Дискриминация в сфере труда: вопросы эффективности норм и правоприменительной практики
The article considers problem questions of protection from discrimination at work from the perspective of the compliance of Russian legislation and judicial practice with international employment standards. The authors conclude that it is necessary to mitigate the burden of proof, to tighten liability for discrimination and to enact norms providing for the employers’ liability for persecuting employees bringing complaints against employers.
The article deals with an understanding of the right to strike as a human right, which was formed during the 20th century, its place among human rights, normative regulation of the right to strike at the international and national levels, as well as its role in labor relations and employment law. The centerpiece of the article is the study of crisis recognition of the right to strike, caused by the Employers' Group’s statements at the International Labour Conference in 2012. During this conference, the representative of the Employers' Group has notified that they refuse to discuss the list of countries, selected from the report of the Committee of Experts and earlier approved by tripartite partners, not fulfilling obligations arising from ratified Conventions, at the Committee on the Application of Standards of the International Labour Conference,
This statement was motivated by the fact that the right to strike is not expressly recognized in the Convention #87, and the Committee of Experts, when making conclusions about the violation of the right to strike by some states – ILO members, has gone beyond his mandate. This raised the question not only on the recognition of the right to strike, which was developed during decades, but also about the mandate of the Committee of Experts as a whole. To understand the scope of the modern recognition of the right to strike, the history of the adoption of the ILO standards concerning the right to strike, and discussions on the content of standards are investigated. The article analyses how the interpretation of the Convention №87, developed by the ILO supervisory bodies, particularly by the Committee on Freedom of Association and the Committee of Experts on application of Conventions and Recommendations; explores limits of the mandate of mentioned bodies in interpretation of the conventions’ content; the role of Employers', Workers’ and Governments” groups in the recognition and development of these interpretations. Efforts undertaken inside the ILO to overcome this crisis are also being explored.
The paper is devoted to the idea of the applicability of mediation in employment disputes.
The author of the report analyses problems of legal regulation of the phenomena of mobbing and harassment in the Russian legislation, protective measures available under the Russian law and perspectives of the development of the regulation in this field.
Russia’s transition towards a market economy in the early 1990s called for new approaches to the regulation of employment relations in the post-Soviet era in order to strike a balance between employers’ interests and employees’ rights in modern conditions. Adopted in 2001, the Labour Code of the Russian Federation (hereafter: LC RF) contributed to solving the issue only partly, for it was actually passed as a compromise between different political forces. As a result, it consists both of provisions which can be implemented in the new context of the market economy and restrictions inherited from a planned economy.
It soon became apparent that Russian employment legislation was in need of further development to adapt to ever-changing socio-economic conditions and the increasing complexity of the employer-employee relationship resulting from globalization and technological progress.
This state of affairs resulted in extensive amendments to the LC RF, in particular in 2006, when the majority of the provisions were profoundly revised. However, previous experience shows that many aspects concerning the legal regulation of employment relations are far from being addressed, not least compliance with international standards and practical needs at a national level.
In this special issue of the ADAPT Labour Studies BOOK-SERIES the authors try to achieve a twofold objective: rate recent developments of Russian labour law from a practical and a theoretical point of view and reveal its new challenges.
The article is devoted to a particular form of freedom of assembly — the right to counter-demonstrate. The author underlines the value of this right as an element of democratic society, but also acknowledges the risk of violent actions among participants of opposing demonstrations. Due to this risk, the government may adopt adequate measures restricting the right to counter-demonstrate, certain types of which are analyzed in this paper.
Development of standards of international controllability is reviewed in the article. Institutional approach is applied to development of international legal regime of Energy Charter. Definition of controllability is connected to development of international standards of dispute settlement, which are described in the article in detail. In connection with controllability, Russian interest, defense of investment in European Union and ecological investment encouragement, is reviewed in the article.
мировое управление и управляемость, Мировая экономика, международное экономическое право, энергетическая хартия, International control and controllability, International economics, international economic law, Energy Charter
международное частное право; недвижимость; ; школа бартолистов; бартолисты; теория статутов; статуарная теория/