Pub Date : 2024-09-10DOI: 10.1177/20319525241266353
Katie Bales
Building upon insights from carceral geography, this article conceptualises the ‘carceral’ as permeating beyond the prison walls to other areas of life through law and policymaking that confines and incarcerates without necessarily ‘imprisoning’. 1 Utilising the case study of asylum applicants in the UK, this article traces the role of ‘work’ as a component of carceral circuitry which enmeshes asylum seekers’ lives. Outside of immigration detention, this includes work exclusions which hinder mobility, life choices and economic independence, as well as fuelling engagement in both ‘voluntary’ unpaid work arrangements, and/or unregulated ‘criminal’ labour practices which arise as a result of exclusionary laws intent on creating a hostile environment. Inside of immigration detention analysis extends to the practice of ‘paid activities’ in which immigration detainees undertake millions of hours of work at a rate of £1.00 per hour, ostensibly ‘for their own benefit’. Labour law and its explicit exclusions, as well as the social welfare framework, thereby intersect with immigration control and the criminal law to construct, shape and reproduce this carceral sphere which seeks to control and govern asylum seekers’ lives as well as entrenching their vulnerability as an easily exploitable workforce from which value can be extracted.
{"title":"Labour as a component of carceral circuitry: The case of asylum seekers","authors":"Katie Bales","doi":"10.1177/20319525241266353","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20319525241266353","url":null,"abstract":"Building upon insights from carceral geography, this article conceptualises the ‘carceral’ as permeating beyond the prison walls to other areas of life through law and policymaking that confines and incarcerates without necessarily ‘imprisoning’.<jats:sup> 1 </jats:sup> Utilising the case study of asylum applicants in the UK, this article traces the role of ‘work’ as a component of carceral circuitry which enmeshes asylum seekers’ lives. Outside of immigration detention, this includes work exclusions which hinder mobility, life choices and economic independence, as well as fuelling engagement in both ‘voluntary’ unpaid work arrangements, and/or unregulated ‘criminal’ labour practices which arise as a result of exclusionary laws intent on creating a hostile environment. Inside of immigration detention analysis extends to the practice of ‘paid activities’ in which immigration detainees undertake millions of hours of work at a rate of £1.00 per hour, ostensibly ‘for their own benefit’. Labour law and its explicit exclusions, as well as the social welfare framework, thereby intersect with immigration control and the criminal law to construct, shape and reproduce this carceral sphere which seeks to control and govern asylum seekers’ lives as well as entrenching their vulnerability as an easily exploitable workforce from which value can be extracted.","PeriodicalId":41157,"journal":{"name":"European Labour Law Journal","volume":"59 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2024-09-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142178110","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-09-10DOI: 10.1177/20319525241270268
Virginia Mantouvalou
Work opportunities in prison can be valuable for the incarcerated. However, prison labour presents significant challenges because of its location behind prison walls away from the public eye, where prison authorities exercise unprecedented power over individuals. Even though work is not part of prisoners’ punishment in Europe, it is often compulsory. What is also striking is that in many legal orders prisoners are excluded from labour rights that other workers have. Unlike work outside prison, the legal regulation of prison work constitutes it as an instrument of exclusion from life outside prison rather than a path towards reintegration in society, and creates structures of exploitation. In this article I examine the value of work in prison and consider the exclusion of working prisoners from labour rights that other workers have. I also scrutinise some typical justifications of these exclusions of working prisoners. I propose that work in prison should be regulated in line with the purpose of reintegration in society and according to European and international human rights standards on prisons.
