Pub Date : 2023-12-06DOI: 10.1177/20319525231217913
Stan Bruurs
{"title":"Book Review: Migrant Labour and the Reshaping of Employment Law by B Ryan and R Zahn","authors":"Stan Bruurs","doi":"10.1177/20319525231217913","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20319525231217913","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":41157,"journal":{"name":"European Labour Law Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2023-12-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138597584","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 : 2023-11-20DOI: 10.1177/20319525231210744
Frank Hendrickx
{"title":"Platform work and beyond","authors":"Frank Hendrickx","doi":"10.1177/20319525231210744","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20319525231210744","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":41157,"journal":{"name":"European Labour Law Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2023-11-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139254917","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 : 2023-11-13DOI: 10.1177/20319525231210550
David Mangan, Karol Muszyński, Valeria Pulignano
Digital labour platforms are able to structure work to limit paid working time, extract fees from workers to access labour, and shift costs associated with occupational safety and health (OSH) compliance onto platform workers. We call this unpaid work the ‘platform discount’. Unpaid labour is embedded within platforms’ competitive strategies as platforms operate with labour oversupply while clients use multiple platforms to search for the cheapest option (multi-homing effect). The authors study pathways through law that would limit the incidence of unpaid work by revisiting three areas of the legal framework: working time, safety and health, and access to work/labour intermediation. The authors argue that reclassification, suggested, among others, by the draft Platform Work Directive, can reduce the platform discount for the misclassified workers, but will leave solo self-employed unprotected. The authors explore two possible strategies to reduce the platform discount for the solo self-employed working on labour platforms: 1) a broader understanding of the concept of working conditions on digital labour platforms covering both standard employees and solo self-employed; 2) proceeding area by area, with the extension of occupational safety and health to the solo self-employed on digital labour platforms being the most feasible and promising from a regulatory standpoint.
{"title":"The platform discount: Addressing unpaid work as a structural feature of labour platforms","authors":"David Mangan, Karol Muszyński, Valeria Pulignano","doi":"10.1177/20319525231210550","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20319525231210550","url":null,"abstract":"Digital labour platforms are able to structure work to limit paid working time, extract fees from workers to access labour, and shift costs associated with occupational safety and health (OSH) compliance onto platform workers. We call this unpaid work the ‘platform discount’. Unpaid labour is embedded within platforms’ competitive strategies as platforms operate with labour oversupply while clients use multiple platforms to search for the cheapest option (multi-homing effect). The authors study pathways through law that would limit the incidence of unpaid work by revisiting three areas of the legal framework: working time, safety and health, and access to work/labour intermediation. The authors argue that reclassification, suggested, among others, by the draft Platform Work Directive, can reduce the platform discount for the misclassified workers, but will leave solo self-employed unprotected. The authors explore two possible strategies to reduce the platform discount for the solo self-employed working on labour platforms: 1) a broader understanding of the concept of working conditions on digital labour platforms covering both standard employees and solo self-employed; 2) proceeding area by area, with the extension of occupational safety and health to the solo self-employed on digital labour platforms being the most feasible and promising from a regulatory standpoint.","PeriodicalId":41157,"journal":{"name":"European Labour Law Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-11-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136282355","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 : 2023-11-01DOI: 10.1177/20319525231208637
Christina Hiessl
Multiparty constellations are on the rise in the labour market, and they can make the classification of contractual relationships exceedingly difficult. Recent case law on platform work provides an insight into the various problems resulting from this development. The article provides an overview of cases in which courts and/or administrative bodies across Europe were called upon to rule on platform workers’ rights in cases that involved relevant multi-party constellations. It establishes a typology of the different actors that have figured as defendants in cases on platform workers’ rights and explores the consequences for both procedural and material aspects. On the basis of these insights from case law, as well as a brief review of the European Parliament's suggestion of regulating subcontractor liability in the proposed directive on platform work, a number of regulatory implications are identified.
