Pub Date : 2022-02-19DOI: 10.1177/13882627221076869
Pauline Melin, Susanne Sivonen
The concept of ‘working time’ for a period of stand-by time according to a stand-by system applicable to firefighters was interpreted by the Court in MG (C-214/20). In the Y case (C-636/19), the Court interpreted the concept of ‘insured person’ for the purpose of reimbursement of healthcare costs under Directive 2011/24. In the TS case (C-538/19), the Court dealt with another cross-border healthcare case. This time the question was whether a Member State can require an authorisation for cross-border healthcare to be subject to the submission of a medical report drawn up by a doctor from its national public health insurance system in light of Article 20 of Regulation 883/2004 and Article 56 TFEU. In ASGI and APN (C-462/20), the exclusion of third-country nationals from the eligibility to the Italian family card was under scrutiny. In SC (C-866/19), the Court clarified that the principle of aggregation applies to the calculation of the theoretical amount of benefit but not to the calculation of the actual amount of benefit under Article 52(1)(b) of Regulation 883/2004. In K (C-285/20), the Court held that being on sick leave and receiving sickness benefits can be considered as equivalent to the pursuit of an economic activity for the purpose of applying the rules on unemployment benefits for wholly unemployed frontier workers under Article 65(2) and (5) of Regulation 883/2004.
{"title":"Overview of recent cases before the Court of Justice of the European Union (September 2021-December 2021)","authors":"Pauline Melin, Susanne Sivonen","doi":"10.1177/13882627221076869","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13882627221076869","url":null,"abstract":"The concept of ‘working time’ for a period of stand-by time according to a stand-by system applicable to firefighters was interpreted by the Court in MG (C-214/20). In the Y case (C-636/19), the Court interpreted the concept of ‘insured person’ for the purpose of reimbursement of healthcare costs under Directive 2011/24. In the TS case (C-538/19), the Court dealt with another cross-border healthcare case. This time the question was whether a Member State can require an authorisation for cross-border healthcare to be subject to the submission of a medical report drawn up by a doctor from its national public health insurance system in light of Article 20 of Regulation 883/2004 and Article 56 TFEU. In ASGI and APN (C-462/20), the exclusion of third-country nationals from the eligibility to the Italian family card was under scrutiny. In SC (C-866/19), the Court clarified that the principle of aggregation applies to the calculation of the theoretical amount of benefit but not to the calculation of the actual amount of benefit under Article 52(1)(b) of Regulation 883/2004. In K (C-285/20), the Court held that being on sick leave and receiving sickness benefits can be considered as equivalent to the pursuit of an economic activity for the purpose of applying the rules on unemployment benefits for wholly unemployed frontier workers under Article 65(2) and (5) of Regulation 883/2004.","PeriodicalId":44670,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Social Security","volume":"24 1","pages":"58 - 67"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2022-02-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47374258","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 : 2022-02-16DOI: 10.1177/13882627221077122
Kristina Koldinská
an impact on both poverty and human rights. In this part, authors examine meta-issues that exacerbate poverty and human rights violations such as climate change, corruption, conflict (zones), technological advances, and corporate/private actors’ disruptions versus their lack of (sufficient) liability. This impressive collection of chapters lacks, regrettably, a concluding section that brings together the most relevant findings. Granted, drawing concluding remarks from such a diverse and broad take on poverty and human rights is nothing short of a challenge if one wants to avoid unnecessary generalisations and over-simplifications of such sensitive issues. Regardless, a final closing chapter could have offered some needed guiding general remarks to inspire both policymakers and future research. These, however, can be found in the respective chapters. The research handbook presents an important collection of insights on crucial ties between poverty and human rights from an impressive interdisciplinary exercise. This is an essential contribution for researchers and academics to enrich their understanding of poverty, its causes and how the phenomenon progressively transforms. It sheds light on a variety of dimensions of poverty that are currently overlooked from a human rights discourse. As a consequence, it is an important reference for future research and policymaking that should be used to inspire forthcoming contributions and avenues for pursuing the eradication of poverty. Moreover, it brings this impressive collection of contributions in a very timely manner. Amidst a global pandemic, which the authors deem one among many reasons to be pessimistic about advances towards poverty eradication, the handbook advocates for confronting poverty as the core human rights issue that it is. Compared to other volumes on this topic, the research handbook offers a more ambitious collection that is able to address poverty and human rights from a variety of fields and disciplines. This allows the volume to cover both intersectional and structural issues. The novelty of this volume also lies in its duality: it uses the human rights approach to poverty both as a foundation and as the basis for its critique in many of its contributions. Hopefully, this volume will serve its purpose and inspire policymakers and governments alike to confront the urgent a long-standing need to eradicate poverty and significantly reducing inequality.
