INSTRUMENTS OF INTERNATIONAL LAW THAT FORM MINIMUM WAGE STANDARD

The topic of the article is the analysis of the instruments of international law that determine the minimum wage standard. Author points out the conventions of the International Labour Organization Nos. 26, 99 and 131 that directly refer to minimum wage. In author’s opinion, international standard of minimum wage is also indirectly formed by other instruments of the International Labour Organization that concern broadly understood workers’ rights. In this context the legal instruments on collective bargainings, prohibition of discrimination in employment, tripartite consultations, labour inspection and wage protection should be indicated. Author is of the opinion that provisions of international law, taken together, require Member States to undertake comprehensive actions aimed at safeguarding minimum wage in practice

GROUNDS (CRITERIA) OF DISCRIMINATION IN THE LIGHT OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE LABOUR CODE OF 16 MAY 2019 IN THE CONTEXT OF INTERNATIONAL AND EU LAW

On 7 September 2019, another amendment to the Labour Code entered into force, which introduced, among other things, an open catalogue of the grounds (criteria) of discrimination. De lege lata enumeration of the grounds of discrimination in the Labour Code is illustrative regardless of whether such criteria pertain to personal characteristics of an employee, an employee’s life choices unrelated to their job, job performed by an employee or a legal status of an employer, etc. It means that any unequal treatment of employees not justified by objective reasons is now regarded as discrimination in employment. However, the new grounds (criteria) of discrimination should be actual, specific and socially relevant. Employees’ claims in this respect should be based on a legitimate (well-balanced and objective) reason and make it objectively plausible. As a consequence, employees will be able to claim compensation under Article 183d of the Labour Code from the employer on various grounds of discrimination, and not only those referred to and specified in the Labour Code.

Differential Treatment of Older Workers Due to COVID-19: Potential for Ageism and Age Discrimination at Work

This paper examines the implications of employers' current COVID-19 protective workplace attendance policies toward older workers, potentially creating the outcomes of increased numbers of involuntary retirees and the discouraged older worker syndrome among otherwise qualified older workforce participants. How potential ageist assumptions and age discrimination under COVID-19 affect workplace decisions in reflection on the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (1967) guidelines is discussed. Older workers may remain in the workforce longer than ever before due to having healthier life expectancies. Workplace policies need to be increasingly sensitive to older employees’ rights to sustain their workplace engagement (Cummins, 2014; Cummins, Harootyan, & Kunkel, 2015). The author reviewed current unemployment trends in 2020 and emerging litigation in reflection upon general issues of COVID-19 related age discrimination in the older workers' workplace attendance decisions by employers and the historical framework of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (1967, with significant amendments in 1978 and 1986). The policy analysis paper presents the implications of employers' COVID-19 protective policies on older workers and how it may affect the “health” of the workplace and older adults and the economy beyond the pandemic. Lastly, strategies to address an "age-friendly" workplace during a pandemic and post-pandemic are discussed.

Toward interventions to reduce internalized ageism

Ageism is an insidious form of injustice that is internalized from an early age with accumulating negative health impacts across the lifespan. Internalized ageism is associated with numerous public health outcomes, including physical and mental health, functional impairment, cognition, cardiovascular stress, hospitalizations, and longevity. Research has begun to document how ageism negatively impacts health through psychological, behavioral, and physiological pathways. Yet, limited research has addressed interventions to reduce internalized ageism. This study integrates stereotype embodiment theory, theories of successful and productive aging, and recent scholarly literature to present a conceptual model with potential downstream, midstream, and upstream interventions at micro, meso, and macro levels. Micro interventions include: social, physical, and cognitive engagement, as well as stress management. Meso interventions include: education, intergenerational contact, and narrative reframing. Macro interventions include anti-ageism policy, such as amendments to the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA). The conceptual model is described in detail, and implications for practitioners are discussed. The need to examine how policy influences health through the three pathways in stereotype embodiment theory is discussed. This study provides a working model for scholars and practitioners to use when considering paths toward reducing internalized ageism and optimizing well-being for aging adults.

The strong global trend of prohibiting employment discrimination based on sexual orientation

Over the last 30 years, more than 85 countries have prohibited sexual orientation discrimination in employment. Enacting such legal prohibitions has thereby become the most common form of legal recognition of homosexual orientation (more so than the decriminalisation of homosexual sex or the opening up of family law to same-sex partners). The trend is global (ten countries in Africa, more in Asia/Oceania, many in Europe and the Americas). The trend is reflected in supranational rules of the European Union and the Organisation of American States and also in decisions of international human rights bodies. On the basis of these numbers and developments, and in light of the various factors that help explain the strength of this global trend, the author argues that it is to be expected that the trend will continue to reach more and more countries. Explicit legal prohibitions of sexual orientation discrimination in employment can play a useful – perhaps central – role amongst other legal, educational, and social strategies aimed at increasing LGB inclusion.