{"title":"Multiparty relationships in platform work: Cross-European case law developments and points of departure for (supranational) regulation","authors":"Christina Hiessl","doi":"10.1177/20319525231208637","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20319525231208637","url":null,"abstract":"Multiparty constellations are on the rise in the labour market, and they can make the classification of contractual relationships exceedingly difficult. Recent case law on platform work provides an insight into the various problems resulting from this development. The article provides an overview of cases in which courts and/or administrative bodies across Europe were called upon to rule on platform workers’ rights in cases that involved relevant multi-party constellations. It establishes a typology of the different actors that have figured as defendants in cases on platform workers’ rights and explores the consequences for both procedural and material aspects. On the basis of these insights from case law, as well as a brief review of the European Parliament's suggestion of regulating subcontractor liability in the proposed directive on platform work, a number of regulatory implications are identified.","PeriodicalId":41157,"journal":{"name":"European Labour Law Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135372241","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 : 2023-10-29DOI: 10.1177/20319525231208635
Engin Yıldırım
The article presents an account of the use of human rights litigation in the employment context through the lens of the Turkish Constitutional Court's (TCC) case law, focusing on the two core human rights of freedom of expression and the right to respect for private and family life under the individual application remedy. The main argument of the article is that the elevation of employees’ free speech and privacy concerns in employment relations, from an understanding and examination based on the employment contract to a constitutional level of review due to the availability of the individual application procedure, allows employees to confront employer-imposed restrictions that may infringe their constitutionally protected human rights. Direct access to the TCC potentially provides greater safeguards for employees' enjoyment of core human rights at work and beyond. At the same time, it is crucial not to magnify the role of individual applications in providing constitutional human rights protection to employees mainly because of procedural requirements.
{"title":"Human rights at work: The experience of The Turkish Constitutional Court","authors":"Engin Yıldırım","doi":"10.1177/20319525231208635","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20319525231208635","url":null,"abstract":"The article presents an account of the use of human rights litigation in the employment context through the lens of the Turkish Constitutional Court's (TCC) case law, focusing on the two core human rights of freedom of expression and the right to respect for private and family life under the individual application remedy. The main argument of the article is that the elevation of employees’ free speech and privacy concerns in employment relations, from an understanding and examination based on the employment contract to a constitutional level of review due to the availability of the individual application procedure, allows employees to confront employer-imposed restrictions that may infringe their constitutionally protected human rights. Direct access to the TCC potentially provides greater safeguards for employees' enjoyment of core human rights at work and beyond. At the same time, it is crucial not to magnify the role of individual applications in providing constitutional human rights protection to employees mainly because of procedural requirements.","PeriodicalId":41157,"journal":{"name":"European Labour Law Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136136349","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 : 2023-09-20DOI: 10.1177/20319525231201279
David McArdle
In September 2021, the Court of Appeal in England and Wales delivered its judgment in the case of Commissioners for HM Revenue and Customs v Professional Game Match Officials [2021] EWCA Civ 1370 (hereafter PGMOL). The case concerned the employment status of referees who officiate in the men's professional game. The First-Tier Tribunal of the Tax and Chancery Chamber (FTT) had allowed PGMOL's appeal against the Revenue's determination that a certain class of part-time referees were the employees of PGMOL under s. 4(1) of the Income Tax (Earnings and Pensions) Act 2003, and that income tax and employer's national insurance contributions should be deducted from the payments that PGMOL made to them in 2013–2016. On the Revenue's appeal, the Upper Tribunal (UT) upheld the FTT's decision on 6 May 2020. The Revenue further appealed.