{"title":"Book Review: Social Law 4.0. New Approaches for Ensuring and Financing Social Security in the Digital Age by Ulrich Becker and Olga Chesalina","authors":"Kristina Koldinská","doi":"10.1177/13882627221077122","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13882627221077122","url":null,"abstract":"an impact on both poverty and human rights. In this part, authors examine meta-issues that exacerbate poverty and human rights violations such as climate change, corruption, conflict (zones), technological advances, and corporate/private actors’ disruptions versus their lack of (sufficient) liability. This impressive collection of chapters lacks, regrettably, a concluding section that brings together the most relevant findings. Granted, drawing concluding remarks from such a diverse and broad take on poverty and human rights is nothing short of a challenge if one wants to avoid unnecessary generalisations and over-simplifications of such sensitive issues. Regardless, a final closing chapter could have offered some needed guiding general remarks to inspire both policymakers and future research. These, however, can be found in the respective chapters. The research handbook presents an important collection of insights on crucial ties between poverty and human rights from an impressive interdisciplinary exercise. This is an essential contribution for researchers and academics to enrich their understanding of poverty, its causes and how the phenomenon progressively transforms. It sheds light on a variety of dimensions of poverty that are currently overlooked from a human rights discourse. As a consequence, it is an important reference for future research and policymaking that should be used to inspire forthcoming contributions and avenues for pursuing the eradication of poverty. Moreover, it brings this impressive collection of contributions in a very timely manner. Amidst a global pandemic, which the authors deem one among many reasons to be pessimistic about advances towards poverty eradication, the handbook advocates for confronting poverty as the core human rights issue that it is. Compared to other volumes on this topic, the research handbook offers a more ambitious collection that is able to address poverty and human rights from a variety of fields and disciplines. This allows the volume to cover both intersectional and structural issues. The novelty of this volume also lies in its duality: it uses the human rights approach to poverty both as a foundation and as the basis for its critique in many of its contributions. Hopefully, this volume will serve its purpose and inspire policymakers and governments alike to confront the urgent a long-standing need to eradicate poverty and significantly reducing inequality.","PeriodicalId":44670,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Social Security","volume":"24 1","pages":"69 - 71"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2022-02-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47658683","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 : 2021-12-21DOI: 10.1177/13882627211064637
M. Seeleib-Kaiser
Tensions surrounding internal migrants’ access to welfare and the associated politicisations about who should shoulder the ‘fiscal burden’ are not unique to the European Union (EU). Based on a Most Different Systems Design and following an institutionalist approach, this article analyses the developments associated with freedom of movement and access to poor relief/social assistance in four economically and politically diverse jurisdictions. It also considers the implications of these developments for the EU. The four cases analysed are industrialising England, contemporary China, Germany, and the United States. Although economic integration was a necessary, it was not a sufficient condition for the abolishment of residence requirements for internal migrants in all four jurisdictions. Moreover, it took political power, various coalitions, or the leadership of actors to overcome the barriers and hurdles on the path to social citizenship in the wider territorial jurisdictions. Solidarity as a precondition did not play a significant role.
