No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 27 October 2017
The Posted Workers Directive was controversial from the outset, and the recent case law from the Court of Justice has made it even more so. In this chapter, the backdrop, genesis, drafting and adoption of the Posted Workers Directive are first considered in turn in order to place it in its context. The Court of Justice’s case law is then considered and contrasted with this background and elaboration of the Directive as it was adopted. The present situation under the Posted Workers Directives is also compared with public international law norms, ILO Conventions and the European Social Charter, and the impact of the Directive in Scandinavia is considered. It is concluded that the case law of the Court of Justice is problematic because of the fact that a normative framework results from its decisions which impinges upon fundamental features of collective labour law and industrial relations: it both entails restrictions on the kinds of terms and conditions of employment which can be imposed, and encroaches upon freedom of collective bargaining more broadly. The autonomy of Member States is also limited and the effectiveness of national industrial relations regimes compromised, which is a highly undesirable outcome.
1 Directive 96/71/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 1996 concerning the posting of workers in the framework of the provision of services, [1997] OJ L18/1 (hereafter referred to as the Posted Workers Directive, or PWD).
2 I use this as a joint denomination for the 2007 decisions in Case C-438/05 International Transport Workers’ Federation, Finnish Seamen’s Union v Viking Line ABP, OÜ Viking Line Eesti [2007] ECR I-10779 (‘Viking Line ‘) and Case C-341/05 Laval un Partneri Ltd v Svenska Byggnadsarbetareförbundet, Svenska Byggnadsarbetareförbundets avd. 1, Byggettan, Svenska Elektrikerförbundet [2007] ECR I-11767 (‘Laval ‘), and the 2008 decisions in Case C-346/06 Rechtsanwalt Dr Dirk Rüffert v Land Niedersachsen [2008] ECR I-1989 (‘Rüffert’) and Case C-319/06 Commission of the EC v Luxembourg [2008] ECR I-4323 (‘Commission v Luxembourg’).
3 See Art 153(5) TFEU.
4 Case C-113/89 Rush Portuguesa Lda v Office national d’immigration [1990] ECR I-1417.
5 Communication from the Commission concerning its Action Programme relating to the Implementation of the Community Charter of Basic Social Rights for Workers, COM(89) 568 final.
6 Community Charter of the Fundamental Social Rights of Workers 1989, [1989] OJ C323/44.
7 In this field implementation was ‘ahead of schedule’, commented Laslett, JM, ‘The Mutual Recognition of Diplomas, Certificates and Other Evidence of Formal Qualifications in the European Community’ (1990) 17 Legal Issues of European Integration 1, 1Google Scholar. The ensuing process was still long and complicated: see Bercusson, B, European Labour Law (London, Butterworths, 1996) 388–90Google Scholar.
8 Regulation 1612/68/EC of the Council of 15 October 1968 on freedom of movement for workers within the Community, [1968] OJ L257/2.
9 Regulation 1408/71/EC of the Council of 14 June 1971 on the application of social security schemes to employed persons and their families moving within the Community, [1971] OJ L149/2, now repealed in part, effective 1 May 2010, by Regulation 883/2004/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the coordination of social security systems, [2004] OJ L200/1; see Art 90 and Regulation 987/2009/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 September 2009 laying down the procedure for implementing Regulation 883/2004/EC on the coordination of social security systems, [2009] OJ L284/1.
10 Inter alia, in Case 167/73 Commission v France [1974] ECR 359, Case 36/74 Walrave and LJN Koch v Association Union cycliste internationale, Koninklijke Nederlandsche Wielren Unie et Federación Española Ciclismo [1974] ECR 1405, Case 30/77 Régina v Pierre Bouchereau [1977] ECR 1999, and just a decade later in Case 237/83 SARL Prodest v Caisse Primaire d’Assurances Maladie de Paris [1984] ECR 3153.
11 See Laslett, above n 7, 1.
12 This point is strongly made by Hellsten, J, ‘On the Social Dimension in Posting of Workers’ (separate paging) in Hellsten, J, From internal market regulation to European labour law (Helsinki, Helsinki University Print, 2007) 8 Google Scholar.