{"title":"Work in prison: Reintegration or exclusion and exploitation?","authors":"Virginia Mantouvalou","doi":"10.1177/20319525241270268","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20319525241270268","url":null,"abstract":"Work opportunities in prison can be valuable for the incarcerated. However, prison labour presents significant challenges because of its location behind prison walls away from the public eye, where prison authorities exercise unprecedented power over individuals. Even though work is not part of prisoners’ punishment in Europe, it is often compulsory. What is also striking is that in many legal orders prisoners are excluded from labour rights that other workers have. Unlike work outside prison, the legal regulation of prison work constitutes it as an instrument of exclusion from life outside prison rather than a path towards reintegration in society, and creates structures of exploitation. In this article I examine the value of work in prison and consider the exclusion of working prisoners from labour rights that other workers have. I also scrutinise some typical justifications of these exclusions of working prisoners. I propose that work in prison should be regulated in line with the purpose of reintegration in society and according to European and international human rights standards on prisons.","PeriodicalId":41157,"journal":{"name":"European Labour Law Journal","volume":"4 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2024-09-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142178091","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-09-02DOI: 10.1177/20319525241274686
M.A.N. Van Schadewijk
The transition to an environmentally sustainable economy raises Herculean challenges for labour law. From a labour law perspective, perhaps the biggest question is the extent to which the environment is an interest that is and should be recognised and protected by labour law. Although the answer to this question is different for each national legal system, the influence of international and European law cannot be ignored. Starting from this assumption, the author analyses to what extent international and European law may influence the recognition of the environment as an interest of national labour law. To this end, the author analyses the overarching principles that characterise the interrelation between labour and the environment in the hard and soft law of the UN, ILO and EU. Subsequently, three areas of national labour law which may be influenced by the supranational framework are identified and discussed: job transition, work-related mobility of employees and remuneration. The author finds that the supranational framework provides arguments to assert that the environment has a place in labour law and is a legitimate interest in the balancing exercise between employer and employee. Nevertheless, a substantive place for labour law in the supranational framework seems lacking. The supranational framework is primarily concerned with compensating employees for the negative effects of the green transition and offers limited support for a broader integration of the environment into the employment relationship. Consequently, it makes few connections with labour law and contains few (hard or soft) obligations for both employers and employees. In the view of the author, this is a missed opportunity.
{"title":"Labour, the Environment and International and European Law: One journey or worlds apart?","authors":"M.A.N. Van Schadewijk","doi":"10.1177/20319525241274686","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20319525241274686","url":null,"abstract":"The transition to an environmentally sustainable economy raises Herculean challenges for labour law. From a labour law perspective, perhaps the biggest question is the extent to which the environment is an interest that is and should be recognised and protected by labour law. Although the answer to this question is different for each national legal system, the influence of international and European law cannot be ignored. Starting from this assumption, the author analyses to what extent international and European law may influence the recognition of the environment as an interest of national labour law. To this end, the author analyses the overarching principles that characterise the interrelation between labour and the environment in the hard and soft law of the UN, ILO and EU. Subsequently, three areas of national labour law which may be influenced by the supranational framework are identified and discussed: job transition, work-related mobility of employees and remuneration. The author finds that the supranational framework provides arguments to assert that the environment has a place in labour law and is a legitimate interest in the balancing exercise between employer and employee. Nevertheless, a substantive place for labour law in the supranational framework seems lacking. The supranational framework is primarily concerned with compensating employees for the negative effects of the green transition and offers limited support for a broader integration of the environment into the employment relationship. Consequently, it makes few connections with labour law and contains few (hard or soft) obligations for both employers and employees. In the view of the author, this is a missed opportunity.","PeriodicalId":41157,"journal":{"name":"European Labour Law Journal","volume":"47 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2024-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142178112","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-06-20DOI: 10.1177/20319525241261027
Julie Ringelheim
OP v Commune d'Ans, handed down on 28 November 2023, is the fifth judgment issued by the Court of Justice of the European Union on a ban on the wearing of religious symbols in employment, but the first to concern a public workplace. This article argues that the judgment does not help clarify the issue. It is ambiguous and provides only vague guidance to national courts. Two aspects of its reasoning are particularly puzzling: firstly, the absence of any discussion on the very meaning and implications of the neutrality of the public service; and secondly, the recognition of a margin of discretion not only for states but also for sub-state entities, such as municipalities, in determining the concrete content of that principle.
