
ON LIMITATION OF EMPLOYEES’ LABOUR RIGHTS UNDER THE CONDITIONS OF AN ECONOMIC CRISIS
Author(s) -
Людмила Чиканова,
Lyudmila CHikanova
Publication year - 2015
Publication title -
žurnal zarubežnogo zakonodatelʹstva i sravnitelʹnogo pravovedeniâ
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
eISSN - 2587-9995
pISSN - 1991-3222
DOI - 10.12737/16138
Subject(s) - legislation , employment protection legislation , statutory law , industrial relations , flexibility (engineering) , labour law , business , law and economics , economics , labour economics , political science , law , economic growth , unemployment , management
The article is dedicated to the problems of limitation of employees’ labour rights under the conditions of an economic crisis. The author analyzes the Russian and foreign legislations, that regulate the relations in connection with mass discharge of employees and concluding of fixed-term employment contracts, as well as the opinions of labour law science representatives on the issue under consideration. The author notes that the statement of business representatives that unlike foreign legislation, the domestic labour legislation is excessively severe and regulates the relations between employees and employers in the Soviet manner and imposes on employers a large number of restrictions is not justified. The practice shows that general employment and labour laws in the developed countries leave very limited room for uncontrolled flexibility on the part of an employer, remaining truly flexible with respect to the diversity and variety of ways to ensure employees’ rights. Comparative analysis of legislations in Russia and foreign developed countries testifies that many foreign statutory regulations either completely agree with the RF Labour Code requirements or are yet less convenient for an employer. The Russian legislation, restricting the possibility of concluding fixed-term employment contracts is less severe compared to the European states. It conforms to international standards and that is why a suggestion on expanding grounds for concluding fixed-term employment contracts appears to be completely unjustified.