13 See Menz, G, Varieties of Capitalism and Europeanization: National Response Strategies to the Single European Market (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2008) VCrossRefGoogle Scholar. The Swedish expe rience, including the Laval case, is just one (but a vivid) illustration.
14 See Barnard, C, ‘Social Dumping or Dumping Socialism?’ (2008) 15(1) International Union Rights 22–23 Google Scholar, commenting on the impact of Laval and Viking Line. See also in the same vein: Cremers, J, Dølvik, JE and Bosch, G, ‘Posting of workers in the single market: attempts to prevent social dumping and regime competition in the EU’ (2007) 38 Industrial Relations Journal 524, 538–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Malmberg, J and Sigeman, T, ‘Industrial Actions and EU Economic Freedoms: The Autonomous Collective Bargaining Model Curtailed by the European Court of Justice’ (2008) 45 CML Rev 1115, 1136–40Google Scholar; Orlandini, G, ‘Trade Union Rights and Market Freedoms: The European Court of Justice Sets out the Rules’ (2008) 29 Comparative Labor Law & Policy Journal 573, 538Google Scholar.
15 Eg Kolehmainen, E, The Posted Workers Directive: European Reinforcement of National Labour Protection (Florence, European University Institute, 2002) (PhD thesis, mimeo), 112 (‘the prologue to the adoption saga’)Google Scholar; Barnard, C, The Substantive Law of the EU: The Four Freedoms (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2004) 345 (‘the green light’)Google Scholar; Dølvik, J and Visser, J, ‘Free movement, equal treatment and workers’ rights: can the European Union solve its trilemma of fundamental principles?’ (2009) 40 Industrial Relations Journal 491, 498 (‘a model’)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. I myself have dubbed the decision a ‘booster’, given that the first foundations had already been laid; see Evju, S, ‘Utstasjonering, vertsstatens reguleringsadgang, «ordre public»‘ Nytt i privatretten No 3, 2009, 3, 4Google Scholar.
16 As illustrated later, eg, by the Court of Justice decisions in Arblade (Joined Cases C-369/96 and C-376/96 Criminal proceedings against Jean-Claude Arblade, Arblade & Fils SARL, as the party civilly liable (C-369/96), and Bernard Leloup, Serge Leloup, Sofrage SARL, as the party civilly liable (C-376/96) [1999] EFD I-8453) and later in Commission v Luxembourg (Case C-319/06 Commission of the EC v Luxembourg [2008] ECR I-4323). See also on France, eg: Pélissier, J, Supiot, A and Jeammaud, A, Droit du travail, 24th edn (Paris, Dalloz, 2008) 45–46, 118–19Google Scholar; Ray, JE, Droit du travail: Droit vivant, 14th edn (Paris, Éditions Liaisons, 2005) 33–36, illustrating also that the French notion of ordre public is both relative and complexGoogle Scholar; and further Meyer, N, L’ordre public en droit du travail: Contribution à l’étude de l’ordre public en droit privé (Paris, LGDJ, 2006)Google Scholar. As for the UK, see Barnard, C, ‘The UK and Posted Workers: The Effect of Commission v Luxembourg on the Territorial Application of British Labour Law’ (2009) 38 Industrial Law Journal 122 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
17 See Malmberg, J and Jonsson, C-M, ‘National Industrial Relations v. Private International Law—A Swedish Perspective’ in Rönnmar, M (ed), EU Industrial Relations v National Industrial Relations: Comparative and Interdisciplinary Perspectives (Austin/Boston, Wolters Kluwer, 2008) 217, 218Google Scholar.
18 See for Germany, eg, A Junker and J Wichmann, ‘Das Arbeitnehmer-Entsendegesetz— Doch ein Verstoß gegen Europäisches Recht’ Neue Zeitschrift für Arbeitsrecht 1996, 505, 506, and O Deinert, ‘Arbeitnehmerentsendung im Rahmen der Erbringung von Dienstleistungen innerhalb der Europäischen Union’ Recht der Arbeit 1996, 339, 341. The literature on the topic is otherwise immense. The state of the law in the Scandinavian countries is essentially similar at the outset.
