Development of labor law in the eu an d eaeu: how comparable?
As of 2015 Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Russia and (since May 2015) Kyrgyzstan have entered into the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) with the ambitious goal of ultimately transforming it into a “Eurasian Union” with a deeper confederative structure in the future. Parallels between this regional integration project and the European Union integration process are emerging. But there are also marked differences between them. The article highlights those parallels and differences in order to assess the general prospects for harmonizing labor law among the member states and to clarify how much of the EU experience in the harmonization of labor law may be applicable to the Eurasian integration project. The completely different roots and ways to harmonize the national labor law systems within the EU and the EAEU are also discussed in the article. The authors claim that the approaches to harmonizing labor law in the two regions are mirror images of each other.While the EU project attempts to provide at least a partial common legal framework for certain separate aspects of legal regulation of labor among the very diverse national labor law systems, the EAEU currently refuses even to address the harmonization of national labor laws. However, the national labor law systems of EAEU member states are already much more homogenous than in the EU. Therefore, labor law harmonization in the EAEU may develop as a consequence of its economic integration and single market.
About the AuthorsNikita Lyutov
Associate Professor, Head of the Department of Labor Law and Social Security Law, Kutafin Moscow State Law University
9 Sadovaya-Kudrinskaya St., Moscow, 125993, Russia
Professor, Head of the Department of Labor Law, Ural State Law University
21 Komsomolskaya St., Yekaterinburg, 620137, Russia
1. Barnard C. EC Employment Law (4th ed., Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012).
2. Strikes and Lock-Outs in Industrialized Market Economies (R. Blanpain & R. Ben-Israel (eds.), The Hague: Kluwer Law International, 1994).
3. Workers’ Representation in Central and Eastern Europe: Challenges and Opportunities for the Works Councils’ System (R. Blanpain & N. Lyutov (eds.), Aspen: Wolters Kluwer, 2014).
4. Cazes S. & Nesporova A. Flexicurity: A Relevant Approach in Central and Eastern Europe (Geneva: ILO, 2007).
5. Cecchini P. et al. The European Challenge, 1992: The Benefits of a Single Market (Aldershot: Gower, 1988).
6. Copeland P. & ter Haar B. A Toothless Bite? The Effectiveness of the European Employment Strategy as a Governance Tool, 23(1) Journal of European Social Policy 21 (2013).
7. De Vos M. European Flexicurity and Globalization: A Critical Perspective, 25(3) International Journal of Comparative Labour Law and Industrial Relations 209 (2009).
8. Golovina S. The Harmonization of Labour Legislation in Former Soviet Union States in Labour Law in Russia: Recent Developments and New Challenges 39 (V.M. Lebedev & E.R. Radevich (eds.), Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2014).
9. Hendrickx F. & Giubboni S. European Labour Law and the European Social Model: A Critical Appraisal in Comparative Labor Law (M.W. Finkin & G. Mundlak (eds.), Northampton: Edward Elgar, 2015).
10. David R. & Jauffret-Spinosi C. Les grands systèmes de droit contemporains (Paris: Dalloz, 2002).
11. Legeais R. Grands systèmes de droit contemporain: une approche comparative (Paris: Litec, 2004).
12. Lyutov N. Freedom of Association: The Case of Russia, 32(4) Comparative Labor Law and Policy Journal 933 (2011).
13. Lyutov N. & Petrylaite D. Trade Unions’ Law Evolution in Post-Soviet Countries: The Experience of Lithuania and Russia, 30(4) Comparative Labor Law and Policy Journal 779 (2009).
14. Muda M. The Impact of European Union Law on Employee Involvement in Estonia, XV Juridica International: Law Review of University of Tartu 25 (2008).
15. Nayler P. Business Law in the Global Marketplace (Oxford, Eng.; Burlington, MA: Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann, 2006).
16. Quigley J. Socialist Law and the Civil Law Tradition, 37(4) American Journal of Comparative Law 781 (1989).
17. Przhilenskiy V. & Zakharova M. Which Way is the Russian Double-Headed Eagle Looking?, 4(2) Russian Law Journal 6 (2016).
18. Sapir A. Globalization and the Reform of European Social Models, 44(2) Journal of Common Market Studies 369 (2006).
19. Tomashevski K. Sources of the Belarus Labour Law vs. EU and CIS Global Processes, 13(1) Transition Studies Review 63 (2006).
20. Trubek D.M. & Trubek L.G. Hard and Soft Law in the Construction of Social Europe: The Role of the Open Method of Co-ordination, 11(3) European Law Journal 343 (2005).
21. Wilthagen T. & Tros F. The Concept of “Flexicurity”: A New Approach to Regulating Employment and Labour Markets, 10(2) Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research 166 (2004).
22. Wise M. & Gibb R. Single Market to Social Europe: The European Community in the 1990s (Harlow: Longman, 1993).
For citation: Lyutov N., Golovina S. Development of labor law in the eu an d eaeu: how comparable?. Russian Law Journal. 2018;6(2):93-117. https://doi.org/10.17589/2309-8678-2018-6-2-93-117
- There are currently no refbacks.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0.