Abstract:
It is the contention of this paper that the nature of the employment
relationship (ER) has not been adequately defined in the academic
literature and that an understanding of how control is exercised in the
ER is needed if its dynamics and consequences are to be better
understood. Even within the employment relations literature, where
one would expect to find such endeavors, relatively little attention has
been directed to defining the nature of the ER. While many writers
have discussed aspects of the ER, their focus has been mainly upon
either specific aspects of the relationship, such as conflict, or upon
issues associated with the relationship, ranging from institutional
arrangements to workplace practices (De Cieri and Kramer, 2003,;
Gardner and Palmer. 1992-; Deery et sl., 2001) Only in the discipline
of law, driven by the necessity to provide definition to the rights and
obligations applying to non-slave and non-feudal workers, does a
detailed explanation of what constitutes an employment relationship
exist. Yet even this definition, based upon the notion of 'control' has
been seen by some to be inadequate (Mills) 1982,270-8) Furthermore,
legal deiinitions of the ER vary according to the different statutes; for
example. in Australia, what is legally seen to constitute a matter
relevant to the ER (or an employment matter) has been defined
considerably more broadly in the State of NSW than federally.
In this paper, although the ER is seen to have sociological,
psychological, economic and legal dimensions, it is the nature of
control in the relationship that is seen to lie at the core of its
definition. We draw upon the insights to the nature of control in the
ER from a multidisciplinary perspective to develop an analytical
model that might assist in identifying and analysing different ER
'types' distinguished by the source and nature of their control and
power elements.