19 COM(76) 653 final, Explanatory Memorandum, 3 (see also n 21 below).
20 Proposition de règlement (CEE) du Conseil relatif aux dispositions concernant les conflits de lois en matière de relations de travail à l’intérieur de la Communauté, 23 mars 1972, [1972] OJ C107/8.
21 COM(75) 653 final Amended proposal for a Regulation of the Council on the provisions on conflict of laws on employment relationships within the Community, 28 April 1976, not in the OJ.
22 While the initiative was taken in 1967, the actual work commenced in 1969; see M Giuliano and P Lagarde, Report on the Convention on the law applicable to contractual obli gations [the Rome Convention], [1980] OJ C282/1.
23 Convention on the law applicable to contractual obligations, of 19 June 1980, [1980] OJ L266/1. The Convention now is superseded by Regulation 593/2008/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 17 June 2008 on the law applicable to contractual obligations (Rome I), [2008] OJ L177/6.
24 EEC Commission, XIV/398/72-E, not in the OJ.
25 For some pertinent observations on this, see Hepple, B, ‘Conflict of Laws on Employment Relationships within the EEC’ in Lipstein, K (ed), Harmonisation of Private International Law by the EEC (London, Institute of Advanced Legal Studies, University of London, 1978) 39 Google Scholar.
26 The 1972 proposal covered posting within a company group (Art 4, similar to Art 2(3)(b) PWD). The 1976 amended proposal was extended to encompass posting in general, the sending of workers ‘to carry out temporary activities’ in another Member State. The reach of the Article was, by way of referring to Art 51 EC, linked to that of Regulation 1408/71/EC.
27 See Hepple, above n 25, 43. See also the text to n 31 below.
28 Eg F Gamillscheg, ‘Intereuropäisches Arbeitsrecht: Zu zwei Vorschlägen der EWG zum Internationalen Arbeitsrecht’ Rabels Zeitschrift für ausländisches und internationales Privatrecht 1973, 284; Borgmann, B, Die Entsendung von Arbeitnehmern in der Europäischen Gemeinschaft (Frankfurt/Main, Peter Lang, 2001) 197–98Google Scholar.
29 Withdrawal of certain proposals and drafts from the Commission to the Council, [1981] OJ C307/3 (item 8).
30 1972 proposal, Art 4(2).
31 COM(75) 653 final, Explanatory Memorandum, 11, emphasis added.
32 See Eichhorst, H, Europäische Sozialpolitik zwischen nationaler Autonomie und Marktfreiheit: Die Entsendung von Arbeitnehmern in der EU (Frankfurt/Main, Campus Verlag, 2000) 143 Google Scholar.
33 Commission, White Paper on Employment Growth, Brussels, 11 December 1985; see Council Resolution of 22 December 1986 on an action programme on employment growth, [1986] OJ C340/2.
34 See, eg, Cremers, J, ‘The Posting Directive: Origins and Assessment’ in Köbele, B and Cremers, J (eds), Europäische Union: Arbeitnehmerentsendung im Baugewerbe—Europse Unie: Detachering in de Bouwnijverheid—European Union: Posting of Workers in the Construction Industry (Witterschlick/Bonn: Verlag Marg. Wehle. 1994) 25 Google Scholar; Cremers, J, ‘Free movement of services and equal treatment of workers: the case of construction’ (2006) 12 Transfer 167, 168–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Corbey, D, ‘Dialectical functionalism: stagnation as a booster of European integration’ (1995) 49 International Organization 253, 279CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Eichhorst, above n 32, 143–44; and Kolehmainen, above n 15, 149–50. Cremers et al, above n 14, 526, oversimplify when stating that the origins of the PWD ‘go back to the debate about public procurement in the single European market’.
35 COM(86) 679 final Proposal for a Council Directive amending Directive 71/305/ EEC concerning coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts, not in the OJ.
