This study involves the adaptation of the Organizational Justice Scale developed by Niehoff and Moorman (1993) to Turkey, and the findings of the reliability, and validity tests. The survey was conducted with a sample of 254 employees working in various departments of a public organization in Erzurum, Turkey. The results of the reliability and validity analysis revealed that the scale was a valid and reliable device and that its factor structure gen- erally fits the original factor structure. The overall coefficient of the instru- ment was found to be 0.905. The factor analysis revealed that though the fac- tor structure was explained by three factors as in the original, six items were loaded on different components. As a result, it has been concluded that the scale developed by Niehoff and Moorman (1993) is a reliable and valid in- strument that can be used in measuring the perception of organizational jus- tice in Turkey.
DOCUMENT
The recent shift towards the interdisciplinary study of the human-environment relationship is largely driven by environmental justice debates. This article will distinguish four types of environmental justice and link them to questions of neoliberalism and altruism. First, environmental justice seeks to redress inequitable distribution of environmental burdens to vulnerable groups and economically disadvantaged populations. Second, environmental justice highlights the developed and developing countries’ unequal exposure to environmental risks and benefits. Third, temporal environmental justice refers to the issues associated with intergenerational justice or concern for future generations of humans. In all three cases, environmental justice entails equitable distribution of burdens and benefits to different nations or social groups. By contrast, ecological justice involves biospheric egalitarianism or justice between species. This article will focus on ecological justice since the rights of non-human species lags behind social justice debates and discuss the implications of including biospheric egalitarianism in environmental justice debates. https://doi.org/10.1186/2194-6434-1-8 https://www.linkedin.com/in/helenkopnina/
MULTIFILE
This research investigates to what extent lecturers at universities of applied sciences do regard differentiated rewards(intended to develop and/or display professionalism)to be fair, and to what extent, and in which form, do these stimulate their willingness to (further) professionalise and/or display professionalism. This was a case study research design, and a factorial survey measurement technique was used to collect data. We argue that lecturers believe it is fair that forms of differentiated rewards are used and applied in order to have them develop and/or display more professionalism. Especially the viewpoints/practices that relate to coordination, consultation, and consideration for personal circumstances have an influence on the justice perceived. This paper contributes to the HRM literature confirming that lecturers appreciate financial stimuli enhancing their professionalism; however, elements such as consultation, respect, coordination, and communication are appreciated even more. It appeals to HRM to design new practices which have more stimulating effect on personal and professional growth in subject-specific knowledge.
DOCUMENT