2021年9月，英格兰和威尔士上诉法院就HM Revenue and Customs commissioner v Professional Game Match Officials [2021] EWCA Civ 1370(以下简称PGMOL)一案作出判决。该案涉及男子职业比赛裁判员的就业状况。税务和衡平法庭一级法庭(FTT)允许PGMOL上诉，反对税务局认定某一类兼职裁判是PGMOL的雇员，根据2003年所得税(收入和养老金)法令第4(1)条，所得税和雇主的国民保险缴款应从PGMOL 2013-2016年向他们支付的款项中扣除。在税务局的上诉中，高等法庭(UT)于2020年5月6日维持了金融交易税的决定。税务局进一步提出上诉。
{"title":"The employment implications and tax status of English football referees: <i>Commissioners for HM Revenue and Customs v Professional Game Match Officials Ltd</i> [2021] EWCA Civ 1370","authors":"David McArdle","doi":"10.1177/20319525231201279","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20319525231201279","url":null,"abstract":"In September 2021, the Court of Appeal in England and Wales delivered its judgment in the case of Commissioners for HM Revenue and Customs v Professional Game Match Officials [2021] EWCA Civ 1370 (hereafter PGMOL). The case concerned the employment status of referees who officiate in the men's professional game. The First-Tier Tribunal of the Tax and Chancery Chamber (FTT) had allowed PGMOL's appeal against the Revenue's determination that a certain class of part-time referees were the employees of PGMOL under s. 4(1) of the Income Tax (Earnings and Pensions) Act 2003, and that income tax and employer's national insurance contributions should be deducted from the payments that PGMOL made to them in 2013–2016. On the Revenue's appeal, the Upper Tribunal (UT) upheld the FTT's decision on 6 May 2020. The Revenue further appealed.","PeriodicalId":41157,"journal":{"name":"European Labour Law Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136374211","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 : 2023-09-20DOI: 10.1177/20319525231194269
Ilda Durri
In recent years, the advent of platform work, i.e. work activities channelled through web platforms or apps, has been at the centre of discussions for being ‘an opportunity-generating machine’, and its darker side, that is the poor quality of working conditions associated with it, has also been discussed. Work patterns inherent in platform work, such as unpredictable work schedules and work insecurity (even for the next minute or hour), the lack of a stable income, and exclusion from even basic protections, have long been detected. They can be traced back in the daily work of dock workers in the late nineteenth century, but also in more contemporary forms of casual work, such as on-call work or zero-hours work. Accordingly, history seems to repeat itself, and even go to extremes with platform work. Against this background, this article focuses on the intersection of casual work and platform work, and explains that as a result of it, platform work can actually fall within the scope of broader regulatory strategies applicable to casual work, hereinafter the casual work agenda. The regulatory challenges deriving from the insecure nature of the work have already been dealt with by national and supranational regulators in the context of casual work. This article evaluates an already-available blueprint - the casual work agenda - in light of reducing the working hours, job (work), income, and employment status insecurity associated with platform work. To this end, it observes that a rich legal landscape exists in the Netherlands for addressing these insecurities. At the EU level, there are also insightful legal tools, prominent examples being the Transparent and Predictable Working Conditions Directive, the Fixed-Term Work Directive, and the Working Time Directive. They provide for important legal safeguards, especially in countering working time and job insecurity. This article also looks at the proposed EU Directive on Platform Work and notes that it overlooks the legal safeguards contained in these instruments. Having regard to this, it calls on EU policymakers to redefine this legal initiative in light of the best regulatory practices offered by the casual work agenda.
