While facing the many challenges coming up from a modernized context of work and society, and particularly from the changing interaction between working relations and society, it is of a major importance to investigate divergencies in supports and contributions that may arise from public bodies compared to private bodies: these both can play an administrative role in coordinating the different (and mixed) relationships as involved.It is acquired that the globalized scenario poses unprecedent issues that cannot be solved by looking for an anwer simply within the legal system as apparently involved, and often private and public matters are mixed and pose complex issues of administration; in general, globalization rises a matter of interrelation amongst different legal systems.At a level of legal theory, schoolars are exploring revolutionary approaches for a new conception of the normative process, that would be capable to overcome the statutory paradigm as just based on a private/public ownership as well as on a possessive individual will that is all centered on the single person (physic human being); I am here referring to the studies by Gunter Teubner, from the Frankfurt School, and by Antonio Negri from the Italian experience of the workerist movement, who both consider the social/civil progress as something to be captured from the interrelation of different normative systems, wherin not only the legal/statutory one assumes a relative meaning as a parameter, rather, its constituent categories too can turn to be the object of a critical approach, in a perspective that is called new “societal constitutionalism”.The societal constitutionalism would have the ambition of posing overtures toward a dynamich substantial justice, other from the rigidities of traditional state-centered formal-gerarchical systems, and stressing the need to rebalance the distances between private and public sectors by also using hybrid categories, which can better contain traditional features and new needs according to a given space and time. This post-systematic approach is searching for efficient solutions by not limiting the normative context to legal institutions, (national or globalized), rather it looks for giving a normative value to also the spontaneous processes that rise across the civil society. Essentially, this means to normatively remark the value of actions/lack of actions, by collocating them in a broader communicative context being explanative or meaningfull to the search of solutions, not excluding the claiming before judicial authorities: whenever a potential conflict amongst legal system emerges, the main question to be highlighted is where the dynamic of actions/lack of actions as concerned might actually lead, else from into an unfruitfull or consuming-only fight.From a legal theory point of view, this means to accept that any relevant fact that matters in the dispute, both for the purpose of its qualification into a given definitional category or for the purpose of its being recepient of a given normative effect, be it from an ex ante perspective or an ex postone, should be better considered in its dynamic dimention, wherin the norm is not just an abstraction, it rather becomes part of a normative process wherin the subject, in his or her action, is partecipating to the definition of the normative category itself
JORM introduces peer-review from its first Edition onwards. The researchers submitting their papers for publication should review atleast one technical paper from their domain. The manuscript also undergoes mandatory procedural review with JORM review and scholar panel.