GENERAL
Submissions made to the journal are first subjected to editorial evaluation for suitability to the journal's aims and scope, writing guidelines, and the suggested outline. At this stage, submissions that do not meet the journal's aims and scope are returned to the authors. Submissions that do not comply with writing guidelines and outline formatting are returned to the authors for correction and resubmission.
ARTICLE REVIEW PROCESS
The Journal of Working Relations employs a "Blind Peer Review" system. The review process is conducted in such a way that the authors and the reviewers reviewing the article are completely unaware of each other's identities. The identities of reviewers who reject the article are also kept confidential. Due to the "Blind Peer Review" principle, communication between reviewers and authors is not conducted directly between themselves but through the Editorial Unit via the Dergipark system. Articles are sent to two reviewers. If a reviewer rejects the review, a new reviewer is assigned. If they accept, the anonymous text of the article and the review report are sent. Reviewers may approve or disapprove the articles, suggest corrections, or suggest corrections and request a re-review. Reviewers can make 4 decisions. These are:
 Acceptance
 Rejection
 Major Revision
 Minor Revision
For articles submitted for publication in the Journal of Working Relations, an initial editorial review is conducted within the first 10 days. Authors are given 7 days to make any necessary revisions after the editorial review. Articles that successfully pass the editorial review then proceed to the peer review process. Each reviewer is given 7 days to accept the invitation and 30 days to complete the review. Any request for additional time by a reviewer with a valid reason will be considered. Authors who successfully complete the peer review process are given a maximum of 30 days to make the revisions requested by the reviewers. If a reviewer wishes to revise the work, the article is sent to them, and they are given an additional 15 days for this purpose. After the final review by the reviewers, the final version of the work undergoes editorial review within 15 days. Requests for additional time from authors or reviewers during this process will also be considered. If the reviewers do not evaluate the work within a reasonable time, the Editor may send the work to different reviewers for evaluation. If deemed necessary by the Editor, the article may be sent to a third reviewer. If the reviewer reports show 1 acceptance and 1 rejection, the editor may send the work to a third reviewer.
REPORTING VIOLATIONS OF ETHICAL PRINCIPLES TO THE EDITOR
The Journal of Working Relations adheres to academic principles and ethical values ​​in its publication policy. It maintains its publication life in accordance with national and international standards regarding ethical principles and values. In this context, the standards determined by COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) and the principles determined in the YÖK "Scientific Research and Publication Ethics Directive" are taken into consideration.
If you encounter any behavior that does not comply with ethical principles regarding editors, reviewers, authors, or any situation that violates ethical principles in the evaluation process, early view, or published article in the Journal of Working Relations, please report it via email to calismailiskileri@csgb.gov.tr. Publication requests for works found to be in violation of accepted research and publication ethics standards during the article review process will be rejected. If such violations are discovered after the work has been published, the work will be withdrawn from publication.