The judicial finetuning of the EU rules determining the applicable social security legislation

A. P. van der Mei, E. van Ooij
{"title":"The judicial finetuning of the EU rules determining the applicable social security legislation","authors":"A. P. van der Mei, E. van Ooij","doi":"10.1177/1023263X211058394","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The conflict rules enshrined in Regulation 883/2004 on the coordination of social security were created six decades ago to offer those who exercise free movement rights ‘constant social security protection’. The main idea was to ensure that beneficiaries are always subject to the legislation of a single Member State and to indicate which Member State that was. Because beneficiaries were above all ‘standard’ employees working on a full-time basis for an indefinite period of time, it was initially quite easy to determine the ‘competent’ Member State. The processes of flexibilization, digitalization, enlargement and globalization, however, have posed new and often formidable challenges. In today’s dynamic labour market it is often particularly difficult to identify the applicable legislation, issues arise as regards swift and frequent switches in the applicable legislation, increased worker and company mobility may affect social security rights and problems have arisen because of the possible fraudulent use of the rules determining the applicable legislation. This contribution analyses some of the recent CJEU case law on topics like working in to or more Member States, posting, abuse and fraud, employment and/or residence outside the EU and gaps in in social security protection by EU workers. The overarching question is how, in the view of the CJEU, the classic conflict rules are to be applied so as to ensure cross-border movers continue to enjoy constant social security protection.","PeriodicalId":39672,"journal":{"name":"Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law","volume":"29 1","pages":"132 - 155"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1023263X211058394","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

The conflict rules enshrined in Regulation 883/2004 on the coordination of social security were created six decades ago to offer those who exercise free movement rights ‘constant social security protection’. The main idea was to ensure that beneficiaries are always subject to the legislation of a single Member State and to indicate which Member State that was. Because beneficiaries were above all ‘standard’ employees working on a full-time basis for an indefinite period of time, it was initially quite easy to determine the ‘competent’ Member State. The processes of flexibilization, digitalization, enlargement and globalization, however, have posed new and often formidable challenges. In today’s dynamic labour market it is often particularly difficult to identify the applicable legislation, issues arise as regards swift and frequent switches in the applicable legislation, increased worker and company mobility may affect social security rights and problems have arisen because of the possible fraudulent use of the rules determining the applicable legislation. This contribution analyses some of the recent CJEU case law on topics like working in to or more Member States, posting, abuse and fraud, employment and/or residence outside the EU and gaps in in social security protection by EU workers. The overarching question is how, in the view of the CJEU, the classic conflict rules are to be applied so as to ensure cross-border movers continue to enjoy constant social security protection.
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
确定适用社会保障立法的欧盟规则的司法调整
关于社会保障协调的第883/2004号条例所载的冲突规则是60年前制定的,旨在为行使自由行动权的人提供“持续的社会保障保护”。其主要思想是确保受益人始终受制于一个会员国的立法,并指明是哪个会员国。由于受益人首先是无限期全职工作的“标准”雇员,因此最初很容易确定“合格”成员国。然而,灵活化、数字化、扩大和全球化进程带来了新的、往往是艰巨的挑战。在当今充满活力的劳动力市场中,确定适用的立法往往特别困难,出现了适用立法快速频繁切换的问题,工人和公司流动性的增加可能会影响社会保障权利,并且由于可能欺诈性地使用确定适用立法的规则而出现了问题。这篇文章分析了欧盟法院最近关于在一个或多个成员国工作、发帖、虐待和欺诈、在欧盟以外的就业和/或居住以及欧盟工人在社会保障保护方面的差距等主题的一些判例法。欧盟法院认为,首要问题是如何适用经典的冲突规则,以确保跨境搬运工继续享受持续的社会保障保护。
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
2.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
27
期刊最新文献
Non-contractual liability of the EU: Need for a ‘diligent’ administrator test The European Arrest Warrant and the protection of the best interests of the child: The Court's last word on the limits of mutual recognition and the evolving obligations of national judicial authorities OP v. Commune d’Ans: When equality, intersectionality and state neutrality collide DPA independence and ‘indirect’ access – illusory in Belgium, France and Germany? Chilling effect: Turning the poison into an antidote for fundamental rights in Europe
×
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