Peer Review Policy
The Employee Relations Law Journal follows a rigorous peer-review process to maintain the scholarly quality, originality, academic integrity, and relevance of the articles it publishes. Manuscripts submitted to the journal are initially evaluated by the Editorial Office to determine whether they fall within the scope of the journal and meet the basic requirements relating to academic quality, originality, structure, ethical standards, and submission guidelines. Manuscripts that satisfy the initial requirements are subsequently sent for peer review by suitably qualified reviewers with relevant subject expertise.
The journal generally follows a double-blind peer-review process, in which the identities of the authors are not disclosed to the reviewers and the identities of the reviewers are not disclosed to the authors. Reviewers are selected on the basis of their academic expertise, research experience, subject knowledge, and ability to provide an independent assessment of the manuscript. The journal may appoint reviewers from institutions different from those of the authors in order to support an impartial assessment.
Reviewers are expected to evaluate manuscripts objectively, fairly, and constructively. The review may consider the originality and significance of the research, clarity of the research objectives, adequacy of the methodology, quality of analysis, validity of the conclusions, relevance of the literature, organization and presentation, ethical considerations, and overall contribution to the field. Reviewers should provide clear and professional comments that can assist the authors in improving their manuscript and should avoid personal criticism or statements unrelated to the scholarly content of the work. These expectations are consistent with the ethical principles recommended by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
Reviewers must maintain strict confidentiality throughout the peer-review process. Manuscripts, research data, arguments, interpretations, and other unpublished information received for review must not be disclosed to third parties or used for personal, professional, or academic advantage. Reviewers should not reproduce, distribute, or retain manuscript materials except as necessary for completing the review.
Reviewers are required to disclose any actual, potential, or perceived conflict of interest before accepting an invitation to review. A reviewer should decline an assignment where personal, professional, financial, academic, institutional, or other relationships could reasonably affect the impartiality of the review. Reviewers should also inform the Editorial Office if they believe that they are not sufficiently qualified to evaluate the manuscript or cannot complete the review within the requested period.
The Editorial Office considers the reviewers' reports when making publication decisions. Possible editorial decisions may include acceptance, minor revision, major revision, or rejection. The final decision rests with the Editor or designated Editorial Board member and is based on the overall scholarly assessment of the manuscript rather than on a single reviewer's recommendation. Where appropriate, revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers for further assessment.
The journal does not guarantee acceptance of any submitted manuscript. Receipt of a manuscript, completion of peer review, or a request for revision does not constitute a guarantee of publication. The journal may reject a manuscript at the editorial screening stage where it falls outside the journal's scope, does not meet the required academic or ethical standards, lacks sufficient originality, or does not comply with the submission requirements. Transparent peer-review policies should clearly identify the review model, reviewer responsibilities, editorial decision process, and any exceptions to the normal process.
Reviewers should promptly notify the Editorial Office if they identify substantial similarities, suspected plagiarism, possible fabrication or falsification of data, duplicate publication, inappropriate citation practices, undisclosed conflicts of interest, or other concerns relating to research or publication integrity. Such concerns will be assessed by the Editorial Office in accordance with the journal's publication ethics procedures and applicable scholarly publishing standards.
The journal expects all participants in the peer-review process to maintain professional conduct and respect academic diversity. Editorial and peer-review decisions should be based on the scholarly quality, originality, relevance, and integrity of the manuscript and should not be influenced by the author's nationality, institutional affiliation, gender, ethnicity, religion, political views, or other characteristics unrelated to the academic merits of the work.
The Employee Relations Law Journal may update this Peer Review Policy from time to time to reflect developments in scholarly publishing, publication ethics, and editorial best practices. The latest version of the policy will be made available on the journal website.
