IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

Das öffentlichen Diensrecht aus der Perspektive der vergleichenden Verwaltungswissenschaft

Listed author(s):
  • Jacques Ziller
Registered author(s):

    International comparisons of Civil Services usually overlook the difficulties due to differing definitions of the civil service in national legal systems. Comparative statistics are therefore extremely misleading, as they are at best based on formal-legal criteria instead of being based on functional definitions. Beyond the issue of numbers, comparing the legal regimes of civil services can also be misleading if the constitutional framework is ignored, as demonstrated by the link between the constitutional principles applying to the Royal prerogative in the UK,and if attention is centred on the source of regulation – as demonstrated by the case of the socalled privatisation of the Italian civil service. Furthermore, any comparison between civil service regimes should also take into account the content of the relevant regulations and compare them with the rules and principles applicable in the same country’s labour law.There is no such a thing as an international common core of civil service regulation

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no

    Paper provided by European University Institute (EUI), Department of Law in its series EUI-LAW Working Papers with number 9.

    in new window

    Date of creation: 01 Mar 2006
    Handle: RePEc:erp:euilaw:p0045
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:erp:euilaw:p0045. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Machteld Nijsten)

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.