Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Wisconsin, 1966. / Typescript. Vita. eContent provider-neutral record in process. Description based on print version record. Includes bibliographical references.

The aim of this essay is to discuss the problems concerning the right of priority for re-employment in connection to employing temporary agency workers. This will be done with the help of relevant laws, preparatory work and literature that fall within the scope of the legal dogmatic method. Using temporary personnel is becoming considerably more common throughout the Swedish workplace. In recent years there has been a rapid growth of work agencies and a tendency to employ temporary personnel. At the same time employees are made redundant, suffering the consequences that arise from the workplace failing to abide by the rules of re-employment. In order to claim that the employer has failed to follow the right of priority for re-employment, evidence must be sufficient. It must also show that the employers’ actions were unfit in relation to the circumstance. It is difficult to identify whether the employer has failed to follow the right of priority for re-employment. The aim, measures and actions of the right of priority for re-employment must be reassessed in order to apply the law effectively. Unfortunately, in comparison to the labor management rights act, the right of priority for re-employment is easily bypassed.

Rights and duties of the owner of the forest This diploma thesis deals with the legal regulation of rights and duties of forest owner and defines the basic terms related to this topic. The thesis consists of seven parts, whereas chapter one is introductory and chapter nine is conclusion. Chapter Two deals with the basic information of the history of the forest legislation. Chapter Three pays attention on the forest in the Czech republic and provides a describtion of different forest types located in our territory. Chapter Four provides legal definitions of basic terminology. Chapter Five mentions the ownership of forest owners and restrictions of their property rights. The main attention is paid to chapter Six and Seven, which include a summary of the most important rights and duties with which the forest ownership is undoubtedly associated. Chapter Eight deals with the liability of forest owner and sanctions, that may be required. The aim of my thesis is to focuse on rights and duties of forest owner within forest inventory etc. The main source of this work is the Forest Act.

In the sphere of labour and employment, "prerogative" is usually taken to refer to the "right to manage" an organisation. The right can be divided into those decisions which relate to the utilisation of the human resources of the organisation and decisions of an "economic" or "business" nature. This thesis focuses on the first category of decisionmaking. It is generally accepted by employers and trade unions that employers have the right to manage employees. The legal basis for this right is to be found in the contract of employment which has as one of its elements the subordination of the employee to the authority of the employer. This element affords the employer the legal right to give instructions and creates the legal duty for the employee to obey these instructions. Employers' right to manage is, however, neither fixed nor static. The main purpose of this thesis is to determine the extent of employers' right to manage employees. This is done by examining the restrictions imposed by the law {ie common law and legislation) and collective bargaining. The examination is accordingly focussed on what is Jett of employer prerogative. A number of conclusions are drawn from the examination. One of the most important conclusions reached is that, although most of an employer's common law decisionmaking powers have been statutorily regulated, none have been rescinded. The employer has accordingly retained its decision-making power, albeit in a more restricted or limited form. This makes further restriction of its decision-making power through contractual or statutory provisions or collective bargaining possible. It, however, also makes the lessening or even the total removal of these restrictions through future statutory provisions or collective bargaining possible. / Law / LL.D.

