions in solving the problem of workers’ participation in management. The author, who in the 1980’s was a workers’ self-management advisor, synthetically compares arguments for and against introducing solutions that include workers’ participation in company management, and decidedly defends the limited participation model in the EU’s version introduced in Poland by the act of 2006.
Źródło:
Roczniki Nauk Społecznych; 2008, 36, 3; 15-31
0137-4176
Pojawia się w:
Roczniki Nauk Społecznych
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
Godność osoby ludzkiej i obiektywne normy moralne jako reguły w działalności gospodarczej
Dignity of the human person and objective moral norms as rules in economy
Autorzy:
Mazurek, Franciszek Janusz
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/1852622.pdf
Data publikacji:
2006
Wydawca:
Katolicki Uniwersytet Lubelski Jana Pawła II. Towarzystwo Naukowe KUL
Tematy:
osoba ludzka
godność
normy moralne
prawa człowieka
wartości uniwersalne
wartość pracy ludzkiej
bezrobocie
human person
dignity
moral norms
human rights
universal values
value of human work
unemployment
Opis:
The author subjects to revision the economic liberalism supporters’ views, according to which there is no room for universal moral norms in the area of economy. The conception of homo economicus accepted in economy and the exclusive rule of profit are a manifestation of reductionism. The conviction that the free competition – free market – acts mechanically and impersonally and solves all economic-social problems in the best way is basically incorrect. In free competition there are positive and negative elements. Free competition – “yes, but what kind?” In the article a possibly complete picture of man is shown. Man is a reasonable creature, he is internally free and able to recognize good and evil (owing to his conscience) and owing to this he is the most perfect being in the created world. In his nature, man is a social being (ens sociale); a spiritual-bodily unity; he is not completely actualized but he is open to development; he is a religious and working creature (laborem exercens, homo economicus); he is able to do good, devote oneself to others, to build just – albeit not ideal –systems: legal, cultural, social and economic. But man is also able to do evil: to kill others, to steal, to lie, to wage wars, to commit acts of terrorism and of genocide, to build concentration camps, to manipulate the needs and mentality of whole societies and to enslave others by means of mass media – that is to form a one-dimension man. In the theological-biblical language this is called sinfulness of the human nature. And finally, man is capable of – as H. Marcuse writes – “scientific idiotism”. The highest value is the inborn, n a t u r a l, dignity of the human person, which is pointed to by his mind, inner freedom and conscience. Man is created in God’s image (imago Dei). Christ’s incarnation and redemption of man show his s u p e r n a t u r a l dignity. This is theological-biblical justification. Also philosophical (rational) justification is given. The former one is binding for believers, and the latter is for unbelievers. In the Catholic social teaching both justifications are given. The ontic structure of the human person in itself gives rise to obligations, it is the highest norm. It is defined in the following form: the human person should be respected for himself, because he is a person, and not for any other reason (persona est affirmanda propter se ipsam). The very human person, his dignity, is the fundamental norm of morality that is searched for. The Decalogue, objective and universal moral norms as principles show how to respect and protect the human person. It is not recognizing and complying with moral norms and human rights for themselves that is meant here – art for the art’s sake (pure formalism) – but protection of one’s own dignity and the dignity of every other person. Both moral norms as principles and human rights have been discovered slowly, step by step, but regressions also occur; this especially happened in the 20th and at the beginning of the 21st century. Human persons are the subjects of all communities – the family, the nation, the universal human society (familiae humanae), production and service institutions. The communities do not exist by themselves, but human persons are their foundation. Human persons, and not various systems, are the subject of any activity, for the systems are not persons or super-persons – Super Ego. Hence the thesis put forward by some economists that the system is ruled by an invisible hand is absurd. In human rights three elements are distinguished: their source, contents and protection. These constitute an integral whole. However, identifying a part with the whole (pars pro toto) is a logical mistake. The debate about man’s right to work can be solved after removing this logical mistake and introducing a new term: “the right for work”; showing that work is one of man’s fundamental needs, that it is a universal phenomenon, has a multi-aspectual dimension of values. Work is an anthropological (personal), moral, social, cultural, historical and economic value. Together with the multidimensional value of work the multidimensional evil of unemployment can be seen. There have been various economic models, even in capitalism. After the fall of socialism the thesis is proclaimed that capitalism is the only alternative (logical quantifier). Recognizing the priority of the real capital over work treated as a tool and commodity bought in the so-called work market is the essential feature of capitalism. John Paul II perceives numerous positive elements in capitalism, but he also sees a few negative ones: “We have found out that the thesis saying that after the defeat of real socialism capitalism remains the only model (logical quantifier) of economic organization is unacceptable.” He does not suggest another model, but generally he states that it is “… a society in which there are: freedom of work, enterprise and participation” that is meant here. He adds: “Economy that does not take into consideration the ethical dimension and does not attempt to serve the good of man – each man and the whole man – in fact does not even deserve the name of «economy» understood as reasonable and benevolent management of material resources”. Although he sees positive elements in the process of globalization, he puts forward an imperative demand to base it on the principle of the dignity of the human person and his rights, and the good of the whole human family (familiae humanae). In the area of economy “ … in the field of economy nobody may insult the human dignity without a punishment, which dignity God himself respects greatly” (Leo XIII).
Źródło:
Roczniki Nauk Społecznych; 2006, 34, 1; 19-53
0137-4176
Pojawia się w:
Roczniki Nauk Społecznych
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
    Wyświetlanie 1-2 z 2

    Ta witryna wykorzystuje pliki cookies do przechowywania informacji na Twoim komputerze. Pliki cookies stosujemy w celu świadczenia usług na najwyższym poziomie, w tym w sposób dostosowany do indywidualnych potrzeb. Korzystanie z witryny bez zmiany ustawień dotyczących cookies oznacza, że będą one zamieszczane w Twoim komputerze. W każdym momencie możesz dokonać zmiany ustawień dotyczących cookies