2023 年 11 月 28 日宣判的 OP v Commune d'Ans 案是欧盟法院就禁止在工作中佩戴宗教标志发布的第五份判决，但却是第一份涉及公共工作场所的判决。本文认为，该判决无助于澄清问题。判决模棱两可，仅为各国法院提供了模糊的指导。其推理的两个方面尤其令人费解：首先，没有对公共服务中立的含义和影响进行任何讨论；其次，承认在确定该原则的具体内容时，不仅国家，而且市镇等次国家实体都有一定的自由裁量权。
{"title":"Headscarf bans in the public workplace before the Court of Justice: OP v. Commune d’Ans or the Art of Ambiguity","authors":"Julie Ringelheim","doi":"10.1177/20319525241261027","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20319525241261027","url":null,"abstract":"OP v Commune d'Ans, handed down on 28 November 2023, is the fifth judgment issued by the Court of Justice of the European Union on a ban on the wearing of religious symbols in employment, but the first to concern a public workplace. This article argues that the judgment does not help clarify the issue. It is ambiguous and provides only vague guidance to national courts. Two aspects of its reasoning are particularly puzzling: firstly, the absence of any discussion on the very meaning and implications of the neutrality of the public service; and secondly, the recognition of a margin of discretion not only for states but also for sub-state entities, such as municipalities, in determining the concrete content of that principle.","PeriodicalId":41157,"journal":{"name":"European Labour Law Journal","volume":"177 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2024-06-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141506980","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-05-25DOI: 10.1177/20319525241255564
Niklas Selberg, Erik Sjödin
The EU Directive 2022/2041 on adequate minimum wages has been welcomed by many stakeholders, but Sweden (together with Denmark), with its historically good track record regarding labour rights, is opposing it on both political and legal grounds. The Directive, the Swedish Government argues, will not fulfil its goals, and concerns, in any instance, matters that are excluded from the competence of the EU. This article describes and analyses the implementation measures in a system whose wage-setting mechanism – at least according to its own opinion – needs no support, and in which legal and political objections have been raised against the Directive.
{"title":"The Directive (EU) 2022/2041 on adequate minimum wages in the European Union: Much ado about nothing in Sweden?","authors":"Niklas Selberg, Erik Sjödin","doi":"10.1177/20319525241255564","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20319525241255564","url":null,"abstract":"The EU Directive 2022/2041 on adequate minimum wages has been welcomed by many stakeholders, but Sweden (together with Denmark), with its historically good track record regarding labour rights, is opposing it on both political and legal grounds. The Directive, the Swedish Government argues, will not fulfil its goals, and concerns, in any instance, matters that are excluded from the competence of the EU. This article describes and analyses the implementation measures in a system whose wage-setting mechanism – at least according to its own opinion – needs no support, and in which legal and political objections have been raised against the Directive.","PeriodicalId":41157,"journal":{"name":"European Labour Law Journal","volume":"23 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2024-05-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141148067","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-05-23DOI: 10.1177/20319525241255601
Marta Lasek-Markey
This article addresses the issue of effective enforcement of EU labour law by looking at the case study of the enforcement of the EU framework on the posting of workers. While recent years have seen a revival of Social Europe in the form of the European Pillar of Social Rights, scholars have also expressed concern over the effectiveness in practice of transnational labour law, and EU labour law in particular. Rasnača (2022) argues that ineffective enforcement creates a ‘justice gap’ between formal rights on paper and access to these rights in practice. One example of an area of EU labour law plagued by enforcement issues is the posting of workers. It is a peculiar type of intra-EU labour mobility, where posted workers, despite often being EU citizens, cannot benefit from the protection afforded by the EU's fundamental principle of the free movement of workers. As the original Directive 96/71/EC on the posting of workers proved manifestly inadequate to safeguard the rights of posted workers, the EU enacted Directive 2014/67 to improve the framework's enforcement. This article offers an evaluation of the Enforcement Directive based on data collected from 29 qualitative interviews. The effectiveness of the Enforcement Directive will be assessed based on the theoretical framework of precarious work. It will be argued that while the Enforcement Directive has contributed to narrowing the justice gap, posted workers continue to be exposed to precarity.
