Yes / We have come along way in terms of equality law since Lord Davey made his statement. Not only was he unable or unwill-ing to see the law as a vehicle for protecting individuals from discrimination in employment, he was also very definitely talking about a ¿workman` and the fact that this might be a woman had probably not occurred to him. Times and contexts have changed and the law now has a clear role to play in protecting individuals from dis-crimination on a number of grounds. This Law in Brief summarises the legal framework relevant to gender equality in the employment sphere. This Law in Brief also acts as a background paper for a pilot research project looking at women`s progression in the academic sector.1

No description available.

Occupational sex segregation, the gender wage gap, and ghettoization persist despite improvements in women's opportunities since World War II. Recent research calls for a focus on the social psychological factors in early life that affect women's career attainments to help us more fully understand the persistence of women's disadvantaged positions in paid work. This dissertation synthesizes prior research to develop a multilevel model of career goal formation by examining community context, mothers' attainments, and gender beliefs as factors that shape young women's career goals. It also considers the degree to which career goals and gender beliefs influence work outcomes in later life. I study the 1979 and 1998 panels of the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth to identify early life factors that affect young women's career goals and to assess the extent to which these early goals influence women's employment situations in later life. This dissertation has three main findings. First, I find that young women's early career goals are influenced by women's disadvantaged position in the labor force more generally, as manifested in relationships with their mothers and women's status in the broader community. Young women with mothers who have lower occupational earnings, lower occupational prestige, and work with more women are more likely to plan to work in occupations with lower earnings, prestige, and more women themselves. Second, part of the influence of community context and mothers' attainments is indirect through young women's beliefs about gender. Third, early career goals and gender beliefs have lasting and cumulative effects on women's attainments in later life. Young women with less ambitious career goals and more traditional gender beliefs complete fewer years of education and are less likely to work full-time in later life. In turn, less education and fewer work hours are associated with employment in occupations with more women, lower median weekly earnings, lower occupational prestige, and lower hourly wages. Overall, the results provide evidence of the social embeddedness of women's career goals, and the cumulative impact of early career goals and gender beliefs on women's mid-life attainments. In addition, the results suggest that women's disadvantaged position in the labor market persists partly because the career goals of each generation are influenced by the constraints and opportunities experienced by their predecessors. / A Dissertation submitted to the Department of Sociology in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. / Degree Awarded: Fall Semester, 2005. / Date of Defense: July 6, 2005. / Gender And Work, Career Attainments, Gender Beliefs, Community Context, Career Goals / Includes bibliographical references. / John R. Reynolds, Professor Directing Dissertation; Mary Ellen Guy, Outside Committee Member; Patricia Y. Martin, Committee Member; Irene Padavic, Committee Member.

In this thesis, we want to establish a theory of "contractual egalitarianism". It depends on the assumption that all people are free and equal. If all people are free and equal and they want to find a principle to govern their society, they would adopt a modified version of Scanlon's contractualism. According to this version of contractualism, a social practice or institution is unjust if it would be disallowed by any set of principles for the general regulation of society that no one could reasonably reject as a basis for informed, unforced general agreement. If we have good reasons not to adopt a certain kind of policies, then it is likely that any principles allowing such policies could be reasonably rejected, hence that they will be unjust. With this contractual framework, we argue that there are four kinds of reason---equal respect, fulfilling basic needs, fair political equality and fair equal opportunity---by which we can reasonably reject inequality. If we accept the contractual framework and adopt the four kinds of reason, then we can justify egalitarianism without appealing to the idea of substantive equality. This kind of egalitarianism is a moderate one. A more radical version of egalitarianism will be reasonably rejected for its conflict with our other important value, such as liberty and personal relationship. / 鄧偉生. / 論文(哲學博士)--香港中文大學, 2006. / 參考文獻(p. 181-186). / Adviser: Yuen Kang Shih. / Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 68-02, Section: A, page: 0602. / Electronic reproduction. Hong Kong : Chinese University of Hong Kong, [2012] System requirements: Adobe Acrobat Reader. Available via World Wide Web. / Electronic reproduction. [Ann Arbor, MI] : ProQuest Information and Learning, [200-] System requirements: Adobe Acrobat Reader. Available via World Wide Web. / Abstracts in Chinese and English. / School code: 1307. / Lun wen (zhe xue bo shi)--Xianggang Zhong wen da xue, 2006. / Can kao wen xian (p. 181-186). / Deng Weisheng.