{"title":"Regulating the Poor through Internal Borders: The EU in Historical and International Perspectives","authors":"M. Seeleib-Kaiser","doi":"10.1177/13882627211064637","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13882627211064637","url":null,"abstract":"Tensions surrounding internal migrants’ access to welfare and the associated politicisations about who should shoulder the ‘fiscal burden’ are not unique to the European Union (EU). Based on a Most Different Systems Design and following an institutionalist approach, this article analyses the developments associated with freedom of movement and access to poor relief/social assistance in four economically and politically diverse jurisdictions. It also considers the implications of these developments for the EU. The four cases analysed are industrialising England, contemporary China, Germany, and the United States. Although economic integration was a necessary, it was not a sufficient condition for the abolishment of residence requirements for internal migrants in all four jurisdictions. Moreover, it took political power, various coalitions, or the leadership of actors to overcome the barriers and hurdles on the path to social citizenship in the wider territorial jurisdictions. Solidarity as a precondition did not play a significant role.","PeriodicalId":44670,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Social Security","volume":"24 1","pages":"3 - 20"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2021-12-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46320003","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 : 2021-12-01DOI: 10.1177/13882627211054537
Szandra Kramarics
{"title":"Book Review: Equality and Non-Discrimination in the EU The Foundations of the EU Legal Order by Giovanni Zaccaroni","authors":"Szandra Kramarics","doi":"10.1177/13882627211054537","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13882627211054537","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":44670,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Social Security","volume":"23 1","pages":"397 - 398"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2021-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"65440395","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 : 2021-11-29DOI: 10.1177/13882627211061419
J. Lundälv
{"title":"Book Review: Leading Social Policy Analysis from the Front. Essays in Honour of Wim Van Oorschot by Tijs Laenen, Bart Meuleman, Adeline Otto, Femke Roosma, Wim Van Lancker","authors":"J. Lundälv","doi":"10.1177/13882627211061419","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13882627211061419","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":44670,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Social Security","volume":"24 1","pages":"71 - 73"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2021-11-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45923978","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 : 2021-11-20DOI: 10.1177/13882627211050083
Pauline Melin, Susanne Sivonen
In O.D. and Others v INPS (C-350/20), the Court dealt with the refusal of the Italian authorities to grant childbirth and maternity allowances to third-country nationals falling within the scope of the Single Permit Directive. In CG (C-709/20), the Court considered the refusal of the UK authorities to grant social assistance to an economically inactive EU citizen resident under the UK scheme adopted in the context of Brexit. In AB v Olympiako (C-511/19), the Court found that the Greek legislation, adopted in the context of the economic crisis, placing public sector workers in a labour reserve system is not discriminatory on grounds of age. In WABE and MH Müller Handel (C-804/18 and C-341/19), the Court clarified what circumstances could justify differential treatment indirectly based on religion or belief. The Court confirmed the direct effect of the principle of equal pay for male and female workers enshrined in Article 157 TFEU for cases of work of equal value in Tesco Stores (C-624/19). In Team Power Europe (C-784/19), the Court specified under which criteria a temporary-work agency could be considered as pursuing ‘substantial activities’ in a Member State. In A (C-535/19), the Court held that a Member State cannot exclude an economically inactive EU citizen from its public sickness insurance system but does not have to grant access free of charge. In FORMAT (C-879/19), the Court confirmed that Article 14(2) of Regulation 1408/71 does not apply to a person who, under a single employment contract concluded with a single employer, works in several Member States for more than 12 months in each of those Member States. Finally, in PF (C-27/20), the Court dealt a national legislation which uses the penultimate year preceding the payment period as the reference year for the calculation of family allowances to be allocated.
