Understanding Stark Law and Its Implications

Understanding Stark Law and Its Implications

Importance of Annual Updates in Medical Coding

The Stark Law, officially known as the Physician Self-Referral Law, is a critical piece of legislation in the United States healthcare system. Enacted in 1989 and named after Congressman Pete Stark, who sponsored the initial bill, the law primarily aims to prevent conflicts of interest in healthcare by prohibiting physician self-referral for certain designated health services paid for by Medicare or Medicaid. In essence, it forbids physicians from referring patients to receive "designated health services" payable by Medicare or Medicaid from entities with which they have a financial relationship unless specific exceptions apply.


At its core, the Stark Law seeks to protect patients and ensure that medical decisions are made based on the best interests of patients rather than potential financial gains for physicians. The law addresses concerns that financial incentives might lead to overutilization of services, increased healthcare costs, and compromised patient care quality. By restricting self-referrals where there is a financial stake involved, the law encourages transparency and integrity within medical practice.


Well-planned staffing promotes compliance with labor and healthcare regulations medical assistant staffing agency health administration.

The significance of Stark Law extends beyond merely curbing unethical practices; it plays a vital role in shaping how healthcare providers structure their business relationships and agreements. Compliance with this regulation is essential for healthcare entities to avoid hefty penalties, including fines and exclusion from participating in federal healthcare programs. Consequently, understanding the intricacies of Stark Law has become paramount for hospitals, clinics, and private practices alike.


Moreover, while the intent behind Stark Law is clear-cut-to eliminate potential conflicts of interest-the application can be complex due to numerous exceptions and nuances within the statute itself. These exceptions allow certain arrangements under safe harbor provisions where compliance criteria are met. Navigating these complexities requires legal expertise and careful structuring of physician-hospital affiliations.


In recent years, discussions surrounding healthcare reform have sparked debates about modernizing or amending aspects of Stark Law to better align with contemporary value-based care models. Some critics argue that parts of the law may inadvertently hinder collaborative care innovations intended to improve outcomes while reducing costs.


Ultimately, understanding Stark Law involves recognizing its foundational purpose-preserving trust in doctor-patient relationships by ensuring decisions are driven solely by patient welfare without undue influence from financial interests. As such laws continue evolving alongside advancements in medicine and changes within our healthcare landscape at large-it remains crucial for stakeholders across sectors not only stay informed but also proactive about maintaining ethical standards pivotal toward fostering public confidence throughout all facets related thereto therein impacting delivery thereof unto recipients thereof-patients themselves most directly affected therein too often enough overlooked when contemplating implications underlying policy initiatives enacted heretofore henceforth always keeping foremost foremost priority indeed!

The Stark Law, officially known as the Physician Self-Referral Law, is a significant piece of legislation in the United States healthcare landscape. Understanding its historical background and development provides insight into its current implications and the rationale behind its existence.


The origins of the Stark Law date back to concerns about the potential for conflicts of interest in physician referrals. In the late 20th century, it became evident that some physicians were referring patients to medical facilities in which they had a financial interest. This practice raised ethical questions about whether such referrals were genuinely in the best interest of patients or primarily driven by financial gain. The concern was that these self-referrals could lead to overutilization of services, increased healthcare costs, and compromised patient care.


In response to these concerns, Congress enacted the first version of the Stark Law in 1989, named after Congressman Pete Stark who sponsored the legislation. The initial scope was relatively narrow, targeting only clinical laboratory services. However, recognizing that similar conflicts could arise with other types of medical services, Congress expanded the law significantly through amendments in subsequent years.


The most notable expansion came with Stark II, introduced in phases during 1993 and 1994. This broadened the prohibition on self-referrals to include a wide range of "designated health services" (DHS) such as radiology, physical therapy, and inpatient hospital services. It established strict liability provisions; meaning intent did not need to be proven for a violation to occur - making compliance particularly challenging for healthcare providers.


Over time, further clarifications and modifications have been introduced through regulatory guidance from agencies like the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS). These changes have sought to address practical challenges faced by providers while maintaining safeguards against improper financial incentives.


The development of Stark Law reflects an ongoing balancing act between preventing abuse within healthcare systems and allowing flexibility for legitimate collaborative structures that can benefit patient care. For instance, exceptions within the law attempt to accommodate beneficial arrangements like group practices or certain value-based payment models without opening loopholes for exploitation.


Understanding this historical context helps illuminate why Stark Law remains a pivotal yet complex component of healthcare regulation today. Its implications are far-reaching - impacting how physicians structure their practices and engage with other parts of the healthcare system. It underscores an enduring commitment to ensuring that medical decisions prioritize patient welfare over personal financial interests.


As healthcare continues evolving towards integrated care models emphasizing quality and efficiency over volume-based rewards, ongoing discussions suggest potential reforms or adaptations may continue shaping how Stark Law functions in modern medical practice settings.

Social Sites

Instagram Channel:

"

"

More about us on X:


Key Changes and Additions to the Latest ICD-10-CM Code Set

The Stark Law, officially known as the Physician Self-Referral Law, has been a cornerstone of healthcare regulation in the United States since its inception. Enacted in 1989, it was designed to prevent physicians from making referrals for certain designated health services (DHS) payable by Medicare to entities with which they have a financial relationship, unless specific exceptions apply. The law aims to curb conflicts of interest that could lead to overutilization of services and increased healthcare costs.


The evolution of Stark Law is marked by several key amendments and regulatory clarifications that have sought to address challenges posed by the complexities of modern healthcare delivery. Initially, the law applied only to clinical laboratory services; however, its scope was expanded significantly with the passage of Stark II in 1993. This amendment broadened the range of DHS and introduced new exceptions, recognizing that not all financial relationships inherently pose risks to patient care.


One major milestone in the evolution of Stark Law was the introduction of Phase I regulations in 2001, followed by Phase II in 2004 and Phase III in 2007. These phases provided detailed guidance on how the law should be interpreted and implemented. They included definitions for terms like "referral" and "financial relationship," as well as elaborations on various exceptions such as those for in-office ancillary services and bona fide employment relationships.


In recent years, there have been efforts to modernize Stark Law further through regulatory reform. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) has recognized that while protecting against abusive practices remains crucial, overly stringent regulations can hinder beneficial arrangements aimed at improving care coordination and efficiency. As part of CMS's Patients Over Paperwork initiative, new rules were proposed in 2019 and finalized in late 2020 to simplify compliance requirements and support value-based care models.


These changes reflect an evolving understanding of healthcare dynamics where collaboration among providers is essential for delivering high-quality care. By providing clearer guidelines on permissible financial relationships within these models, recent amendments aim to reduce undue burdens on providers while maintaining safeguards against fraud and abuse.


Understanding Stark Law today requires appreciating its historical context as well as its ongoing transformation. As healthcare continues to evolve towards integrated delivery systems focused on patient outcomes rather than service volume alone, so too will the legal frameworks governing provider interactions adapt accordingly. The challenge moving forward will be balancing flexibility with accountability-ensuring that innovations benefit patients without compromising ethical standards or fiscal responsibility.


In conclusion, the evolution of Stark Law underscores both its foundational role in promoting ethical medical practices and its adaptability amid changing paradigms in American healthcare. By remaining attuned to these developments, stakeholders can better navigate potential pitfalls associated with physician self-referral while leveraging opportunities presented by collaborative care initiatives designed ultimately to enhance patient wellbeing across diverse settings nationwide.

Key Changes and Additions to the Latest ICD-10-CM Code Set

Impact of Updates on Healthcare Providers and Coders

The Stark Law, formally known as the Physician Self-Referral Law, is a vital yet complex component of healthcare regulation in the United States. Its core provisions are designed to address ethical concerns and financial conflicts of interest in medical practice, creating a framework that ensures patient care decisions remain unbiased and in the best interest of patients.


At its essence, the Stark Law prohibits physicians from making referrals for certain designated health services (DHS) payable by Medicare to an entity with which they-or an immediate family member-have a financial relationship. This includes ownership interests or compensation arrangements. The rationale behind this prohibition is straightforward: when physicians stand to benefit financially from their own referrals, there is a potential risk that these decisions may be influenced more by profit motives than by genuine medical necessity.


One of the primary core provisions involves defining what constitutes a "financial relationship." This term broadly encompasses both direct and indirect ownership interests and compensation arrangements between physicians and entities providing DHS. The law specifies which types of relationships fall under its scrutiny, ensuring that any potential financial incentive leading to self-referral is thoroughly regulated.


Another significant aspect of the Stark Law is its list of exceptions. Recognizing that not all financial relationships inherently lead to unethical behavior, the law provides detailed exceptions under which certain arrangements are permissible. These exceptions include situations such as in-office ancillary services, fair market value compensation agreements, and bona fide employment relationships. Each exception has specific criteria that must be met to ensure compliance, thereby allowing legitimate business practices while safeguarding against abuse.


Compliance with the Stark Law requires rigorous attention to detail from healthcare providers. Institutions often implement comprehensive compliance programs involving regular audits and training sessions for staff to navigate these regulations effectively. Violations can lead to severe penalties including substantial fines and exclusion from federal health programs.


The implications of the Stark Law extend beyond mere regulatory compliance; they shape how healthcare providers structure their business dealings and relationships within the industry. By enforcing transparency and accountability, it fosters an environment where patient welfare takes precedence over financial gain-a fundamental principle in maintaining trust within healthcare systems.


In conclusion, understanding the core provisions of the Stark Law is crucial for anyone involved in healthcare management or legal advisement within this sector. While navigating its complexities can be challenging, adherence not only avoids legal repercussions but also upholds ethical standards critical to patient-centered care. As healthcare continues to evolve with new models and technologies, ongoing awareness and adaptation will be essential in ensuring that these foundational principles remain intact.