Wong Fan. / Thesis (M.Phil.)--Chinese University of Hong Kong, 2000. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 102-106). / Abstracts in English and Chinese. / Abstracts --- p.i / Preface --- p.iii / Acknowledgements --- p.viii / Chapter 1. --- Walzer's Theory of Distributive Justice --- p.1 / Walzer's philosophical Approach --- p.1 / Distribution and Social Meanings of Goods --- p.2 / "Monopoly, Domination, and Complex Equality" --- p.9 / Relativist Theory of Justice and Democratic Socialism --- p.19 / Chapter 2. --- On Equality --- p.23 / Arneson on Walzer's Criticism of Simple Equality --- p.23 / "Cohen's ""Voluntary Equality"" 一 A Defense Of Literal Equality" --- p.26 / Arneson's Criticism on Walzer's Complex Equality --- p.33 / Further Problems on Walzer's Complex Equality --- p.41 / Chapter 3. --- Social Meanings of Goods --- p.45 / Is Walzer's Theory Unnecessarily Restrictive? --- p.45 / Social Meanings of Goods and Moral Considerations --- p.51 / The Conflicting Social Meanings of A Good --- p.54 / Other Problems --- p.61 / Chapter 4. --- Shared Understandings And Moral Relativism --- p.65 / Is Walzer A Conventionalist? --- p.65 / Equal Citizenship And Democracy --- p.72 / Walzer's Benign Relativism --- p.76 / Chapter 5. --- Interpretation --- p.86 / Walzer's Thesis of Interpretation --- p.86 / Walzer and Marx --- p.93 / Conclusion --- p.98 / BIBLIOGRAPHY --- p.102

Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Delaware, 2005. / Principal faculty advisor: Bahira S. Trask, Dept. of Individual & Family Studies. Includes bibliographical references.

In this thesis I argue that Adam Smith is committed to moral egalitarianism, which extends to his theory of political economy. While Smith’s work is often used to justify economic inequality in society, I show that his political theory is best understood as a kind of relational egalitarianism. Using Elizabeth Anderson’s Democratic Equality as a model, I examine Smith’s commitment to equality in the space of social relationships. In particular, I argue that Smith’s focus on eliminating inequalities that cause oppression in society in conjunction with his efforts to design a political and economic system that will yield social conditions of freedom for individuals make him a relational egalitarian.

Many people think that political equality is obviously a good thing, an ideal toward which any decent political system should strive. Despite this -- or perhaps because of it -- some basic questions about political equality remain unanswered. What is political equality? What is good about it? Could some other ideal(s) take its place? My aim here is to answer each of these questions. In regards to the first question, I argue that political equality obtains when political power is distributed equally. Two people are political equals if, and only if, they have the same amount of political power. By 'political power' I mean (roughly) the ability to get what one wants in the political arena. Conceiving of political equality in this way allows us to accommodate both the moral and amoral dimensions of politics. What is good about political equality, so conceived? Political equality is good insofar as it leads to the equal advancement of everyone's interests. There are several reasons to think that advancing everyone's interests is important. It may be a fundamental requirement of morality, a principle of social justice, or a necessary condition of political legitimacy. Of course, an equal distribution of political power is not unique in its ability to advance people's interests equally. Indeed, I argue that an unequal distribution of power will almost always lead to a moral equal advancement of everyone's interests. This is because different people have different interests, and, depending on the circumstances, different amounts of power may be needed in order to advance different sets of interests to the same degree. Thus, it is a mistake to assume that an equal distribution of power will lead to the equal advancement of everyone's interests. If the equal advancement of interests is our ultimate goal, then political power should be distributed in accordance with a principle of sufficiency, not equality. Everyone should have whatever amount of political power they need in order for their interests to be advanced to the same degree.

The electoral system has already become the important foundation of modern democratic politics; the following one is to expand political participation day by day. Democratic theories have attended the political participation of the masses in the past, which is to say that the discussions of electoral right and meaning, so that candidate qualification have not been discuss clearly. There is a delicate relation of political participation between political equal in candidate qualifications: The candidate qualification is set up to ensure the equal of political participation¡H Or causes the unequal participation? Those questions are not easy to say. This thesis thinks that the various degree candidate qualifications will have make different meaning of poltical participation and political equality, and it reflects different democratic meaning too, even improving the qualification is a result of authoritarian regimes. Because it lacked to research candidate qualifications in the past, this thesis attempted to be the first visited study of candidate qualifications. So two research face in this thesis: First, designing the model of candidate qualifications, political participate and political equality as distinguishing the index, and annotating the meaning of candidate qualifications under the democratic system or authoritarian regimes. Second, the case study of Taiwan: studying on the change of candidate qualifications and analyzing the qualifications of sex and academic background by that former model in this thesis. Finally, I believe it can reinterpretation and confer democracy by the studying on the change of candidate qualification.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Washington, 2001. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 162-181.