{"title":"Overview of recent cases before the Court of Justice of the European Union (March 2021-September 2021)","authors":"Pauline Melin, Susanne Sivonen","doi":"10.1177/13882627211050083","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13882627211050083","url":null,"abstract":"In O.D. and Others v INPS (C-350/20), the Court dealt with the refusal of the Italian authorities to grant childbirth and maternity allowances to third-country nationals falling within the scope of the Single Permit Directive. In CG (C-709/20), the Court considered the refusal of the UK authorities to grant social assistance to an economically inactive EU citizen resident under the UK scheme adopted in the context of Brexit. In AB v Olympiako (C-511/19), the Court found that the Greek legislation, adopted in the context of the economic crisis, placing public sector workers in a labour reserve system is not discriminatory on grounds of age. In WABE and MH Müller Handel (C-804/18 and C-341/19), the Court clarified what circumstances could justify differential treatment indirectly based on religion or belief. The Court confirmed the direct effect of the principle of equal pay for male and female workers enshrined in Article 157 TFEU for cases of work of equal value in Tesco Stores (C-624/19). In Team Power Europe (C-784/19), the Court specified under which criteria a temporary-work agency could be considered as pursuing ‘substantial activities’ in a Member State. In A (C-535/19), the Court held that a Member State cannot exclude an economically inactive EU citizen from its public sickness insurance system but does not have to grant access free of charge. In FORMAT (C-879/19), the Court confirmed that Article 14(2) of Regulation 1408/71 does not apply to a person who, under a single employment contract concluded with a single employer, works in several Member States for more than 12 months in each of those Member States. Finally, in PF (C-27/20), the Court dealt a national legislation which uses the penultimate year preceding the payment period as the reference year for the calculation of family allowances to be allocated.","PeriodicalId":44670,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Social Security","volume":"23 1","pages":"379 - 391"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2021-11-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47873451","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 : 2021-11-06DOI: 10.1177/13882627211059192
J. Lundälv
they have regarding social policy, but also about understanding how they are organised, how different issues are linked with other topics in their portfolio, and how they combine different world views in order to disseminate ideas. Third, the whole chain of shaping discourses is thus covered, leading to new empirical insights. The first main lesson is the role played by IOs in establishing priorities and structuring different fields. For instance, the second chapter explains their contribution to shaping youth unemployment as an important policy field, with education becoming a cross-cutting issue for many IOs, resulting in a convergence of the discourse. In some other cases, it may go in the other direction. The way the field itself is structured may impact the dynamic evolution of IOs, as with migration and care issues in chapter 4 or the evolution of climate change in chapter 11. The way IOs contribute to establish priorities and disseminate ideas is reflected in the effectiveness of national policies. In chapter 13, the authors show how food security remains a fundamental problem today and assert that IOs are part of the problem, displaying an overly optimistic trust in the markets to solve the issue. The second important lesson is the connection between discourses and the intrinsic features of IOs, also leading to different interactions with other IOs in the same policy field. The ILO and the World Bank, two dominating IOs in the global governance of social policy, are organised very differently. It leads to opposing logics regarding, labour and migration issues (chapter 2) and also supports the continuation of their dominant positions over time. The different intrinsic features of both key players have resulted in different discourses between a social and a neoliberal discourse regarding global labour standards (chapter 3), pensions (chapter 5), family policies between the North and the South (chapter 8) and disability (chapter 9). Overall, the book shows the importance of a strong contextual perspective for understanding the complexity of the architecture of global social governance and the variety of factors that shape this complexity and the resulting discourses.
{"title":"Book Review: Social Research and Disability. Developing Inclusive Research Spaces for Disabled Researchers by Ciaran Burke and Bronagh Byrne (eds.)","authors":"J. Lundälv","doi":"10.1177/13882627211059192","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13882627211059192","url":null,"abstract":"they have regarding social policy, but also about understanding how they are organised, how different issues are linked with other topics in their portfolio, and how they combine different world views in order to disseminate ideas. Third, the whole chain of shaping discourses is thus covered, leading to new empirical insights. The first main lesson is the role played by IOs in establishing priorities and structuring different fields. For instance, the second chapter explains their contribution to shaping youth unemployment as an important policy field, with education becoming a cross-cutting issue for many IOs, resulting in a convergence of the discourse. In some other cases, it may go in the other direction. The way the field itself is structured may impact the dynamic evolution of IOs, as with migration and care issues in chapter 4 or the evolution of climate change in chapter 11. The way IOs contribute to establish priorities and disseminate ideas is reflected in the effectiveness of national policies. In chapter 13, the authors show how food security remains a fundamental problem