本文通过对欧盟派驻工人框架执行情况的案例研究，探讨欧盟劳动法的有效执行问题。近年来，社会欧洲以欧洲社会权利支柱（European Pillar of Social Rights）的形式复兴，但学者们也对跨国劳动法，尤其是欧盟劳动法在实践中的有效性表示担忧。Rasnača (2022) 认为，执法不力造成了纸面上的正式权利与实际享有这些权利之间的 "正义差距"。欧盟劳动法中受执法问题困扰的一个领域是工人的派驻。这是欧盟内部劳动力流动的一种特殊类型，在这种情况下，派驻工人尽管往往是欧盟公民，但却不能享受欧盟工人自由流动基本原则所提供的保护。由于最初关于派驻工人的第 96/71/EC 号指令被证明明显不足以保障派驻工人的权利，欧盟颁布了第 2014/67 号指令，以改善该框架的执行情况。本文基于从 29 个定性访谈中收集的数据，对《执行指令》进行了评估。本文将基于不稳定工作的理论框架来评估《执行指令》的有效性。文章认为，虽然《执行指令》有助于缩小司法差距，但派驻工人仍然面临不稳定的工作。
{"title":"Effective enforcement of the EU framework on the posting of workers: Empirical evidence","authors":"Marta Lasek-Markey","doi":"10.1177/20319525241255601","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20319525241255601","url":null,"abstract":"This article addresses the issue of effective enforcement of EU labour law by looking at the case study of the enforcement of the EU framework on the posting of workers. While recent years have seen a revival of Social Europe in the form of the European Pillar of Social Rights, scholars have also expressed concern over the effectiveness in practice of transnational labour law, and EU labour law in particular. Rasnača (2022) argues that ineffective enforcement creates a ‘justice gap’ between formal rights on paper and access to these rights in practice. One example of an area of EU labour law plagued by enforcement issues is the posting of workers. It is a peculiar type of intra-EU labour mobility, where posted workers, despite often being EU citizens, cannot benefit from the protection afforded by the EU's fundamental principle of the free movement of workers. As the original Directive 96/71/EC on the posting of workers proved manifestly inadequate to safeguard the rights of posted workers, the EU enacted Directive 2014/67 to improve the framework's enforcement. This article offers an evaluation of the Enforcement Directive based on data collected from 29 qualitative interviews. The effectiveness of the Enforcement Directive will be assessed based on the theoretical framework of precarious work. It will be argued that while the Enforcement Directive has contributed to narrowing the justice gap, posted workers continue to be exposed to precarity.","PeriodicalId":41157,"journal":{"name":"European Labour Law Journal","volume":"14 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2024-05-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141148001","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-04-08DOI: 10.1177/20319525241242896
Emiliano Maran
This article provides an overview of the legislation on the status and working conditions of the different categories of non-professional magistrates, as utilised by the judiciary administration of European Member States. In this regard, a distinction is made between ‘lay judges’, non-professional judges cooperating in a judicial process on the basis of their perspective as normal citizens, and ‘honorary judges’, who cooperate in the adjudication with their specialist knowledge and experiences. Through the lens of the CJEU's ruling in UX, the article also provides an insight into whether, on the basis of the reported legislation, any particular category of honorary judges is susceptible of falling within the European concept of ‘worker’.
