Treść głównego artykułu


The international research group led by the Warsaw School of Economics (Szkoła Główna Handlowa w Warszawie) were involved in comparing remuneration justice perception in Poland, Hungary and Lithuania. This article concerns the Hungarian results. The paper introduces the general theoretical picture of labour fairness and justice and demonstrates the results of the Hungarian research conducted in June 2018. Hungarian firms consider employees as the most important stakeholders, so CSR programmes that involve them are useful and important. Just and fair remuneration is a form of intern CSR besides health and safe working conditions, flexible working hours or voluntarism. It is a moral obligation, but at the same time a potential source of business case. The basis of the relation is the generosity of the company: to assure a salary on which the employee can subsist without tax evasion and other unfair methods and feels appreciation.

Słowa kluczowe

remuneration justice procedural fairness moral obligation business case minimum wage wage differentiation

Szczegóły artykułu

Jak cytować
Győri, Z. (2018). Remuneration Justice – The Results of the Hungarian Research. Edukacja Ekonomistów I Menedżerów, 49(3), 61-82.


    1. Cohen, B., Warwick, M. (2006). Values‑driven Business – How to Change the World, Make Money, and Have Fun. San Francisco: Berrett‑Koehler Publishers, Inc.
    2. Etzioni, A. (1993). A „személy a közösségben” paradigma (The I and we paradigm). In: J. Kindler, L. Zsolnai, Etika a gazdaságban (Ethics in the economy). Budapest: Keraban Könyvkiadó, 57–64.
    3. Frank, R.H. (2004). What Price the Moral High Ground? Ethical Dilemmas in Competitive Environments. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
    4. Freeman, R.E. (1993). Stakeholder‑menedzsment (Stakeholder‑management). In: J. Kindler, L. Zsolnai, Etika a gazdaságban (Ethics in the economy). Budapest: Keraban Könyvkiadó, 169–192.
    5. Frey, B., Osterloh, M. (2005). Yes, Managers Should Be Paid as Bureaucrats. Journal of Management Inquiry, 14(1), 96–111.
    6. Győri, Zs. (2012). Corporate Social Responsibility and Beyond: The history and future of CSR. Saarbrücken: Lap Lambert Academic Publishing.
    7. Kindler, J., Zsolnai, L. (1993). Etika a gazdaságban (Ethics in the economy). Budapest: Keraban Könyvkiadó.
    8. Nagy, Z.B. (2018). Complex analysis of the economic context of prosperity and well‑being: The natural limit of income inequality. PhD dissertation. Keszthely: Faculty Georgikon, Pannon University.
    9. Pfeffer, J., Sutton, R.I. (2000). The Knowing Doing Gap. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School of Publishing.
    10. Pink, D.H. (2009). Drive: The surprising truth about what motivates us. New York, NY: Riverhead Books.
    11. Radácsi, L. (1997). A vállalatok stakeholder‑elmélete (The Stakeholder Theory of the Firms). In: Zs. Boda, L. Radácsi, Vállalati etika (Corporate Ethics). Budapest: Budapesti Közgazdaságtudományi Egyetem Vezetőképző Intézet, 79–92.
    12. Roberts, K., Young, W. (1997). Procedural Fairness, Return to Work, and the Decision to Dispute in Workers’ Compensation. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 10(3), 193–212.
    13. Vogel, D. (2006). The Market for Virtue – The Potential and Limits of Corporate Social Responsibility. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press.
    14. Zwetsloot, G.I.J.M. (2003). From Management Systems to Corporate Social Responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 44(2–3), 201–207.