today and assert that IOs are part of the problem, displaying an overly optimistic trust in the markets to solve the issue. The second important lesson is the connection between discourses and the intrinsic features of IOs, also leading to different interactions with other IOs in the same policy field. The ILO and the World Bank, two dominating IOs in the global governance of social policy, are organised very differently. It leads to opposing logics regarding, labour and migration issues (chapter 2) and also supports the continuation of their dominant positions over time. The different intrinsic features of both key players have resulted in different discourses between a social and a neoliberal discourse regarding global labour standards (chapter 3), pensions (chapter 5), family policies between the North and the South (chapter 8) and disability (chapter 9). Overall, the book shows the importance of a strong contextual perspective for understanding the complexity of the architecture of global social governance and the variety of factors that shape this complexity and the resulting discourses.","PeriodicalId":44670,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Social Security","volume":"23 1","pages":"400 - 402"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2021-11-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49004438","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 : 2021-10-29DOI: 10.1177/13882627211050651
Marco Biasi
neration would no longer be determined by demand and supply on the labour market, but by the government or some other kind of centralised institution (on what criteria?). While it is certainly true that markets too often fail to produce a fair distribution of income, it should not be overlooked that the price mechanism underlying free markets fulfils an important coordinating function, attracting labour supply to the economic sectors where it is needed most. This coordinating function would be thwarted if pay rates were set by the state. The arguments in favour of equal pay are presented in the fourth part of the book. It is argued that rewards other than money could be used to incentivise activities and professions that have a positive impact on society. The authors advocating equal pay for all refer, above all, to solidarity, pointing to the fact that the amount of pay earned by workers often depends on factors for which workers are not accountable, such as health or certain physical abilities. A possible objection to this argument is that ‘equal’ and ‘just’ are not necessarily synonymous terms. As known since Aristotle’s time, only like cases are to be treated alike. Thus, the equal treatment of unequal cases is unjust. Can all works performed really be said to be equal or of equal value? Moreover, granting an equal rate of pay may not result in equal economic treatment of all workers, since some individuals may have greater needs than others due to disease or other natural disadvantages, for example. In my view, the authors supporting equal pay for all could have discussed these aspects more thoroughly. What these considerations show is that an equal rate of pay is neither sufficient nor necessary to achieve an egalitarian system of wealth distribution. This fact is acknowledged by the authors of the second and third parts of the book, which – in my opinion – contain the most convincing contributions. Here, various regulatory alternatives to equal pay that are designed to reduce income disparities are discussed, such as a minimum income for all citizens or pay ratios (i.e., provisions requiring that the highest wages in an organisation or profession cannot be x times greater than the wages of the lowest-paid workers). Compared with the idea of an equal pay rate for all workers, these regulatory proposals seem much more practicable and may be of actual interest for policymakers. In sum, the book offers many different views and perspectives by experts from a wide array of disciplines. It is absolutely worthwhile reading for lawyers, philosophers, economists, social scientists, and policymakers alike.
{"title":"Book review: The Dual Nature of Employee Involvement. An Economic and Human Right Issue by Sára Hungler","authors":"Marco Biasi","doi":"10.1177/13882627211050651","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13882627211050651","url":null,"abstract":"neration would no longer be determined by demand and supply on the labour market, but by the government or some other kind of centralised institution (on what criteria?). While it is certainly true that markets too often fail to produce a fair distribution of income, it should not be overlooked that the price mechanism underlying free markets fulfils an important coordinating function, attracting labour supply to the economic sectors where it is needed most. This coordinating function would be thwarted if pay rates were set by the state. The arguments in favour of equal pay are presented in the fourth part of the book. It is argued that rewards other than money could be used to incentivise activities and professions that have a positive impact on society. The authors advocating equal pay for all refer, above all, to solidarity, pointing to the fact that the amount of pay earned by workers often depends on factors for which workers are not accountable, such as health or certain physical abilities. A possible objection to this argument is that ‘equal’ and ‘just’ are not necessarily synonymous terms. As known since Aristotle’s time, only like cases are to be treated alike. Thus, the equal treatment of unequal cases is unjust. Can all works performed really be said to be equal or of equal value? Moreover, granting an equal rate of pay may not result in equal economic treatment of all workers, since some individuals may have greater needs than others due to disease or other natural disadvantages, for example. In my view, the authors supporting equal pay for all could have discussed these aspects more thoroughly. What these considerations show is that an equal rate of pay is neither sufficient nor necessary to