劳资契约安排的制度逻辑——无固定期限劳动合同的法律经济学重读

无固定期限劳动合同引发了任何规则建构都必须依循其内在制度逻辑这一普适性的法理学命题。基于法律经济学的分析视角,无论是《劳动合同法》还是配套的《实施条例》,无固定期限劳动合同皆无法保护员工的职业稳定权,反而损害了同样值得珍视的就业权,引发了一系列影响就业数量、就业质量的利益再分配效应。缘于人力资本在监督、计量上的技术难度,企业无法就员工是否"不能胜任工作"等常规合同解除条件给出满足可观察、可检验要件的客观证据,无法满足司法治理机制的"外部视角"对于证据可观察、可检验的刚性约束,《劳动合同法》赋予企业的合同解除抗辩权不具有司法操作意义。在劳动力结构性过剩的背景下,以提升劳动者职业技能、降低其可替代性来提高企业解除劳资契约关系的退出成本,应当是更有助于激励企业保持稳定的劳资契约关系、节省执法成本的可行进路。     

城市房屋拆迁法律性质之定位

我国现行的《城市房屋拆迁管理条例》不仅存在若干内容与上位法相抵触的问题,而且模糊了房屋拆迁的法律性质。政府一方面实际主导着拆迁,另一方面又不承担拆迁人应有的法律义务。政府、拆迁人与被拆迁人之间的关系含混不清,是造成被拆迁人处于不利地位的根本法律原因。法律修改的首要问题在于理顺拆迁法律关系,明确房屋拆迁的行政征收性质,依此对房屋拆迁各方的权利义务进行重新配置。政府作为行政征收人直接承担对被拆迁人履行拆迁程序、拆迁补偿等方面的义务。     

论连带责任分摊请求权——兼论不具有分摊能力连带责任人份额的再分配方案

分摊请求权不同于追偿请求权,是与连带责任相对应的制度。大陆法系的分摊请求权较为体系化,英美法上的分摊请求权具有较强的衡平法色彩。对不具有分摊能力连带责压入份额的再分配方案,大陆法系采用“事后二次分担规则”,英美法系采用“事前二次分担规则”,《民法通则》未对该问题作出规定。分摊请求权的产生基础是矫正正义。我国侵权法上应采大陆法系“事后二次分担规则”。     

The Geographical Challenge: How Winning Elections Has Become Much More Difficult for Labour

Labour won fewer seats in 2015 than in 2010, even though its share of the vote increased. The decline in representation was occasioned by three features of the electoral geography of the 2015 contest—a collapse in Labour support in Scotland, a particularly strong Conservative advance in marginal seats and the fact that in England and Wales Labour's vote rose most strongly in seats that the party already held. As a result, Labour's vote became markedly less efficiently distributed than that of the Conservatives—a development that could make it very difficult for the party to win an overall majority at the next election. Meanwhile, the redrawing of constituency boundaries that is currently in train will make winning a majority even more difficult. However, the next election could well produce a hung parliament, and the party should be prepared for that eventuality.     

Religion,partisanship and preferences for redistribution

This article offers a new theoretical explanation of the relationship between religion and the demand for redistribution. Previous literature shows that religious individuals are less likely to favour redistribution either because (a) religion provides a substitute for state welfare provision, or (b) it adds a salient moral dimension to an individual's calculus which induces them to act contrary to their economic interests. In this article, it is argued that the effect of religion on an individual's redistributive preferences is best explained by their partisanship, via a process of partisan motivated reasoning. In contexts where parties are able to combine religion with pro-redistribution policies, religious individuals are more likely to favour redistribution as doing so reinforces their partisan identity. In advanced democracies, religious individuals are more likely to be supporters of centre-right parties that oppose redistribution. However, in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) the historical and political context leads to the opposite expectation. The nature of party competition in CEE has seen nationalist populist parties adopt policy platforms that combine religion and leftist economic programmes. They are able to credibly combine these two positions due to the way in which religion and the welfare state became linked to conceptions of the nation during the inter-war state-building years. Using data from 2002–2014, the study shows that religiosity is associated with pro-redistribution attitudes in CEE. Furthermore, religious supporters of nationalist populist parties are more likely to favour redistribution than religious supporters of other parties. The results of this research add greater nuance to our understanding of the relationship between religiosity and economic preferences.     

Immigration and support for redistribution: survey experiments in three European countries

In times of increasing globalisation scholars put considerable efforts into understanding the consequences of immigration to the welfare state. One important factor in this respect is public support for the welfare state and redistribution. This article presents results from a unique survey experiment and a panel study in three European countries (Norway, Germany and the Netherlands) in order to examine whether and how individuals change their preference for redistribution when faced with immigration. Theoretically, citizens with high incomes should be especially likely to withdraw their support for redistribution because they fear the increased fiscal burden, whereas other types of citizens might ask for more compensation for the increased labour market risks caused by immigration. The empirical evidence reveals that only respondents with high incomes and those who face low labour market competition withdraw support for redistribution when faced with immigration.     

Democracy and the demand for government redistribution: A survey analysis

This article uses survey data to study the impact of democracy on the demand by poor citizens for government redistribution. Taking the well‐known Meltzer‐Richard theory as the point of departure, three arguments are presented as to why such a demand should be stronger in democracies than in autocracies: in democracies low‐income groups are: (1) exposed to elections that can make a policy difference: (2) better informed about the income distribution; and (3) better equipped to process such information. The argument receives empirical support in a Bayesian multilevel analysis which combines 188 World Values Surveys with cross‐sectional and longitudinal macro data from 80 countries.     

Recognition as Redistribution

Abstract

This paper aims to explore and examine the implied commitment to the premises of recognition in Rawls’s account of redistributive justice. It attempts to find out whether or not recognition relations that produce humiliation and cultural injustice can be followed to their logical conclusion in his theory of redistribution. This paper makes two claims. Firstly, although Rawls does not disregard the harms of misrecognition as demonstrated in his notion of self-respect being the most important primary good, he cannot liberally accommodate the idea of humiliation as a case of injustice without compromising the basic premises of his theory. Secondly, while resource distribution produces indirect side effects that can impact upon cultural injustice, addressing recognition issues through the prism of redistribution can inadvertently result in further misrecognition. The paper concludes that in the final analysis Rawls wrongly takes redistribution as the overarching principle of justice to which recognition is but a subservient principle.     

法医毒理学的结果解释（下）

法医毒理学的主要任务是从生物检材中分析毒（药）物,并且推断毒（药）物浓度对死亡或行为能力的作用程度,结果解释是法医毒理学的最终目的。现代法医毒理学主要包括死后法医毒理学、滥用药物筛查和行为能力影响三个方面,由此探讨在进行结果解释时的诸多影响因素。进行法医毒理学的结果解释时应非常慎重,充分了解案情和调查结果,全面考虑毒（药）物的毒性、生物检材、药代动力学、体内再分布、药物交叉反应等多种因素,才能对案件作出较为准确的结果解释。