Problématique : Les effets de la constitutionnalisation du droit du travail sur le contrôle arbitral du pouvoir de réglementation de l’employeur. La problématique de notre projet de recherche consiste à évaluer les effets du phénomène de la constitutionnalisation du droit du travail sur le pouvoir de l’employeur d’établir de la réglementation d’entreprise relative au travail, lequel pouvoir est une manifestation concrète de ses droits de direction. Notre projet de recherche, qui se limite au contexte syndiqué, met donc en relation deux grandes dimensions lesquelles sont le pouvoir de réglementation de l’employeur et le phénomène de la constitutionnalisation du droit du travail. Mentionnons que notre projet de recherche s’attarde aux limites, se trouvant tant dans la législation que dans la convention collective, permettant l’encadrement du pouvoir de réglementation de l’employeur. Concernant le phénomène de la constitutionnalisation du droit du travail, notre projet de recherche s’attarde tant à ses fondements qu’à ses effets sur le pouvoir de réglementation de l’employeur, ces derniers effets découlant principalement de la décision Parry Sound, laquelle est à l’effet que tous les droits et obligations prévus dans les lois sont contenus implicitement dans chaque convention collective, quelles que soient les intentions des parties contractantes. Ainsi, notre projet de recherche vise à démontrer empiriquement, en observant la jurisprudence arbitrale, dans quelle mesure le phénomène de la constitutionnalisation du droit du travail, en contexte syndiqué, modifie l’encadrement du pouvoir de réglementation de l’employeur puisque ce dernier doit dorénavant composer avec des normes étatiques fondamentales qu’il n’a ni négociées, ni déterminées. Mentionnons que le concept central de notre recherche se trouve à être le contrôle arbitral du pouvoir de réglementation de l’employeur relativement à la réglementation d’entreprise susceptible de faire intervenir les dispositions 1, 3, 4 et 5 de la Charte des droits et libertés de la personne et qu’il vise la classification dudit contrôle arbitral en deux grandes logiques : la logique I préalablement à la décision Parry Sound et la logique II postérieurement à cette même décision. Ainsi, notre hypothèse dominante est à l’effet qu’en matière de contrôle arbitral du pouvoir de réglementation de l’employeur, deux logiques existent et que dans une logique II, le contrôle arbitral est modifié en ce que les arbitres, situent au sommet de la hiérarchie des aspects à évaluer, la conformité de la réglementation d’entreprise aux dispositions de la Charte susmentionnées. / Issue : The effects of the « constitutionalization » of labor law on the arbitral review of employers’ regulatory power. Our research consists in evaluating the effects of the « constitutionalization » of labor law on employers’ regulatory power to establish corporate regulation related to work. Our research is limited to the unionized workplace and brings together two concepts: employers’ regulatory power which comes from their management rights and the « constitutionalization » of labor law. Our research concerns mainly the boundaries, both statutory and contractual, to employers’ regulatory power, which boundaries offer a legal framework to the application of said power. With regard to the « constitutionalization » of labor law, our research presents both its substance and effects on employers’ regulatory power. These effects are mainly consequences of the Supreme Court’s decision in the Parry Sound case, stating that every collective agreement benefits from an implicit content including all human rights and employment-related legislation. Thus, our research aims to demonstrate, while observing the arbitral jurisprudence, the extent to which the « constitutinalization » of labor law, in unionized workplaces, can modify the boundaries of employers’ regulatory power since they must now compose with fundamental standards that they have neither negotiated nor established. The central concept of our research is the arbitral review of employers’ regulatory power related to corporate regulation, wherein provisions 1, 3, 4 and 5 of the Charte des droits et libertés de la personne are likely to be found applicable. More specifically, our research aims to classify said arbitral review into two different logics: Logic 1 before Parry Sound and Logic 2 after Parry Sound. Therefore, our main hypothesis is that two logics exist when we refer to the arbitral review of employers’ regulatory power and that, when applying Logic II, the arbitral review is modified since the arbitrators tend to prioritize the compliance of the corporate regulation with the above-mentioned provisions of the Charte des droits et libertés de la personne.

