scholarly journals The Problem of Freedom of Association: A Comparative Legal Study of Provisions of Laws on Trade Unions of the States of the Eurasian Economic Union, Taking into Account International Labor Standards

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 165-174
Author(s):  
К. S. Ramankulov
Keyword(s):  
Trade Union ◽  
Trade Unions ◽  
Legal Aspect ◽  
Labor Standards ◽  
Kyrgyz Republic ◽  
Freedom Of Association ◽  
International Labor Standards ◽  
Eurasian Economic Union ◽  
International Labor ◽  
Economic Union

The paper investigates the norms of laws on trade unions of the states of the Eurasian Economic Union, with respect to international labor standards, in the context of the problems of freedom of association in a comparative legal aspect. In this regard, trade union monopolies (Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan) are challenging the provision of the independence of trade unions in a number of countries of the Eurasian Economic Union. The paper concludes that there is a significant inconsistency, in particular, Art. 11-15 of the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 211-V "On Trade Unions" and Art. 7-12 of a new Law (draft) of the Kyrgyz Republic "On Trade Unions" to the principles of Art. 2 and 11 of the ILO Convention No. 87. The paper examines the trends associated with the expansion of some trade union rights in terms of their relationship with civil rights and freedoms and international labor standards. On this basis, it is concluded that in international legal acts, trade union rights are considered as a complex legal institution containing norms related to civil and political rights, to economic, social and cultural rights.

Precarious Employment Trend: Features of its Development in Labor Legislation and the Problems of Other Norms of Industry Affiliation Influence on the World of Work, Taking into Account International Labor Standards

2019 ◽  
pp. 153-165
Author(s):  
К. S. Ramankulov
Keyword(s):  
Labor Relations ◽  
Labor Standards ◽  
Kyrgyz Republic ◽  
International Labor Standards ◽  
Precarious Employment ◽  
Eurasian Economic Union ◽  
Labor Legislation ◽  
International Labor ◽  
The World ◽  
Economic Union

The paper notes that the conceptualization of the basic concepts related to precarious employment and the adoption of norms and legal acts adequate to these relations in the system of labor legislation of the states of the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) are at the preparatory stages. In the paper, the features of the manifestation of precarious employment in the labor legislation of the EAEU countries are analyzed by the example of norms on a fixed-term labor contract taking into account international labor standards. The labor legislation of the EAEU countries shows a tendency to expand the scope of fixed-term employment contracts, including towards lowering the level of legal guarantees for workers (Article 41 of the Labor Code of Belarus, Article 30 of the Labor Code of Kazakhstan, Article 82 of the Labor Code of Kyrgyzstan, Article 348.12 of the Labor Code of Russia), which contradicts the rules of ILO Recommendation No. 166 on the termination of labor relations on the initiative of the employer (Article 3) and the fundamental Convention No. 105 on the abolition of forced labor (Article 1), ratified by all states of the Eurasian Economic Union. In the paper, in the context of the development of precarious employment, the problems of the influence of norms of a different sectoral affiliation on the world of work are analyzed (by the example of Kyrgyzstan). It is noted, in particular, that the practice of applying the patent system to regulate the world of work does not contribute to resolving the issues of legalization of labor relations, and the tax authorities are not motivated to prove the existence of labor rather than civil law relations, even when they meet the criteria set forth in the ILO Recommendation No. 198 on labor relations and in Art. 13 of the Labor Code of Kyrgyzstan. The conclusion is formulated in relation to the restrictions of the labor inspectorates established by the Law of the Kyrgyz Republic dated May 25, 2007 No. 72 and by the Decree of the Government of the Kyrgyz Republic dated December 17, 2018 No. 586 as contrary to the ILO priority Convention No. 81 on labor inspection in industry and trade (Part 1 of Article 12) ratified by Kyrgyzstan. Serious inconsistencies of measures to deregulate administrative responsibility to the tasks of the labor legislation of Kyrgyzstan to counteract precarious employment are identified.

Improving the Legal Framework for Social Partnership in the Eurasian Economic Union States under International Labor Standards

Lex Russica ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 160-175
Author(s):  
M. Kh. Khasenov
Keyword(s):  
Legal Framework ◽  
International Standards ◽  
Freedom Of Association ◽  
International Labor Standards ◽  
Social Partnership ◽  
Eurasian Economic Union ◽  
Labor Legislation ◽  
International Labor ◽  
Economic Union ◽  
The Right

In the paper, the author examines the legal mechanism of social partnership in the States of the Eurasian Economic Union for compliance with international labor standards. The status of ratification of the ILO conventions in the field of social partnership in the EAEU Member States is defined, and a brief description of international standards in the exercise of the right to freedom of association, the institution of employee representation, and the implementation of forms of social partnership is given. The author concludes that some approaches to the legislative regulation of collective labor relations differ from international standards, and in some cases contradict them. Based on the analysis of labor legislation, gaps and conflicts in the regulation of collective bargaining procedures, mutual consultations and exchange of information, as well as ensuring the right to freedom of association and representation of employees in social partnership are identified. There is no uniformity in the definition and regulation of forms of social partnership in the EAEU States. The legislation of the EAEU States is characterized by heterogeneous conditions for conducting consultations: in some countries, this form of social partnership is implemented through the mechanism of coordination of important decisions and acts of the employer (Belarus, Kyrgyzstan) with employees’ representatives, in others through the mechanism of taking into account the opinion of the representative body of employees (Kazakhstan, Russia). In Armenia, the labor legislation does not provide for a counselling mechanism. The national legislation of a number of States contains rules that violate the right to freedom of association. The Committee of experts on the application of ILO conventions and recommendations has repeatedly noted this in its reports and recommendations. The author formulates recommendations for improving the legal framework of social partnership in the EAEU States in order to implement international obligations. In particular, it is recommended that the legislation of the EAEU States provide for a more systematic and clear mechanism for regular exchange of information between employees and the employer and their representatives as an independent form of social partnership.