{"title":"The intersection of casual work and platform work: Lessons learned from the casual work agenda for the labour protection of platform workers","authors":"Ilda Durri","doi":"10.1177/20319525231194269","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20319525231194269","url":null,"abstract":"In recent years, the advent of platform work, i.e. work activities channelled through web platforms or apps, has been at the centre of discussions for being ‘an opportunity-generating machine’, and its darker side, that is the poor quality of working conditions associated with it, has also been discussed. Work patterns inherent in platform work, such as unpredictable work schedules and work insecurity (even for the next minute or hour), the lack of a stable income, and exclusion from even basic protections, have long been detected. They can be traced back in the daily work of dock workers in the late nineteenth century, but also in more contemporary forms of casual work, such as on-call work or zero-hours work. Accordingly, history seems to repeat itself, and even go to extremes with platform work. Against this background, this article focuses on the intersection of casual work and platform work, and explains that as a result of it, platform work can actually fall within the scope of broader regulatory strategies applicable to casual work, hereinafter the casual work agenda. The regulatory challenges deriving from the insecure nature of the work have already been dealt with by national and supranational regulators in the context of casual work. This article evaluates an already-available blueprint - the casual work agenda - in light of reducing the working hours, job (work), income, and employment status insecurity associated with platform work. To this end, it observes that a rich legal landscape exists in the Netherlands for addressing these insecurities. At the EU level, there are also insightful legal tools, prominent examples being the Transparent and Predictable Working Conditions Directive, the Fixed-Term Work Directive, and the Working Time Directive. They provide for important legal safeguards, especially in countering working time and job insecurity. This article also looks at the proposed EU Directive on Platform Work and notes that it overlooks the legal safeguards contained in these instruments. Having regard to this, it calls on EU policymakers to redefine this legal initiative in light of the best regulatory practices offered by the casual work agenda.","PeriodicalId":41157,"journal":{"name":"European Labour Law Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136313975","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 : 2023-09-16DOI: 10.1177/20319525231194267
Stan Bruurs
Labour mobility within the European Union can take multiple forms and is becoming an increasingly diversified phenomenon. On the one hand, workers can move physically from one Member State to another for a short or long stay, while, on the other hand, virtual migration is rising. Partly due to globalisation and the Covid-19 pandemic, cross-border telework – which can take place anytime and anywhere – has become an integral part of society. Whereas the social security and tax laws applicable to these cross-border teleworkers have been researched extensively, the applicable labour law, following the Rome I-Regulation and the Posting of Workers Directive, remains unclear. The same is true regarding the qualification of such cross-border teleworkers as posted workers under the free movement of services. Indeed, these legal frameworks include a general approach without prescribing specific connecting factors or conditions of application tailored to the virtuality of cross-border teleworkers. Consequently, this contribution examines the labour law applicable to cross-border teleworkers within the EU and the (un)surmountable bottlenecks that arise in applying the legal frameworks currently in place.
{"title":"Cross-border telework in light of the Rome I-Regulation and the Posting of Workers Directive","authors":"Stan Bruurs","doi":"10.1177/20319525231194267","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20319525231194267","url":null,"abstract":"Labour mobility within the European Union can take multiple forms and is becoming an increasingly diversified phenomenon. On the one hand, workers can move physically from one Member State to another for a short or long stay, while, on the other hand, virtual migration is rising. Partly due to globalisation and the Covid-19 pandemic, cross-border telework – which can take place anytime and anywhere – has become an integral part of society. Whereas the social security and tax laws applicable to these cross-border teleworkers have been researched extensively, the applicable labour law, following the Rome I-Regulation and the Posting of Workers Directive, remains unclear. The same is true regarding the qualification of such cross-border teleworkers as posted workers under the free movement of services. Indeed, these legal frameworks include a general approach without prescribing specific connecting factors or conditions of application tailored to the virtuality of cross-border teleworkers. Consequently, this contribution examines the labour law applicable to cross-border teleworkers within the EU and the (un)surmountable bottlenecks that arise in applying the legal frameworks currently in place.","PeriodicalId":41157,"journal":{"name":"European Labour Law Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135308483","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 : 2023-09-14DOI: 10.1177/20319525231201274
Michele Molè, David Mangan
This contribution analyses the European Court of Human Rights’ (ECtHR) decision on workplace surveillance, Florindo De Almeida Vasconcelos Gramaxo v Portugal (2022) App no 26968/16 (ECtHR 13 December 2022). This is a case of interest as it introduces a new surveillance technology into the Strasbourg jurisprudence: the Global Positioning System (GPS). The movements of Mr. Florindo's company car were constantly monitored by GPS for three years, during and outside working hours. We criticise the stance taken by the majority of the judges, which we summarise as a ‘just more surveillance’ approach. This approach led them to value the GPS’ efficiency in pursuing a legitimate employer aim, and failed to engage in a critical analysis of this tool and of the alternative (less invasive) means available. We argue that the Court did not effectively protect the employee's right to privacy (Art. 8 European Convention on Human Rights) through a proper ‘least intrusive mean test’, which can be found in previous ECtHR case law on the subject.
