The EU, Competition Law and Workers’ Rights

The rise of the gig economy, and the expansion of self-employment more generally, have magnified pre-existing concerns about how to address the risk of exploitation of non-employees, including franchisees, freelance journalists and owner-driver transport workers, amongst others. In a bid to fill relevant regulatory gaps, and correct destructive power imbalances, many are turning their attention to the power and potential of collective bargaining. At the same time, there is growing appreciation of how competition prohibitions against price-fixing may curb workers’ capacity to organize for decent wages and working conditions. There has been much discussion and debate about the need to expand existing labour exemptions from competition law in order to allow gig workers, and other vulnerable categories of selfemployed workers, to engage in lawful collective bargaining. Rather than fixating on questions of misclassification, however, this article considers a novel proposal emanating from the sphere of competition regulation in Australia. After extensive consultation and prolonged Parliamentary debate, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) has adopted a class exemption which provides a broad legal immunity to eligible small businesses, including self-employed workers, wishing to engage in collective bargaining. The ACCC’s Determination to extend collective bargaining rights to small businesses – with effect from 3 June 2021 – represents a highly progressive approach and one worthy of greater attention and deeper analysis. To assess the regulatory value of this unique approach, we draw upon the International Labour Organization (ILO) standards relating to collective bargaining and freedom of association. In doing so, we critically assess the extent to which the ACCC’s approach offers a potential solution to resolving the tension between labour law and competition law when it comes to the regulation of self-employed workers. Somewhat surprisingly, we find that the class exemption largely complies with relevant ILO principles, despite the fact that it does little in terms of actively promoting or encouraging effective collective bargaining. For example, in line with ILO conceptions of voluntariness, the class exemption places virtually no restrictions on the scope, level or subject matter of the bargaining. Ultimately, however, we argue that if collective bargaining is to have any chance of filling the regulatory void which exists between labour law and competition law, it is critical that basic structures and supports are in place to facilitate meaningful bargaining: where collective activity is supported by trade union autonomy and the right to engage in strikes in support of bargaining demands and concluded agreements. Mercosur, Socio-Labour Declaration, Argentina, Brazil, Uruguay, Paraguay, Venezuela, Regional Integration, Labour Rights, Regional Trade Blocs, Latin America, Global South

Research Handbook on Labour, Business and Human Rights Law, edited by Janice R.Bellace and Beryl terHaar. Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, UK, 2019, 528 pp., ISBN: 978‐1‐78642‐310‐7, £195.00 (US$290.00)

Reviewed by: Labour Left Out: Canada's Failure to Protect and Promote Collective Bargaining as a Human Right David Cingranelli (bio) Labour Left Out: Canada's Failure to Protect and Promote Collective Bargaining as a Human Right, by Roy J. Adams (Ottowa, ON: Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives2006) 152 pp. In this concise, hard-hitting book, Roy J. Adams, professor emeritus in the DeGroote School of Business at McMaster University, reports on his research into Canada's failure to protect and promote the rights of workers to collective bargaining with their employers. The author argues that Canadian labor policies deviate seriously from international human rights law. For its violations of international norms, Canada has been frequently and strongly condemned by the International Labor Organization's Committee on Freedom of Association. The author is a world-renowned expert on the general topic of "worker rights as human rights" and, in particular, on what it means to have "freedom of association" and the "right to collective bargaining." I have read many of his previous articles and books on these subjects, so I was not surprised to find this book well organized and filled with good information and analytical insights. The author argues that many of the entitlements we refer to as "labor rights" such as the right to freedom of association at the workplace and the right to bargain collectively with employers are also internationally recognized human rights. Thus, when governments deny the human rights of their employees or when they look the other way so private sector employers can do so, they are engaging in morally reprehensible behavior. His other important thesis, the one that is emphasized by the title of the book, is that "millions of Canadians are being denied daily the exercise of a fundamental human right"1 —the right to collective bargaining. This second thesis is well supported. The author presents evidence that nearly all Canadian workers want independent workplace representation, but law, custom and practice systemically deny it to them. In 1998, Adams reports, the ILO's annual labor conference adopted a Declaration of Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work that affirmed the human rights character of a set of core labor rights, including the right to organize and bargain collectively, and announced the responsibility of all member states to "respect, protect and promote" those rights as human rights. In 2001 the Canadian Supreme Court established that all Canadian workers have, in addition, a constitutional right, over and above whatever statutory rights they may have or lack, to organize and make demands on their employers and have their organizations recognized by their employers. To find out what the federal, provincial and territorial governments were doing to promote the practice of collective [End Page 1071] bargaining and inform workers of their newly established constitutional rights and employers of their constitutional responsibilities, Adams sent letters to all Ministers of Labor. The book contains copies of the responses. A reading of them indicates that there has been essentially no change in policy as a result of these recent events. The overall impact of the book is to educate the reader about worker rights issues and to exhort Canadian policy makers to change their ways. It is a "must read" for those who make labor policy in Canada, for worker rights activists, and labor union leaders everywhere in the world. The book should be of special interest to American readers. Although focused on Canada, most of Adams' criticisms are equally applicable (if not more so) to the United States, which has a labor relations system with characteristics very similar to those north of the border. Students will find Appendix 8, "Frequently Asked Questions about Labour's Human Rights," to be especially informative. In very straightforward language, the author asks and answers some basic questions such as "Who decides what labour issues should be considered human rights?" and "What is the International Labour Organization?" and "What is the international status of the right to strike." The argument that worker rights are human rights and the way the author develops it will also be of great interest to those conducting research and teaching about human rights. Not only does Adams report on international...

