European Cross-Sectoral Collective Bargaining as Post-Crisis Social Policy

This article proposes a policy project, centered around coordinated collective bargaining at the European Union level, to redistribute income towards low-wage workers in post-crisis Europe. It suggests we allow labor unions in sectors employing low-wage workers to present common wage demands across sectors and EU Member States. It shows that this would make union wage increases less harmful to workers and consumers than under uncoordinated sectoral bargaining, while coming more directly at the expense of managers and investors. The article then describes existing EU legal institutions that-although they do not quite amount to the policy proposed here-constitute useful precedents for it. These institutions are European social dialogue, European Works Councils, and European Framework Agreements bargained for by multinational firms and worker representatives. The article also discusses doctrines of EU competition and internal market law that could potentially be held to prohibit European cross-sectoral collective bargaining coordination. The article lays out arguments in favor of finding such coordination lawful, so that it may form part of the EU's policy arsenal to address wrenching economic inequalities worsened by the ongoing economic and health crises.

The Electrical Contractors Case: Irish Supreme Court Illuminates Collective Bargaining and Delegated Legislation

As Europe begins to emerge from the Covid‐19 pandemic, two trends are clear: one, labour market reform is urgently needed, to cope with new economic and technological realities;and two, big government is back. The recent decision of the Irish Supreme Court in Náisiúnta Leichtreach Contraitheoir Éireann v Labour Court illuminates the relationship between collective bargaining and the regulatory state. In potentially one of the most important decisions in Irish labour law in decades, the Court rejected a constitutional challenge to legislation aimed at empowering social partners to regulate economic sectors through collective bargaining. This article situates that decision within recent scholarship on the ‘labour constitution' model of labour law, under which the social partners should participate in economic governance. It also highlights the relevance of the decision for the ‘Social Europe' agenda and the political economy of both national constitutional law and the EU internal market.

"Laws of Fear” in the EU: The Precautionary Principle and Public Health Restrictions to Free Movement of Persons in the Time of COVID-19

COVID-19 has demonstrated the fragility of EU free movement rules when we are faced with an unknown virus of such magnitude and strength that it threatens our lives, health systems, economies and society. The aim of this text is to show the dynamics between the threat of COVID-19 and the rules imposed as a response to the pandemic, which have impacted the functioning of the EU internal market and the Schengen area. The text will concentrate on the application of the precautionary principle and public health restrictions, caused by COVID-19, to free movement of persons in the EU. The analysis will lead to three conclusions. First, it will be shown that the decisions to apply free movement restrictions and the logic followed in the EU COVID-19-related documents can be viewed as a triumph of the precautionary principle. Second, it will be argued that implementing the precautionary principle has a transformative effect on the application of the principle of proportionality in EU law. Finally, it will be shown that COVID-19 has emphasised and increased the difference between the conditions for the applicability of public health restrictions when compared to restrictions based on public policy and public security grounds.

Capture of state aid provided to businesses as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic in European antitrust law

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused the need for massive state aid to strengthen businesses in the member states of the European Union. The European Commission promptly adopted a soft law act in which it offered member states various instruments for providing state aid to businesses and specified the conditions and indicators upon fulfillment of which it will consider the provided state aid compatible with the internal market. © 2022, Institute of State and Law of the Slovak Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Impact of the COVID-19 on the migration in the European Union

Migration within the European Union is one of the main mechanisms for promoting and supporting the citizens of the Member States, being a component of the European internal market. For the last 6 years, amid illegal migration from outside Europe, the Union has been under strong pressure of solidarity, with border states, especially Greece and Italy, being severely affected. The emergence and development of COVID-19 has affected both the countries of the Union, the economies and the citizens, but also the migrants in the camps organized on the territory of the Union. The scientific paper addresses the legal aspects of the situation, the legal ways to ensure solidarity, but also respect for human rights for those in the camps. By using the logical method, the comparative method, but also the historical one, the presentation of the legislative norms, of the judicial practice for a good knowledge and understanding of the phenomenon is considered. Through this study we contribute to the standardization of scientific approaches to migration and to the determination of the obligations of the Member States of the European Union.