36 See Council Directive 89/440/EEC of 18 July 1989 amending Directive 71/305/EEC concerning coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts, [1989] OJ L210/1, Art 18, inserting a new Art 22a into Council Directive 71/305/EEC of 26 July 1971 concerning the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts, [1971] OJ L185/5; and see on this, eg, Cremers (1994), above n 34, 170, and Eichhorst, above n 32, 143–44.
37 Opinions differ as to who was first with the idea for a directive on posting; see Kolehmainen, above n 15, 150. Jan Cremers, General Secretary of the EFBWW at the time, indicates that the initiative originated in the Commission: see Cremers (2006), above n 34, 170; Eichhorst, above n 32, 146, on the other hand, suggests that the Commission ‘reacted’ to the EFBWW’s call for legislation.
38 [1989] OJ C323/44. Drafts were tabled earlier in 1989, COM(89) 248 final Preliminary Draft: Community Charter of Fundamental Social Rights, Brussels, 30 May 1989, and COM(89) 471 final Community Charter of Fundamental Social Rights (Draft), Brussels, 2 October 1989.
39 COM(89) 568 final Communication from the Commission concerning its Action Programme relating to the Implementation of the Community Charter of Basic Social Rights for Workers, Brussels, 29 November 1989.
40 The following proposal dealt with ‘the insertion of labour clauses into public contracts’ with reference to, inter alia, Directive 89/440/EEC; this proposal was, however, essentially a suggestion of a possible course to take upon later analysis.
41 See above n 15 and further, among many, eg, G Tuts, ‘Detachement et droit du travail: la directive 96/71/C.E. du Parlement et du Conseil du 16 decembre 1996 concernant le detachement de travailleurs effectue dans le cadre d’une prestation de services’ Journal des tribunaux du travail 1997, 265, 267; S Krebber, ‘Anmerkung [zu EuGH Vereinigte Rechtssachen C369/96 und C-376/96, Arblade]’ Zeitschrift für Europäisches Privatrecht 2001, 378; Davies, P, ‘The Posted Workers Directive and the EC Treaty’ (2002) 31 Industrial Law Journal 298, 300CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and T Sigeman, ‘Fri rörlighet för tjänster och nationell arbetsrätt’ Europarättslig Tidskrift 2005, 465, 467.
42 Case C-113/89 Rush Portuguesa Lda v Office national d’immigration [1990] ECR I1417, para 12.
43 Ibid, para 18.
44 Case 279/80 Criminal proceedings against Alfred John Webb [1981] ECR 3305.
45 Joined Cases 62 and 63/81 Société anonyme de droit français Seco et Société anonyme de droit français Desquenne & Giral v Etablissement d’assurance contre la vieillesse et l’invalidité [1982] ECR 223.
46 See Davies, P, ‘Market Integration and Social Policy in the Court of Justice’ (1995) 24 Industrial Law Journal 49, 73CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and for a view on Webb and Seco, G Druesne, ‘Liberté de prestation des services et travailleurs salariés’ Revue trimestrielle de droit européen 1982, 75.
47 Rush, above n 42, para 15.
48 See P Rodière, ‘Note [sur Arrêt du 27 mars 1990 Société Rush Portuguesa Lda et Office national d’immigration (aff. C 113/89)]’ Revue trimestrielle de droit européen 1990, 635, 637–38, and A Lyon-Caen ‘Le droit, la mobilité et les relations du travail: quelques perspecti ves’ Revue du Marché commun 1991, 108, 110.
49 Rush, above n 42, Opinion of A-G Van Gerven, paras 17 and 14.
50 Eg H Verschueren, ‘L’arrêt Rush Portuguesa: un nouvel apport au principe de la libre circulation des travailleurs dans le droit communautaire’ Revue du droit des étrangers 1990, 231, 234; Rodière, above n 48, 638, and Lyon-Caen, above n 48, 110.
51 See Davies, P, ‘Posted Workers: Single Market or Protection of National Labour Law Systems’ (1997) 34 CML Rev 571, 588Google Scholar, and, conversely, Kolehmainen, above n 15, 168.