{"title":"The working conditions of non-professional magistrates and the European concept of ‘worker’","authors":"Emiliano Maran","doi":"10.1177/20319525241242896","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20319525241242896","url":null,"abstract":"This article provides an overview of the legislation on the status and working conditions of the different categories of non-professional magistrates, as utilised by the judiciary administration of European Member States. In this regard, a distinction is made between ‘lay judges’, non-professional judges cooperating in a judicial process on the basis of their perspective as normal citizens, and ‘honorary judges’, who cooperate in the adjudication with their specialist knowledge and experiences. Through the lens of the CJEU's ruling in UX, the article also provides an insight into whether, on the basis of the reported legislation, any particular category of honorary judges is susceptible of falling within the European concept of ‘worker’.","PeriodicalId":41157,"journal":{"name":"European Labour Law Journal","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2024-04-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140575526","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-04-08DOI: 10.1177/20319525241242796
Nicola Kountouris
The present article offers an analysis of some key aspects of the UK Supreme Court (SC) Deliveroo judgment. After a short description of some of the facts and findings of the case, the article argues that the Supreme Court may have actually misconstrued the personal scope of application of Article 11 ECHR and, like the other domestic jurisdictions before, misapplied the law (and the concept of ‘employment relationship’ deployed by the ECtHR) to the facts of this case. While the SC judgment did not expressly elaborate on the domestic ‘worker’ definition contained in s. 296 TULRCA 1992, the article explores the extent to which the Deliveroo saga has incorrectly construed this concept, embracing a very narrow concept of ‘personal work’ that neither the statutory wording itself nor the context in which it was applied arguably support. Finally, the concluding section of this article offers an alternative approach to the legal construction and legal regulation of ‘personal work’, one that is already emerging in other jurisdictions and that should underpin any future reform of the personal scope of application of UK, but also EU labour law - a reform, the article concludes, that is long overdue.
{"title":"Not Delivering: the UK ‘worker’ concept before the UK Supreme Court in Deliveroo - IWGB v CAC and another [2023] UKSC 43","authors":"Nicola Kountouris","doi":"10.1177/20319525241242796","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20319525241242796","url":null,"abstract":"The present article offers an analysis of some key aspects of the UK Supreme Court (SC) Deliveroo judgment. After a short description of some of the facts and findings of the case, the article argues that the Supreme Court may have actually misconstrued the personal scope of application of Article 11 ECHR and, like the other domestic jurisdictions before, misapplied the law (and the concept of ‘employment relationship’ deployed by the ECtHR) to the facts of this case. While the SC judgment did not expressly elaborate on the domestic ‘worker’ definition contained in s. 296 TULRCA 1992, the article explores the extent to which the Deliveroo saga has incorrectly construed this concept, embracing a very narrow concept of ‘personal work’ that neither the statutory wording itself nor the context in which it was applied arguably support. Finally, the concluding section of this article offers an alternative approach to the legal construction and legal regulation of ‘personal work’, one that is already emerging in other jurisdictions and that should underpin any future reform of the personal scope of application of UK, but also EU labour law - a reform, the article concludes, that is long overdue.","PeriodicalId":41157,"journal":{"name":"European Labour Law Journal","volume":"35 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2024-04-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140575565","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-04-05DOI: 10.1177/20319525241244921
Sara Huybrechts
The Matzak case, a landmark ruling by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), challenged traditional understandings of working time and rest periods, particularly for volunteer firefighters in Belgium. Despite earlier cases before Belgian courts, the Matzak decision brought significant shifts in jurisprudence, influencing how volunteers were categorised and how stand-by time was interpreted. This article examines the impact of the Matzak judgment on Belgian case law, tracing its evolution from pre- Matzak rulings to post-decision interpretations. Analysing decisions from the Court of Cassation and the Constitutional Court, the study explores the redefinition of volunteers as employees and the qualification of stand-by time as working time. The reluctance of Belgian courts to adapt their views on stand-by duty prior to Matzak is highlighted, with persistent adherence to principles established in the Simap case. However, the Matzak ruling prompted questions about the treatment of voluntary firefighters and the adequacy of legal distinctions. Despite initial resistance, subsequent cases challenged previous interpretations, leading to clarifications by the Court of Cassation. Ambiguities remain, as seen in the Simon case, raising concerns about consistent application of Matzak jurisprudence. The unique status of voluntary firefighters in Belgium presents challenges, as they operate in a legal grey area with regards to rights and working conditions. Municipalities are urged to regulate their working time in the absence of general legislation. Nonetheless, the recognition of firefighters as workers by the CJEU offers promise for their legal standing under EU law. Increasing recognition of comparability between volunteers and professionals suggests a move towards more equitable treatment. Looking beyond Matzak, the article explores implications for the evolving digital workplace, where boundaries between work and personal time blur. The Matzak principle, which introduces objective limitations on devotion to personal and social interests, offers a framework for addressing these challenges. By considering potential applications in the digital realm, the article emphasises the importance of protecting worker well-being and rest periods, consistent with the objectives of the Working Time Directive. In conclusion, the Matzak case has had a significant impact on Belgian jurisprudence regarding the working time of volunteer firefighters and the adjudication of stand-by periods. While challenges and ambiguities persist, the ruling has spurred a reassessment of legal frameworks and encouraged greater recognition of the rights of volunteer workers. As the digital landscape continues to evolve, the Matzak principle provides a valuable tool for navigating complex issues of work-life balance and ensuring the protection of workers’ rights.