本文分析了欧洲人权法院(ECtHR)关于工作场所监视的判决，Florindo De Almeida Vasconcelos Gramaxo诉葡萄牙(2022)应用程序号26968/16 (ECtHR 2022年12月13日)。这是一个有趣的案例，因为它将一种新的监视技术引入了斯特拉斯堡判例:全球定位系统(GPS)。三年来，弗洛林多公司的汽车在工作时间和工作以外的活动都受到GPS的持续监控。我们批评大多数法官所采取的立场，我们将其总结为“只是更多的监督”方法。这种方法导致他们重视GPS在追求合法雇主目标方面的效率，而未能对该工具和可用的替代方法(侵入性较小)进行批判性分析。我们认为，法院没有通过适当的“最小侵入性平均值测试”有效地保护雇员的隐私权(《欧洲人权公约》第8条)，这可以在以前欧洲人权法院关于该主题的判例法中找到。
{"title":"‘Just more surveillance’: The ECtHR and workplace monitoring","authors":"Michele Molè, David Mangan","doi":"10.1177/20319525231201274","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20319525231201274","url":null,"abstract":"This contribution analyses the European Court of Human Rights’ (ECtHR) decision on workplace surveillance, Florindo De Almeida Vasconcelos Gramaxo v Portugal (2022) App no 26968/16 (ECtHR 13 December 2022). This is a case of interest as it introduces a new surveillance technology into the Strasbourg jurisprudence: the Global Positioning System (GPS). The movements of Mr. Florindo's company car were constantly monitored by GPS for three years, during and outside working hours. We criticise the stance taken by the majority of the judges, which we summarise as a ‘just more surveillance’ approach. This approach led them to value the GPS’ efficiency in pursuing a legitimate employer aim, and failed to engage in a critical analysis of this tool and of the alternative (less invasive) means available. We argue that the Court did not effectively protect the employee's right to privacy (Art. 8 European Convention on Human Rights) through a proper ‘least intrusive mean test’, which can be found in previous ECtHR case law on the subject.","PeriodicalId":41157,"journal":{"name":"European Labour Law Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134970229","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 : 2023-09-06DOI: 10.1177/20319525231194278
Charalampos Stylogiannis
This article contends that the effective application of the right to collective bargaining for self-employed (platform) workers can be particularly challenging due to the current structure of existing systems of industrial relations, even when we set aside restrictions stemming from competition law. These limitations persist despite the strong legal basis and broad consensus under international law that the right to collective bargaining constitutes a human right with universal application. Several international labour and human rights instruments, along with the findings and wording of their respective supervisory bodies, illustrate that the right to collective bargaining should have a broad personal scope of application, regardless of workers’ employment status. However, in practice, achieving such widespread application is not an easy task. As this article points out, the inability of current industrial relations systems to fully allow self-employed workers to exercise their right to collective bargaining necessitates a discussion on the future of industrial relations.
{"title":"The effective application of the right to collective bargaining for self-employed (platform) workers: ‘Not such an easy task’","authors":"Charalampos Stylogiannis","doi":"10.1177/20319525231194278","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20319525231194278","url":null,"abstract":"This article contends that the effective application of the right to collective bargaining for self-employed (platform) workers can be particularly challenging due to the current structure of existing systems of industrial relations, even when we set aside restrictions stemming from competition law. These limitations persist despite the strong legal basis and broad consensus under international law that the right to collective bargaining constitutes a human right with universal application. Several international labour and human rights instruments, along with the findings and wording of their respective supervisory bodies, illustrate that the right to collective bargaining should have a broad personal scope of application, regardless of workers’ employment status. However, in practice, achieving such widespread application is not an easy task. As this article points out, the inability of current industrial relations systems to fully allow self-employed workers to exercise their right to collective bargaining necessitates a discussion on the future of industrial relations.","PeriodicalId":41157,"journal":{"name":"European Labour Law Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2023-09-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47023142","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：