TAILIEUCHUNG - Institutional Inequality and the Mobilization of the Family and Medical Leave Act

For many years the United States was virtually the only major industrial- ized country without a family and medical leave policy. Employers could legally fire a worker who needed time off to care for a seriously ill child, parent, or spouse. Employers had wide latitude to fire workers tempo- rarily unable to work because of illnesses or injuries. Employers could legally fire women who needed time off for pregnancy and childbirth if they also denied time off to nonpregnant employees who were unable to work. And, although some employers provided parental leave after the birth of a new child, this discretionary leave. | Institutional Inequality and the Mobilization of the Family and Medical Leave Act Rights on Leave Catherine R. Albiston CAUHlDGI AT II DI FA IX UH AXD SOCIBYY Camak I IK. I Cambridge g 9780521878975 This page intentionally left blank INSTITUTIONAL INEQUALITY AND THE MOBILIZATION OF THE FAMILY AND MEDICAL LEAVE ACT How do the rights created by the Family and Medical Leave Act operate in practice in the courts and in the workplace This empirical study examines how institutions and social practices transform the meaning of these rights to re-create inequality. Workplace rules and norms built around the family wage ideal the assumption that disability and work are mutually exclusive and management s historical control over time all constrain opportunities for social change. Yet workers can also mobilize rights as a cultural discourse to change the social meaning of family and medical leave. Drawing on theoretical frameworks from social constructivism and new institutionalism this study explains how institutions transform rights to re-create systems of power and inequality but at the same time also provide opportunities for law to change social structure. It provides a fresh look at the perennial debate about law and social change by examining how institutions shape the process of rights mobilization. Catherine R. Albiston is Professor of Law at the University of California Berkeley. She is active in the American Sociological Association and the Law and Society Association serving in several capacities including Trustee for the Law and Society Association. Her research has been supported by grants from the National Science Foundation and the American Bar Foundation and she has published widely in peer-reviewed journals and law reviews including Law Society Review and Annual Review of Law Social .

• Tiếng Anh thương mại
• Legal Reform
• The Paradox
• Rights
• Institutions
• Social Meaning
• Mobilizing Rights
• Property law reform
• Principles in property law reform
• Law system integrity
• Interest protection
• Economic development
• FinTech legal framework
• conceptual framework
• police administrative
• detention powers
• administrative detention
• eliminate prostitution
• Administrative and territorial reform
• European integration processes
• Legal standards of the EU countries
• Inter budgetary relations
• Local self government
• the Neoconservative Era
• n the Liberal Era
• The Future
• Mental Health
• the Insane Offender
• United Nation Security Council
• Organ of the Organization
• Claims of democracy
• Public International Law
• Non procedural matters
• administrative implementation
• Shared administration
• disbursement
• regulatory state
• ongoing reform
• transatlantic regulation
• EU administrative
• Education
• Work
• Prevention
• International Law
• Experiences
• Children’s Rights