52 Preis, Eg U and Temming, F, Die Urlaubs- und Lohnausgleichskasse im Kontext des Gemeinschaftsrechts (Frankfurt/Main, Peter Lang 2006), 115ffGoogle Scholar, with extensive references. For case law examples see, eg, Case 18/95 Terheuve [1999] ECR I-345 (posted worker vs home State, application of Art 48 EEC and Regulation 1612/68/EC), and Case C-202/97 Fitzwilliam [2000] ECR I-883 (Regulation 1408/71/EC).
53 Paraphrasing Gormley, L, ‘Freedom of establishment and freedom to provide services. Workers and Services distinguished’ (1992) 17 EL Rev, 63, 66Google Scholar. See also Davies, above n 51, 589.
54 Rush, above n 42, para 18.
55 Davies, P, ‘The Posted Workers Directive and the EC Treaty’ (2002) 31 Industrial Law Journal 298, 300CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
56 Eg, Davies, above n 46, 74; Davies, above n 51, 589–90; Hepple, B, Labour Laws and Global Trade (Oxford, Hart Publishing, 2005) 166 Google Scholar.
57 Eg France in 1991 and 1993, The Netherlands rather informally in 1991, Austria and Norway both in 1993, Luxembourg in 1995, and Germany in early 1996 after a protracted legislative process. See to this generally Eichhorst, above n 32, 185–272, Menz, above n 13, and S Evju, ‘Utstasjonering og sosial dumping—et skandinavisk perspektiv’ Arbeidsrett 2008, 1, 12–15.
58 Case C-76/90 Säger v Dennemeyer [1991] ECR I-4221. On the ‘market access’ notion, see Barnard, above n 15, 19.
59 Eg Case C-43/93 Raymond Vander Elst v Office des Migrations Internationales [1994] ECR I-3803, Joined Cases C-49/98 Finalarte Sociedade de Construção Civil Ldª and Urlaubs- und Lohnausgleichskasse der Bauwirtschaft, C-70 98 Portugaia Construções Ldª and C-71/98 Engil Sociedade de Construção Civil SA v Urlaubs- und Lohnausgleichskasse der Bauwirtschaft, and C-50/98 Urlaub- sund Lohnausgleichskasse der Bauwirtschaft v Amilcar Oliveira Rocha, C-52/98 Tudor Stone Ltd, C-53/98 Tecnamb-Tecnologia do Ambiante Ldª, C54/98 Turiprata Construções Civil Ldª, C-68/98 Duarte dos Santos Sousa, and C-69/98 Santos & Kewitz Construções Ldª [2001] ECR I-7831. See Barnard, above n 15, 345–46, 351–52, Davies, above n 55, 301–06, and Hepple, above n 56, 169–72.
60 For detailed accounts of the drafting process see, eg: Eichhorst, above n 32, 143–84 and 273–89; Borgmann, above n 28, 197–210 and 257–301; Kolehmainen, above n 15, 149–68; and Houwerzijl, M, De Detacheringsrichtlijn: Over de achtergrond, inhoud en implementatie van Richtlijn 96/71/EG Europese Monografieën 78 (Deventer, Kluwer, 2005) 29–113Google Scholar.
61 See COM(91) 230 final, [1991] OJ C225/6, and Eichhorst, above n 32, 149–50.
62 COM(93) 225 final, [1993] OJ C187/5.
63 Doc No SN 3953/94 (SOC), 6 October 1994.
64 See Doc No 4980/95, 17 February 1995.
65 This was a consistent French view; eg, in July 1993 France insisted that the proposed threshold provision be deleted, as this was ‘a fundamental political issue’, a statement that was repeated over again. See Doc No 9570/93, 3 November 1993, and Doc No 9712/93, 8 November 1993.
66 See also Biagi, M, ‘Fortune smiles on the Italian EU Presidency: talking half-seriously about the posted workers and parental leave directives’ (1996) 12 The International Journal of Comparative Labour Law and Industrial Relations 97 Google Scholar, and Biagi, M, ‘The “posted workers” EU directive: from social dumping to social protectionism’ in Blanpain, R (ed), Labour Law and Industrial Relations in the European Union, Bulletin of Comparative Labour Relations 32 (The Hague/London/Boston, Kluwer, 1997) 173 Google Scholar.