The essence of social dialogue as a legal phenomenon has been analysed, with one of its main objectives being the implementation of contractual legal regulation of labour and social rights through reconciliation and compromises. Attention is drawn to international interest in the application of social dialogue procedures within the legal mechanism for ensuring the labour and social rights of workers. Focus is given to the form of social dialogue involving collective bargaining for the conclusion of collective agreements and contracts. The study provides a detailed analysis of certain conclusions made by the European Committee of Social Rights regarding reports from the member states of the European Social Charter (revised) on the compliance of their national legislation with the provisions of this Charter. Certain aspects of the implementation of the right to collective bargaining, enshrined in Article 6 §2 of this international treaty, are highlighted. Attention is drawn to the fact that if an industry agreement includes provisions allowing for the non-application of some of its clauses - thereby initiating a mechanism that restricts the right to work for individuals covered by this agreement or complicates the procedures for exercising the right to work - clear contractual legal conditions for applying these norms must be established. The parties to the industry agreement must define the conditions and procedures under which such a non-application clause may be invoked. The article examines the limitations of this right within the context of wage regulation. It is noted that if a collective agreement or contract has been duly concluded by the subjects of contractual regulation, any unilateral interference with its provisions can only be justified by the need to protect the rights of other workers or safeguard public interests, national security, public health, etc. The importance of improving collective contractual regulation of labour relations through mechanisms of social dialogue is emphasized, as the anticipated reform of labour legislation foresees an expansion of labour and social rights, which will need to be defined in collective agreements and contracts. The issue of the representativeness of the parties involved in social dialogue is addressed through an analysis of innovations in Ukrainian labour legislation.

