Several scholars in the sociological school wrote about the relationships between the economic study and its relationship to the day-to-day life of individuals. Among the topics discussed was that of employment, which the scholars compared to some paradigms that associate to complete the economic cycle. Among such paradigms, contracts’ study and relation to the capitalistic societal division that existed amounted to the conclusion by most of the scholars that relations of employment cannot be completely reduced to explicit contracts. Among the scholars with writers who studied this phenomenon were Durkheim, Marx, Schumpeter, Polanyi, and Weber.
Capitalism refers to a market system in which ...view middle of the document...
For any capitalistic system to occur there must be sale of readily available and demanded labor power to an individual or firm seeking to employ this available labor power. Otherwise, capitalism does not occur irrespective of the presence of any other attributes also present in capitalistic market scenarios. This definition lays its basis on the fact the any output produced by other means absent of labor do not qualify as capital products (Hayek, 1991). Another feature of the capitalistic market system is the relationship between capital and wage-labor, where the inter-twinning of the two determine how the entire production process takes place.
An employment contract refers to a binding agreement between two parties, one of which agrees to perform certain roles predetermined by the other party, who is the employer. An employment contract is different from enslavement, though there exists some similarities between the two.
One of the similarities is the fact that both employees and slaves live under the actual or potential control of a person or persons with relatively greater managerial power. Moreover, both do not have access to the right to possession of whatever fruit bears from their endeavors and do not claim any liability for the expenses incurred by the employer in the working process.
Employment contracts are thus limited in terms of their jurisdiction, in that employers lack the legal jurisprudence to perform his or her roles in a manner not pre-determined by the contract. The employee enjoys the freedom to terminate the contract with the employer at any time he deems fit.
In an employment contract, a worker abides by writing, to perform their roles under the authority of the employer (Houston, 2001). Authority in this case involves potential control, but this does not necessarily include direct, indirect, or actual control. Therefore, an employer bears the mandate of typically specifying the order and manner of the task in need of fulfilling. However, there exists a legal limit that determines the level of contractual limits as to the requirements that an employer would expect of an employee.
For clear illustration, assuming a firm hires a window cleaner. In real sense, the firm does not employ the respective individual, but rather, the company purchases the services offered by the window cleaner. This is irrespective of whether the cleaner is self-employed or is an employee of a secondary firm that deals with window cleaning. In order to make the cleaner an employee, it would require hiring of the individual in person and not their services in order to assume determination of the pattern and manner of work they perform. In employment relations, one of the common traits is the power enjoyed by the employer, who bears the authority to determine the pattern and manner in which employees perform their roles (Yunker, 1992). This power does not necessarily need communication prior to the beginning of the employer employee relationship. ...