The paper "Human Resource Management in Australia" is a wonderful example of human resources and literature review. Justice, or injustice, is almost tantamount to cleavage. It is a critical consideration in all facets of life, especially in the governance circles. Justice was created because of a lack of it, which was engendered by the rift between the rich and the poor and the men and women. This issue in the business management arena is broken down by Kramar, Bartram & De Cieri (2011) in their work regarding human resource management. This essay will discuss the issue of justice and how it affects the business organization and the human person with regard to the age-old human resource management front.
It will also analyze the principles that inform the two theoretical issues: human resource management and ethics, juxtaposing them with justice. Many a scholar has tried to explain the relationship between these two. Chief among these two theories are the Kantian Ethics, Consequentialism, Virtue Ethics and Justice Ethics. All these, considering their practical dimension, boil down to fairness. Rawls (1971) in his work concerning social justice posits that distributive justice concerns what is fairly acceptable in terms of allocation of resources and goods like wages in society.
He argues through two propositions of the principle of equal liberty that discusses the rights of individuals in a society to the most extensive liberties compatible with similar liberties and the difference principle which is about resources trickling down to the least advantaged in the society. It should also be understood that justice and ethics go hand in hand; for justice to reign, ethics must be observed.
Ethics, according to Klikauer (2010), are the principal concepts and fundamental principles of right human conduct. When extended to the business arena, where human resource management is a mainstay, it translates to the well being of all those involved in the business undertaking. In his work, Rawls (1971) argues that nobody has the advantage over the other and he uses the two principles of the original position and the notion of the veil of ignorance to claim that nobody in the world knows their position. Therefore, everybody struggles to find their footing in society, not necessarily comparing themselves to each other.
Justice, here, therefore boils down to the ethics concept that is about observing right and wrong in society and trying to do the right thing in every undertaking, even in the human resource management scene.
Charles, T 1986, “The nature and scope of distributive justice”, in Justice and Equality Here and Now, Frank S. Lucash, ed., Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 34-67
Choptiany, L 1973, “A Critique on John Rawls’s Principles of justice.” Ethics 83:146-150.
Greenwood, MR (2002). Ethics and HRM: are view and conceptual analysis, Journal of Business Ethics, 3(3), pp. 261–278.
James, K 2003, “Which Is the Fairest One of All?: A Positive Analysis of Justice Theories,” Journal of Economic Literature, 41(4), pp. 1188-1239.
Jeffrey, M 2002, “Desert and distributive justice in a theory of justice”, Journal of Social Philosophy, 33(1), pp. 131-143.
John, A. & Shaw, W (eds.), 1991, Justice and Economic Distribution 2nd Ed., Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall
Marx, K 1875 . "Critique of the Gotha Programme." In Justice, edited by Alan Ryan. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 159-63.
Kelly, PJ 1990, Utilitarianism and Distributive Justice, Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Klikauer, T 2010, Critical Management Ethics, Basingstoke (UK): Palgrave.
Kramar, R., Bartram, T. & De Cieri, H 2011, Human Resource Management in Australia- Strategy, People, and Performance (4th ed.), Sydney: McGraw-Hill (chapters 1 and 5).
Okin, SM 1989, Justice, Gender and the Family. New York: Basic Books.
Rawls, J. 1971, A Theory of Justice. Harvard, MA: Harvard University Press.
Winstanley, D. & Woodall, J 1996, Business ethics and human resource Management, Personnel Review 25(6), pp. 5–12.