DOES JUSTICE INFLUENCE THE PATHS TO THE COURT? STUDYING THE MODERATING ROLE OF JUSTICE PERCEPTIONS IN RIGHTS BREACH EVENTS

Abstract

While a growing evidence that employees often feel
their rights have been violated by their employer,
there is still little academic investigation to
determine what response they are likely to adopt. In
this study, we develop the view that the mobilization
of rights by employees depends on the perception of
violation. In parallel, we argue that perceived justice
of legal structure (i.e. the perception of how the law
is usually implemented) moderates the influence of
violation perceptions on intention to mobilize rights
(i.e, demand for support from the elected staff and
representatives or intent a legal action as mediation
or go to court). Building on the sub-dimensions of
justice (procedural, interpersonal and informational),
we develop and test - through a questionnaire survey
with scenario – a set of hypotheses pertaining to the
moderating role of justice. Our findings point out a
nuanced and sometimes ambiguous influence of
justice which has practical implications. Procedural
justice appears to have no moderating effect.
Interactional justice has a strong effect, showing that
employees who perceive a violation will follow a
longer path before intending a legal action and ask
support inside the organization before going to court
for example. Nevertheless, Informational justice has
an ambiguous effect, suggesting that the firms
keeping their employees well-informed may push
them for a legal action.