6 | International Union Rights | 26/1 FOCUS | UNION RIGHTS OF STATE ADMINISTRATION AND ESSENTIAL SERVICES WORKERS Public Service and restriction of basic labour rights in Japan Still restricted: basic rights for Japanese public service workers In Japan, the basic labour rights of public sector workers employed by central and local government are largely restricted. In legal terms, trade unions in the public sector are called ‘employee organizations’. They have the right to organise, but do not have the rights to adopt collective bargaining agreement, nor to strike. This is a high hurdle or obstacle to achieve better working conditions, as we negotiate with the National Personnel Authority for central government employees and with each local government’s personnel commission or equality commission for local government employees. As a result, their terms and conditions are regulated by law, ordinance and orders legally committed to recommendation or opinion by those compensatory structures. However, this broad restriction violates the Constitution of Japan, which granted basic labour rights for all workers. The ILO supervisory bodies have repeatedly criticised the government of Japan, and they have requested improvements to rights for public servants. We, Japanese public sector unions, have struggled to restore our rights. The restrictions have posed a lot of challenges and difficulties First, we face decreasing wage standards for public service workers, particularly low starting pay as well as blunting wage increases for workers over 45 years of age. This particular pattern of public service workers wage reflects that of private sector workers. In 1973, the Japanese trade union movement achieved a 20.1 percent wage increase in the ‘Shunto’ (‘Spring Offensive’) collective bargaining, and in 1974 it achieved 32.9 percent. The number of strikes in 1974 was 11,576, which is the highest number since the Second World War. Business quickly reacted, and organised a counterattack at the bargaining table, and on the right to strike – not only in the private sector, but also in the public sector, so that wage increases could not take place by workers’ strike. Secondly, the restriction caused deterioration of administration. Under the principle of separation of powers, legislation is superior to the power of administration. Separate from the Diet (parliament in Japan), the administration is neutral and maintained stability and continuity in order to secure rights and interests of the people. Taking into consideration that the will of the cabinet consists of parliamentarians, the administration has maintained neutrality by collecting objective and fair data and statistics, or always made multiple proposals in policy issues. However, due to the lack of equal labour-employer negotiation and basic rights, political power now has superiority in policy proposals in a top-down way. In recent years, we have witnessed a series of frauds and the use of illicit statistics or data to support positions of the cabinet. Thirdly, this creates a lack of confidence in the political process, and politics is becoming not ‘for the people’ but also ‘for the handful number of ruling people’. We do believe it is vital to realise democracy in public sector workplaces for more open and democratic administration processes for the people. Basic labour rights for public service workers are vital for decent administration. I also have to point out that the lack of basic labour rights impoverishes public service workers, including those in essential services. They are denied an independent-minded way of work, and are working without any rights under de facto oppression by the employer. The most serious case is the prohibition of the rights to organise for firefighters and prison staff, a violation of ILO Convention 87. The government has implemented a policy to privatise or outsource prisons. If the prisons are privatised, workers should have basic labour rights employed by private entity. There is no reason to restrict the right to organise for prison staff. The government claims firefighters are regarded as workers in an essential service and as part of police force. And in fact, the Japanese fire service was formed in 1872 as part of the police organization. However, it was around 70 years ago that the fire service came under the control of municipal governments, just after the Second World War. During the...

Problem setting. After returning from military service, war veterans face the challenge of reintegration into civilian life through various legal mechanisms provided by the state. One of the most pressing areas of social relations for adaptation to peaceful life is employment. Labor activity enables individuals to realize their abilities in different societal spheres and ensures a decent level of income. Purpose of research. The purpose of this article is to highlight key trends in the labor sector in Ukraine concerning the realization of war veterans’ right to work, as well as to outline the advantages and limitations veterans face due to labor market developments under martial law and the lack of legal regulation of employment relations in the field of nonstandard employment. Analysis of recent research and publications. Recent studies on labor and social rights of war veterans include the work of E.A. Novikov, who advocates for distinguishing military personnel and war veterans as special (specific) subjects of labor law. V.I. Sheverdina examines the social protection of military personnel and war veterans, formulating a categorical-conceptual framework for their social protection. I. Nalyvaiko’s article discusses the development of legislation protecting combatants in Ukraine, analyzing significant recent achievements in the legal regulation of their social protection. At the end of 2024, a collective monographic study titled “Legal Support for Professional Adaptation and the Right to Entrepreneurial Activity of War Veterans” was published. It aimed to establish the legal foundations for the professional adaptation and employment of war veterans, facilitate their right to engage in entrepreneurial activities, and improve mechanisms for their social protection and support during martial law and the post-war period. Article’s main body. The article examines the impact of digital technologies on the labor market. Firstly, this impact manifests in the transformation of employment relationships and the emergence of non-standard forms of work that do not fully exhibit the classical characteristics of labor relations. Secondly, it is reflected in the development of state electronic services in the field of labor. A possible solution to the problem of implementing the right to work for war veterans is leveraging the benefits of digitalization in society and the economy. This is expressed in new forms of work organization – non-standard employment – whose main feature is the dependence of an employee’s labor function on digital devices, Internet access, and electronic means of communication through which work is received and/or performed. Modern forms of non-standard employment – remote work, on-call work, and platform-based work – offer both advantages (flexibility, the ability to balance personal life and work, the opportunity to work from any location) and disadvantages (temporary nature, limited realization of labor rights established by law in the absence of legal regulation of non-standard employment) for workers choosing such forms of work. Conclusions and prospects for development. The author concludes that the spread of digital technologies positively influences war veterans’ access to information on available legal opportunities and guarantees in labor law and social security. The introduction of state electronic services related to education (retraining), professional adaptation, and employment of war veterans represents a step forward in ensuring this category of workers can exercise their labor rights and receive employment-related social benefits and guarantees. For war veterans, employment under non-standard conditions presents a viable solution for realizing their right to work while benefiting from digitalization in society and the economy. It is suggested that labor legislation should move towards regulating non-standard employment relationships, which remain largely unregulated, as these forms of employment offer numerous advantages and align with workers’ interests.

