Introduction

2019 ◽  
pp. 1-30
Author(s):  
Gamonal C. Sergio ◽  
César F. Rosado Marzán

This chapter introduces the book’s main goal: to provide a “principled labor law” method to decide hard cases. It describes principled labor law as a Latin American method embedded in the principles of protection, primacy of reality, nonwaiver, and continuity. It argues that principled labor law can be useful even in the least likely case of labor protection, the United States, and explains how, if useful for the United States, it is likely helpful for other jurisdictions. It describes how principled labor law complements perspectives favoring freedom of association—the so-called labor constitution—but opposes views attempting to eviscerate the idea of protecting weaker parties from contemporary law, or those that envision labor law as merely a regulatory endeavor. It also describes how principled labor law shares similarities with the purposive perspective of Guy Davidov, but also contrasts with that perspective, to the extent principled labor law is mostly concerned, and is, in fact, “rulified” in favor of labor protection. It explains that principled labor law seems particularly needed to evade problems of legal endogeneity. The chapter concludes by arguing that the book provides a countercultural narrative for labor law in the United States that is also consonant with international labor standards and, as such, better brings U.S. labor law into the mainstream. Principled labor law may be less countercultural in other countries, but may also help there to renew jurisdictional commitments in favor of labor protection.

Author(s):  
Fauzan Fauzan

The position between workers and workers in labor law always places an unbalanced position, where the position of workers will always be in a weak position. In the dispute over industrial relations disputes regulated in Law Number 2 of 2004 the basis for evidence is based on Article 163 HIR (Herzien Indonesis Reglement)/ 283 RBg (Rechtsreglement Buitengewesten) / 1865 BW (burgerlijk wetboek voor Indonesie). The provisions of this Article give rise to injustice about the reverse evidence that has been established by the International Labor Organization (ILO) through international labor standards and other ILO legal instruments regarding reverse proof in cases of dismissal, Freedom of Association, and Equality in Employment and Occupation. This research utilizes a juridical normative, descriptive approach and is supported by case studies as data support, and an analysis is carried out based on qualitative methods and legal comparisons.


Author(s):  
Sergio Gamonal C. ◽  
César F. Rosado Marzán

This book provides a Latin American perspective of the “idea” of labor law, which the authors call “principled labor law.” It a jurisprudential method based on worker protection, i.e., the protective principle, and its derivative principles: primacy of reality, nonwaiver, and continuity. We argue that principled labor law is needed given that many labor law scholars have declared a crisis in their field due to the ascendancy of “fissured,” “gig,” “precarious,” and “nonstandard” work. While some scholars reassert the basic idea of labor law—protecting workers—despite the contemporary world of work, others argue for a “capabilities” perspective that can displace traditional labor law, a “Third Way” perspective concerned with market regulation, or simply argue for laissez-faire. Latin American scholars, perhaps because of a language barrier, have had scant presence in those international debates. They would likely disagree with shifts away from labor protection. This book forcefully advocates for the continued empirical validity of labor protection as the basis for labor law. The authors describe principled labor law as observable in four cases: Argentina, Brazil, Chile, and Uruguay. To show the utility of principled labor law, the authors then apply the method to legal cases from the least labor-protective country in the industrialized world, the United States. Through principled labor law, the authors focus on the Thirteenth Amendment as a labor-protective constitutional provision, the National Labor Relations Act, and the Fair Labor Standards Act. The authors show how principled labor law can provide a clear and simple method for consistent, labor protective jurisprudence in the United States and, hence, likely elsewhere.


2017 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
pp. 159-173
Author(s):  
Alexander Zavgorodniy

The main purpose of the article is to identify the contradictions and problems arising when both international labor standards and Russian labor law are applied and separate guarantees to workers are provided in the case of their dismissal. The object of the research is the employment relationship which arises between the employer and the employee when social guarantees are given to the workers when the employment relations are terminated. This article considers the regulations of Russian and foreign labor law which provide workers with certain guarantees if the employment contract is terminated at the initiative of the employer. For the first time, these guarantees are considered from a comparative legal perspective. Specific recommendations about improvement of the Russian labor law and its enforcement.


