新自由主义对欧洲劳动法的影响:劳动的意义和不同宪法妥协的需要

IF 1.1 Q2 LAW European Labour Law Journal Pub Date : 2022-04-13 DOI:10.1177/20319525221093716
Pierluigi Digennaro
{"title":"新自由主义对欧洲劳动法的影响:劳动的意义和不同宪法妥协的需要","authors":"Pierluigi Digennaro","doi":"10.1177/20319525221093716","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article aims to identify continuity between the main neoliberal schools that had a role in the making the European legal order and the conception of labour and 'work activity' embedded in the European legal framework. The consequences of this contiguity are also discussed. In particular, the concepts of 'working activity' and 'undertaking' elaborated by the Court of Justice are used as a driver of the analysis to detect signs of these influences. A two-phase approach is adopted to develop the research. First, a review is undertaken of relevant ECJ judgments that testify to the Court's position on the topics discussed in the article. Second, the cultural common ground between the interpretation of the legal framework found in case law and specific neoliberal theories is highlighted. The meta-principles that are identified through the analysis are then compared with those derived from the rights recognised in the constitutions proclaimed in the second half of the 20th century to show the significant discontinuity that endangers the very existence of the European Union as a political project and has destabilised the constitutional order of many European countries. As the founding principles of the EU legal order kickstarted a containment of labour and social rights, the call for change at the roots of European constitutional law is becoming increasingly urgent. The formal proclamation of the Charters of Fundamental Rights at the European level (not least because of the way in which rights are recognised) has not in itself proved to be capable per se of transcending the original matrix of the European order.","PeriodicalId":41157,"journal":{"name":"European Labour Law Journal","volume":"13 1","pages":"249 - 272"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The effects of neoliberalism in European labour law: The meaning of labour and the need for a different constitutional compromise\",\"authors\":\"Pierluigi Digennaro\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/20319525221093716\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article aims to identify continuity between the main neoliberal schools that had a role in the making the European legal order and the conception of labour and 'work activity' embedded in the European legal framework. The consequences of this contiguity are also discussed. In particular, the concepts of 'working activity' and 'undertaking' elaborated by the Court of Justice are used as a driver of the analysis to detect signs of these influences. A two-phase approach is adopted to develop the research. First, a review is undertaken of relevant ECJ judgments that testify to the Court's position on the topics discussed in the article. Second, the cultural common ground between the interpretation of the legal framework found in case law and specific neoliberal theories is highlighted. The meta-principles that are identified through the analysis are then compared with those derived from the rights recognised in the constitutions proclaimed in the second half of the 20th century to show the significant discontinuity that endangers the very existence of the European Union as a political project and has destabilised the constitutional order of many European countries. As the founding principles of the EU legal order kickstarted a containment of labour and social rights, the call for change at the roots of European constitutional law is becoming increasingly urgent. The formal proclamation of the Charters of Fundamental Rights at the European level (not least because of the way in which rights are recognised) has not in itself proved to be capable per se of transcending the original matrix of the European order.\",\"PeriodicalId\":41157,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Labour Law Journal\",\"volume\":\"13 1\",\"pages\":\"249 - 272\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-04-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Labour Law Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/20319525221093716\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Labour Law Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20319525221093716","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文旨在确定在建立欧洲法律秩序中发挥作用的主要新自由主义学派与嵌入欧洲法律框架的劳动和“工作活动”概念之间的连续性。还讨论了这种邻接的后果。特别是,法院阐述的“工作活动”和“承担”概念被用作分析的驱动因素,以检测这些影响的迹象。研究采用了两阶段的方法。首先,对欧洲法院的相关判决进行了审查,这些判决证明了法院对文章中讨论的主题的立场。其次,强调了判例法中对法律框架的解释与特定的新自由主义理论之间的文化共同点。然后,将通过分析确定的元原则与20世纪下半叶颁布的宪法中承认的权利进行比较,以显示严重的不连续性,这种不连续性危及欧盟作为一个政治项目的存在,并破坏了许多欧洲国家的宪法秩序。随着欧盟法律秩序的基本原则开始遏制劳工和社会权利,从欧洲宪法的根源进行变革的呼声变得越来越迫切。《基本权利宪章》在欧洲层面的正式宣布(尤其是因为权利的承认方式)本身并没有被证明能够超越欧洲秩序的原始矩阵。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The effects of neoliberalism in European labour law: The meaning of labour and the need for a different constitutional compromise
This article aims to identify continuity between the main neoliberal schools that had a role in the making the European legal order and the conception of labour and 'work activity' embedded in the European legal framework. The consequences of this contiguity are also discussed. In particular, the concepts of 'working activity' and 'undertaking' elaborated by the Court of Justice are used as a driver of the analysis to detect signs of these influences. A two-phase approach is adopted to develop the research. First, a review is undertaken of relevant ECJ judgments that testify to the Court's position on the topics discussed in the article. Second, the cultural common ground between the interpretation of the legal framework found in case law and specific neoliberal theories is highlighted. The meta-principles that are identified through the analysis are then compared with those derived from the rights recognised in the constitutions proclaimed in the second half of the 20th century to show the significant discontinuity that endangers the very existence of the European Union as a political project and has destabilised the constitutional order of many European countries. As the founding principles of the EU legal order kickstarted a containment of labour and social rights, the call for change at the roots of European constitutional law is becoming increasingly urgent. The formal proclamation of the Charters of Fundamental Rights at the European level (not least because of the way in which rights are recognised) has not in itself proved to be capable per se of transcending the original matrix of the European order.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
28.60%
发文量
29
期刊最新文献
Anti-discrimination cases decided by the Court of Justice of the EU in 2023 Resocialisation through prisoner remuneration: The unconstitutionally low remuneration of working prisoners in Germany Work in prison: Reintegration or exclusion and exploitation? Beyond profit: A model framework for ethical and feasible private prison labour Minding the gap? Blind spots in the ILO's and the EU's perspective on anti-forced labour policy
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1