Distributive justice
When we think of distributive justice, one of the first things that come to mind is 'am I being paid fairly?'. Although how much we are paid is important for most people, distributive justice also covers who gets the exciting work and who gets the mundane tasks, who gets the better career opportunities and promotions, etc. In fact, distributive justice includes any aspect where something is distributed within the employment setting, even punishment.

Procedural justice
Much of the employment legislation focuses on establishing the minimum standards for what should happen in the employment setting. Factors such as consistency, free from bias, based on fact, correctable, democratic, ethical viewpoints, and legal considerations are all part of the process of making a fair decision. While this is an objective view of what organisational justice should be, how we perceive fairness in the workplace is more subjective. If we think a process is unfair, then we are more likely to think the outcome (whatever is distributed) is also unfair[1], but we are less likely to question the fairness of the process if we are happy with the amount received[2]. Not surprisingly, we are more likely to perceive an outcome as being fair if we were involved in the process[3].

Interactional justice
Regardless of who we are in the organisation, we all expect to be treated with dignity and respect, as well as being trusted, but how outcomes are communicated, including the adequacy of the explanations and the timeliness of the communication, also shape our perceptions of what is fair in the work setting.

[1] Folger, R., & Cropanzano, R. (1998). Organizational justice and human resource management. Thousand Oaks, CA US: Sage Publications.

[2] Beugre, C.D. (2007). A cultural perspective of organizational justice. Charlotte, NC US: Information Age Publishing Inc.

[3] Wesolowski, M.A. & Mossholder, K.W. (1997). Relational demography in the supervisor-subordinate dyads: Impact on subordinate job satisfaction, burnout, and perceived procedural justice. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 18(4), 351-362.