Strategies for Staying Informed About Code Changes

Understanding Stark Law and its implications is crucial for healthcare providers, administrators, and legal professionals navigating the complex healthcare landscape. The Stark Law, officially known as the Physician Self-Referral Law, was enacted to prohibit physicians from referring patients to entities with which they have a financial relationship unless certain exceptions apply. This law aims to prevent conflicts of interest and ensure that medical decisions are made based on patient needs rather than financial gain.


At its core, the Stark Law encompasses several key components: prohibited referrals, designated health services (DHS), and applicable exceptions. Prohibited referrals refer to situations where a physician refers a Medicare or Medicaid patient for certain DHS to an entity in which they or an immediate family member has a financial interest. This financial relationship can take various forms, including ownership interests or compensation arrangements.


Designated health services under the Stark Law include clinical laboratory services, physical therapy, radiology services, radiation therapy, durable medical equipment supplies, parenteral and enteral nutrients equipment and supplies, prosthetics and orthotics devices and supplies, home health services, outpatient prescription drugs, inpatient and outpatient hospital services among others. These are typically services that could be susceptible to overuse if influenced by improper financial incentives.


While the law sets clear boundaries on self-referral practices by physicians, it also incorporates numerous exceptions designed to accommodate legitimate business arrangements without compromising ethical standards. Some of these exceptions include in-office ancillary services exception allowing physicians within their practice to provide necessary ancillary services; rental of office space exception permitting fair market value lease agreements between parties; employment relationships exception ensuring bona fide employment relationships are not unduly restricted; personal service arrangements covering contracts for specific professional services rendered personally by physicians etc.


The rationale behind these exceptions is not only pragmatic but also acknowledges that strict enforcement without flexibility might hinder effective healthcare delivery systems or discourage beneficial collaborations in dynamic environments needing tailored solutions addressing unique challenges faced across different settings nationwide.


However nuanced interpretation remains critical given potential consequences arising from violations such as hefty fines imposed per incident coupled with possible exclusion from federally funded programs like Medicare/Medicaid severely impacting operations long-term sustainability amid growing regulatory scrutiny emphasizing compliance alongside transparency accountability maintaining trust amongst stakeholders involved ultimately strengthening overall integrity framework underpinning U.S healthcare sector today tomorrow alike!

Challenges and Solutions in Adapting to New Codes

Understanding the Stark Law and its implications is crucial for medical coding professionals, as it directly influences how they perform their roles within healthcare institutions. The Stark Law, formally known as the Physician Self-Referral Law, prohibits physicians from referring patients to receive designated health services payable by Medicare or Medicaid from entities with which they have a financial relationship, unless exceptions apply. This law was enacted to prevent conflicts of interest and ensure that medical decisions are made in the best interest of patients without undue financial influence.


For medical coding professionals, understanding the nuances of the Stark Law is essential because accurate coding is pivotal in ensuring compliance with this regulation. Coding professionals must be vigilant in documenting services accurately and completely to support compliance efforts. Missteps in coding can lead to significant legal issues for healthcare providers, including substantial fines and penalties.


The implications of the Stark Law for medical coders extend beyond simply adhering to ethical standards; they also involve navigating complex relationships between doctors and healthcare entities. Coders need to be aware of instances where improper referrals might occur, ensuring that all procedures and services are justified under current regulations. This requires not only a deep understanding of medical terminology and procedures but also knowledge of legal frameworks surrounding healthcare practices.


Moreover, staying informed about changes in legislation is crucial. The healthcare landscape is continually evolving, with updates in laws and regulations occurring frequently. Medical coders must stay abreast of these changes to maintain compliance and avoid inadvertent violations that could jeopardize their employer's standing.


Additionally, comprehensive training programs on Stark Law implications can enhance a coder's proficiency in identifying potential red flags associated with physician referrals. Workshops, seminars, and continued education courses focused on regulatory compliance can equip them with tools needed for effective monitoring and reporting.


In conclusion, medical coding professionals play an integral role in maintaining regulatory compliance within the healthcare system concerning the Stark Law. By thoroughly understanding this legislation's stipulations and keeping up-to-date with any modifications or interpretations thereof, coders can help protect their organizations from legal repercussions while promoting ethical standards in patient care delivery. Their expertise ensures that healthcare providers operate transparently, fostering trust within the patient community while adhering strictly to legislative mandates designed to safeguard public health interests.

Understanding Stark Law and Its Implications: How Stark Law Affects the Responsibilities and Practices of Medical Coders


Stark Law, officially known as the Physician Self-Referral Law, plays a critical role in shaping the healthcare landscape in the United States. Its primary aim is to prevent conflicts of interest by prohibiting physicians from referring Medicare patients to entities with which they or their immediate family members have a financial relationship. While this law primarily targets physicians and healthcare facilities, its ripples extend beyond these parties, significantly impacting medical coders' responsibilities and practices.


Medical coders serve as the linchpin in ensuring accurate documentation and billing within healthcare institutions. They translate clinical diagnoses, procedures, medical services, and equipment into universal alphanumeric codes. These codes are essential for billing purposes and ensuring compliance with various regulations, including Stark Law. As such, medical coders must possess a thorough understanding of how Stark Law influences their duties.


One significant way Stark Law affects medical coders is through the heightened need for vigilance in coding practices. Coders must ensure that all referrals meet legal requirements outlined under Stark Law to avoid inadvertently contributing to non-compliant claims. This responsibility necessitates a comprehensive understanding of not only coding but also legal stipulations surrounding physician referrals and financial relationships.


Moreover, medical coders must maintain meticulous records of patient encounters and referral patterns to support compliance efforts. Detailed documentation helps demonstrate adherence to Stark Law provisions if audited by regulatory bodies like the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS). Coders play an integral part in this documentation process by accurately capturing referral information tied to specific services rendered.


Additionally, ongoing education becomes paramount for medical coders working within environments governed by Stark Law. With frequent updates in regulations and guidelines, staying informed about changes is critical to maintaining compliance. Regular training sessions tailored toward understanding legal nuances associated with self-referral restrictions can empower coders to execute their roles effectively while minimizing risks related to Stark violations.


Collaboration between medical coders and compliance officers also assumes greater significance under Stark Law's purview. Close cooperation ensures that institutional policies align with legal requirements concerning physician referrals involving financial interests or benefits derived indirectly through ownership arrangements prohibited under this legislation.


In conclusion, while Stark Law primarily targets physicians' conduct regarding patient referrals influenced by financial interests; its implications reverberate throughout various facets of healthcare operations-including those managed by diligent professionals like medical coders tasked with navigating complex coding scenarios accurately amidst evolving regulations aimed at promoting transparency within health systems nationwide.


By recognizing how stark laws affect them directly-medical coder professionals uphold ethical standards while safeguarding both themselves against potential liabilities arising from inadvertent non-compliance issues stemming from improper interpretation or application thereof during routine practice activities across diverse clinical settings today!

Compliance in healthcare is a critical issue, particularly when it comes to navigating the complex web of regulations that govern financial relationships between providers and entities. One such regulation, the Stark Law, plays a pivotal role in shaping these interactions. Understanding Stark Law and its implications is essential for healthcare entities aiming to develop effective compliance strategies.


The Stark Law, officially known as the Physician Self-Referral Law, was enacted to prevent conflicts of interest in Medicare and Medicaid referrals. It prohibits physicians from referring patients for certain designated health services (DHS) payable by Medicare if the physician or an immediate family member has a financial relationship with the entity providing those services, unless an exception applies. The law's intent is straightforward: to ensure that medical decisions are based on patient needs rather than financial gain.


Despite its clear objectives, the Stark Law's complexity presents significant challenges for healthcare entities striving for compliance. The law includes numerous exceptions and definitions that require careful interpretation. For example, exceptions exist for certain compensation arrangements and ownership interests that meet specific criteria outlined by federal regulations. Navigating these intricacies demands not only legal expertise but also a robust internal compliance framework.


To address these challenges effectively, healthcare organizations must implement comprehensive compliance strategies centered around education, monitoring, and auditing. First and foremost, educating staff about the Stark Law is crucial. Physicians and administrative personnel should be well-informed about what constitutes a prohibited referral and understand how their actions could potentially violate the law.


Monitoring systems also play a vital role in ensuring ongoing compliance. By establishing protocols to track referrals and financial relationships systematically, organizations can proactively identify potential issues before they escalate into violations. This often involves leveraging technology solutions designed to flag anomalies or suspicious patterns indicative of non-compliance.


Regular auditing further strengthens compliance efforts by providing an opportunity to assess existing practices critically. Through audits, organizations can verify adherence to policies related to physician self-referrals while identifying areas needing improvement or adjustment. Audits should be conducted with objectivity and thoroughness to ensure they yield actionable insights.


Developing strong lines of communication within the organization enhances transparency around referral processes and financial arrangements-a key component in fostering a culture of compliance. Encouraging open dialogue allows staff members at all levels to voice concerns or seek clarification without fear of reprisal.


In conclusion, understanding Stark Law and its implications is imperative for healthcare entities committed to maintaining ethical standards while avoiding costly penalties associated with non-compliance. By prioritizing education, implementing rigorous monitoring protocols, conducting regular audits, and fostering open communication channels among staff members-healthcare organizations can navigate this regulatory landscape successfully while upholding integrity in their operations.

Understanding the Stark Law and its implications is essential for anyone involved in medical coding operations. This complex set of regulations, officially known as the Physician Self-Referral Law, was designed to prevent conflicts of interest in healthcare by prohibiting physicians from referring patients to entities with which they have a financial relationship, unless specific exceptions are met. Compliance with Stark Law is not just a legal obligation but also an ethical one that ensures fairness and integrity in patient care.


