Abandoning individual enforcement? Interrogating the enforcement of age discrimination law

IF 1 4区 社会学 Q2 LAW Legal Studies Pub Date : 2023-02-15 DOI:10.1017/lst.2023.8
A. Blackham
{"title":"Abandoning individual enforcement? Interrogating the enforcement of age discrimination law","authors":"A. Blackham","doi":"10.1017/lst.2023.8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Discrimination law primarily relies on individual enforcement for addressing discrimination at work; yet those who are most impacted by discrimination are likely the least able to enforce their rights. The question then becomes: what role should individual enforcement play in discrimination law? Can we effectively abandon individual enforcement as part of the legislative model? Drawing on a mixed method, multi-year comparative study of the enforcement of age discrimination law in the UK, Australia and Sweden, this paper considers the gaps, limits and risks of the individual enforcement model in discrimination law. Integrating doctrinal analysis; statistical analysis of claims and cases, and data from the EU and OECD; qualitative expert interviews; and a survey of legal practitioners, this paper argues that while individual enforcement is inherently limited as a tool for achieving systemic change, it must remain part of any legislative model. Reflecting on the experience in Sweden, where individual enforcement of discrimination law is significantly curtailed, the paper posits that individual rights and individual enforcement remain important complements to other regulatory tools, particularly in jurisdictions with strong enduring age norms. Abandoning or severely restricting individual enforcement is unlikely to support either the macro or micro effectiveness of age discrimination law.","PeriodicalId":46121,"journal":{"name":"Legal Studies","volume":"43 1","pages":"3 - 28"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Legal Studies","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/lst.2023.8","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Discrimination law primarily relies on individual enforcement for addressing discrimination at work; yet those who are most impacted by discrimination are likely the least able to enforce their rights. The question then becomes: what role should individual enforcement play in discrimination law? Can we effectively abandon individual enforcement as part of the legislative model? Drawing on a mixed method, multi-year comparative study of the enforcement of age discrimination law in the UK, Australia and Sweden, this paper considers the gaps, limits and risks of the individual enforcement model in discrimination law. Integrating doctrinal analysis; statistical analysis of claims and cases, and data from the EU and OECD; qualitative expert interviews; and a survey of legal practitioners, this paper argues that while individual enforcement is inherently limited as a tool for achieving systemic change, it must remain part of any legislative model. Reflecting on the experience in Sweden, where individual enforcement of discrimination law is significantly curtailed, the paper posits that individual rights and individual enforcement remain important complements to other regulatory tools, particularly in jurisdictions with strong enduring age norms. Abandoning or severely restricting individual enforcement is unlikely to support either the macro or micro effectiveness of age discrimination law.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
放弃个人执法?质疑年龄歧视法的执行
摘要歧视法主要依靠个人执法来解决工作中的歧视问题;然而,那些受歧视影响最大的人可能最无力行使自己的权利。那么问题就变成了:个人执法在歧视法中应该扮演什么角色?作为立法模式的一部分,我们能否有效地放弃个人强制执行?本文采用混合方法,对英国、澳大利亚和瑞典实施年龄歧视法的情况进行了多年比较研究,考虑了歧视法中个人执法模式的差距、局限性和风险。整合理论分析;索赔和案件的统计分析,以及欧盟和经合组织的数据;定性专家访谈;在对法律从业者的调查中,本文认为,尽管个人强制执行作为实现系统性变革的工具本质上是有限的,但它必须成为任何立法模式的一部分。根据瑞典的经验,在瑞典,歧视法的个人执行被大幅削减,该文件认为,个人权利和个人执行仍然是对其他监管工具的重要补充,特别是在具有强大持久年龄规范的司法管辖区。放弃或严格限制个人执法不太可能支持年龄歧视法的宏观或微观有效性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
38
期刊最新文献
Conspiracy! Or, when bad things happen to good litigants in person European human rights law and the legality of sex offence prosecutions based on deception as to gender history Deportation and human rights: the right to respect for private life in MK (Albania) v Minister for Justice and Equality Imprisonment for breach of injunctions: what is happening in the civil courts? Medical negligence and disclosure of alternative treatments
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1