{"title":"Before, after and beyond the Matzak case: Overview of the Belgian jurisprudence","authors":"Sara Huybrechts","doi":"10.1177/20319525241244921","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20319525241244921","url":null,"abstract":"The Matzak case, a landmark ruling by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), challenged traditional understandings of working time and rest periods, particularly for volunteer firefighters in Belgium. Despite earlier cases before Belgian courts, the Matzak decision brought significant shifts in jurisprudence, influencing how volunteers were categorised and how stand-by time was interpreted. This article examines the impact of the Matzak judgment on Belgian case law, tracing its evolution from pre- Matzak rulings to post-decision interpretations. Analysing decisions from the Court of Cassation and the Constitutional Court, the study explores the redefinition of volunteers as employees and the qualification of stand-by time as working time. The reluctance of Belgian courts to adapt their views on stand-by duty prior to Matzak is highlighted, with persistent adherence to principles established in the Simap case. However, the Matzak ruling prompted questions about the treatment of voluntary firefighters and the adequacy of legal distinctions. Despite initial resistance, subsequent cases challenged previous interpretations, leading to clarifications by the Court of Cassation. Ambiguities remain, as seen in the Simon case, raising concerns about consistent application of Matzak jurisprudence. The unique status of voluntary firefighters in Belgium presents challenges, as they operate in a legal grey area with regards to rights and working conditions. Municipalities are urged to regulate their working time in the absence of general legislation. Nonetheless, the recognition of firefighters as workers by the CJEU offers promise for their legal standing under EU law. Increasing recognition of comparability between volunteers and professionals suggests a move towards more equitable treatment. Looking beyond Matzak, the article explores implications for the evolving digital workplace, where boundaries between work and personal time blur. The Matzak principle, which introduces objective limitations on devotion to personal and social interests, offers a framework for addressing these challenges. By considering potential applications in the digital realm, the article emphasises the importance of protecting worker well-being and rest periods, consistent with the objectives of the Working Time Directive. In conclusion, the Matzak case has had a significant impact on Belgian jurisprudence regarding the working time of volunteer firefighters and the adjudication of stand-by periods. While challenges and ambiguities persist, the ruling has spurred a reassessment of legal frameworks and encouraged greater recognition of the rights of volunteer workers. As the digital landscape continues to evolve, the Matzak principle provides a valuable tool for navigating complex issues of work-life balance and ensuring the protection of workers’ rights.","PeriodicalId":41157,"journal":{"name":"European Labour Law Journal","volume":"12 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2024-04-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140575413","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-04-03DOI: 10.1177/20319525241244940
Christina Hiessl
Perspectives on social dialogue.
社会对话视角。
{"title":"Perspectives on Social Dialogue","authors":"Christina Hiessl","doi":"10.1177/20319525241244940","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20319525241244940","url":null,"abstract":"Perspectives on social dialogue.","PeriodicalId":41157,"journal":{"name":"European Labour Law Journal","volume":"17 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2024-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140575563","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：