To navigate the intricacies of Stark Law effectively, organizations engaged in medical coding must adhere to a series of best practices. First and foremost, it is crucial to establish comprehensive education and training programs for all staff members involved in coding and billing processes. Regular training sessions should cover not only the basics of Stark Law but also any updates or changes to the legislation. Keeping staff informed helps mitigate risks associated with inadvertent non-compliance.


Another critical practice is conducting thorough internal audits on a regular basis. These audits should assess whether coding operations align with Stark Law requirements, identifying any potential violations or areas needing improvement. By proactively monitoring compliance through audits, organizations can correct issues promptly before they escalate into significant legal problems.


Developing robust policies and procedures tailored specifically to Stark Law compliance is also vital. These guidelines should delineate clear protocols for referral practices and outline steps for addressing conflicts of interest when they arise. Having well-documented policies provides a framework within which employees can operate confidently while ensuring that all actions are legally sound.


Moreover, fostering an organizational culture that prioritizes transparency and accountability plays an indispensable role in maintaining compliance with Stark Law. Encouraging open communication among staff about potential concerns related to referrals or financial relationships can help identify issues early on. This culture starts at the top; leadership must exemplify commitment to ethical standards and compliance by setting clear expectations and reinforcing them consistently.


Finally, it may be beneficial for organizations to seek expert legal advice periodically. Consulting with healthcare attorneys who specialize in regulatory compliance can provide invaluable insights into navigating complex scenarios involving potential self-referrals or financial relationships that could trigger liability under Stark Law.


In conclusion, understanding the implications of Stark Law requires ongoing diligence and dedication from those involved in medical coding operations. Through comprehensive education, regular auditing, solid policy development, transparent organizational culture, and expert consultation, healthcare providers can ensure they remain compliant while upholding their commitment to delivering fair and unbiased patient care. By embracing these best practices wholeheartedly, institutions not only protect themselves legally but also contribute positively towards building trust within their communities-a fundamental tenet underlying quality healthcare services worldwide.

Understanding Stark Law and Its Implications: Common Challenges and Misinterpretations


Navigating the intricate nuances of healthcare regulations can be a daunting endeavor, particularly when it comes to the Stark Law. Officially known as the Physician Self-Referral Law, it was enacted in 1989 with the intent to prevent conflicts of interest in Medicare and Medicaid services by prohibiting physicians from referring patients to entities with which they have a financial relationship. Despite its straightforward aim, Stark Law has become one of the most complex and often misunderstood components of healthcare legislation.


One of the primary challenges associated with Stark Law is its sheer complexity. The law encompasses numerous exceptions and definitions that can confuse even seasoned healthcare professionals. Understanding which referrals are permissible under these exceptions requires a meticulous examination of each specific case. For instance, determining what constitutes "fair market value" or ensuring compliance with "in-office ancillary services" exceptions necessitates not only legal expertise but also a deep understanding of medical practice operations.


Misinterpretations often arise from misconceptions about the scope of Stark Law. Many assume that it applies universally across all medical scenarios; however, it primarily governs physician referrals within federal healthcare programs such as Medicare and Medicaid. This misconception can lead to unnecessary caution or misapplication in situations where other regulations might be more pertinent.


Additionally, another common misunderstanding involves conflating Stark Law with other regulatory frameworks like the Anti-Kickback Statute or False Claims Act. While all three laws aim to curb fraud and abuse in healthcare, their scopes differ significantly. Unlike the Anti-Kickback Statute, which requires proof of intent for violation, Stark Law is a strict liability statute-meaning that intent does not need to be proven for a violation to occur. This distinction is crucial yet frequently overlooked, potentially leading to inadequate compliance strategies.


Healthcare providers also grapple with challenges related to evolving interpretations and amendments to the law over time. Regulatory updates often add layers of complexity as policymakers attempt to adapt legal frameworks to modern medical practices without compromising ethical standards or patient care quality.


In conclusion, while Stark Law serves an essential role in maintaining ethical standards within federal healthcare programs, its complexity can pose significant challenges for compliance. Misunderstandings about its applicability and scope further complicate adherence efforts among healthcare providers. Therefore, continuous education and collaboration between legal experts and medical practitioners are imperative for navigating this challenging landscape effectively-ensuring that patient care remains at the forefront while upholding regulatory obligations.

Understanding Stark Law and Its Implications: Identifying Frequent Issues Faced by Medical Coders


Stark Law, formally known as the Physician Self-Referral Law, is a crucial piece of legislation in the healthcare sector that aims to prevent conflicts of interest by prohibiting physicians from referring patients to entities with which they have a financial relationship. Its implications are far-reaching, influencing how medical practices operate and how healthcare providers collaborate. For medical coders, navigating the complexities of Stark Law compliance presents several frequent challenges.


One of the most prominent issues faced by medical coders is understanding the intricate details of what constitutes a financial relationship under Stark Law. The law is notoriously complex, with numerous exceptions and definitions that can be difficult to interpret. For instance, differentiating between acceptable and non-acceptable financial arrangements requires not just legal knowledge but also a deep understanding of operational practices within healthcare institutions. This complexity can lead to unintentional violations if coders misinterpret or overlook critical aspects of these relationships.


Additionally, staying updated with regulatory changes presents another significant challenge for medical coders. Stark Law has undergone various amendments since its inception, each adding new layers of compliance requirements. Medical coders must keep abreast of these changes to ensure accurate coding and billing practices that align with current regulations. However, given the rapid evolution of healthcare laws and policies, maintaining up-to-date knowledge can be overwhelming.


Another issue arises from the integration of technology into healthcare systems. The advent of electronic health records (EHRs) has transformed how patient data is managed and shared across platforms. While EHRs offer efficiency improvements, they also introduce potential pitfalls regarding Stark Law compliance. Coders must ensure that referrals documented electronically adhere to all legal stipulations while safeguarding against errors that could result in costly penalties for their organizations.


Moreover, effective communication between physicians and coding professionals is vital yet often lacking in practice. Physicians may not always provide complete or clear information regarding their financial interests or referral decisions, leaving coders in a precarious position when assigning codes for billing purposes. Establishing open lines of communication and fostering collaboration between these two groups can mitigate misunderstandings and promote adherence to Stark Law requirements.


Lastly, resource constraints pose a significant hurdle for many healthcare facilities striving for compliance with Stark Law. Smaller practices or those operating on limited budgets may struggle to allocate sufficient resources towards training programs or hiring legal experts who specialize in this area. Consequently, staff members might find themselves inadequately prepared when faced with complex compliance scenarios.


In conclusion, while Stark Law serves an essential purpose in maintaining ethical standards within healthcare settings by preventing self-referral abuses among physicians; it simultaneously introduces unique challenges for medical coders tasked with ensuring lawful adherence during their daily operations-whether through deciphering intricate legislative texts amidst evolving regulations; managing technological advancements without compromising integrity; fostering inter-professional dialogue; or overcoming resource limitations-all facets demand attention if we are truly committed toward achieving both compliant practice environments alongside optimal patient care outcomes alike!

Understanding Stark Law and Its Implications: Case Studies on Violations and Penalties


The Stark Law, formally known as the Physician Self-Referral Law, stands as a critical piece of legislation in the American healthcare system. Its primary aim is to prevent conflicts of interest by prohibiting physicians from referring patients to entities with which they have a financial relationship. While its intentions are clear, the application and implications of this law can be complex and challenging for healthcare providers. To grasp its far-reaching impacts, one must delve into case studies that illustrate violations and the subsequent penalties imposed.


One notable case involved a major hospital system that engaged in improper compensation arrangements with several referring physicians. The Department of Justice (DOJ) alleged that these arrangements did not meet any Stark Law exceptions, thereby resulting in illegal referrals for services reimbursed by Medicare. As a consequence, the hospital was subjected to a substantial financial penalty amounting to millions of dollars in settlement fees. This case underscores the importance for healthcare organizations to diligently structure their compensation agreements in compliance with Stark Law provisions.


Another striking example is that of a prominent physician group practice caught in violation due to non-compliance with the "group practice" definition under the Stark Law. The group's revenue-sharing arrangement failed to meet specific regulatory requirements, leading them into murky waters legally. Upon investigation, it was found that certain income distributions were based on volume or value of referrals, which directly contravenes Stark regulations. The resultant penalties included not only hefty fines but also mandatory implementation of more stringent compliance programs within their operations.


In some cases, violations stem from sheer oversight rather than deliberate defiance. For instance, smaller practices often fall prey to inadvertent breaches due to lack of awareness or understanding of the intricate details embedded within Stark Law's clauses. A rural clinic once faced penalties after an audit revealed non-compliance stemming from inadequate documentation supporting their referral arrangements. Although unintentional, such breaches highlight how crucial it is for even smaller entities to invest in robust legal counsel and compliance training.


The repercussions of violating Stark Law extend beyond financial penalties; they can severely tarnish reputations and disrupt operations significantly. Healthcare providers may face exclusion from federal health programs like Medicare and Medicaid if found guilty of serious misconduct repeatedly-a sanction that could be devastating for any medical entity relying heavily on such reimbursements.


These case studies collectively underscore an essential lesson: vigilance is paramount when navigating through legal frameworks governing healthcare practices today-especially those as comprehensive as Stark Law-and ignorance offers no immunity against punitive measures enforced by regulatory bodies like CMS or DOJ.


