Les intérimaires seraient en concurrence avec les permanents souhaitant garder leur emploi. Cependant, les observations menées dans différentes plates-formes logistiques, nous ont amené à penser que cette vision ne permet pas d’expliquer les raisons poussant des embauchés à faire preuve de solidarité vis-à-vis d’un intérimaire. Le débat mérite d’autant plus d’être posé que la coopération et la solidarité semblent difficilement envisageables sans collectif. Mais si intérimaires et permanents ont des intérêts opposés, comment expliquer qu’un collectif puissent rassembler ces deux types de salariés ? Cette question mérite d’autant plus examen que les intérimaires sont déconsidérés dans les entreprises utilisatrices. Pour autant, il y a peu de conflits entre les temporaires et les embauchés. Est-il possible d’imputer cette absence – relative – de conflits à la présence d’un collectif ? / Supposedly temporary workers compete with permanent staffs who, in turn, want to retain their positions. Observations carried out at various logistics hubs have led us to think that standpoint insufficient to understand the reasons why permanent employees are able to show temporary workers solidarity. The debate needs all the more to be open that cooperation and solidarity relations seem hardly possible without referring to a collective. If temporary and permanent workers have conflicting interests, how should we explain that a collective gathers both groups? The question needs further study as temporary workers are generally discredited in end-user businesses. Oddly enough, we came across few conflicts between temporary and permanent workers. Can we impute the relative absence of conflicts to the presence of a collective ?

The Labour Relations Act of 1995, hailed as an achievement to rank in importance alongside the Industrial Conciliation Act of 1924, remains the legal punchbag of the nineties. Despite its hurricane passage through NEDLAC and Parliament, the criticism generated by its predecessor (the Draft Bill) remains for the most part unanswered. It would appear that the drafter's optimism, epitomised by the kind fashionable, rhetoric that has become equally synonymous with this the age of co-operation and reconstruction, will have to suffice.

Includes bibliographical references (leaves 80-84).

Inaug.-Diss.--Berlin.

Thesis (doctoral)--Universität Mainz, 1974. / Includes bibliographical references (p. v-xvi).

Thesis (Ph. D..)--University of Wisconsin--Madison, 1982. / Typescript. Vita. eContent provider-neutral record in process. Description based on print version record. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 348-357).

Thesis (M.S.)--University of Wisconsin--Madison, 1971. / eContent provider-neutral record in process. Description based on print version record. Includes bibliographical references.

Syftet med denna uppsats är att kritisera David Copps collective moral autonomy thesis. Denna tes säger att det är möjligt för kollektiv att ha moraliska förpliktelser och vara moraliskt ansvariga trots att ingen av dess medlemmar har motsvarande egenskaper. Copp har fört fram två argument och tre exempel till stöd för sin tes. Jag kommer att diskutera dessa utifrån den kritik som förts fram mot tesen. Min slutsats är att Copps tes, om ändå konceptuellt möjlig, inte stöds av de argument och exempel som Copp presenterar. Jag kommer huvudsakligen argumentera för att dessa är fall där ingen agent – varken ett kollektiv eller en individ – kan hållas moraliskt ansvarig.

Diss.--Fachbereich Geschichts- und Kulturwissenschaften--Berlin--Freie Universität, 2002. / Bibliogr. p. [486]-536. Index.

Habilitation à diriger des recherches--Histoire--Tours--Université F. Rabelais, 2002. / Bibliogr. p. 329-363. Notes bibliogr. Index.