Gloss to the Decision of the European Court of Human Rights of May 15, 2018, Case Number 2451/16 , Association of Academics v. Iceland, Hudoc.int

Gloss of approval

Karol Sołtys

The John Paul II Catholic University of Lublin , Poland
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5101-3878


Abstract

In the judgment of the ECtHR in the case of Association of Academics v. Iceland, the Court commented on two important issues concerning the broadly understood procedure for resolving collective disputes. Firstly, the Court pointed out that “found that the taking of industrial action should be accorded the status of an essential element of the Article 11 guarantee but it is clear that strike action is protected by Article 11 as it is considered to be a part of trade union activity”. Secondly, it considered that the institution of mandatory arbitration could be a substitute for the right to strike, which was prohibited due to the need to protect the health of Icelandic citizens. In the context of the issues outlined in this way, the aim of the gloss is to verify the two theses mentioned above. First, the thesis was analyzed according to which the right to strike is not an essential element of freedom of association. For this reason, the jurisprudence of the Tribunal has been discussed against the background of ILO standards, taking into account the doctrine’s views on the status of the right to strike in the system of human rights protection and its relationship with other irenic methods of dispute resolution. Secondly, the thesis of the ECtHR was verified, according to which the mandatory arbitration established by the Icelandic legislator in the circumstances presented in the facts of the case does not constitute a violation of the right to strike. As part of the second thesis, the concept of mandatory arbitration and its status in the jurisprudence of the Court, as well as ILO bodies and labor law doctrine were analyzed. Finally, the relationship between the right to strike and social arbitration was examined.

Keywords:

Right to strike, Compulsory Arbitration, Collective Labor Law, Collective dispute resolution, European collective labor law

Feldman, Yuval. The law of good people. Challenging States’ Abilities to Regulate Human Behavior. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008.

Grzebyk, Piotr. Od rządów siły do rządów prawa. Polski model prawa do strajku na tle standardów unijnego i międzynarodowego prawa pracy. Warsaw: Wydawnictwo naukowe SCHOLAR, 2019.

International Labour Organization. Freedom of Association: digest of decisions and principles of Freedom of Association Committee of the Governing Body of the ILO. Geneva: International Labour Office, 2013.

Masewicz, Walery. Strajk. Studium prawno-socjologiczne. Warsaw: Instytut Wydawniczy Związków Zawodowych, 1986.

Nowicki, Marek. “Commentary on the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.” In Wokół konwencji europejskiej.Komentarz do Europejskiej Konwencji Praw Człowieka, edited by Marek Nowicki, 985–1022. Warsaw: Wolters Kluwer, 2021.

Nowik, Paweł. “European Collective Labor Law.” In Międzynarodowe publiczne prawo pracy, edited by Krzysztof Baran, 939–1093. Warsaw: Wolters Kluwer, 2020.

Orzeł-Jakubowska, Aleksandra. Sądownictwo polubowne w świetle standardów konstytucyjnych. Warsaw: Wolters Kluwer, 2021.

Sternlight, Jean. “Creeping Mandatory Arbitration.” Stanford Law Review 57, no. 5 (April 2005): 1631–1675.

Strzeszewski, Czesław. Praca ludzka. Lublin: Towarzystwo Naukowe KUL, 1978.

Szymański, Antoni, and Ludwik Górski. Kodeks społeczny: Zarys katolickiej syntezy społecznej. Lublin: Towarzystwo Wiedzy Chrześcijańskiej, 1934.

Utz, Arthur Fridolin. “Is a right to strike a human right?” Washington University Law Review 65, no. 4 (1987): 732–757.

Wojtyła, Karol. Katolicka etyka społeczna. Lublin: Wydawnictwo św. Stanisława BM Krakau, 2018.

Závodná, Martina. “The European Convention on Human Rights and Arbitration.”Bachelor’s thesis, Masaryk University, 2014.

Download

Published
2023-03-30


Sołtys, K. (2023). Gloss to the Decision of the European Court of Human Rights of May 15, 2018, Case Number 2451/16 , Association of Academics v. Iceland, Hudoc.int. Review of European and Comparative Law, 52(1), 201–218. https://doi.org/10.31743/recl.15011

Karol Sołtys  karolsoltys6@gmail.com
The John Paul II Catholic University of Lublin

MA, Faculty of Law, Canon Law and Administration, The John Paul II Catholic University of Lublin, correspondence address: Al. Racławickie 14, 20-950 Lublin, Poland.

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5101-3878



License

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.