Problématique : Les effets de la constitutionnalisation du droit du travail sur le contrôle arbitral du pouvoir de réglementation de l’employeur. La problématique de notre projet de recherche consiste à évaluer les effets du phénomène de la constitutionnalisation du droit du travail sur le pouvoir de l’employeur d’établir de la réglementation d’entreprise relative au travail, lequel pouvoir est une manifestation concrète de ses droits de direction. Notre projet de recherche, qui se limite au contexte syndiqué, met donc en relation deux grandes dimensions lesquelles sont le pouvoir de réglementation de l’employeur et le phénomène de la constitutionnalisation du droit du travail. Mentionnons que notre projet de recherche s’attarde aux limites, se trouvant tant dans la législation que dans la convention collective, permettant l’encadrement du pouvoir de réglementation de l’employeur. Concernant le phénomène de la constitutionnalisation du droit du travail, notre projet de recherche s’attarde tant à ses fondements qu’à ses effets sur le pouvoir de réglementation de l’employeur, ces derniers effets découlant principalement de la décision Parry Sound, laquelle est à l’effet que tous les droits et obligations prévus dans les lois sont contenus implicitement dans chaque convention collective, quelles que soient les intentions des parties contractantes. Ainsi, notre projet de recherche vise à démontrer empiriquement, en observant la jurisprudence arbitrale, dans quelle mesure le phénomène de la constitutionnalisation du droit du travail, en contexte syndiqué, modifie l’encadrement du pouvoir de réglementation de l’employeur puisque ce dernier doit dorénavant composer avec des normes étatiques fondamentales qu’il n’a ni négociées, ni déterminées. Mentionnons que le concept central de notre recherche se trouve à être le contrôle arbitral du pouvoir de réglementation de l’employeur relativement à la réglementation d’entreprise susceptible de faire intervenir les dispositions 1, 3, 4 et 5 de la Charte des droits et libertés de la personne et qu’il vise la classification dudit contrôle arbitral en deux grandes logiques : la logique I préalablement à la décision Parry Sound et la logique II postérieurement à cette même décision. Ainsi, notre hypothèse dominante est à l’effet qu’en matière de contrôle arbitral du pouvoir de réglementation de l’employeur, deux logiques existent et que dans une logique II, le contrôle arbitral est modifié en ce que les arbitres, situent au sommet de la hiérarchie des aspects à évaluer, la conformité de la réglementation d’entreprise aux dispositions de la Charte susmentionnées. / Issue : The effects of the « constitutionalization » of labor law on the arbitral review of employers’ regulatory power. Our research consists in evaluating the effects of the « constitutionalization » of labor law on employers’ regulatory power to establish corporate regulation related to work. Our research is limited to the unionized workplace and brings together two concepts: employers’ regulatory power which comes from their management rights and the « constitutionalization » of labor law. Our research concerns mainly the boundaries, both statutory and contractual, to employers’ regulatory power, which boundaries offer a legal framework to the application of said power. With regard to the « constitutionalization » of labor law, our research presents both its substance and effects on employers’ regulatory power. These effects are mainly consequences of the Supreme Court’s decision in the Parry Sound case, stating that every collective agreement benefits from an implicit content including all human rights and employment-related legislation. Thus, our research aims to demonstrate, while observing the arbitral jurisprudence, the extent to which the « constitutinalization » of labor law, in unionized workplaces, can modify the boundaries of employers’ regulatory power since they must now compose with fundamental standards that they have neither negotiated nor established. The central concept of our research is the arbitral review of employers’ regulatory power related to corporate regulation, wherein provisions 1, 3, 4 and 5 of the Charte des droits et libertés de la personne are likely to be found applicable. More specifically, our research aims to classify said arbitral review into two different logics: Logic 1 before Parry Sound and Logic 2 after Parry Sound. Therefore, our main hypothesis is that two logics exist when we refer to the arbitral review of employers’ regulatory power and that, when applying Logic II, the arbitral review is modified since the arbitrators tend to prioritize the compliance of the corporate regulation with the above-mentioned provisions of the Charte des droits et libertés de la personne.

In the sphere of labour and employment, "prerogative" is usually taken to refer to the "right to manage" an organisation. The right can be divided into those decisions which relate to the utilisation of the human resources of the organisation and decisions of an "economic" or "business" nature. This thesis focuses on the first category of decisionmaking. It is generally accepted by employers and trade unions that employers have the right to manage employees. The legal basis for this right is to be found in the contract of employment which has as one of its elements the subordination of the employee to the authority of the employer. This element affords the employer the legal right to give instructions and creates the legal duty for the employee to obey these instructions. Employers' right to manage is, however, neither fixed nor static. The main purpose of this thesis is to determine the extent of employers' right to manage employees. This is done by examining the restrictions imposed by the law {ie common law and legislation) and collective bargaining. The examination is accordingly focussed on what is Jett of employer prerogative. A number of conclusions are drawn from the examination. One of the most important conclusions reached is that, although most of an employer's common law decisionmaking powers have been statutorily regulated, none have been rescinded. The employer has accordingly retained its decision-making power, albeit in a more restricted or limited form. This makes further restriction of its decision-making power through contractual or statutory provisions or collective bargaining possible. It, however, also makes the lessening or even the total removal of these restrictions through future statutory provisions or collective bargaining possible. / Law / LL.D.