Purpose: To determine the relationship between labor contracting and the labor rights of public sector workers in Peru. Theoretical framework: The theory found allowed us to delve deeper into the topic of hiring and labor rights, but not from theory on employee perception but from specialists in legal matters, which is why in this research it was decided to take into account the perception of public sector employees. Design/methodology/approach: A quantitative study was considered, under an applied type of research, with a descriptive correlational non-experimental design, so the surveys were applied to 25 public sector workers. Results: The findings revealed a bilateral sigma much lower than 0.05, allowing the null hypothesis to be rejected and the alternative hypothesis to be accepted, likewise, it is observed that the Spearman's Rho reached 0.815 between labor contracting and labor rights. In addition, the variables reached 92% in the inadequate level, of the three dimensions, the one that presents the greatest difficulties was subordination because it obtained 92% in the inadequate level, on the other hand, onerosity reached 88% in the inadequate level, followed by exclusivity which obtained 76% in the inadequate level, thus revealing that within the institution there is no internal discipline that allows workers to comply with the provisions of the superiors assigned to each office. Research, practical and social implications: It is shown that when labor contracting is carried out efficiently, considering the legal bases and respecting the established clauses, then the labor rights of workers will be protected and protected, thus revealing that within the institution there is no internal discipline that allows workers to comply with the provisions of the superiors assigned to each office, this result could be argued in the legal basis of Law 29783. Originality/value: The purpose of an employment contract is to outline the rights and responsibilities of both the employer and the employee, as both parties will sign the contract. However, employers will always look for ways to undermine their workers' protections under the law, as current labor laws leave many workers unprotected.

According to the Constitution of Korea, “Workers shall have the right to independent association, collective bargaining, and collective action.” However, the courts have ruled that the rights to organize a trade union, collective bargaining and collective action can be exercised solely within a framework of an employment relationship. Based on these precedents, the basic labour rights of independent workers are not recognized and exercising these collective rights in relation to user employers or main contractors is not allowed.BR However, by virtue of the principles of freedom of association, all workers, with the sole exception of members of the armed forces and police, should have the right to establish and join organizations of their own choosing. The criterion for determining the persons covered by that right, therefore, is not based on the existence of an employment relationship. Freedom of association and the right to collectively bargain should be ensured, regardless of the form of employment relationship, as fundamental principles and rights at work. This is reaffirmed in the international labour standards including the Employment Relationship Recommendation (No. 198, 2006).BR Even if considering the difficulties of establishing whether or not an employment relationship exists, the scope of the rights to organize a trade union and to collective bargaining should not be determined on the premise of an employment relationship. On the contrary, collective bargaining and collective agreements in this area may be helpful for finding solutions to questions relating to the scope of the employment relationship.BR For years, Korean trade unions and precariously employed workers have struggled for basic labour rights and a few of them collectively bargained or achieved a collective agreement. However, these efforts have been confronted with suppression caused by biased interpretation and a biased application of law. Employers usually refuse collective bargaining and suppress trade union activities on the pretext of decisions by public authorities.BR The Korean Confederation of Trade Unions (KCTU), with various social movement organizations, has been demanding legislation to ensure rights for precariously employed workers since 2000. The existing labour laws are inadequate to protect workers in the changing labour market and changing organization of work. Especially, since definitions of “employee” and “employer” in labour laws are based on the traditional regular employment relationship, precarious types of work such as triangular employment workers and independent workers are left outside the scope of labour laws. This article proposes the legislation that adjusts the terms ‘employee’ and ‘employer’ in labour laws to reflect changes in the world of work.