European consumer law in the digital single market

In the context of current pandemic crisis due, social distancing and quarantine measures were imposed by states due to the high risk of infection by going out of the house for buying the goods and services that are required. Naturally, there has been an increase in online acquisitions, use of online entertainment and online tools for professional purposes. This has increased the level of demand alongside the consumption in the online sector which forces the suppliers to become more inventive in order to sell their products and services and make them more accessible, price wise, in better meet the expectations. Unfortunately, this being a highly abrupt shift with no precedence, forcing the traders and providers in the online sector to cut corners in order to keep up and, as a consequence, may affect the consumers. All these being said, although we speak about unprecedented context, the European Union, over the last two decades, has enacted more directives and regulations in order to keep up with this market's unique and high innovation rate with the goal to ensure the consumer's protection. This papers analysis the evolution of the European Consumer Law starting with the minimum harmonisation approach and getting to new acts which try to fully harmonise the area for the attainment of a functional internal market, a Single Market which is, nowadays, pressured by the digital revolution and social distancing to change perspective, as customers are interacting with the business in different ways they did once and the digital content is becoming the main product or service to be supplied.

THE INTERNAL MARKET OF THE EUROPEAN UNION AT THE TIME OF THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC

Following the COVID-19 outbreak, the EU Member States have imposed a number of restrictions to prevent the spread of infection. The purpose of this paper is to analyse the recent acquis communautaire which introduces measures affecting the internal market of the European Union, i.e. the right of citizens of the European Union to free movement of persons. Nowadays, we are witnessing many restrictions ranging from those related to the freedom of movement of people from one Member State to another to the ones linked with trade in goods and services. The question arises as to whether the EU is adequately dealing with the public health crisis caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. Firstly, it should be pointed out that public health policy falls within the competence of the Member States, while the EU only supports them through its actions (Art. 168 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU). In this context, the paper analyses the competence of the EU regarding the health and scope of the EU Health Policy. Secondly, no fundamental market freedom is absolute, so the Member States may impose certain restrictions if they are justified. The protection of public health is certainly one of the legitimate reasons for imposing restrictions, but the question arises as to whether all the measures taken by the Member States are proportionate to the goal and if there is any softer measure that could achieve the same effect. In this context, the existing relevant case law of the European Courts - Court of Justice of the European Union and European Court of Human Rights - is critically assessed and compared.

A Critical Assessment of the Need for Harmonization of the Legal Framework Concerning Abusive Informal Debt Collection Practices in the European Union: Is Harmonization Possible and How Can it Best Be Attained?

The loss of jobs and the decline in real incomes caused by the 2008 financial crisis and the COVID-19 pandemic have affected consumers' ability to repay their debts. These have led to high ratios of non-performing loans (NPLs), which affect the stability of the financial industry and undermine economic recovery. The result has been a need for faster debt enforcement and a drastic increase in abusive informal debt collection practices (IDCPs). In the EU, the need to regulate and harmonize abusive IDCPs surfaced in 2018 in connection to the Proposal for a Directive on Credit Servicers, Credit Purchasers and the Recovery of Collateral (CSDP). The directive would enable banks to outsource the servicing of NPLs to a specialized debt collector, but it contained no protection rules against abusive IDCPs. In this article, the researcher critically assesses the need for harmonization of the legal framework concerning abusive IDCPs in the EU, mainly from the standpoint of the initial and current text of the CSDP. Where necessary, the researcher will refer to both historical and comparative law perspectives. The researcher focuses on the legal character of informal debt collection, its relation to financial services, and its potential sui generis character. After that, the researcher will address the arguments for and against establishing pan-EU sector-specific legislation dedicated to IDCPs. Next, the researcher discusses the constitutional authority of the EU to regulate abusive IDCPs. Finally, the researcher will examine the interaction of the CSDP with other consumer (financial) protection instruments to identify the best solution for harmonizing abusive IDCPs at the EU level. The researcher will juxtapose several dichotomies: general versus sector-specific, procedural versus substantive, minimum versus maximum harmonization, and hard versus soft regulation. In the conclusion, the researcher shall synthesize the core problems and suggest an approach.