Pregledni znanstveni ?lanek
|
POVZETEK
V raziskovalnem delu smo na osnovi metodologije iz tudije Evalvacija zadovoljstva s olo: Metodoloki in vsebinski izzivi (Trnav?evi? et al., 2008) pripravili visoko strukturirane ankete, s katerimi smo merili zadovoljstvo treh pomembnih delenikov ole: dijakov, u?iteljev in starev. Kot izhodi?e za postavljanje raziskovalnih hipotez smo uporabili model Storitvene verige dobi?ka, s tem da so nas zanimale samo zveze med zadovoljstvom zaposlenih in zadovoljstvom odjemalcev (dijakov in starev). Z metodo bivariatne korelacije smo potrdili zveze med zadovoljstvom dijakov in zadovoljstvom starev, nismo pa potrdili zveze med zadovoljstvom u?iteljev in zadovoljstvom dijakov in zadovoljstvom starev. S prepoznavanjem storitvene vrzeli smo identificirali kriti?ne dejavnike zadovoljstva, ki so zanesljiva informacijska osnova za ukrepanje na podro?ju zagotavljanja kakovosti.
Klju?ne besede: zadovoljstvo s olo, storitvena veriga dobi?ka, analiza kriti?nih dejavnikov zadovoljstva, zveza med zadovoljstvom u?iteljev in dijakov, starev
ABSTRACT
The empirical section of the paper, which is based on the methodology from the study Evalvacija zadovoljstva s olo: Metodoloki in vsebinski izzivi / School Satisfaction Evaluation: Methodological and content challenges (Trnav?evi? et al., 2008), presents a highly structured survey prepared for measuring the satisfaction of three important school stakeholders: students, teachers and parents. Research hypotheses have been set on the basis of the model The Service Profit Chain, but we have been interested only in the relationship among employee satisfaction and customer satisfaction (students and parents). With the method of bivariate correlation, the link between students' satisfaction and parents' satisfaction has been confirmed, but the links between teachers' satisfaction and students' satisfaction and parents' satisfaction has not been confirmed. By recognising service gap, we have identified the critical factors of satisfaction, which are the base for improvements in quality of educations.
Key words: satisfaction with school, service profit chain, analysis of critical satisfaction factors, correlation between teacher and pupils, as well as parents
|
|
|
Strokovni ?lanek
|
Povzetek Predstavil bom dokazno breme v kazenskem postopku in podrobneje predstavil. kdo ga nosi v posameznih fazah postopka. Osredoto?il se bom predvsem na sedaj veljavni slovenski pravni red, vendar pa je potrebno za celovito razumenje predstaviti tudi nekaj kazenskih postopkov, ki so se razvijali skozi zgodovino in jih danes v njihovi ?isti obliki prakti?no ne najdemo nikjer ve?, najdemo le nekatere njihove posamezne elemente. Torej za?eni z zgodovinskim pregledom kazenskih postopkov je potrebno izpostaviti akuzatorni oziroma adversarni postopek, ter inkvizitorni, ki je akuzatornemu popolno nasprotje. Sledi del o tem, kdo v slovenskem pravnem redu nosi dokazno breme. Najpogosteje je to dravni toilec, ki opravlja funkcijo pregona, redkeje pa tudi okodovanec in sicer tedaj, ko je Kazenski zakonik v posameznih ?lenih izrecno dolo?il, da se kaznivo dejanje preganja na zasebno tobo (primer kazniva dejanja zoper ?ast in dobro ime) in v primeru, da dravni toilec iz razli?nih razlogov odstopi od pregona in pregon v to?no dolo?en ?asu nadaljuje okodovanec. Za tem govorim e na splono o dokaznem bremenu, v katerih pravnih virih je to urejeno, torej tako v Zakonu o kazenskem postopku (ZKP), kot tudi v Ustavi RS. Na koncu pa sledi e pregled celotnega postopka v slovenskem pravnem redu, pregled posameznih faz in viina dokaznega bremena oziroma dokaznih standardov v posameznih delih kazenskega postopka.
Klju?ne besede: kazensko procesno pravo, dokazno breme, dravni toilec, kazenski postopek...
Abstract: I will present a burden of proof in criminal proceeding and who bears it in individual stages of proceeding in more detail. I will mostly focus on Slovenian legislation which is in force these days. However, to be entirety understandable I also need to introduce some criminal proceedings, developing through history which nowadays are not to be found anywhere as a whole but only partially in inforce legislation. Therefore, beginning with the historical overview of criminal proceedings we need to emphasize an adversary and an inquest proceeding which are a total opposite to the adversary one. Then follows the part where I present who bears the burden of proof in Slovenian criminal proceeding. Most frequently this is a public procecutor who has a prosecution function with a few exceptions. Hardly ever does the burden of proof bear the injured party and this is when the Criminal code (KZ-1) explicitly defines that a criminal act is persecuted by private prosecution (for example, criminal acts against honour and a good name) and in case when a public prosecutor withdraws from the prosecution of a criminal proceeding with a reason (for example, lack of evidence) and the criminal proceeding is continued by the injured party. Later on I will explain the burden of proof in general and what legislation it is defined by, that is the Criminal procedure act (ZKP) as well as the Constitution of Republic of Slovenia. To conclude, I will present a short overview of the whole process of Slovenian criminal proceeding and the amount of the burden of proof or standards of proof in individual stages of criminal proceeding.
Keywords: criminal procedural law, burden of proof, public prosecutor, criminal proceeding...
|
|
|
|
Strokovni ?lanek
|
Izvle?ek
Zaradi vse ve?jega prispevka k celotnemu gospodarstvu ter poudarjanju pozitivnega u?inka na drubo in posameznike je postalo sodelovalno oziroma delitveno gospodarstvo (sharing/collaborative economy) v zadnjih letih predmet pogostih obravnav v javnosti, v dravnih organih in organih Evropske skupnosti. Namen prispevka je predstaviti razli?ne poglede na sodelovalno gospodarstvo ter na primeru Airbnb in Uber tudi t.i. 'temno plat', ki je bila zaradi spretne retorike o njem pogosto potisnjena v ozadje. Prikaemo, kako se novi poslovni modeli, ki so bili do nedavnega zaradi t.i. tehnolokih posebnosti obravnavani izven okvira regulative tradicionalnih sektorjev, po?asi, vendar vztrajno vpenjajo v obstoje?e predpise. S tem se zaklju?uje obdobje 'medenih tednov' udeleencev v sodelovalnem gospodarstvu.
Klju?ne besede: tehnoloke platforme, sodelovalno gospodarstvo, delitvena ekonomija, Airbnb, Uber, pravna regulacija
Abstract
For the last few years, sharing or collaborative economy has become a frequently discussed topic in public, state authorities and European Union institutions. There are at least two reasons for that: increasing contribution of sharing/collaborative economy to economic growth and exposure of its positive effect to overall society and individuals. The purpose of this paper is to present different views on sharing/collaborative economy and on the case of Airbnb and Uber also discuss its 'dark side'. We highlight how new business models based on technological platforms slowly get their position in the framework of existing sectorial regulation. It can be concluded that the 'honeymoon' time of avoiding regulations is over.
Key words: technology-based platforms, sharing economy, collaborative economy, Airbnb, Uber, legal regulation
|
|
|
|