{"title":"我们相距甚远:不相称的工资扣减、工业行动和人权","authors":"Dave Mead","doi":"10.1093/indlaw/dwac037","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n This article sets out a human rights-based critique of one aspect of the common law wage/work bargain: the rule that entitles employers to deduct an entire week’s pay from those taking action short of strike, and who thereby perform most, but not all, of their contractual duties. It makes the case that that rule, established in Miles v Wakefield MDC and Wiluszynski v Tower Hamlets over 35 years ago, constitutes a disproportionate interference with an employee’s right to strike and to take industrial action, under Article 11 of the ECHR. The article shows how such cases might be brought, depending on whether an employee is in the public or private sector and iterates the argument for implying a duty of ‘rights-obedience’ into the contract—either as a free-standing duty or as part of an expansion of the duty of mutual trust and confidence—as a corrective.","PeriodicalId":45482,"journal":{"name":"Industrial Law Journal","volume":"21 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"We’re Miles Apart: Disproportionate Deductions from Wages, Industrial Action and Human Rights\",\"authors\":\"Dave Mead\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/indlaw/dwac037\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n This article sets out a human rights-based critique of one aspect of the common law wage/work bargain: the rule that entitles employers to deduct an entire week’s pay from those taking action short of strike, and who thereby perform most, but not all, of their contractual duties. It makes the case that that rule, established in Miles v Wakefield MDC and Wiluszynski v Tower Hamlets over 35 years ago, constitutes a disproportionate interference with an employee’s right to strike and to take industrial action, under Article 11 of the ECHR. The article shows how such cases might be brought, depending on whether an employee is in the public or private sector and iterates the argument for implying a duty of ‘rights-obedience’ into the contract—either as a free-standing duty or as part of an expansion of the duty of mutual trust and confidence—as a corrective.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45482,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Industrial Law Journal\",\"volume\":\"21 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Industrial Law Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/indlaw/dwac037\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS & LABOR\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Industrial Law Journal","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/indlaw/dwac037","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS & LABOR","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
本文以人权为基础,对普通法工资/工作谈判的一个方面进行了批判:即雇主有权从那些在罢工之外采取行动并因此履行了大部分(但不是全部)合同义务的人身上扣除一整个星期的工资。它认为,根据欧洲人权公约第11条,在35年前的Miles v Wakefield MDC和Wiluszynski v Tower Hamlets案中确立的这一规则,对雇员罢工和采取工业行动的权利构成了不成比例的干涉。这篇文章展示了这样的案例是如何被提起的,这取决于雇员是在公共部门还是私营部门,并反复论证了在合同中暗示“权利服从”的义务——要么作为独立的义务,要么作为相互信任和信心义务的一部分——作为一种纠正。
We’re Miles Apart: Disproportionate Deductions from Wages, Industrial Action and Human Rights
This article sets out a human rights-based critique of one aspect of the common law wage/work bargain: the rule that entitles employers to deduct an entire week’s pay from those taking action short of strike, and who thereby perform most, but not all, of their contractual duties. It makes the case that that rule, established in Miles v Wakefield MDC and Wiluszynski v Tower Hamlets over 35 years ago, constitutes a disproportionate interference with an employee’s right to strike and to take industrial action, under Article 11 of the ECHR. The article shows how such cases might be brought, depending on whether an employee is in the public or private sector and iterates the argument for implying a duty of ‘rights-obedience’ into the contract—either as a free-standing duty or as part of an expansion of the duty of mutual trust and confidence—as a corrective.
期刊介绍:
Industrial Law Journal is established as the leading periodical in its field, providing comment and in-depth analysis on a wide range of topics relating to employment law. It is essential reading for practising lawyers, academics, and lay industrial relations experts to keep abreast of newly enacted legislation and proposals for law reform. In addition Industrial Law Journal carries commentary on relevant government publications and reviews of books relating to labour law.