To mitigate risks associated with potential violations effectively requires proactive measures including thorough internal reviews regularly conducted alongside expert consultations regarding all facets related directly/indirectly impacted by self-referral statutes applicable within respective jurisdictions served presently/future considerations alike ensuring continued adherence towards maintaining ethical standards set forth originally intended protect patient interests foremost ultimately fostering trust between provider-patient relationships integral overarching mission delivering quality care universally accessible everyone irrespective background socioeconomic status alike without exception whatsoever so long remain committed upholding principles embodied therein always remember consequences failing do so grave indeed both financially morally speaking too!

Understanding the Stark Law and its implications is crucial for healthcare providers, as violations can lead to severe consequences. Named after Congressman Pete Stark, this law was enacted to prevent physicians from self-referring patients to medical facilities in which they have a financial interest. While the intention is to eliminate conflicts of interest that could potentially drive up healthcare costs and compromise patient care, real-world violations showcase the complexity and gravity of compliance.


One notable example of Stark Law violation involves Tuomey Healthcare System in South Carolina. In 2015, a federal jury found Tuomey guilty of entering into illegal compensation arrangements with physicians that violated the Stark Law. The hospital had paid doctors based on the volume and value of their referrals rather than fair market value, leading to improper financial gain for both parties. As a consequence, Tuomey faced a staggering $237 million judgment, which eventually led to bankruptcy and acquisition by another healthcare system. This case underscores how non-compliance can threaten not only financial stability but also the very existence of healthcare institutions.


Another prominent case is that of Halifax Health in Florida. Halifax was accused of engaging in prohibited financial relationships with six oncologists, providing them with contracts that incentivized referrals within their network. The settlement reached $85 million after allegations surfaced that these arrangements breached the Stark Law's provisions against physician self-referral. Such hefty penalties demonstrate how rigorous enforcement aims to deter similar practices across the industry.


The consequences extend beyond financial repercussions; reputational damage is a significant concern as well. For instance, public trust can be severely undermined when patients perceive that their healthcare providers prioritize personal gain over patient welfare. This erosion of trust can result in long-term impacts on patient loyalty and institutional credibility.


Furthermore, non-compliance with the Stark Law often triggers ancillary legal issues such as False Claims Act violations if Medicare or Medicaid funds are involved in fraudulent claims related to illicit referrals. These additional legal battles can lead to increased scrutiny from regulators and further sanctions.


In conclusion, understanding and adhering to the Stark Law is imperative for healthcare providers seeking to maintain ethical standards and avoid detrimental outcomes. Real-world violations elucidate not only the potential financial devastation but also highlight broader implications for organizational integrity and patient trust in the healthcare system. As such, fostering a culture of compliance through education and vigilant oversight remains essential in navigating this complex regulatory landscape while ensuring high-quality care for all patients.

The future of Stark Law in medical coding is a topic that continues to garner significant attention within the healthcare industry. As we delve into understanding Stark Law and its implications, it becomes apparent that this regulation plays a pivotal role in shaping the financial dynamics between physicians and healthcare entities.


Stark Law, formally known as the Physician Self-Referral Law, was enacted to prevent conflicts of interest by prohibiting physicians from referring patients to entities with which they have a financial relationship. The law aims to curb overutilization of services and ensure that medical decisions are made based on patient care rather than financial gain. However, as the healthcare landscape evolves, so too must our understanding and application of this law.


One of the primary challenges facing Stark Law today is its complexity and rigidity. Healthcare delivery models are rapidly changing, increasingly emphasizing integrated care and value-based arrangements. These models often involve intricate networks of providers working collaboratively across various settings. In such an environment, Stark Law's rigid restrictions can sometimes hinder innovation and collaboration efforts aimed at improving patient outcomes.


In response to these challenges, there have been calls for modernization or even reform of Stark Law to better align with contemporary healthcare practices. Efforts such as the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) "Regulatory Sprint to Coordinated Care" reflect attempts to refine these regulations while maintaining their core purpose - protecting against fraud and abuse.


Medical coding professionals must stay abreast of any changes or updates related to Stark Law compliance because accurate coding directly influences billing practices subject to this legislation. Coders need comprehensive training on both existing statutes and prospective reforms so they can effectively navigate potential pitfalls associated with improper referrals or non-compliance penalties.


Looking forward, it's crucial that stakeholders-including policymakers-work collaboratively towards creating a balanced framework where regulatory oversight does not stifle innovation but rather supports efficient service delivery without compromising ethical standards in medicine.


Ultimately, understanding Stark Law goes beyond simply adhering strictly because doing so requires appreciating its underlying intentions: ensuring fair competition among providers while safeguarding taxpayer dollars devoted toward public health programs like Medicare/Medicaid from misuse through unnecessary procedures driven solely by profit motives instead genuine necessity dictated solely best interests patients involved throughout process at all times possible given constraints present within system itself currently being navigated whenever applicable under circumstances encountered during everyday operations conducted therein accordingly moving ahead into foreseeable future anticipated still lies ahead awaiting further developments arise along journey taken together collectively united common goal shared amongst everyone involved alike universally speaking overall!

The landscape of healthcare is continually evolving, and with it, the intricacies surrounding medical coding have become increasingly complex. As medical coders strive to keep pace with these changes, one area that demands particular attention is the Stark Law, formally known as the Physician Self-Referral Law. Understanding this regulation and its implications is crucial for professionals in the field of medical coding as it has profound consequences for compliance and operations within healthcare facilities.


The Stark Law was initially enacted to prevent conflicts of interest in Medicare patient referrals by prohibiting physicians from referring patients for certain designated health services (DHS) to entities in which they or their immediate family members have a financial relationship. The essence of this law is to ensure that medical decisions are made based on patient needs rather than financial gains; however, navigating its provisions can be challenging due to its complexities and frequent updates.


For medical coding professionals, understanding Stark Law involves recognizing how these legal standards impact billing practices. Coders must ensure that claims submitted for reimbursement accurately reflect services provided without crossing into areas that might imply self-referral violations. With healthcare facilities facing hefty fines and penalties if found non-compliant, coders play a pivotal role in safeguarding against inadvertent breaches through meticulous record-keeping and adherence to established guidelines.


One significant potential change impacting medical coders is the increasing use of technology-driven solutions designed to streamline compliance processes. As artificial intelligence and machine learning tools become more prevalent in healthcare settings, they offer promise in identifying patterns or anomalies indicative of Stark Law violations before they occur. Medical coding professionals must adapt by acquiring skills to work alongside these technologies effectively, ensuring they enhance rather than replace human oversight.


Additionally, evolving trends such as value-based care models emphasize outcomes over service volume. This shift necessitates an adjustment in how coding practices align with regulatory compliance like Stark Law while still promoting efficiency and accuracy. Coders need to stay informed about policy changes that reflect these new priorities, continuously updating their knowledge base through professional development opportunities.


Moreover, as regulatory environments become more dynamic globally, coders should be aware of international versions or equivalents of such laws if they work within multinational healthcare systems. This global perspective not only broadens their expertise but also enhances their ability to navigate complex legal landscapes effectively.


In conclusion, understanding the Stark Law is imperative for medical coding professionals amidst potential changes and evolving trends impacting their roles. By staying current with technological advancements and healthcare policy shifts while maintaining rigorous attention to detail in daily tasks, coders can continue providing essential support within a compliant framework. Their efforts significantly contribute to maintaining ethical standards across the industry-ultimately ensuring better patient care outcomes free from undue financial influence.

Employment is a relationship between two parties regulating the provision of paid labour services. Usually based on a contract, one party, the employer, which might be a corporation, a not-for-profit organization, a co-operative, or any other entity, pays the other, the employee, in return for carrying out assigned work.[1] Employees work in return for wages, which can be paid on the basis of an hourly rate, by piecework or an annual salary, depending on the type of work an employee does, the prevailing conditions of the sector and the bargaining power between the parties. Employees in some sectors may receive gratuities, bonus payments or stock options. In some types of employment, employees may receive benefits in addition to payment. Benefits may include health insurance, housing, and disability insurance. Employment is typically governed by employment laws, organization or legal contracts.

Employees and employers

[edit]

An employee contributes labour and expertise to an endeavor of an employer or of a person conducting a business or undertaking (PCB)[2] and is usually hired to perform specific duties which are packaged into a job. In a corporate context, an employee is a person who is hired to provide services to a company on a regular basis in exchange for compensation and who does not provide these services as part of an independent business.[3]

Independent contractor

[edit]

An issue that arises in most companies, especially the ones that are in the gig economy, is the classification of workers. A lot of workers that fulfill gigs are often hired as independent contractors.

To categorize a worker as an independent contractor rather than an employee, an independent contractor must agree with the client on what the finished work product will be and then the contractor controls the means and manner of achieving the desired outcome. Secondly, an independent contractor offers services to the public at large, not just to one business, and is responsible for disbursing payments from the client, paying unreimbursed expenses, and providing his or her own tools to complete the job. Third, the relationship of the parties is often evidenced by a written agreement that specifies that the worker is an independent contractor and is not entitled to employee benefits; the services provided by the worker are not key to the business; and the relationship is not permanent.[4]

As a general principle of employment law, in the United States, there is a difference between an agent and an independent contractor. The default status of a worker is an employee unless specific guidelines are met, which can be determined by the ABC test.[5][6] Thus, clarifying whether someone who performs work is an independent contractor or an employee from the beginning, and treating them accordingly, can save a company from trouble later on.

