Literature Review Women on boards and in TMTS and firm performance 129 other industries Layoffs during economic expansi on and rising markets however are being consi dered rather as proactive and efficiency enhancing Marshall et al 2012 find that capital markets respond positively to layoffs during prosperous markets in the period from 2005 to 2006 Market reaction to layoffs undertaken during the 2008 fi nancial crisis lead to negative capital market reac tions The price effects are consistent regardless of the reason for the staff reduction and the industry of the announcing firm Hypothesis 3 Market reactions to layoff announ cements will be zero or positive during rising financial markets and negative during the period of the financial crisis 5 3 3 3 Influence of employment protection legislation Comparing the United States with member states of the European Union the two countries from the Anglo Saxon area have the least stringent employ ment protection legislation OECD 2016a In 2004 legislation on individual and collective dismissals was by far least strict in the United States follo wed by the United Kingdom Ireland came third By contrast OECD data shows that strictness was highest in Portugal followed by the Czech Repu blic the Netherlands ranking third In 2013 the situation was nearly identical only Latvia replaced Greece on rank four OECD 2016a The indicator of strictness of employment protection with respect to collective dismissals measures additional costs and procedures involved in dismissing more than one worker at a time compared with the cost of individual dismissal OECD 2016b and incorpo rates four data items The OECD recommends that this data should not be used in isolation from the indicators that refer to individual dismissals The following figure 5 1 depicts variations in strict ness of employment protection for the United Sta tes and European OECD member states Figure 5 1 Strictness of employment protection individual and collective dismissals 4 4 5 3 5 3 2 5 2 1 5 1 0 5 Un ite d St at es Un ite d Ki ng do m Ire lan d Sw itz er lan d Be lg iu m Hu ng ar y De nm ar k Fin lan d Slo va k R ep ub lic Po lan d No rw ay Sp ain Au str ia Fra nc e Sw ed en Ge rm an y Ita ly Gr ee ce Ne th er lan ds Cz ec h Re pu bl ic Po rtu ga l 0 Source own diagram OECD 2016a25 2013 2004 10 The OECD indicators of employment protection are synthetic indicators of the strictness of regulation on dismissals and the use of temporary contracts For each year indicators refer to regulation in force on the 1st of January The OECD indicators of employment protection legislation measure the procedures and costs involved in dismissing individuals or groups of workers and the procedures involved in hiring workers on fixed term or temporary work agency contracts The indicators have been compiled using the Secretariat s own reading of statutory laws collective bargaining agreements and case law as well as contributions from officials from OECD member countries and advice from country experts OECD 2016b Layoffs and shareholder wealth

Vorschau DIRK-Forschungsreihe Band 21 Workforce diversity and personal policies Seite 129
Hinweis: Dies ist eine maschinenlesbare No-Flash Ansicht.
Klicken Sie hier um zur Online-Version zu gelangen.