Social Europe without Social Dialogue: Decision of the Court of Justice of the European Union in C-928/19 P European Federation of Public Service Unions

IF 1.6 2区 社会学 Q1 LAW European Constitutional Law Review Pub Date : 2022-06-01 DOI:10.1017/S1574019622000177
Perrine Carré, Marc Steiert
{"title":"Social Europe without Social Dialogue: Decision of the Court of Justice of the European Union in C-928/19 P European Federation of Public Service Unions","authors":"Perrine Carré, Marc Steiert","doi":"10.1017/S1574019622000177","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"C-928/19 P European Federation of Public Service Unions (EPSU) is a cornerstone to the future of Social Europe and the probably limited role of social dialogue in it. In this judgment, the Grand Chamber of the Court of Justice of the European Union confirms that the European Commission is not obliged to transmit a collective agreement negotiated by the European social partners to the Council for its adoption as an EU legal act under Article 155(2) TFEU. What seems like a technical judgment on the Union’s institutions is a constitutional decision on the European social model. In fact, EU labour lawyers have been heatedly discussing whether the Commission can examine and reject the content of collective agreements negotiated in the European Social Dialogue under Articles 154 and 155 TFEU.1 One can effectively understand the European Social Dialogue as an alternative procedure of EU law-making that shares the right of legislative initiative in social policy among the Commission and the social partners. For this reason, the Commission should not be allowed to unilaterally reject a collective","PeriodicalId":45815,"journal":{"name":"European Constitutional Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Constitutional Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1574019622000177","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

C-928/19 P European Federation of Public Service Unions (EPSU) is a cornerstone to the future of Social Europe and the probably limited role of social dialogue in it. In this judgment, the Grand Chamber of the Court of Justice of the European Union confirms that the European Commission is not obliged to transmit a collective agreement negotiated by the European social partners to the Council for its adoption as an EU legal act under Article 155(2) TFEU. What seems like a technical judgment on the Union’s institutions is a constitutional decision on the European social model. In fact, EU labour lawyers have been heatedly discussing whether the Commission can examine and reject the content of collective agreements negotiated in the European Social Dialogue under Articles 154 and 155 TFEU.1 One can effectively understand the European Social Dialogue as an alternative procedure of EU law-making that shares the right of legislative initiative in social policy among the Commission and the social partners. For this reason, the Commission should not be allowed to unilaterally reject a collective
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
没有社会对话的社会欧洲:欧洲联盟法院在c -928/ 19p欧洲公共服务工会联合会的决定
欧洲公共服务工会联合会(EPSU)是社会欧洲未来的基石,社会对话在其中的作用可能有限。在本判决中,欧盟法院大分庭确认,欧盟委员会没有义务将由欧洲社会伙伴协商达成的集体协议提交理事会,以使其成为第155(2)条TFEU规定的欧盟法律行为。看起来像是对欧盟制度的技术判断,实际上是对欧洲社会模式的宪法决定。事实上,欧盟劳工律师一直在热烈讨论欧盟委员会是否可以根据《欧盟劳工法》第154条和第155条审查和拒绝欧洲社会对话中谈判的集体协议内容。人们可以有效地将欧洲社会对话理解为欧盟立法的另一种程序,它在欧盟委员会和社会伙伴之间分享了社会政策的立法主动权。因此,不应允许委员会单方面拒绝一个集体
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
2.80
自引率
14.30%
发文量
31
期刊介绍: The European Constitutional Law Review (EuConst), a peer reviewed English language journal, is a platform for advancing the study of European constitutional law, its history and evolution. Its scope is European law and constitutional law, history and theory, comparative law and jurisprudence. Published triannually, it contains articles on doctrine, scholarship and history, plus jurisprudence and book reviews. However, the premier issue includes more than twenty short articles by leading experts, each addressing a single topic in the Draft Constitutional Treaty for Europe. EuConst is addressed at academics, professionals, politicians and others involved or interested in the European constitutional process.
期刊最新文献
How to Detect Abusive Constitutional Practices A Doctrinal Approach to Unconstitutional Constitutional Amendments: Judicial Review of Constitutional Amendments in Sweden Constitutional Courts as Guarantors of EU Charter Rights: A Rhetorical Perspective on Constitutional Change in Austria and Germany Constitutional Referrals by Ordinary Courts: A Platform for Judicial Dialogue and Another Toolkit for Judicial Resistance? Of Winners and Losers: A Commentary of the Bundesverfassungsgericht ORD Judgment of 6 December 2022
×
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