Sexual Harassment

This chapter explores the origins, development, and current status of workplace sexual harassment law. Sexual harassment law owes its genesis to a combination of grass-roots feminist organizing and legal feminist theorizing. After initial losses in the courts, feminist lawyers and their clients scored significant victories in the court system. Employers and those accused of discrimination soon fought back, including by participating in the development of an extensive system of training and anti-sexual harassment policies that have not proven helpful to targets of sexual harassment. Feminist legal scholars have offered critiques of the courts’ decisions, taking a variety of approaches to increasing the law’s efficacy and extending its reach to encompass the experiences of men, women of color, and sexual minorities. Yet, plaintiffs using Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the main federal antidiscrimination statute applicable to sex discrimination in employment, continue to find themselves thrust out of court due to formalistic rules developed in the court system. This has led other scholars to suggest different legal approaches to address this persistent and disturbing form of workplace discrimination. Whether current grass-roots campaigns like the #MeToo movement will prove more effective than prior legal efforts remains to be seen.

Menstruation Discrimination and the Problem of Shadow Precedents

The burgeoning menstrual justice movement highlights that women, girls, transgender men and boys, and non-binary persons may face discrimination or harassment due to their menstruation in workplaces, schools, prisons, and many other aspects of life. In recent years, a few courts have suggested such discrimination may violate Title VII, the federal law that prohibits sex discrimination in employment. Their analysis focuses on the Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA), an amendment to Title VII passed in response to a Supreme Court case holding that pregnancy discrimination was not sex discrimination. The PDA overrode the decision by explicitly defining sex as including “pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions.” The menstruation discrimination cases thus implicate more general questions of how statutory overrides should be interpreted, a subject I’ve explored extensively in prior work. My research suggests that this nascent litigation campaign may face two distinct challenges. The first is that courts will simply deny the claims, reasoning that menstruation is not directly addressed by the text of the PDA and therefore should not be recognized as sex discrimination. The second—which is more subtle, and also perhaps more likely—is that courts could find such discrimination to be actionable, but do so relying solely on the PDA’s explicit reference to “medical conditions” related to pregnancy. While that would be helpful for addressing discrimination in workplaces, it could open the door to arguments that menstruation is outside the ambit of sex discrimination laws that were not amended in a manner analogous to how Title VII was amended. To avoid these potential risks, theorists and advocates should seek to establish that menstruation discrimination is discrimination on the basis of “sex” itself, in that it is a condition linked to female reproductive organs and associated with stereotypes about women’s inferiority. That reasoning, which suggests that the PDA is properly interpreted as signaling Congress’s disapproval with the Supreme Court’s unduly narrow understanding of what constitutes sex discrimination in the earlier pregnancy case, should apply not only to Title VII, but also to the interpretation of statutory and regulatory prohibitions on sex discrimination in non-employment contexts.

Addressing Age Discrimination in Employment: a report on the findings of Australian Research Council Project DE170100228

This project aimed to research the effectiveness of Australian age discrimination laws. While demographic ageing necessitates extending working lives, few question the effectiveness of Australian age discrimination laws in supporting this ambition. This project drew on mixed methods and comparative UK experiences to offer empirical and theoretical insights into Australian age discrimination law. It sought to create a normative model for legal reform in Australia, to inform public policy and debate and improve responses to demographic ageing, providing economic, health and social benefits.

Differential Treatment of Older Workers Due to COVID-19 Accommodations: Potential Issues of Ageism and Age Discrimination

This paper examines the implications of employers’ current COVID-19 protective workplace attendance policies toward older workers, potentially creating the outcomes of increased numbers of involuntary retirees and the discouraged older worker syndrome among otherwise qualified older workforce participants. How potential ageist assumptions and age discrimination under COVID-19 affect workplace decisions in reflection on the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (1967) guidelines is discussed. Older workers may remain in the workforce longer than ever before due to having extended life expectancies. Workplace policies need to be increasingly sensitive to older employees’ rights to sustain their workplace engagement (Cummins, 2014; Cummins, Harootyan, & Kunkel, 2015). The author reviewed current unemployment trends in 2020 and emerging litigation in reflection upon general issues of COVID-19 related age discrimination. Specifically, older workers’ workplace attendance decisions by employers were analyzed within the historical framework of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (1967 significant amendments in 1978 and 1986). The policy analysis paper presents the implications of employers’ COVID-19 protective policies on older workers and how it may affect the “health” of the workplace and older adults and the economy beyond the pandemic. Lastly, strategies to address an “age-friendly” workplace during a pandemic and post-pandemic are discussed.