Provided key circumstances, including ones such as that the worker is paid regularly, follows set hours of work, is supplied with tools from the employer, is closely monitored by the employer, acting on behalf of the employer, only works for one employer at a time, they are considered an employee,[7] and the employer will generally be liable for their actions and be obliged to give them benefits.[8] Similarly, the employer is the owner of any invention created by an employee "hired to invent", even in the absence of an assignment of inventions. In contrast, a company commissioning a work by an independent contractor will not own the copyright unless the company secures either a written contract stating that it is a "work made for hire" or a written assignment of the copyright. In order to stay protected and avoid lawsuits, an employer has to be aware of that distinction.[4]

Employer–worker relationship

[edit]

Employer and managerial control within an organization rests at many levels and has important implications for staff and productivity alike, with control forming the fundamental link between desired outcomes and actual processes. Employers must balance interests such as decreasing wage constraints with a maximization of labor productivity in order to achieve a profitable and productive employment relationship.

Labor acquisition / hiring

[edit]

The main ways for employers to find workers and for people to find employers are via jobs listings in newspapers (via classified advertising) and online, also called job boards. Employers and job seekers also often find each other via professional recruitment consultants which receive a commission from the employer to find, screen and select suitable candidates. However, a study has shown that such consultants may not be reliable when they fail to use established principles in selecting employees.[1] A more traditional approach is with a "Help Wanted" sign in the establishment (usually hung on a window or door[9] or placed on a store counter).[3] Evaluating different employees can be quite laborious but setting up different techniques to analyze their skills to measure their talents within the field can be best through assessments. Employer and potential employee commonly take the additional step of getting to know each other through the process of a job interview.

Training and development

[edit]
Wiki-training with employees of Regional Institute of Culture in Katowice 02

Training and development refers to the employer's effort to equip a newly hired employee with the necessary skills to perform at the job, and to help the employee grow within the organization. An appropriate level of training and development helps to improve employee's job satisfaction.[10]

Remuneration

[edit]

There are many ways that employees are paid, including by hourly wages, by piecework, by yearly salary, or by gratuities (with the latter often being combined with another form of payment). In sales jobs and real estate positions, the employee may be paid a commission, a percentage of the value of the goods or services that they have sold. In some fields and professions (e.g., executive jobs), employees may be eligible for a bonus if they meet certain targets. Some executives and employees may be paid in shares or stock options, a compensation approach that has the added benefit, from the company's point of view, of helping to align the interests of the compensated individual with the performance of the company.

Under the faithless servant doctrine, a doctrine under the laws of a number of states in the United States, and most notably New York State law, an employee who acts unfaithfully towards his employer must forfeit all of the compensation he received during the period of his disloyalty.[11][12][13][14][15]

Employee benefits

[edit]

Employee benefits are various non-wage compensation provided to employees in addition to their wages or salaries. The benefits can include: housing (employer-provided or employer-paid), group insurance (health, dental, life etc.), disability income protection, retirement benefits, daycare, tuition reimbursement, sick leave, vacation (paid and non-paid), social security, profit sharing, funding of education, and other specialized benefits. In some cases, such as with workers employed in remote or isolated regions, the benefits may include meals. Employee benefits can improve the relationship between employee and employer and lowers staff turnover.[16]

Organizational justice

[edit]

Organizational justice is an employee's perception and judgement of employer's treatment in the context of fairness or justice. The resulting actions to influence the employee-employer relationship is also a part of organizational justice.[16]

Workforce organizing

[edit]

Employees can organize into trade or labor unions, which represent the workforce to collectively bargain with the management of organizations about working, and contractual conditions and services.[17]

Ending employment

[edit]

Usually, either an employee or employer may end the relationship at any time, often subject to a certain notice period. This is referred to as at-will employment. The contract between the two parties specifies the responsibilities of each when ending the relationship and may include requirements such as notice periods, severance pay, and security measures.[17] A contract forbidding an employee from leaving their employment, under penalty of a surety bond, is referred to as an employment bond. In some professions, notably teaching, civil servants, university professors, and some orchestra jobs, some employees may have tenure, which means that they cannot be dismissed at will. Another type of termination is a layoff.

Wage labor

[edit]
Worker assembling rebar for a water treatment plant in Mazatlan, Sinaloa, Mexico

Wage labor is the socioeconomic relationship between a worker and an employer, where the worker sells their labor under a formal or informal employment contract. These transactions usually occur in a labor market where wages are market-determined.[10][16] In exchange for the wages paid, the work product generally becomes the undifferentiated property of the employer, except for special cases such as the vesting of intellectual property patents in the United States where patent rights are usually vested in the original personal inventor. A wage laborer is a person whose primary means of income is from the selling of his or her labor in this way.[17]

In modern mixed economies such as that of the OECD countries, it is currently the dominant form of work arrangement. Although most work occurs following this structure, the wage work arrangements of CEOs, professional employees, and professional contract workers are sometimes conflated with class assignments, so that "wage labor" is considered to apply only to unskilled, semi-skilled or manual labor.[18]

Wage slavery

[edit]

Wage labor, as institutionalized under today's market economic systems, has been criticized,[17] especially by socialists,[18][19][20][21] using the pejorative term wage slavery.[22][23] Socialists draw parallels between the trade of labor as a commodity and slavery. Cicero is also known to have suggested such parallels.[24]

The American philosopher John Dewey posited that until "industrial feudalism" is replaced by "industrial democracy", politics will be "the shadow cast on society by big business".[25] Thomas Ferguson has postulated in his investment theory of party competition that the undemocratic nature of economic institutions under capitalism causes elections to become occasions when blocs of investors coalesce and compete to control the state plus cities.[26]

American business theorist Jeffrey Pfeffer posits that contemporary employment practices and employer commonalities in the United States, including toxic working environments, job insecurity, long hours and increased performance pressure from management, are responsible for 120,000 excess deaths annually, making the workplace the fifth leading cause of death in the United States.[27][28]

Employment contract

[edit]

Australia

[edit]

Australian employment has been governed by the Fair Work Act since 2009.[29]

Bangladesh

[edit]

Bangladesh Association of International Recruiting Agencies (BAIRA) is an association of national level with its international reputation of co-operation and welfare of the migrant workforce as well as its approximately 1200 members agencies in collaboration with and support from the Government of Bangladesh.[18]

Canada

[edit]

In the Canadian province of Ontario, formal complaints can be brought to the Ministry of Labour. In the province of Quebec, grievances can be filed with the Commission des normes du travail.[21]

Germany

[edit]

Two of the prominent examples of work and employment contracts in Germany are the Werksvertrag[30][31] or the Arbeitsvertrag,[32][33][34][35] which is a form of Dienstleistungsvertrag (service-oriented contract). An Arbeitsvertrag can also be temporary,[36] whereas a temporary worker is working under Zeitarbeit[37] or Leiharbeit.[38] Another employment setting is Arbeitnehmerüberlassung (ANÜ).[39][40][41]

India

[edit]

India has options for a fixed term contract or a permanent contract. Both contracts are entitled to minimum wages, fixed working hours and social security contributions.[21]

Pakistan

[edit]

Pakistan has no contract Labor, Minimum Wage and Provident Funds Acts. Contract labor in Pakistan must be paid minimum wage and certain facilities are to be provided to labor. However, the Acts are not yet fully implemented.[18]

Philippines

[edit]

In the Philippines, employment is regulated by the Department of Labor and Employment.[42]

Sweden

[edit]

According to Swedish law,[43] there are three types of employment.

  • Test employment (Swedish: Provanställning), where the employer hires a person for a test period of 6 months maximum. The employment can be ended at any time without giving any reason. This type of employment can be offered only once per employer and in employee combination. Usually, a time limited or normal employment is offered after a test employment.[44]
  • Time limited employment (Swedish: Tidsbegränsad anställning). The employer hires a person for a specified time. Usually, they are extended for a new period. Total maximum two years per employer and employee combination, then it automatically counts as a normal employment.
  • Normal employment (Swedish: Tillsvidareanställning / Fast anställning), which has no time limit (except for retirement etc.). It can still be ended for two reasons: personal reason, immediate end of employment only for strong reasons such as crime, or lack of work tasks (Swedish: Arbetsbrist), cancellation of employment, usually because of bad income for the company. There is a cancellation period of 1–6 months, and rules for how to select employees, basically those with shortest employment time shall be cancelled first.[44]

There are no laws about minimum salary in Sweden. Instead, there are agreements between employer organizations and trade unions about minimum salaries, and other employment conditions.

There is a type of employment contract which is common but not regulated in law, and that is Hour employment (Swedish: Timanställning), which can be Normal employment (unlimited), but the work time is unregulated and decided per immediate need basis. The employee is expected to be answering the phone and come to work when needed, e.g. when someone is ill and absent from work. They will receive salary only for actual work time and can in reality be fired for no reason by not being called anymore. This type of contract is common in the public sector.[44]

United Kingdom

[edit]
A call centre worker confined to a small workstation/booth

In the United Kingdom, employment contracts are categorized by the government into the following types:[45]

  • Fixed-term contract: last for a certain length of time, are set in advance, end when a specific task is completed, ends when a specific event takes place.
  • Full-time or part-time contract: has no defined length of time, can be terminated by either party, is to accomplish a specific task, specified number of hours.[42]
  • Agency staff
  • Freelancers, Consultants and Contractors
  • Zero-hour contracts

United States

[edit]
All employees, private industries, by branches

For purposes of U.S. federal income tax withholding, 26 U.S.C. § 3401(c) provides a definition for the term "employee" specific to chapter 24 of the Internal Revenue Code:

Government employment as % of total employment in EU

"For purposes of this chapter, the term "employee" includes an officer, employee, or elected official of the United States, a State, or any political subdivision thereof, or the District of Columbia, or any agency or instrumentality of any one or more of the foregoing. The term "employee" also includes an officer of a corporation."[46] This definition does not exclude all those who are commonly known as 'employees'. "Similarly, Latham's instruction which indicated that under 26 U.S.C. § 3401(c) the category of 'employee' does not include privately employed wage earners is a preposterous reading of the statute. It is obvious that within the context of both statutes the word 'includes' is a term of enlargement not of limitation, and the reference to certain entities or categories is not intended to exclude all others."[47]

