A normative model for the employment of people with disabilities within the Provincial Government of the Western Cape
This article investigates the trends in the employment of people with disabilities within the Provincial Government of the Western Cape (PGWC) and proposes a normative model to address the matter of low employment and progression rates of people with disabilities within the PGWC. The proposed normative model presented in this article incorporates eight sets of criteria, identiﬁ ed and deﬁ ned from the literature and the empirical survey. The advent of democracy in South Africa in 1994 witnessed the enshrinement of the fundamental human rights of all citizens with Government’s target for disability employment legislated at 2%, in 1995. Yet, in spite of employment targets and disability rights being legislated for people with disabilities since 1995, such people within the public service represented only 0.15% of the total staff complement of the public service nationwide, as at December 2004. Hence, a compelling need arises for a structured approach to disability employment. The article accordingly refers to the subject matter relating to disability employment
Research Methods for Public Administrators
Introduction Basic Concepts What's Your Question? Designing a Research Study Choosing Measures The Data Collection: Observation and Available Data The Data Collection: Surveys and Focus Groups Sampling Demystified Data Analysis for Description Analyzing Data: Exploring Relationships Analyzing Data: Inferential Statistics Conclusion Appendix A: The Mathematical Formulae for Selected Statistics Appendix B: Glossary Appendix C: Survey: Merit Principles Survey 2000 Appendix D: Survey Results: City of Portland, 1999 Citizen Survey Results Appendix E: Guidelines for Reporting Research Appendix F: Resources Index
The Three Faces of Defeasibility in the Law
In this paper we will analyse the issue of defeasibility in the law, taking into account research carried out in philosophy, artificial intelligence and legal theory. We will adopt a very general idea of legal defeasibility, in which we will include all different ways in which certain legal conclusions may need to be abandoned, though no mistake was made in deriving them. We will argue that defeasibility in the law involves three different aspects, which we will call inference-based defeasibility, process-based defeasibility, and theory-based defeasibility. Only the integration of these three perspectives allows us to provide a satisfactory account of the role of defeasibility in legal reasoning.