achieve an egalitarian system of wealth distribution. This fact is acknowledged by the authors of the second and third parts of the book, which – in my opinion – contain the most convincing contributions. Here, various regulatory alternatives to equal pay that are designed to reduce income disparities are discussed, such as a minimum income for all citizens or pay ratios (i.e., provisions requiring that the highest wages in an organisation or profession cannot be x times greater than the wages of the lowest-paid workers). Compared with the idea of an equal pay rate for all workers, these regulatory proposals seem much more practicable and may be of actual interest for policymakers. In sum, the book offers many different views and perspectives by experts from a wide array of disciplines. It is absolutely worthwhile reading for lawyers, philosophers, economists, social scientists, and policymakers alike.","PeriodicalId":44670,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Social Security","volume":"23 1","pages":"393 - 395"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2021-10-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42484899","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 : 2021-10-25DOI: 10.1177/13882627211050417
Juliette Alenda-Demoutiez
{"title":"Book Review: International Organizations in Global Social Governance, Cham by Martens K., Niemann D. & Kaasch A.","authors":"Juliette Alenda-Demoutiez","doi":"10.1177/13882627211050417","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13882627211050417","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":44670,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Social Security","volume":"23 1","pages":"399 - 400"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2021-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43167096","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 : 2021-10-21DOI: 10.1177/13882627211048514
Lauri Mäkinen
According to Principle 14 of the European Pillar of Social Rights, everyone should have the right to adequate minimum income benefits that ensure a life in dignity. Reference budgets have been proposed to monitor this principle. Reference budgets are priced baskets of goods and services that represent a given living standard. At the moment, no common methodology for constructing reference budgets exists; instead, different methods are used to construct them. This study sought to compare the approaches and results of two Finnish reference budgets: one created by the Centre for Consumer Society Research (CCSR), and the second by the ImPRovE project. The purpose of the article is to respond to a gap in existing literature around how different methods for constructing reference budgets impact their outcomes. The two reference budgets offer a strong basis for comparison because they both sought to capture the same living standard in the same context for similar household types (single woman, single man, heterosexual couple, and heterosexual couple with two children), while using different approaches. The results suggest that the two reference budgets arrive at different estimates of what is needed for social participation. Ultimately, we found that the most significant differences between the budgets were housing and mobility costs for the couple with two children due to differences in information bases, selection criteria, evaluators, and pricing. The study makes a significant contribution to the literature because it is one of the first to explore how different approaches to constructing reference budgets affect their outcomes. The results suggest that clear criteria for constructing reference budgets are needed to monitor Principle 14 of the European Pillar of Social Rights.
{"title":"Different Methods, Different Standards? A Comparison of Two Finnish Reference Budgets","authors":"Lauri Mäkinen","doi":"10.1177/13882627211048514","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13882627211048514","url":null,"abstract":"According to Principle 14 of the European Pillar of Social Rights, everyone should have the right to adequate minimum income benefits that ensure a life in dignity. Reference budgets have been proposed to monitor this principle. Reference budgets are priced baskets of goods and services that represent a given living standard. At the moment, no common methodology for constructing reference budgets exists; instead, different methods are used to construct them. This study sought to compare the approaches and results of two Finnish reference budgets: one created by the Centre for Consumer Society Research (CCSR), and the second by the ImPRovE project. The purpose of the article is to respond to a gap in existing literature around how different methods for constructing reference budgets impact their outcomes. The two reference budgets offer a strong basis for comparison because they both sought to capture the same living standard in the same context for similar household types (single woman, single man, heterosexual couple, and heterosexual couple with two children), while using different approaches. The results suggest that the two reference budgets arrive at different estimates of what is needed for social participation. Ultimately, we found that the most significant differences between the budgets were housing and mobility costs for the couple with two children due to differences in information bases, selection criteria, evaluators, and pricing. The study makes a significant contribution to the literature because it is one of the first to explore how different approaches to constructing reference budgets affect their outcomes. The results suggest that clear criteria for constructing reference budgets are needed to monitor Principle 14 of the European Pillar of Social Rights.","PeriodicalId":44670,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Social Security","volume":"23 1","pages":"360 - 378"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2021-10-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46832248","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：