Employees are often contrasted with independent contractors, especially when there is dispute as to the worker's entitlement to have matching taxes paid, workers compensation, and unemployment insurance benefits. However, in September 2009, the court case of Brown v. J. Kaz, Inc. ruled that independent contractors are regarded as employees for the purpose of discrimination laws if they work for the employer on a regular basis, and said employer directs the time, place, and manner of employment.[42]

In non-union work environments, in the United States, unjust termination complaints can be brought to the United States Department of Labor.[48]

Labor unions are legally recognized as representatives of workers in many industries in the United States. Their activity today centers on collective bargaining over wages, benefits, and working conditions for their membership, and on representing their members in disputes with management over violations of contract provisions. Larger unions also typically engage in lobbying activities and electioneering at the state and federal level.[42]

Most unions in America are aligned with one of two larger umbrella organizations: the AFL–CIO created in 1955, and the Change to Win Federation which split from the AFL–CIO in 2005. Both advocate policies and legislation on behalf of workers in the United States and Canada, and take an active role in politics. The AFL–CIO is especially concerned with global trade issues.[26]

[edit]

Younger age workers

[edit]
Youth employment rate in the US, i.e. the ratio of employed persons (15–24Y) in an economy to total labor force (15–24Y)[49]

Young workers are at higher risk for occupational injury and face certain occupational hazards at a higher rate; this is generally due to their employment in high-risk industries. For example, in the United States, young people are injured at work at twice the rate of their older counterparts.[50] These workers are also at higher risk for motor vehicle accidents at work, due to less work experience, a lower use of seat belts, and higher rates of distracted driving.[51][52] To mitigate this risk, those under the age of 17 are restricted from certain types of driving, including transporting people and goods under certain circumstances.[51]

High-risk industries for young workers include agriculture, restaurants, waste management, and mining.[50][51] In the United States, those under the age of 18 are restricted from certain jobs that are deemed dangerous under the Fair Labor Standards Act.[51]

Youth employment programs are most effective when they include both theoretical classroom training and hands-on training with work placements.[53]

In the conversation of employment among younger aged workers, youth unemployment has also been monitored. Youth unemployment rates tend to be higher than the adult rates in every country in the world.[54]

Older age workers

[edit]

Those older than the statutory defined retirement age may continue to work, either out of enjoyment or necessity. However, depending on the nature of the job, older workers may need to transition into less-physical forms of work to avoid injury. Working past retirement age also has positive effects, because it gives a sense of purpose and allows people to maintain social networks and activity levels.[55] Older workers are often found to be discriminated against by employers.[56]

Working poor

[edit]
A worker in Dhaka, Bangladesh

Employment is no guarantee of escaping poverty, the International Labour Organization (ILO) estimates that as many as 40% of workers are poor, not earning enough to keep their families above the $2 a day poverty line.[44] For instance, in India most of the chronically poor are wage earners in formal employment, because their jobs are insecure and low paid and offer no chance to accumulate wealth to avoid risks.[44] According to the UNRISD, increasing labor productivity appears to have a negative impact on job creation: in the 1960s, a 1% increase in output per worker was associated with a reduction in employment growth of 0.07%, by the first decade of this century the same productivity increase implies reduced employment growth by 0.54%.[44] Both increased employment opportunities and increased labor productivity (as long as it also translates into higher wages) are needed to tackle poverty. Increases in employment without increases in productivity leads to a rise in the number of "working poor", which is why some experts are now promoting the creation of "quality" and not "quantity" in labor market policies.[44] This approach does highlight how higher productivity has helped reduce poverty in East Asia, but the negative impact is beginning to show.[44] In Vietnam, for example, employment growth has slowed while productivity growth has continued.[44] Furthermore, productivity increases do not always lead to increased wages, as can be seen in the United States, where the gap between productivity and wages has been rising since the 1980s.[44] Oxfam and social scientist Mark Robert Rank have argued that the economy of the United States is failing to provide jobs that can adequately support families.[57][58] According to sociologist Matthew Desmond, the US "offers some of the lowest wages in the industrialized world," which has "swelled the ranks of the working poor, most of whom are thirty-five or older."[59]

Researchers at the Overseas Development Institute argue that there are differences across economic sectors in creating employment that reduces poverty.[44] 24 instances of growth were examined, in which 18 reduced poverty. This study showed that other sectors were just as important in reducing unemployment, such as manufacturing.[44] The services sector is most effective at translating productivity growth into employment growth. Agriculture provides a safety net for jobs and economic buffer when other sectors are struggling.[44]

Growth, employment and poverty[44]
  Number of
episodes
Rising
agricultural
employment
Rising
industrial
employment
Rising
services
employment
Growth episodes associated with falling poverty rates
18
6
10
15
Growth episodes associated with no fall in poverty rates
6
2
3
1

Models of the employment relationship

[edit]

Scholars conceptualize the employment relationship in various ways.[60] A key assumption is the extent to which the employment relationship necessarily includes conflicts of interests between employers and employees, and the form of such conflicts.[61] In economic theorizing, the labor market mediates all such conflicts such that employers and employees who enter into an employment relationship are assumed to find this arrangement in their own self-interest. In human resource management theorizing, employers and employees are assumed to have shared interests (or a unity of interests, hence the label “unitarism”). Any conflicts that exist are seen as a manifestation of poor human resource management policies or interpersonal clashes such as personality conflicts, both of which can and should be managed away. From the perspective of pluralist industrial relations, the employment relationship is characterized by a plurality of stakeholders with legitimate interests (hence the label “pluralism), and some conflicts of interests are seen as inherent in the employment relationship (e.g., wages v. profits). Lastly, the critical paradigm emphasizes antagonistic conflicts of interests between various groups (e.g., the competing capitalist and working classes in a Marxist framework) that are part of a deeper social conflict of unequal power relations. As a result, there are four common models of employment:[62]

  1. Mainstream economics: employment is seen as a mutually advantageous transaction in a free market between self-interested legal and economic equals
  2. Human resource management (unitarism): employment is a long-term partnership of employees and employers with common interests
  3. Pluralist industrial relations: employment is a bargained exchange between stakeholders with some common and some competing economic interests and unequal bargaining power due to imperfect labor markets[44]
  4. Critical industrial relations: employment is an unequal power relation between competing groups that is embedded in and inseparable from systemic inequalities throughout the socio-politico-economic system.

These models are important because they help reveal why individuals hold differing perspectives on human resource management policies, labor unions, and employment regulation.[63] For example, human resource management policies are seen as dictated by the market in the first view, as essential mechanisms for aligning the interests of employees and employers and thereby creating profitable companies in the second view, as insufficient for looking out for workers’ interests in the third view, and as manipulative managerial tools for shaping the ideology and structure of the workplace in the fourth view.[64]

Academic literature

[edit]

Literature on the employment impact of economic growth and on how growth is associated with employment at a macro, sector and industry level was aggregated in 2013.[65]

Researchers found evidence to suggest growth in manufacturing and services have good impact on employment. They found GDP growth on employment in agriculture to be limited, but that value-added growth had a relatively larger impact.[44] The impact on job creation by industries/economic activities as well as the extent of the body of evidence and the key studies. For extractives, they again found extensive evidence suggesting growth in the sector has limited impact on employment. In textiles, however, although evidence was low, studies suggest growth there positively contributed to job creation. In agri-business and food processing, they found impact growth to be positive.[65]

They found that most available literature focuses on OECD and middle-income countries somewhat, where economic growth impact has been shown to be positive on employment. The researchers didn't find sufficient evidence to conclude any impact of growth on employment in LDCs despite some pointing to the positive impact, others point to limitations. They recommended that complementary policies are necessary to ensure economic growth's positive impact on LDC employment. With trade, industry and investment, they only found limited evidence of positive impact on employment from industrial and investment policies and for others, while large bodies of evidence does exist, the exact impact remains contested.[65]

Researchers have also explored the relationship between employment and illicit activities. Using evidence from Africa, a research team found that a program for Liberian ex-fighters reduced work hours on illicit activities. The employment program also reduced interest in mercenary work in nearby wars. The study concludes that while the use of capital inputs or cash payments for peaceful work created a reduction in illicit activities, the impact of training alone is rather low.[66]

Globalization and employment relations

[edit]

The balance of economic efficiency and social equity is the ultimate debate in the field of employment relations.[67] By meeting the needs of the employer; generating profits to establish and maintain economic efficiency; whilst maintaining a balance with the employee and creating social equity that benefits the worker so that he/she can fund and enjoy healthy living; proves to be a continuous revolving issue in westernized societies.[67]

Globalization has affected these issues by creating certain economic factors that disallow or allow various employment issues. Economist Edward Lee (1996) studies the effects of globalization and summarizes the four major points of concern that affect employment relations:

  1. International competition, from the newly industrialized countries, will cause unemployment growth and increased wage disparity for unskilled workers in industrialized countries. Imports from low-wage countries exert pressure on the manufacturing sector in industrialized countries and foreign direct investment (FDI) is attracted away from the industrialized nations, towards low-waged countries.[67]
  2. Economic liberalization will result in unemployment and wage inequality in developing countries. This happens as job losses in uncompetitive industries outstrip job opportunities in new industries.
  3. Workers will be forced to accept worsening wages and conditions, as a global labor market results in a “race to the bottom”. Increased international competition creates a pressure to reduce the wages and conditions of workers.[67]
  4. Globalization reduces the autonomy of the nation state. Capital is increasingly mobile and the ability of the state to regulate economic activity is reduced.