The European Court of Human Rights (the Court, the ECHR) has made a significantcontribution to the protection of social rights in general and labor rights in particular. The articlefocuses on four specific areas that demonstrate the richness of case-law in this area. First of all, theauthor focuses on individual issues related to the general rights of workers, drawing attention to issuesof unfair dismissal, the right to respect for private and family life, freedom of religion and freedomof expression. Secondly, the author dwells on the protection of the rights of migrant workers underthe Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. Third, the articleexamines trade union rights in the light of freedom of association. Finally, reflecting the economiclandscape of the past decade, case-law is provided to demonstrate how austerity measures can affecthuman rights and how the Court has responded to this problematic issue.Social rights, including labor rights, have received many advantages from the fact that they wereconsidered in the case-law of the Court, since its practice clarified the boundaries and limited thestate’s unlimited discretion in the management of these rights. At the same time, a certain trend hasformed. If at first the protection of workers’ rights and freedoms sharply increased, which is confirmedby some textbook cases of the ECHR, now it is impossible not to notice a regressive trend that isassociated with labor legislation, expands the discretion of governments and significantly limits theeffectiveness of the Court when considering labor rights. However, this regressive trend should notbe regarded as irreversible. The article highlights how meaningful consideration of soft law principlesallows the Court to take a progressive position that promotes labor rights and how it can continueto help protect workers’ rights.

The need to protect workers’ rights as human rights was initiated by human rights activists in the early 1990s. For about half a century, after the United Nations (UN) recognition of the rights, there were no or less concerns on pursuit of workers’ rights as human rights. The pursuit of the labour rights as human rights was a result of the feeling that the conventional approach in protecting them had not been successful, as the respect for such rights by employers and other stakeholders had tremendously fallen (accelerated by among other factors globalisation). The book is a resource for various groups engaged with labour and human rights issues (including researchers, activists and academicians). It contributes on critical labour rights and their protection as human rights. The discussion takes aboard the human rights of vulnerable workers and prohibited labour practices. Reference is made to international human rights instruments, International Labour Standards (ILS) and domestic labour law and policy of the United States (U.S.) and other selected countries. Even though the book has left out the right to collective bargaining and its focus on the domestic law is narrow, its contribution to human rights at a workplace is immense particularly in the era of globalisation and advancement in science and technology. The book provides not only understanding of the critical human rights of the workers and ILS but also the practical approaches to their protection. Besides, it is a significant literature for theories and practices on human rights at work.

The development of digital labour platform resulted from the growth of digital economy and has transformed the world of work. However, the progress of platforms has stagnated due to various issues arising in the employment relationship between platform providers and young workers. These issues include wages, compensation and benefits, working hours, rest days, leave and public holidays. Young workers often face unfair treatment by platform providers while performing their tasks. The research objectives of this study are twofold: firstly, to analyse the labour rights of workers from an Islamic perspective and secondly, to explore how the labour rights of young workers on digital labour platforms can be improved through Islamic principles. A qualitative method is employed to achieve these objectives. The content analysis method is used to analyse secondary sources relevant to this study. The main sources of this research are the Qur’an, hadith and journal articles. Additionally, the Employment Act 1955 (Act 265) and the Children and Young Persons Employment Act 1996 (Act 350) are also analysed to reach the objectives of this study. The findings of this study show that Islam promotes justice in the employment relationship between employer and employee. Consequently, existing legislation must be improved to ensure labour protection for young workers on digital labour platforms. This study contributes to the theoretical framework of labour rights by expanding the discussion to include digital labour platforms and young workers. Furthermore, it explores the Islamic perspective on labour rights for young workers on digital labour platforms.

