Search

This article studies labour inspectors’ discretion in determining the severity of labour exploitation. The concept of labour exploitation is not clearly defined at a legal level, leaving these professionals the necessity to move within a discretionary space. This study, using a qualitative methodology and through a vignette study, investigates the way in which labor inspectors in Italy and the Netherlands decide when a work irregularity can be considered "severe labour exploitation" and, therefore, become of criminal relevance. The study places itself within the broader analytical framework of the street-level bureaucracy, studying the discretionary power of these actors and the way in which they solve different dilemmas. The research highlights 1) which institutional, situational and individual factors explain the way in which it is decided when exploitation is “severe” and 2) how the phenomenon of labour exploitation is defined and managed by these professionals.

Almost 40 years after the seminal work by Lipsky (1980), a milestone in the study of street-level bureaucracy, his perspective continues to produce interesting output in the study of implementation processes in several policy areas. Lipsky assigns a key role to professionals who interact directly with citizens for welfare benefits and sanctions and exercising their discretionary power. The street-level bureaucracy perspective has been used to study and assess welfare organizations and measures via different methodological tools (Kelly 1994; Maynard-Moody, Mucheno 2003; Brodkin 2008) and to enrich its background theory with new concepts and clarifications (e.g., the better definition of different forms of discretion in Ham, Hill 1986, Evans, Harris 2004, Kazepov, Barberis 2012). The importance of street-level bureaucrats and their room for agency is still at the center of a relevant theoretical and empirical debate in welfare policy studies. There is a wide array of conferences and publications on this issue as a number of studies use this theoretical approach within several disciplinar fields.

This article builds on previous studies concerning the question of street-level bureaucracy, an expression coined by Lipsky (1980) – Street-Level Bureaucracy. Dilemmas of the Individual in Public Services (New York: Russel Sage Foundation) – to highlight the importance of the discretionary power that professionals in public agencies exercise during the implementation of laws, standards and guidelines. Discretion may depend on the need to compromise between the limited resources available and the claims of citizens, or between administrative policy directives and assessments, on the one hand, and their interpretation by “street-level” bureaucrats, on the other. This article focuses on the dilemmas that labour inspectors face when dealing with employment irregularities involving domestic workers. Based on nine months of observations in a local office of the Italian Labour Inspectorate, it aims to understand how labour inspectors make use of their discretionary power when the workplace is the home. This article connects studies of street-level bureaucracy with the new institutional organisational analysis, focusing on the isomorphic pressures from the institutional field in which the labour inspectors operate, together with the manner in which such pressures shape labour inspectors’ discretion. Through this connection, the article aims to extend the scope of both theories.

This paper analyzes how labor inspectors deal with ambiguous legal boundaries between those who can and who cannot be identified as a labor exploitation victim. Street-level bureaucracy research has largely overlooked how frontline officers deal with victims. We combine the street-level bureaucracy framework with insights from symbolic interactionism and criminology about ‘ideal/iconic victims’ to explain how inspectors use heuristics based on societal norms about victimhood to deal with legal ambiguity when dealing with potential labor exploitation cases. Using qualitative vignette studies in Belgium and the Netherlands, our results show that the perceived vulnerability and blamelessness of employees have a crucial role in inspectors’ assessment of who is and is not a labor exploitation victim. More specifically, migrant workers are seen as more vulnerable than native workers, particularly if they are female, and perceived complicity of social fraud reduces the chance that workers are seen as exploitation victims. Furthermore, also perceived employer characteristics have a role in case assessment. Our findings thus show that within the context of legal ambiguity, labor inspectors use stereotypical societal victim perceptions as heuristics, which can result in legal uncertainty and the risk that those suffering exploitations do not receive the support they need.