What also results from Lee's (1996) findings is that in industrialized countries an average of almost 70 per cent of workers are employed in the service sector, most of which consists of non-tradable activities. As a result, workers are forced to become more skilled and develop sought after trades, or find other means of survival. Ultimately this is a result of changes and trends of employment, an evolving workforce, and globalization that is represented by a more skilled and increasing highly diverse labor force, that are growing in non standard forms of employment (Markey, R. et al. 2006).[67]

Alternatives

[edit]

Subcultures

[edit]

Various youth subcultures have been associated with not working, such as the hippie subculture in the 1960s and 1970s (which endorsed the idea of "dropping out" of society) and the punk subculture.

Post-secondary education

[edit]

One of the alternatives to work is engaging in post-secondary education at a college, university or professional school. One of the major costs of obtaining a post-secondary education is the opportunity cost of forgone wages due to not working. At times when jobs are hard to find, such as during recessions, unemployed individuals may decide to get post-secondary education, because there is less of an opportunity cost.

Social assistance

[edit]

In some countries, individuals who are not working can receive social assistance support (e.g., welfare or food stamps) to enable them to rent housing, buy food, repair or replace household goods, maintenance of children and observe social customs that require financial expenditure.

Volunteerism

[edit]

Workers who are not paid wages, such as volunteers who perform tasks for charities, hospitals or not-for-profit organizations, are generally not considered employed. One exception to this is an internship, an employment situation in which the worker receives training or experience (and possibly college credit) as the chief form of compensation.[68]

Indentured servitude and slavery

[edit]

Those who work under obligation for the purpose of fulfilling a debt, such as indentured servants, or as property of the person or entity they work for, such as slaves, do not receive pay for their services and are not considered employed. Some historians[which?] suggest that slavery is older than employment, but both arrangements have existed for all recorded history.[citation needed] Indentured servitude and slavery are not considered compatible with human rights or with democracy.[68]

Self-employment

[edit]

Self-employment is the state of working for oneself rather than an employer. Tax authorities will generally view a person as self-employed if the person chooses to be recognised as such or if the person is generating income for which a tax return needs to be filed. In the real world, the critical issue for tax authorities is not whether a person is engaged in business activity (called trading even when referring to the provision of a service) but whether the activity is profitable and therefore potentially taxable. In other words, the trading is likely to be ignored if there is no profit, so occasional and hobby- or enthusiast-based economic activity is generally ignored by tax authorities. Self-employed people are usually classified as a sole proprietor (or sole trader), independent contractor, or as a member of a partnership.

Self-employed people generally find their own work rather than being provided with work by an employer and instead earn income from a profession, a trade, or a business that they operate. In some countries, such as the United States and the United Kingdom, the authorities are placing more emphasis on clarifying whether an individual is self-employed or engaged in disguised employment, in other words pretending to be in a contractual intra-business relationship to hide what is in fact an employer-employee relationship.

Local employment

[edit]

Local employment initiatives aim to ensure that residents of the area adjacent to an employers' premises are offered employment there. Local jobs initiatives are common in a construction context.[69] In retail, the Westfield Centre in west London, which opened in 2008, has been noted as an example offering employment to local residents: during the period when the centre was under construction, up to 3000 local people received pre-employment training through a partnership scheme aiming to ensure that a significant proportion of the centre's jobs were taken up by local people. 40% of the centre's management staff had been locally recruited at the time when the centre opened.[70]

Statistics

[edit]

See also

[edit]
  • Alternative employment arrangements
  • Automation
  • Bullshit job
  • Career-oriented social networking market
  • Critique of work
  • Domestic inquiry
  • Employer branding
  • Employer registration
  • Employment gap
  • Employment of autistic people
  • Employment rate
  • Employment website
  • The End of Work
  • Equal opportunity employment
  • Equal pay for equal work
  • Ethnic Penalty
  • Faithless servant
  • Green growth
  • Job analysis
  • Job description
  • Job guarantee
  • Jobless recovery
  • Labor economics
  • Labor power
  • Labor rights
  • List of largest employers
  • Lump of labor fallacy
  • Onboarding
  • Payroll
  • Personnel selection
  • Post-work society
  • Protestant work ethic
  • Refusal of work
  • Reserve army of labor (Marxism)
  • Salary inversion
  • Staffing models
  • Universal basic income
  • Work ethic
  • Work (human activity)

