Disability status,individual variable pay,and pay satisfaction: Does relational and institutional trust make a difference?

Although prior research suggests that disabled employees have different needs in the context of some HRM practices, we know little about their reactions to reward systems. We address this gap in the literature by testing a model using the 2011 British Workplace Employee Relations Survey (disabled employees, n = 1,251; nondisabled employees, n = 9,959; workplaces, n = 1,806) and find that disabled employees report lower levels of pay satisfaction than nondisabled employees, and when compensated based on individual performance, the difference in pay satisfaction is larger. We suggest that relational (derived from trust in management) and institutional (derived from firm‐wide policies and HRM practices, both intended to provide equitable treatment to disabled employees) forms of trust play important roles. The results of multilevel analyses show that when trust in management is high, the difference in pay satisfaction under variable pay is reduced. We find just the opposite for employees who work in organizations with a formal disability policy but without supportive HRM practices; the gap in pay satisfaction is exacerbated. However, the combination of the presence of a firm‐wide policy and HRM practices reduced the difference in pay satisfaction. Implications of the findings for theory, future research, and management practice are discussed.     

How Common Are Bad Bosses?

Bosses play a fundamental role in workplaces. Yet, almost nothing is known about an important and basic question in labor economics and industrial relations. Are the right people promoted to be supervisors, team leaders, and managers? The infamous Peter Principle claims that incompetent bosses are likely to be all around us, but is that true? This article provides the first statistically representative international estimates—taking comparable data on thirty-five nations—of the extent to which employees have “bad bosses.” Using a natural measure, the article calculates that approximately 13 percent of Europe’s workers have a bad boss. Such bosses are most common in large organizations, in organizations without employee-representation committees, in the transport sector, and where workers themselves have no supervisory responsibility. Last, the article offers a practical finding as a potential aid to human resource training and hiring. Contrary to media portrayals, bad bosses are rated least bad on “respect for workers” and worst on their ability to get the job done. Lack of competence, not lack of consideration, appears to be the key problem.     

Strategic reporting by nonprofit hospitals: an examination of bad debt and charity care

Review of Accounting Studies - In this paper, we examine bad debt and charity care reporting by nonprofit hospitals around bond issuance. Given the tax advantages afforded to nonprofit hospitals,...     

Trying to Serve Two Masters is Easy,Compared to Three: Identity Multiplicity Work by Christian Impact Investors

Journal of Business Ethics - While research has focused on financial and social goals in impact investing, we add to the limited research that focuses on how individuals manage identity...