Documents Zou, Mimi 7 results

"Au début du 21ème siècle, les TMWP (programmes pour les travailleurs migrants temporaires) ont été créés et se sont développés dans de nombreux États développés, libéraux et industrialisés. Cet article examine les restrictions les plus problématiques en matière d'emploi et de droits sociaux des migrants, dans des pays d'accueil démocratiques libéraux. En examinant et en critiquant un certain nombre de propositions en vue de la refonte des TMWP, cet article de s'appuyer sur le compromis « Exit, Voice » dans les relations de travail des migrants pour envisager la refonte des principales caractéristiques des TMWP actuellement en cours."

"At the beginning of the 21st century, (TMWPs) have emerged and expanded in numerous advanced industrialised, liberal states. This paper probes into the most problematic restrictions of migrants' employment and social rights under such schemes in liberal democratic host states. In reviewing and critiquing a number of notable proposals for redesigning TMWPs, this paper puts forward the discourse of ‘exit and voice' in migrants' work relations as a normative foundation for redesigning the key features of current TMWPs"

"This handbook offers an important exploration of generative AI and its legal and regulatory implications from interdisciplinary perspectives. The volume is divided into four parts. Part I provides the necessary context and background to understand the topic, including its technical underpinnings and societal impacts. Part II probes the emerging regulatory and policy frameworks related to generative AI and AI more broadly across different jurisdictions. Part III analyses generative AI's impact on specific areas of law, from non-discrimination and data protection to intellectual property, corporate governance, criminal law and more. Part IV examines the various practical applications of generative AI in the legal sector and public administration. Overall, this volume provides a comprehensive resource for those seeking to understand and navigate the substantial and growing implications of generative AI for the law."

"The two key concepts developed in this article, 'hyper-dependence' and 'hyper-precarity', are aimed at drawing attention to the constitutive role of immigration law in shaping certain vulnerabilities in migrants' work relations. Immigration law is not merely concerned with controlling the entry and exit of migrants, but also creates personal legal statuses - some highly precarious - that shape their employment and residence in the host state. The two 'hyper' concepts seek to elucidate the most problematic features of Temporary Migrant Worker Programmes (TMWPs) currently found in a number of advanced industrialized, liberal democratic countries. Hyper-dependence refers to a particular tie of migrant workers to their employers as a requirement of their legal status. Hyper-precarity refers to the tenuous nature, in law and practice, of these workers' entitlements to employment protection, social rights, and transition to more secure residence status. In some circumstances both hyper-dependence and hyper-precarity can combine to give rise to extremely exploitative situations for migrants at work. This article explores possible normative constraints on states' design and implementation of TMWPs. It identifies two genres of normative interventions that may respond to the legal construction of hyper-precarity and hyper-dependence: first, the international human rights framework, and second, the discourse against forms of exploitation that could be regarded as 'unfree labour'. However, it is argued that neither of the discourses poses a fundamental challenge to host states' powers to create the precarious statuses of non-citizens admitted into their territory, nor do they tackle the complex realities of migrants' work relations on a continuum of exploitation."

"There has been nascent litigation around the world on the employment classification of workers in the ‘sharing economy', ‘gig economy' or ‘on demand economy'. New business models and forms of work organization arising from rapid advancements in digital technologies (or ‘disruptive innovation' as some have described the phenomenon) have sparked considerable debate on a wide array of regulatory issues, including the role of labour law protections for the emergent ‘digital workforce'. This debate is currently taking place in the People's Republic of China. This article analyses how Chinese courts and lawmakers have addressed issues that are directly or indirectly relevant to determining the status of drivers in the ride-hailing sector. Despite the presence of criteria for identifying a ‘labour relationship' under Chinese labour law, the courts have not adopted a uniform approach across different types of claims involving these drivers. A new government regulation on the ride-hailing sector, which took effect in November 2016, has not resolved this issue as it permits ride-hailing platform companies to enter into labour contracts and other forms of agreements with drivers based on the particularities of their work arrangements. In considering these recent cases and regulatory developments, the article concludes that a purposive approach to the existing criteria in Chinese labour law for ascertaining the status of workers in the sharing economy is useful for addressing the basic question of whether they should be protected, rather than creating ‘new' categories of employment classification."

"At the beginning of the 21st century, temporary migrant workers programmes (TMWPs) have emerged and expanded in numerous advanced industrialised, liberal states. Advocates of contemporary TMWPs argue that 'carefully designed' schemes can deliver so-called 'triple wins' for host countries, home countries and migrants and their families. Yet, the case for 'new and improved' TMWPs is not without critics, who maintain that such schemes remain highly exploitative. This paper probes into the ethical underpinnings of the regulatory design of TMWPs in liberal democratic states, with a focus on the most problematic restrictions of migrants' employment and social rights under such schemes. Scholars from different disciplines have sought to justify and propose 'well-designed' TMWPs that address, to varying extent, concerns over these restrictions on migrants' rights. In reviewing and critiquing a number of notable proposals, this paper puts forward the discourse of 'exit and voice' in migrants' work relations as a normative foundation for redesigning the key features of current TMWPs. Expanding the contours for exit in migrants' work relations is essential for them to engage freely in the host state's labour market as well as to facilitate their broader life plans emerging from their migration project. Access to effective voice mechanisms can provide a bulwark against exploitation, especially through collective empowerment and mobilisation."