Notes and references

[edit]
  1. ^ a b Dakin, Stephen; Armstrong, J. Scott (1989). "Predicting job performance: A comparison of expert opinion and research findings" (PDF). International Journal of Forecasting. 5 (2): 187–94. doi:10.1016/0169-2070(89)90086-1. S2CID 14567834.
  2. ^ Archer, Richard; Borthwick, Kerry; Travers, Michelle; Ruschena, Leo (2017). WHS: A Management Guide (4th ed.). Cengage Learning Australia. pp. 30–31. ISBN 978-0-17-027079-3. Retrieved 2016-03-30. The most significant definitions are 'person conducting a business or undertaking' (PCBU). 'worker' and 'workplace'. [...] 'PCBU' is a wider ranging term than 'employer', though this will be what most people understand by it.
  3. ^ a b Robert A. Ristau (2010). Intro to Business. Cengage Learning. p. 74. ISBN 978-0-538-74066-1.
  4. ^ a b Bagley, Constance E (2017). The entrepreneur's guide to law and strategy. Cengage Learning. ISBN 978-1-285-42849-9. OCLC 953710378.
  5. ^ "ABC test". Legal Information Institute (LII). Retrieved 2022-10-06.
  6. ^ Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court, vol. 4, April 30, 2018, p. 903, retrieved March 30, 2020
  7. ^ "Overview of Independent Contractor Guidelines". Findlaw. Retrieved 2020-03-30.
  8. ^ "Employer Liability for Employee Conduct". Findlaw. Retrieved 2020-03-30.
  9. ^ J. Mayhew Wainwright (1910). Report to the Legislature of the State of New York by the Commission appointed under Chapter 518 of the laws of 1909 to inquire into the question of employers' liability and other matters (Report). J. B. Lyon Company. pp. 11, 50, 144.
  10. ^ a b Deakin, Simon; Wilkinson, Frank (2005). The Law of the Labour Market (PDF). Oxford University Press.
  11. ^ Glynn, Timothy P.; Arnow-Richman, Rachel S.; Sullivan, Charles A. (2019). Employment Law: Private Ordering and Its Limitations. Wolters Kluwer Law & Business. ISBN 978-1-5438-0106-4 – via Google Books.
  12. ^ Annual Institute on Employment Law. Vol. 2. Practising Law Institute. 2004 – via Google Books.
  13. ^ New York Jurisprudence 2d. Vol. 52. West Group. 2009 – via Google Books.
  14. ^ Labor Cases. Vol. 158. Commerce Clearing House. 2009 – via Google Books.
  15. ^ Ellie Kaufman (May 19, 2018). "Met Opera sues former conductor for $5.8 million over sexual misconduct allegations". CNN.
  16. ^ a b c Marx, Karl (1847). "Chapter 2". Wage Labour and Capital.
  17. ^ a b c d Ellerman 1992.
  18. ^ a b c d Ostergaard 1997, p. 133.
  19. ^ Thompson 1966, p. 599.
  20. ^ Thompson 1966, p. 912.
  21. ^ a b c Lazonick, William (1990). Competitive Advantage on the Shop Floor. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. p. 37. ISBN 978-0-674-15416-2.
  22. ^ "wage slave". merriam-webster.com. Retrieved 4 March 2013.
  23. ^ "wage slave". Dictionary.com Unabridged (Online). n.d.
  24. ^ "...vulgar are the means of livelihood of all hired workmen whom we pay for mere manual labour, not for artistic skill; for in their case the very wage they receive is a pledge of their slavery." – De Officiis [1]
  25. ^ "As long as politics is the shadow cast on society by big business, the attenuation of the shadow will not change the substance", in "The Need for a New Party" (1931), Later Works 6, p163
  26. ^ a b Ferguson 1995.
  27. ^ Pfeffer, Jeffrey (2018). Dying for a Paycheck: How Modern Management Harms Employee Health and Company Performance – and What We Can Do About It. HarperBusiness. p. 38. ISBN 978-0-06-280092-3.
  28. ^ McGregor, Jena (March 22, 2018). "This professor says the workplace is the fifth leading cause of death in the U.S." The Washington Post. Retrieved June 7, 2023.
  29. ^ "House of Reps seals 'death' of WorkChoices". ABC News. Australian Broadcasting Corporation. 2008-03-19. Retrieved 2014-02-15.
  30. ^ Gross, Willi; Söhnlein, Walter (1990), Gross, Willi; Söhnlein, Walter (eds.), "Werkvertrag", Bürgerliches Recht 3: Fall · Systematik · Lösung · Schuldrecht · Besonderer Teil. Kauf und Tausch · Schenkung · Miete und Pacht · Leihe · Verwahrung · Darlehen · Bürgschaft · Dienst- und Werkvertrag (in German), Wiesbaden: Gabler Verlag, pp. 127–135, doi:10.1007/978-3-322-99402-8_13, ISBN 978-3-322-99402-8, retrieved 2021-04-11
  31. ^ "§ 631 BGB – Einzelnorm". www.gesetze-im-internet.de. Retrieved 2021-04-11.
  32. ^ "Arbeitsrecht". Recht – Schnell Erfasst. 2006. doi:10.1007/3-540-32544-1. ISBN 3-540-32541-7.
  33. ^ Höhl, Rebekka (2017). "Kollegen anstellen: Was beim Arbeitsvertrag zu beachten ist!". Uro-News (in German). 21: 45. doi:10.1007/s00092-017-1358-0.
  34. ^ "§ 611a BGB – Einzelnorm". www.gesetze-im-internet.de. Retrieved 2021-04-11.
  35. ^ "Links zu Musterverträgen". IHK Frankfurt am Main (in German). Retrieved 2021-04-11.
  36. ^ "Arbeitsvertrag (Befristet)". IHK Frankfurt am Main (in German). Retrieved 2021-04-11.
  37. ^ "Zeitarbeit: Infos und Stellen | Bundesagentur für Arbeit". www.arbeitsagentur.de. Retrieved 2024-05-17.
  38. ^ "Zeitarbeit = Leiharbeit: häufige Fragen – Bundesagentur für Arbeit". www.arbeitsagentur.de. Retrieved 2021-04-11.
  39. ^ Auer, M.; Egglmeier-Schmolke, B. (2009-10-01). "Arbeitnehmerüberlassung aus Deutschland im Bereich des Baugewerbes". Baurechtliche Blätter (in German). 12 (5): 199. doi:10.1007/s00738-009-0718-x. ISSN 1613-7612. S2CID 176538819.
  40. ^ Stieglmeier, Jacqueline (2005), Hök, Götz-Sebastian (ed.), "Internationales Arbeitsrecht", Handbuch des internationalen und ausländischen Baurechts (in German), Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, pp. 361–368, doi:10.1007/3-540-27450-2_24, ISBN 978-3-540-27450-6, retrieved 2021-04-11
  41. ^ "AÜG – nichtamtliches Inhaltsverzeichnis". www.gesetze-im-internet.de. Retrieved 2021-04-11.
  42. ^ a b c d "Brown v. J. Kaz, Inc., No. 08-2713 (3d Cir. Sept. 11, 2009)". Archived from the original on 2012-03-23. Retrieved 2010-01-23.
  43. ^ Lag om anställningsskydd (1982:80)
  44. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p Claire Melamed, Renate Hartwig and Ursula Grant 2011. Jobs, growth and poverty: what do we know, what don't we know, what should we know? Archived May 20, 2011, at the Wayback Machine London: Overseas Development Institute
  45. ^ "Contract types and employer responsibilities". gov.uk. Retrieved 21 May 2014.
  46. ^ 26 U.S.C. § 3401(c)
  47. ^ United States v. Latham, 754 F.2d 747, 750 (7th Cir. 1985).
  48. ^ "Termination". United States Department of Labor. Archived from the original on 27 September 2012. Retrieved 27 September 2012.
  49. ^ "Bluenomics". Archived from the original on 2014-11-17.
  50. ^ a b "Young Worker Safety and Health". www.cdc.gov. CDC NIOSH Workplace Safety and Health Topic. Retrieved 2015-06-15.
  51. ^ a b c d "Work-Related Motor Vehicle Crashes" (PDF). NIOSH Publication 2013-153. NIOSH. September 2013.
  52. ^ "Work-Related Motor Vehicle Crashes: Preventing Injury to Young Drivers" (PDF). NIOSH Publication 2013-152. NIOSH. September 2013.
  53. ^ Joseph Holden, Youth employment programmes – What can be learnt from international experience with youth employment programmes? Economic and private sector professional evidence and applied knowledge services https://partnerplatform.org/?fza26891
  54. ^ Pastore, Francesco (2018-01-23). "Why is youth unemployment so high and different across countries?". IZA World of Labor. doi:10.15185/izawol.420.
  55. ^ Chosewood, L. Casey (May 3, 2011). "When It Comes to Work, How Old Is Too Old?". NIOSH: Workplace Safety and Health. Medscape and NIOSH.
  56. ^ Baert, Stijn (February 20, 2016). "Getting Grey Hairs in the Labour Market: An Alternative Experiment on Age Discrimination". Journal of Economic Psychology. 57: 86–101. doi:10.1016/j.joep.2016.10.002. hdl:10419/114164. S2CID 38265879.
  57. ^ Henderson, Kaitlyn (May 3, 2023). "Where hard work doesn't pay off: An index of US labor policies compared to peer nations". Oxfam. Retrieved February 18, 2024. The US is falling drastically behind similar countries in mandating adequate wages, protections, and rights for millions of workers and their families. The wealthiest country in the world is near the bottom of every dimension of this index.
  58. ^ Rank, Mark Robert (2023). The Poverty Paradox: Understanding Economic Hardship Amid American Prosperity. Oxford University Press. pp. 4, 121. ISBN 978-0190212636. The tendency of our free market economy has been to produce a growing number of jobs that will no longer support a family. In addition, the basic nature of capitalism ensures that unemployment exists at modest levels. Both of these directly result in a shortage of economic opportunities in American society. In addition, the absence of social supports stems from failings at the political and policy levels. The United States has traditionally lacked the political desire to put in place effective policies and programs that would support the economically vulnerable. Structural failing at the economic and political levels have therefore produced a lack of opportunities and supports, resulting in high rates of American poverty.
  59. ^ Desmond, Matthew (2023). Poverty, by America. Crown Publishing Group. p. 62. ISBN 9780593239919.
  60. ^ Kaufman, Bruce E. (2004) Theoretical Perspectives on Work and the Employment Relationship, Industrial Relations Research Association.
  61. ^ Fox, Alan (1974) Beyond Contract: Work, Power and Trust Relations, Farber and Farber.
  62. ^ Budd, John W. and Bhave, Devasheesh (2008) "Values, Ideologies, and Frames of Reference in Industrial Relations," in Sage Handbook of Industrial Relations, Sage.
  63. ^ Befort, Stephen F. and Budd, John W. (2009) Invisible Hands, Invisible Objectives: Bringing Workplace Law and Public Policy Into Focus, Stanford University Press.
  64. ^ Budd, John W. and Bhave, Devasheesh (2010) "The Employment Relationship," in Sage Handbook of Handbook of Human Resource Management, Sage.
  65. ^ a b c Yurendra Basnett and Ritwika Sen, What do empirical studies say about economic growth and job creation in developing countries? Economic and private sector professional evidence and applied knowledge services https://partnerplatform.org/?7ljwndv4
  66. ^ Blattman, Christopher; Annan, Jeannie (2016-02-01). "Can Employment Reduce Lawlessness and Rebellion? A Field Experiment with High-Risk Men in a Fragile State". American Political Science Review. 110 (1): 1–17. doi:10.1017/S0003055415000520. ISSN 0003-0554. S2CID 229170512.
  67. ^ a b c d e Budd, John W. (2004) Employment with a Human Face: Balancing Efficiency, Equity, and Voice, Cornell University Press.
  68. ^ a b Rayasam, Renuka (24 April 2008). "Why Workplace Democracy Can Be Good Business". U.S. News & World Report. Retrieved 16 August 2010.
  69. ^ Joseph Rowntree Foundation, Local labour in construction: tackling social exclusion and skill shortages, published November 2000, accessed 17 February 2024
  70. ^ All Party Urban Development Group, Building local jobs, p. 18, published in 2008, accessed on 25 December 2024

General bibliography

[edit]
  • Acocella, Nicola (2007). Social pacts, employment and growth: a reappraisal of Ezio Tarantelli's thought. Heidelberg: Springer Verlag. ISBN 978-3-7908-1915-1.
  • Anderson, Elizabeth (2017). Private Government: How Employers Rule Our Lives (and Why We Don't Talk about It). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. ISBN 978-0-691-17651-2.
  • Dubin, Robert (1958). The World of Work: Industrial Society and Human Relations. Englewood Cliffs, N.J: Prentice-Hall. p. 213. OCLC 964691.
  • Ellerman, David P. (1992). Property and Contract in Economics: The Case for Economic Democracy. Blackwell. ISBN 1-55786-309-1.
  • Freeman, Richard B.; Goroff, Daniel L. (2009). Science and Engineering Careers in the United States: An Analysis of Markets and Employment. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. ISBN 978-0-226-26189-8.
  • Ferguson, Thomas (1995). Golden Rule : The Investment Theory of Party Competition and the Logic of Money-Driven Political Systems. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. ISBN 0-226-24317-6. Retrieved January 26, 2023.
  • Lee, Eddy (January 1996). "Globalization and Employment: Is Anxiety Justified?". International Labour Review. 135 (5): 485–98. Archived from the original on 2013-05-16. Retrieved 2017-08-27.
  • Markey, Raymond; Hodgkinson, Ann; Kowalczyk, Jo (2002). "Gender, part-time employment and employee participation in Australian workplaces". Employee Relations. 24 (2): 129–50. doi:10.1108/01425450210420884.
  • Ostergaard, Geoffrey (1997). The Tradition of Workers' Control. London: Freedom Press. ISBN 978-0-900384-91-2.
  • Stone, Raymond J. (2005). Human Resource Management (5th ed.). Milton, Qld: John Wiley. pp. 412–14. ISBN 978-0-470-80403-2.
  • Thompson, E. P. (1966) [1963]. The Making of the English Working Class. New York: Vintage. ISBN 978-0-394-70322-0.
  • Wood, Jack M. (2004). Organisational Behaviour: A Global Perspective (3rd ed.). Milton, Qld: Wiley. pp. 355–57. ISBN 978-0-470-80262-5.
[edit]
  • Business Link (archived from the original on 29 September 2012)
  • "Labor and Employment". Government Information Library. University of Colorado at Boulder. Archived from the original on 2009-06-12. Retrieved 2009-08-05.
  • "Overview and topics of labour statistics". Statistics and databases. International Labour Organization.