2019 ◽  
pp. 157-164
Author(s):  
Gamonal C. Sergio ◽  
César F. Rosado Marzán

This chapter, the book’s conclusion, summarizes the book’s main points and generally describes how the U.S. case illuminates the utility of Latin America and principled labor law for the rest of the world. It argues that, despite globalization, neoliberalism, labor law crises, and whatnot, many countries have deep traditions, legal and otherwise, that support protecting the weak and, as such, the protective principle and its correlative principles, primacy of reality, nonwaiver, and continuity. If the United States, one of the least labor-protective jurisdictions in the developed world, has the potential of having a labor-protective jurisprudence, other countries might do even better than the United States if they ascribe to principled labor law. In fact, the chapter briefly shows how the United Kingdom’s courts acknowledge primacy of reality (fact) and the protective principle in recent cases dealing with “gig” work. The conclusion also acknowledges that the book has been partial to state-enforced labor law, discussing little the importance of freedom of association. However, it asserts that freedom of association remains a necessary aspect for workers’ rights. As such, the book has provided a necessary but still incomplete toolbox for robust labor law. It concludes by underscoring the need for labor-protective jurisprudence in developed and developing countries alike, and the relevance of Latin America for at least part of that task.


2019 ◽  
pp. 145-156
Author(s):  
Gamonal C. Sergio ◽  
César F. Rosado Marzán

Chapter 6 acknowledges that labor law principles are not the end-all for all labor law cases and controversies. Labor law may conflict with other laws and their principles, complicating adjudication. The chapter discusses two major conflicts between labor law and other law, particularly in the United States, but likely also present elsewhere: constitutional rights concerning property and free speech. The U.S. Supreme Court has held in ways that essentially sustain that labor law conflicts with property rights and free speech and, in addition, must cede space to property rights and free speech. The U.S. doctrine of permanent strike replacements, which violates international labor standards, is based on protecting employer property rights. The recent Janus v. AFSCME decision outlawing compulsory union service fees in the public sector is based on protecting individual free speech. But such conflicts need not be. By understanding labor law principles and how labor norms operate, we should recognize that labor law protects workers’ property rights and their capacity to consume, which better guarantees the health of capitalism and societal property rights generally. Moreover, labor law provides a voice to workers, who would be otherwise subordinated. As long as labor norms stem from democratic processes, labor norms should respect constitutional free speech rights. Labor law can thus live side by side with important constitutional principles. Given the importance of property rights and free speech in contemporary, liberal societies, the U.S. case can help warn other jurisdictions from heading down the same erroneous jurisprudential path.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nikita Lyutov ◽  
Vyacheslav Bobkov ◽  
Elena Volk ◽  
Ilona Voytkovskaya ◽  
Svetlana Golovina ◽  
...  

The first volume of the collective monograph "Labor Law: National and International Dimension", prepared by leading experts in Russian and international labor law, labor economics, philosophy of law, is devoted to the general problems of modern labor law. The first section of the volume deals with general theoretical issues of modern labor law, the second rethinks the principles of labor law in modern conditions, and the third analyzes modern employment problems. Most of the issues are investigated from the standpoint of the national labor law of Russia, international labor standards using the comparative legal method, as well as an intersectoral approach to legal research. For practitioners and researchers in the field of labor, international law, economics and sociology of labor, as well as students, postgraduates and anyone interested in this issue.


2019 ◽  
pp. 93-118
Author(s):  
Gamonal C. Sergio ◽  
César F. Rosado Marzán

Chapter 4 describes the principle of nonwaiver in Latin America focusing on Argentina, Brazil, Chile, and Uruguay. It posits that employers and workers cannot waive labor rights, given by law, through contract. It shows how the principle is expressly stated in some positive law, in court opinions, and in legal scholarship. It also details how the principle is typically applied in controversies over contract terms and claim settlements. The chapter also shows that the principle surfaces in Latin American cases related to contract modification and novation, even when such contracts contain terms that meet or exceed minimum labor standards. Second, the chapter finds a nonwaiver principle in the United States, mostly in its protection of free labor under the Thirteenth Amendment and in the positive labor law and jurisprudence. However, the chapter also focuses on the particular problem of so-called “procedural” waivers sanctioned by the U.S. Supreme Court’s coerced readings of the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA). The U.S. Supreme Court permits employers to require employees to sign agreements to arbitrate legal claims, even if those legal claims are class or collective in scope. Evidence clearly shows that such “procedural waivers” undermine substantial labor rights. Because the U.S. Supreme Court has already ruled on the issue, we argue that such waivers need to either be legally banned or regulated by Congress, under its Thirteenth Amendment authority, so as to not undo workers’ rights in the United States and force workers to agree to terms they likely oppose. In fact, we argue that regulated arbitration might actually help to create legitimate labor courts in the United States, which that country still lacks.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document