Documents La Hovary, Claire 6 results

"Many workers, employers and enterprises around the world are, to varying degrees, in a situation of 'informality'. Although intuitive, the notion of 'informality' is however not easy to define. For many, it evokes a sense of hardship, characterized by precarity, vulnerability, poverty, exploitation and exclusion, for example. It can however have very different connotations for others, who might associate 'informality' with autonomy, entrepreneurialism, or freedom from bureaucratic constraint. Whatever the perspective, however, 'informality' can have a whole range of different potential causes, and their identification, as well as the remedies suggested to overcome them, will vary. Having said this, the concept of 'informality' arguably poses a number of specific challenges from a legal perspective, more specifically concerning how the notion fits within the international and national legal framework relating to the protection of workers. This article proposes to examine these challenges, and the evolution of the understanding of 'informality' within the International Labour Organization (ILO), in light of the recent suggestion that the ILO adopt a recommendation on 'facilitating gradual transitions from the informal economy to the formal economy'. The ILO is an important reference point when discussing informality, on the one hand because of its role in introducing the notion into global development debates, and on the other hand, because of its important role with regards to improving working conditions, and the concerns raised by informality in this respect."

"In June 2012, the International Labour Organization's (ILO) Employers' group dramatically challenged the right to strike, interrupting usual proceedings within the organisation's annual International Labour Conference. Among their many arguments was the fact that the ILO's Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations did not have a mandate to interpret conventions and could not therefore interpret the existence of a right to strike in a convention that does not explicitly mention this right. This has widely been seen as an unprecedented crisis, but the fact is that the Employers have regularly voiced their opposition to the right to strike since 1989, and it is moreover intertwined with deep-rooted questions regarding interpretation within the ILO. In other words, the questions raised by the Employers long predate the current (so-called) crisis. At the same time, however, until 1989, the Employers not only supported the interpretations of the Committee of Experts, but also supported the interpretation of a right to strike. In order to get to grips with this apparent paradox, this article explores the historical and political circumstances surrounding the Employers' relationship with the right to strike within the ILO, highlighting how current events reflect a new position of power that is historically contingent, as well as a desire to reduce the ILO's influence."

"Die Auslegung von Verträgen ist im Allg. eine bekanntermaßen komplexe Angelegenheit im Völkerrecht. Besonders in der Internat. Arbeitsorganisation (ILO) ist dies eigentlich schon seit der Gründung im Jahre 1919 ein sensibles Thema, das im Laufe der Jahre immer wieder aufgetaucht ist und nun auch kürzlich wieder an Bedeutung gewonnen hat. Dabei ist besonders auffällig, dass es bei Auslegungsfragen in der ILO nicht nur um das Ergebnis von Auslegungen geht, sondern auch um die Klärung der dafür zuständigen Behörde. Letzteres ist überraschend, da in der ILO-Verfassung festgeschrieben ist, welches Gremium die Befugnis zur Auslegung der Verfassung und der Übereinkommen hat und welches Gremium geschaffen werden könnte, um Übereinkommen im Falle von diesbezüglichen Streitfällen oder Unklarheiten auszulegen. Genauer gesagt war Art. 37 der Verfassung bisher immer dieser Frage gewidmet.

Claire La Hovary: Article 37 of the ILO Constitution: an unattainable solution to the issue of interpretation?

Interpretation of treaties is a notorious complex affair in public international law generally. It is a very sensitive topic in the International Labour Organisation (ILO) in particular and has in fact been a long standing issue within the Organization since its inception in 1919, one that has resurfaced regularly over the years, and again, very recently. What is striking about the issue surrounding interpretation in the ILO is that it concerns not only the result of interpretations but also the question of the authority to proceed to interpretations. This latter aspect is surprising because the ILO's Constitution is clear as to which body has the authority to interpret the Constitution and conventions and which body could be created to interpret conventions in case of dispute or questions in this regard. More specifically, it has always been given that Article 37 of the Constitution answers this question."