67 See Doc No 11360/94, 29 November 1994, and Doc No 6495/95, 10 April 1995.
68 This provision can be traced back to a Portuguese proposal from November 1994 to stipulate an exception in Art 1 from the scope of application of the directive. See Doc No 10899/94, 17 November 1994.
69 The point is illustrated by the Court of Justice in Laval, above n 2, paras 57–59.
70 Whether Art 3(1) PWD genuinely is a conflict of laws rule is arguable; see Kidner, R, ‘Jurisdiction in European Contracts of Employment’ (1998) 27 Industrial Law Journal 103, 115–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar. This is not of immediate importance, however, and can be left aside here.
71 There may still be problems but those are left aside here. See rather Davies, above n 51, 577–79, Kidner, above n 70, 115–16, Hellsten, above n 12, 6; and largely also Kolehmainen, above n 15, 85–91.
72 Ie, the ‘Laval Quartet ‘ (see above n 2), except Viking Line which concerned freedom of establishment and Art 43 EC (now Art 49 TFEU).
73 Rüffert, above n 2, para 36.
74 Eg Laval, above n 2, paras 58–61, 74, 80 and 93; Rüffert, above n 2, para 36, with the proviso that the provisions of the Directive must be ‘interpreted in the light of Article 49 EC’; and Commission v Luxembourg, above n 2, paras 33, 41, 43 and 49.
75 Laval, above n 2, para 80; Rüffert, above n 2, para 33.
76 COM(2006) 159 final Communication from the Commission. Guidance on the posting of workers in the framework of the provision of services, Brussels, 4 April 2006, 2.
77 See Barnard, above n 14, 23, commenting on the impact of Laval and Viking Line. See also, in the same vein, Cremers et al, above n 14, 538–39, Malmberg and Sigeman, above n 14, 1136–40, and Orlandini, above n 14, 538.
78 See Biagi (1996), above n 66, 104.
79 See Laval, above n 2, paras 60 and 73–84.
80 See Commission v Luxembourg, above n 2, paras 26–33. The ‘strict interpretation’ clause is of course familiar from Court of Justice case law in general.
81 See also Laval, above n 2, paras 60 and 73–84.
82 Finalarte, above n 59, paras 55–58.
83 ESA decision of 15 July 2009, Case No 63734, Event No 5211127, 3.
84 See, eg, Biagi (1996 and 1997), above n 66, and Dølvik and Visser, above n 15, 8.
85 See Laval, above n 2, Opinion of A-G Mengozzi, paras 197–99, and Rüffert, above n 2, Opinion of A-G Bot, paras 81–84.
86 See COM(93)225 final; the wording in both provisions was ‘provided for by the law applicable’. It was clear from the Explanatory Memorandum that this referred to the home State of a worker.
87 See, in particular, Doc No 11360/94, 29 November 1994, Outcome of proceedings of: Committee of Permanent Representatives on 25 November 1994.
88 Doc No 6689/2/96 REV 2 ADD 1—CODEC 235, 5 June 1996, Statement of the Council’s reasons, Statement 231/96 explicitly referring to ‘the law applicable to the employment relationship’.
89 See Laval, above n 2, paras 79–81.
90 See Rüffert, above n 2, paras 32–34.
91 ‘… or arbitration awards’; nothing is lost, however, by leaving this out here.
92 The first alternative stems from a Danish proposal and the second is of Italian making. Both were accepted and written into the draft texts by the end of 1994.
93 Act (1999:678) on Posting of Workers.
94 See Laval, above n 2, paras 62–72.
95 Report by the Working Party on the transposal of the Directive concerning the posting of workers (Brussels, 1999), 11.
96 By Arbetsdomstolens (the Labour Court’s) decision 2009:89, 2 December 2009, Laval un Partneri Ltd was awarded ‘exemplary damages’ against the three trade unions involved in the total amount of SEK 550,000 (€56,500) plus interest from December 2004, and also litigation costs at SEK 2.13 million (€219,000).
