Examining the EU’s performance in the pandemic crisis requires a comparison with two milestones in the trajectory of European integration: the 1973 oil crisis and the 2008 financial crisis. The EU has been more effective in this moment than in the one immediately preceding it. This was not difficult. But if one examines the dynamism of post-1973 and measures it against the burden of the current European Council, optimism fades. However, the financial muscle, then as the European Social Fund, now updated, is still in excellent shape.

In 2018, the Committee on Freedom of Association (CFA) of the International Labour Organization (ILO) released its Annual Report showing a puzzling scenario: around 50% of the complaints – 1,681 out of 3,336 – presented before the Committee since its creation have come from Latin America. If we analyse the last 10 years – i.e. from 2008 to 2018 – we find out a more astonishing situation: around 67% of the complaints – 477 out of 708 – came from Latin America. This Latin-American presence in the CFA may become even greater due to the COVID-19 pandemic, as economic downturns often impact labour rights. By the way, it was during an economic crisis in Brazil that the 2017 Labour Reform – symbolized by Law No. 13,467/2017, in force since November that year – was passed, remodelling some of the Labour Law pillars in the country. On the ILO Normlex website, we notice that three Brazilian complaints were sent to the CFA after November 2017: Cases No. 3327, 3344, and 3355. They may show us how freedom of association has been recently treated in diverse economic sectors, as well as sow the seeds of Labour Reforms amid/after the COVID-19 economic crisis. This article utilizes observational/exploratory methods to analyse these three cases, pointing out if/how the core modifications of the 2017 Labour Reform in Brazil connect with the debates in the selected CFA Cases. All in all, what about next Reforms?

The changes of the labour market have strong characteristics compared to the earlier eras. These changes are primarily the changes happening due to the process of digitalization coming to the foreground which will significantly transform the structure of the labour market2. The time shift between the terminating workplaces and the new ones resulting from the application of new technologies and the retraining of the employees will result in an intermediate time interval. The maximal use of this time interval will be typical mainly for the low-educated manpower. However, based on the principle of national social care, these people cannot be left without provision. This problem has become really urgent because of the COVID-19 epidemic reaching Europe on the spring of 2020. More countries have introduced basic income or a similar kind of social benefit. The reason for this step is the significant employment crisis which is the consequence of the lock-down that has been applied in certain countries in order to stop the spread of the virus. But basic income is only one element of the system, so the issue should be examined in terms of minimum wage and minimum income.

The article addresses the provision of reasonable accommodation within the context of the European Union, in particular within EU labour law. Specifically, the provision of reasonable accommodation is enshrined within the framework provided by non-discrimination law. Furthermore, the article introduces the concept of vulnerability which represents a new and pioneering category especially in legal studies. The research question wonders whether it would be feasible to expand the provision on reasonable accommodation beyond the ground of disability considering vulnerability as an encompassing category to be used in order to evaluate whether a reasonable accommodation can be required or not. To this aim, it has to be noted that disability is the only ground based on which a reasonable accommodation can be provided under the EU law.

For over a decade, Turkey has been facing mass influx of Syrian citizens – besides Afghans, Iraqis, and Iranians – who are seeking international protection. This humanitarian problem has many different aspects, e.g., providing housing, employment, health services, and education. The general rule regarding the accommodation of refugees and asylum seekers is temporary accommodation centres. But this cannot be realised in the Syrian migrants’ case due to their massive numbers. Turkey is hosting 3,6 million Syrians under the temporary protection status. This international protection type does not give them the right to work per se. Like other foreigners who want to work in Turkey, Syrians have to apply for a work permit. In practice, many of the Syrians work informally, which causes major infringements of fundamental rights. Besides the legal aspect, this problem has to be handled by the cooperation of different fields of social sciences, especially by sociology and public policy. The implementation of legal instruments will not solve the social problems unless the integration of the migrants to the host community is realised with appropriate public incentives. This paper examines the national legislation concerning migrant workers. Following this examination, the author analyses the actual situation deriving from practice, based on prior research and reports of national and international organizations.

The coronavirus pandemic has become an unprecedented situation in the way it has made remote work common around the globe. The existing regulations concerning teleworking, in particular its normative definition, have turned out to be inadequate in the realities of the labor market. When legislative work started in September 2020, legislators were was faced with the following dilemma: Are the current regulations supposed to obtain only during the pandemic or should they also remain valid after it? The definition of remote work in the new Article67[5] plays a fundamental role in this matter. Dependent on it is not only the future of the labor market but also a possible revolution in terms of the ontology of work itself.

Edyta Sobótka-Bentyn’s aim in this article is to review the current state of regulations on the transparency of salaries and to analyze the planned regulations in this area in connection with the continuing emergence of legislative proposals concerning this issue. The author discusses the provisions of the Polish Order, the draft of the European Commission and the parliamentary draft bill to amend the existing labor law. Additionally, she presents the results of her research on the universality of the practice of publishing the amount of the offered salary in job advertisements. The article is an attempt to answer the question whether the transparency of salaries in the IT industry in Poland is a standard procedure or merely good practice.

Karol Sołtys’s aim in this article is to identify future threats in the area of collective disputes. He examines in detail three issues: the monopoly that trade unions have on organising strikes against the background of the low level of workers’ membership in trade unions; the employer’s passivity towards the possibility of the simultaneous organisation of numerous strikes in the workplace; the right to lockout. In view of the threats discussed in the article, it is necessary to open a debate in Polish labour law over the adoption of exceptions to the said trade unions’ monopoly on organising strikes. The debate should consider the possibility of a liberalisation of regulations concerning the representation of employees. In the context of employer protection, special attention should be paid to the right to retaliatory lockout.

In March 2021, the EU Commission presented a proposal for a directive on pay transparency. Its aim is to strengthen the principle of equal pay for women and men, since, despite its recognition as a fundamental principle of the European Union, in all the Member States the pay gap between employees of both sexes remains at around 14%.
The draft directive of 2021 provides for the strengthening of pay transparency by, among other measures, introducing transparent remuneration systems, defining criteria for comparing jobs of comparable value, indicating the amount of remuneration in job advertisements, and introducing reporting obligations for businesses with more than 250 employees. The draft also introduces facilitations related to the pursuit of claims for pay discrimination. However, pay transparency should not be confused with pay disclosure.
Currently, in Poland there are no regulations on pay transparency. Employers are not obliged to examine salaries for potential discrimination and to address unjustified gender pay gaps. No such practice has developed in the approach of social partners, either. For this reason, regardless of the progress made on the draft directive, it is necessary to ensure a gradual increase in pay transparency, for it protects employees against the imposition of discriminatory employment conditions by the employer.