scholarly journals Reception of Investigation Principles According to ILO’s International Labor Standards on Labor in Indonesia

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (7) ◽  
pp. 230
Author(s):  
Fauzan Fauzan
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Methods ◽  
Case Studies ◽  
Industrial Relations ◽  
Labor Law ◽  
Labor Standards ◽  
International Labor Organization ◽  
Freedom Of Association ◽  
International Labor Standards ◽  
International Labor ◽  
Descriptive Approach

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.

Who Speaks for Workers? Japan and the 1919 ILO Debates Over Rights and Global Labor Standards

2015 ◽  
Vol 87 ◽  
pp. 213-234 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dorothy Sue Cobble
Keyword(s):  
Trade Unions ◽  
Japanese Society ◽  
Organized Labor ◽  
Global Politics ◽  
Labor Standards ◽  
International Labor Standards ◽  
Worker Rights ◽  
Economic Rights ◽  
International Labor ◽  
Western Nations

AbstractContrary to conventional wisdom, some of the most contentious disputes over international labor standards and worker rights occurred not between Western nations and the “rest” but within single nations. To explore the deep fissures in Japanese society over the rights of women and workers, I offer the first scholarly account of Japan's only woman representative to the ILO's inaugural 1919 Washington conference, elite social feminist Tanaka Taka, grandniece of renowned Japanese capitalist Shibusawa Eiichi. I recount her efforts in Japan and in Washington to secure free speech and economic rights for Japan's workers, men and women, and detail the hostilities she encountered from employers and organized labor. In addition, I reconstruct the parallel tale of factory supervisor Masumoto Uhei whose appointment as Japan's labor delegate led to widespread labor protests and a power struggle between trade unions and the state in Japan. The debate over who would speak for Japan's workers at the ILO and whether Japan would accept the labor standards being proposed by Western nations captured worldwide attention. It changed ideas in the East and the West about what Japan's workers deserved and desired and had lasting consequences for global politics and social policy.

Introduction

2019 ◽  
pp. 1-30
Author(s):  
Gamonal C. Sergio ◽  
César F. Rosado Marzán
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Latin American ◽  
Labor Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
Labor Standards ◽  
Labor Protection ◽  
Freedom Of Association ◽  
International Labor Standards ◽  
International Labor ◽  
American Method

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.

scholarly journals Non-compliance with international labor standards in the implementation of codification of labor legislation

1970 ◽  
pp. 204-209
Author(s):  
Nataliya Tsyhanchuk
Keyword(s):  
Trade Unions ◽  
International Standards ◽  
Labor Standards ◽  
International Labor Organization ◽  
The European Union ◽  
International Labor Standards ◽  
Association Agreement ◽  
Scientific Debate ◽  
Labor Legislation ◽  
International Labor

The integration of Ukraine into the European Union requires amendments to national legislation and harmonizing its norms with international standards. At present, it is necessary to prepare and adopt a new Labor Code of Ukraine. In the Verkhovna Rada four Draft Labor Codes have been registered, but the analysis of each of them indicates that not all norms of the proposed drafts meet international standards. International labor standards and of foreign experience should be applied with due regard for the features of the legal systems of different countries, including ours. The issues of developing the concept of reforming the labor legislation of Ukraine and its further progress, as well as the adoption of the new Labor Code, have long been the subject of scientific debate and research. But many questions are not answered. In this regard, this topic is still relevant. Draft Law № 0955 was registered in the Verkhovna Rada, replacing Draft Law № 1658, which had already been voted for at first reading and had been awaiting for consideration at second reading, but was revoked by the Verkhovna Rada of the new convocation because of its inconsistence with the norms and principles of international law and with International Labor Organization Conventions ratified by Ukraine. The analysis of Draft Law № 2410 and Draft Law № 2410-1 indicates that they also do not meet international labor standards and therefore require improvement. Draft Law on Labor № 2708, submitted by the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine, contradicts the Constitution of Ukraine and other laws and had been developed without the involvement of social partners, that is employers and trade unions. The authors of the Draft Law had not taken into account the ILO Conventions, ratified by Ukraine, and the commitments undertaken by Ukraine as a result of signing the Association Agreement with the EU in labor relations issues. The analysis of the Draft Law shows that its provisions commit the gross violation of the norms of the Constitution of Ukraine and of the current labor legislation and do not meet international labor standards. It is necessary to adopt a new Labor Code of Ukraine, but it must be a legislative instrument that meets all international labor standards and is built on the principles of social partnership.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document