97 Or the home State or ‘State of departure’ as in Viking Line.
98 See Viking Line, above n 2, paras 32 et seq, and Laval, above n 2, paras 96–100, 99 and 100 in particular.
99 See Case C-307/05 Yolanda Del Cerro Alonso v Osakidetza-Servicio Vasco de Salud [2007] ECR I-7109, paras 39–41, and in particular Viking Line, above n 2, paras 39–47, and Laval, above n 2, paras 86–88.
100 Cf Viking Line, above n 2, paras 43ff, and Laval, above n 2, paras 90ff.
101 See in particular Laval, above n 2, para 108 and the reference to paras 81 and 83 therein.
102 See Viking Line, above n 2, para 81.
103 See Laval, above n 2, paras 69, 71, 100 and 110.
104 See Laval, above n 2, para 108 and paras 81 and 83 referred to therein.
105 Cf Viking Line, above n 2, para 87.
106 See the text to n 102 above.
107 See further, eg, Evju, S, ‘Norway’ in Blanpain, R and Świątkowski, AM (eds), The Laval and Viking Cases: Freedom of Services and Establishment v Industrial Conflict in the European Economic Area and Russia, Bulletin of Comparative Labour Relations 69 (Austin,Bostonao, Kluwer, 2009) 123, 134–35Google Scholar. Further, the Court’s stance in Rüffert is not reconcilable with ILO Convention No 94. An infringement case on the ground of Norway’s implementation of Convention No 94, pending with the ESA (April 2010), is illustrative of this point.
108 Application by the British Air Line Pilots Associationto the International Labour Organisation Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations against the United Kingdom for breach of ILO Convention No 87, London, 5 October 2009.
109 Report of the Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations, Report III (Part 1A) International Labour Conference 99th Session 2010 (Geneva, International Labour Office, 2010) 208–209.
110 And equally the European Social Charter (revised) 1996. Hereafter both Charters are referred to jointly with the acronym ‘ESC’.
111 See ESC 1961 Art 31, and Art G of the 1996 revised Charter; the exception clauses are similar to that of Art 11(2) ECHR.
112 See, eg, ESC, European Committee of Social Rights, Conclusions XVIII-1 (Council of Europe, Strasbourg, 2006), vol 1, 74–75 (Belgium) and 306–307 (Germany).
113 This Declaration has subsequently been reinforced by the ILO Declaration on Social Justice for a Fair Globalisation 2008.
114 Cf Evju, above n 107, and, eg, the EP Resolution on the Commission communication COM(2001) 416, [2003] OJ C271E/598, 598–600.
115 The scheme in Finland is anchored in ch 2, s 7 of the Employment Contracts Act 26.1.2001/55. Norway employs a particular form of fixing minimum standards based on collective agreements by public law regulations, under the Act of 4 June 1993 No 58 on Making Collective Agreements Generally Applicable, etc.
116 Act No 933 of 15 December 1999 on Posting of Workers, as amended by Act No 1394 of 27 December 2008, inserting a new s 6a. Cf the committee report, Betænkning fra udredningsarbejdet om Laval-afgørelsen, 19 June 2008 (Copenhagen, Beskæftigelsesministeriet).
117 There is a certain irony in this. The ‘most representative’ option in Art 3(8) PWD was an Italian proposal. The alternative that was proposed and insisted on by Denmark is the ‘generally applicable’ option in the first indent of Art 3(8); cf above n 92. The choice made in 2008 can be seen as a reluctant recognition of reality on the part of Danish industrial relations actors.
118 SOU 2008:123 Förslag till åtgärder med anledning av Lavaldomen Betänkande av Lavalutredningen.
119 Regeringens proposition 2009/10:48 Åtgärder med anledning av Lavaldomen.
120 Sveriges Riksdag (available at <http://www.riksdagen.se/>, accessed 5 July 2010) Redovisning förslagspunkter 2009/10:AU5 and Kammarens beslut Beslut i korthet Onsdag 24 mars 2010.
121 Notwithstanding the somewhat enigmatic statement in Laval, above n 2, para 68.