This article is devoted to the legal analysis of provisions of the European Social Charter, as the main international normative act regulating legal relations in the field of social and labor rights of workers, as well as identifying the features of the system of international cooperation in this area. The article touches upon the problem of institutional and conventional interaction of subjects of international law. The issues of the structure and content of both the European Social Charter and its basic norms governing the sphere of social and labor rights are considered. Attention is drawn to the fact that 60 years have passed since the adoption of this international legal act, which was opened for signature on October 18, 1961 in Turin. In the jubilee year, there is every reason to recall the history of the adoption and entry into force of the European Social Charter, its revision in 1996 and the ratification of this international legal act by the Russian Federation after a long period after the official signature. The article also concerns certain problems of reforming domestic legislation in the field of social rights and guarantees in accordance with European standards. The problems of the implementation of the norms of the European Social Charter governing legal relations related to social rights and guarantees of workers into the modern legislation of the Russian Federation are touched upon. On this basis, it is concluded that it is necessary and advisable to include in Russian legislation the provisions of the European Social Charter on additional guarantees for the protection of social, labour and economic rights. It was found that certain norms of the European Social Charter, which provide guarantees of rights to migrant workers, are not fully included in domestic legislation. Comparative legal analysis of the compliance of the legislation of the Russian Federation with the provisions of the European Social Charter shows that the legal foundations of social and economic guarantees of the rights of Russian citizens are basically consistent with the provisions of the Charter. At the same time, it is stated that the level of guarantees actually provided is determined by the capabilities of the state. Further development of the social and labor sphere in the country makes it possible to approach the standards proclaimed in the Charter, which makes it possible to fulfill the obligations assumed upon its ratification. Russias accession to the European Social Charter and its ratification undoubtedly strengthened the position of our state in relations with other countries, increased the level of protection of social, labour and economic rights in the country. It is advisable to discuss issues of ensuring the implementation of the provisions of the European Social Charter in the Russian legal system in order to further improve national legislation, improve the level and quality of life in our country.

This book shows how to design labour rights to effectively protect digital platform workers, organise accountability on digital work platforms, and guarantee workers’ collective representation and action. It acknowledges that digital work platforms entail enormous risks for workers, and at the same time it reveals the extent to which labour law is in need of reconstruction. The book focuses on the conceptual links – often overlooked in the past – between labour law’s categories and its regulatory approaches. By explaining and analysing the wealth of approaches that deconstruct and reconceptualise labour law, the book uncovers the organisational ideas that permeate labour law’s categories as well as its policy approaches in a variety of jurisdictions. These ideas reveal a lack of fit between labour law’s traditional concepts and digital platform work: digital work platforms rarely behave like hierarchical organisations; instead, they more often function as market organisers. The book provides a fresh perspective for international academic and policy debates on the regulation of digital work platforms, as well as on the purposes and foundations of labour law. It offers a way out of the impasse the debate around labour law classification has reached, by showing what labour law could learn from digital law approaches to platforms – and vice versa.

Labor law of Ukraine is one of the most social branches of law, as it not only regulates labor relations, but also ensures the implementation of socio-economic rights of workers. In the new economic conditions, the problem of ensuring the protection of labor rights and legitimate interests of employees is extremely important. The protection of labor rights is seen in various senses, including as an institution of labor law. It is noted that the protection of labor rights is considered as an independent institution of labor law (narrow understanding of the protection of labor rights), which presents all available in the legal system and possible methods (measures) to protect labor rights. The Institute for the Protection of Labor Rights is one of the central institutes of labor law. The content of this institute consists of: the content of basic labor rights and human freedoms; forms of protection; methods of protection by which protection is provided; protection procedure; conditions of legality of realization of the right to protection of labor rights and freedoms. In order to develop an effective mechanism for the protection of labor rights, it is necessary to define the concept of the form of protection of labor rights, its types and methods of protection. The form of protection of labor rights is defined as the procedure for the protection of subjective labor rights and legitimate interests. This procedure includes a set of organizational actions, the list of which depends on the subject of protection and the subject whose rights and interests are protected. The method of protection of labor rights is defined as a specific action aimed at protecting subjective labor rights and legitimate interests or to remove obstacles to the exercise of these subjective rights.

Labor and Employment Rights in the United States: Down a Different Rabbit Hole