Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T09:08:41.154Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

5 - Mobilizing Rights in the Courts: The Paradox of Losing by Winning

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 October 2010

Catherine R. Albiston
Affiliation:
University of California, Berkeley
Get access

Summary

WE HAVE SEEN THAT WHEN WORKERS MOBILIZE FMLA rights in the workplace, social institutions shape the meaning of these rights in ways that recreate inequality. Although informal mobilization of rights can challenge deeply entrenched social practices, change through these microlevel interactions can be slow and difficult, because each individual must negotiate the meaning of rights within this institutional context. At least in theory, rights formally mobilized in court are less likely to be displaced or transformed because courts enforce legal principles, not cultural norms. In addition, formal rights claims can force courts to articulate publicly the legitimacy and significance of rights, unlike informal claims that remain largely hidden from public attention (see, e.g., Zemans 1983). In this way, formal rights mobilization produces its own cultural framework for understanding social action in a more visible and authoritative manner than informal workplace negotiations. Thus, from this perspective, adjudication offers a means of shaping public policy and of changing cultural meanings that individuals can access without the need for political clout or a social movement. This claim about formal mobilization raises an important empirical question, however: Do individuals who mobilize FMLA rights in the courts generate legal decisions that affirm the legitimacy of taking leave, and in this way change expectations about work and leave?

Whether a formal rights claim produces a judicial declaration of the public values embodied in a statute depends in part on the institutional rules that determine how courts consider and resolve cases.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×