Questo lavoro di tesi fa parte del filone di studi sullaStreet-level bureaucracy (SLB). Al centro dell’analisi, infatti, è posta la discrezionalità degli ispettori del lavoro nella gestione di irregolarità lavorative che si trovano in bilico tra le forme di sfruttamento lavorativo “grave”, ossia di rilevanza penale, e “non grave”. In quanto street-level bureaucrats, gli ispettori del lavoro hanno un ruolo-chiave nell’assegnazione di benefici o sanzioni, nel determinare la procedura e nel dare senso, attraverso le loro pratiche quotidiane, a norme, strumenti, regolamenti formali. Nel farlo, hanno a propria disposizione un certo quantitativo di discrezionalità. L'obiettivo è capire quando queste irregolarità sono etichettate come "gravi" dagli ispettori del lavoro, rispondendo alle seguenti domande: a) quali pressioni istituzionali agiscono nel campo organizzativo dei controlli di lavoro o con quali conseguenze?; b) Come si manifesta la discrezionalità degli ispettori del lavoro nei loro interventi e quali conseguenze ha nel determinare la gravità dei casi da gestire?; c) Perché simili irregolarità lavorative vengono processate in modo diverso? Attraverso 9 mesi di osservazione dei partecipanti in una sede locale dell'Ispettorato nazionale del lavoro e 30 interviste con la tecnica della vignetta in Italia e nei Paesi Bassi, si di capire come gli ispettori del lavoro utilizzano il loro potere discrezionale nel campo organizzativo del controllo nei luoghi di lavoro., This thesis is part of the strand of studies on street-level bureaucracy (SLB). The focus of the research is on labour inspectors’ discretion managing labour exploitation cases. The goal is to understand when work irregularities are labelled as “labour exploitation” by labour inspectors, adapting law and formal rule to specific cases. The purpose of the research is to answer the following questions: a) which institutional pressures influence the organizational field of workplace controls and with what consequences?; b) how is labour inspectors’ discretion manifested in their everyday practices? Does it have consequences in determining the severity of cases to be managed?; c) Why similar irregularities are processed in a different way? Through 9 months of participant observation in a local office of the National Labour Inspectorate and 30 interviews with vignette technique in Italy and in The Netherlands, we try to understand how labor inspectors use their discretionary power within the organizational field of the workplace control.

This article builds on previous studies concerning street-level bureaucracy (SLB), an expression coined by Lipsky to highlight the importance of the discretionary power that professionals in public agencies exercise during the implementation of laws, standards and guidelines. Connecting SLB theoretical framework and the new institutional organizational analysis, this article puts in how labour inspectors use their discretionary power when dealing with similar work irregularities in different organizational fields. Based on 9 months of participant observations and vignette interviews in a local office of the Italian Labour Inspectorate, the article aims to extend the range of both theories.

Il crescente numero di imprese confiscate alla criminalità organizzata ha reso sempre più rilevante il tema del loro riutilizzo. Se infatti la confisca è un’affermazione dello Stato sulla criminalità organizzata, il recupero e la valorizzazione dell’impresa rappresentano il successo completo. L’impresa restituita alla legalità e alla sostenibilità genera esternalità positive, favorisce lo sviluppo di un mercato corretto e di una concorrenza leale, crea un’alternativa al dominio delle imprese mafiose, aumenta il tasso di rispetto delle leggi sul lavoro e di tutela dell’ambiente. Un’operazione, quindi, che genera un beneficio sociale per la collettività e l’economia in cui è realizzata. Un’occasione per innovare e rilanciare un’impresa e insieme un territorio. Una restituzione alla collettività del maltolto tramite il recupero e la valorizzazione di un’impresa che è anche ripresa economica e riscatto sociale. Nonostante gli ostacoli, le esperienze positive crescono. Alcuni dei casi più significativi sono presentati nel volume insieme alle scelte istituzionali, imprenditoriali, legislative, procedurali e organizzative in grado di migliorare l’attuale sistema. La ricerca da cui scaturisce la pubblicazione nasce dalla collaborazione tra la Regione Emilia Romagna e l’Università di Bologna, rappresentata dal Dipartimento di Scienze Politiche e Sociali del Campus di Forlì.

Drawing from Lipsky’s (1980) concept of street-level bureaucracy and the theories of justice (Rawls, 1971; Mashaw, 1983; Elster, 1992), this paper is focused on the dilemmas that social welfare services’ caseworkers face in their daily work. The field research is based on the collection and comparison of caseworkers’ narratives about complex cases. It was conducted within services located in the North and South of Europe: Bologna in Central Italy and Copenhagen in Denmark. Social work practices are analysed through caseworkers’ narratives to understand how their ideas influence the services. This study is intended to answer the following research questions: What challenges do caseworkers have to cope with? How do they manage their discretion to shape ‘fair’ decisions? What conditions and limits contribute to shaping the services’ final decisions? What principles of justice regulate the processing of cases, and thus what concrete ideas of social justice underpin the services?

Some crimes, in particular white-collar crimes, are rarely and with many difficulties perceived as crimes. Despite the known potential social and economic damage they cause, it seems as though they were declassified, considered “less criminal” than other kinds of crimes, and therefore punished in a different way. Many specific characteristics make them less perceived and easier to tolerate than other crimes, so much that a white collar perpetrator will be easily defined as a “dishonest” person rather than a “criminal”. This article presents the redefinition of the harmful event occurred in Casale Monferrato (Italy) where one of the Eternit plants was located. The “asbestos war” begins here starting from inside the factory spreading to citizens who are not indifferent to choices which are exclusively dictated by profit motive.