The Subjects of Labor Law: 'Employees' and Other Workers

G. Davidov, M. Freedland, N. Countouris
{"title":"The Subjects of Labor Law: 'Employees' and Other Workers","authors":"G. Davidov, M. Freedland, N. Countouris","doi":"10.4337/9781781000137.00011","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Who is an employee? Which workers ought to be covered by the protective panoply offered by labor law? These are questions with a long history. In the current contribution we consider them from a comparative perspective. Our aim is to highlight similarities and differences between different legal systems. This cross-national analysis can in turn assist the national analyses. Understanding how others have been approaching the same problem can help us better understand our own legal system, including in terms of its historical development and in identifying shortcoming, inconsistencies and hidden assumptions. Understanding to what extent the problem and solutions are universal can also assist us in identifying the normative foundations behind the law.We start with a brief overview of the tests used in different countries to decide if one is an employee (and covered by labor law), showing some points of diversity but for the most part significant similarities, with a trend towards greater convergence. We then turn to examine some relatively recent developments in different legal systems through three prisms. First we discuss the response in different countries to employers’ evasion attempts. We show how in some systems courts and legislatures remain inactive in the face of evasion, and the stagnation of the law leaves room to massive misclassification of employees as independent contractors. In other countries, on the other hand, creative solutions have been used to contain or minimize this problem. Next we consider the dialogue between the judiciary and the legislature in determining who is an employee. We show how in some countries, judicial approaches to the problem have triggered a legislative response, while in others the legislature remains silent, possibly to signal approval or simply out of disinterest. Finally, we examine the breaking of the binary divide between employees and independent contractors. We show that a third (intermediate) category has been added in an increasing number of countries, as a response to similar problems in classifying workers who share only some of the characteristics of employees. In the conclusion we return to reflect on the issues of diversity vs. convergence, in light of the developments discussed in the previous parts.","PeriodicalId":357008,"journal":{"name":"Employment Law eJournal","volume":"29 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"22","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Employment Law eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4337/9781781000137.00011","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 22

Abstract

Who is an employee? Which workers ought to be covered by the protective panoply offered by labor law? These are questions with a long history. In the current contribution we consider them from a comparative perspective. Our aim is to highlight similarities and differences between different legal systems. This cross-national analysis can in turn assist the national analyses. Understanding how others have been approaching the same problem can help us better understand our own legal system, including in terms of its historical development and in identifying shortcoming, inconsistencies and hidden assumptions. Understanding to what extent the problem and solutions are universal can also assist us in identifying the normative foundations behind the law.We start with a brief overview of the tests used in different countries to decide if one is an employee (and covered by labor law), showing some points of diversity but for the most part significant similarities, with a trend towards greater convergence. We then turn to examine some relatively recent developments in different legal systems through three prisms. First we discuss the response in different countries to employers’ evasion attempts. We show how in some systems courts and legislatures remain inactive in the face of evasion, and the stagnation of the law leaves room to massive misclassification of employees as independent contractors. In other countries, on the other hand, creative solutions have been used to contain or minimize this problem. Next we consider the dialogue between the judiciary and the legislature in determining who is an employee. We show how in some countries, judicial approaches to the problem have triggered a legislative response, while in others the legislature remains silent, possibly to signal approval or simply out of disinterest. Finally, we examine the breaking of the binary divide between employees and independent contractors. We show that a third (intermediate) category has been added in an increasing number of countries, as a response to similar problems in classifying workers who share only some of the characteristics of employees. In the conclusion we return to reflect on the issues of diversity vs. convergence, in light of the developments discussed in the previous parts.
劳动法的主体:“雇员”和其他劳动者
谁是雇员?哪些工人应该受到劳动法规定的保护?这些都是历史悠久的问题。在目前的贡献中,我们从比较的角度来考虑它们。我们的目的是突出不同法律制度之间的异同。这种跨国分析反过来又有助于国内分析。了解其他人是如何处理同样问题的,可以帮助我们更好地了解我们自己的法律体系,包括从其历史发展和识别缺点、不一致和隐藏的假设方面。了解问题和解决办法在多大程度上具有普遍性,也有助于我们确定法律背后的规范基础。我们首先简要概述一下不同国家用来决定一个人是否为雇员(并受劳动法保护)的测试,显示出一些差异,但在大多数情况下有显著的相似之处,并有越来越趋同的趋势。然后,我们通过三个棱镜来研究不同法律制度中一些相对较新的发展。首先,我们讨论了不同国家对雇主逃避企图的反应。我们展示了在某些制度中,法院和立法机构如何面对逃税行为仍然不活跃,而法律的停滞不前给将雇员大规模错误分类为独立承包商留下了空间。另一方面,在其他国家,创造性的解决方案被用来控制或最小化这个问题。接下来,我们考虑司法机关和立法机关在确定谁是雇员方面的对话。我们展示了在一些国家,对这个问题的司法处理如何引发了立法反应,而在其他国家,立法机构保持沉默,可能是为了表示赞同,或者仅仅是出于不感兴趣。最后,我们考察了员工和独立合同工之间二元划分的打破。我们发现,越来越多的国家增加了第三种(中间)类别,作为对仅具有某些雇员特征的工人进行分类的类似问题的回应。在结论部分,我们将根据前几部分讨论的发展情况,回过头来思考多样性与趋同的问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信