European Union non-discrimination law and intersectionality:Investigating the triangle of racial, gender and disability discrimination

This book contributes to a critical reflection of current legislative and jurisprudential developments in Non-Discrimination Law, focusing on the European Union. The book is focused on intersectionality between gender, race and disability and the question of whether, and to what extent, this intersection can be adequately addressed in (EU) law. The discussion rests on two basic assumptions. First, the multiplication of 'discrimination grounds' in EU law and other legal regimes should not result in a dilution of the demands of equality law. Accordingly, the book focuses on the three key grounds - race, gender and disability. These constitute nodes around which other discrimination grounds can be grouped. Second, any multi-ground non-discrimination law framework needs to engage with the question of discrimination on several grounds. This book provides a critical evaluation of some of the problems presented by such intersectionality and an opportunity to explore the issues in depth. This collection offers some new proposals relating to the regrouping of identity categories and to the general approach to socio-legal research in the field. It also contains a comparative section, which expands on practical experiences with intersectionality and law, and a section dedicated to juridical responses to intersectionality.

The failure of Australian legislation on indirect discrimination to detect the systemic racism which prevents Aboriginal people from fully participating in the workforce

Government figures put the current indigenous unemployment rate at around 23%, 3 times the unemployment rate for other Australians. This thesis aims to assess whether Australian indirect discrimination legislation can provide a remedy for one of the causes of indigenous unemployment - the systemic discrimination which can result from the mere operation of established procedures of recruitment and hiring. The impact of those practices on indigenous people is examined in the context of an analysis of anti-discrimination legislation and cases from all Australian jurisdictions from the time of the passing of the Racial Discrimination Act by the Commonwealth in 1975 to the present. The thesis finds a number of reasons why the legislation fails to provide equality of opportunity for indigenous people seeking to enter the workforce. In nearly all jurisdictions it is obscurely drafted, used mainly by educated middle class white women, and provides remedies which tend to be compensatory damages rather than change to recruitment policy. White dominance of the legal process has produced legislative and judicial definitions of "race" and "Aboriginality" which focus on biology rather than cultural difference. In the commissions and tribunals complaints of racial discrimination are often rejected on the grounds of being "vexatious" or "frivolous", not reaching the required standard of proof, or not showing a causal connection between race and the conduct complained of. In all jurisdictions the cornerstone of liability is whether a particular employment term, condition or practice is reasonable. The thesis evaluates the approaches taken by appellate courts, including the High Court, and concludes that there is a trend towards an interpretation of reasonableness which favours employer arguments such as economic rationalism, the maintenance of good industrial relations, managerial prerogative to hire and fire, and the protection of majority rights. The thesis recommends that separate, clearly drafted legislation should be passed to address indigenous disadvantage and that indigenous people should be involved in all stages of the process.

Article 23: Equality between women and men

This analysis of Article 23 CFREU (Charter of Fundamental Rights for the European Union) argues that this provision can promote a more progressive understanding of gender equality then promoted by the European Court of Justice, in that it requires actual change in gender relations. It also finds shortcomings in that the EU conceptualises gender equality by relating women to men, thus falling short of providing a basis for women's rights.

Elitutbildning: en strategi för erkännande? : En studie om anti-diskrimineringsstrategier bland juriststudenter med ursprung i Mellanöstern

Elite Education: a strategy for recognition? A study on anti-discrimination strategies among law-students of Middle Eastern background While research show that individuals of foreign background are being discriminated against and stigmatized in Sweden, an increasing number of them still choose higher education and also show a tendency towards choosing an elite education. In this article, I examine if there is a link between experiences of discrimination and the choice of elite education. The study is based upon semi-structured interviews with five female and five male law students of Middle Eastern background. The findings show that discrimination, either against the students or their parents, has led to a high study motivation where the choice of elite education can be understood as an anti-discrimination strategy. Other anti-discrimination strategies are to resist a victim mentality and to destigmatize by challenging stereotypes. These anti-discrimination strategies can be understood as strategies for recognition, that is, striving for equality by being ascribed a positive status.

Disability Discrimination: Obesity and the Court of Justice of the European Union’s decision in Karsten Kaltoft v Billund Kommune Case C-354/13 ECJ

Walker and Karsten are two important decisions in disability discrimination law – not solely on the basis of their legal and practical repercussions for the United Kingdom (UK) and European Union (EU), respectively, but because they capture the very ideological spirit of domestic and European anti-discrimination legislation. The former directly relates to disability discrimination in the UK and the entire EU is feeling the brunt of the Court of Justice of the European Union’s decision in the latter. This article explores the impact of both these decisions and to what extent the obese or those suffering from a functional overlay are now protected from being discriminated against by the Framework Directive 2000/78 and the United Kingdom’s Equality Act 2010.

Equity in the twenty-first century

Issues of equity and inequity have always been part of employment relations and are a fundamental part of the industrial landscape. For example, in most countries in the nineteenth century and a large part of the twentieth century women and members of ethnic groups (often a minority in the workforce) were barred from certain occupations, industries or work locations, and received less pay than the dominant male ethnic group for the same work. In recent decades attention has been focused on issues of equity between groups, predominantly women and different ethnic groups in the workforce. This has been embodied in industrial legislation, for example in equal pay for women and men, and frequently in specific equity legislation. In this way a whole new area of law and associated workplace practice has developed in many countries. Historically, employment relations and industrial relations research has not examined employment issues disaggregated by gender or ethnic group. Born out of concern with conflict and regulation at the workplace, studies tended to concentrate on white, male, unionized workers in manufacturing and heavy industry (Ackers, 2002, p. 4). The influential systems model crafted by Dunlop (1958) gave rise to The discipline’s preoccupation with the ‘problem of order’ [which] ensures the invisibility of women, not only because women have generally been less successful in mobilizing around their own needs and discontents, but more profoundly because this approach identifies the employment relationship as the ultimate source of power and conflict at work (Forrest, 1993, p. 410). While ‘the system approach does not deliberately exclude gender . . . by reproducing a very narrow research approach and understanding of issues of relevance for the research, gender is in general excluded or looked on as something of peripheral interest’ (Hansen, 2002, p. 198). However, long-lived patterns of gender segregation in occupations and industries, together with discriminatory access to work and social views about women and ethnic groups in the paid workforce, mean that the employment experience of women and ethnic groups is frequently quite different to that of men in the dominant ethnic group. Since the 1980s, research into women and employment has figured in the employment relations literature, but it is often relegated to a separate category in specific articles or book chapters, with women implicitly or explicitly seen as the atypical or exceptional worker (Hansen, 2002; Wajcman, 2000). The same conclusion can be reached for other groups with different labour force patterns and employment outcomes. This chapter proposes that awareness of equity issues is central to employment relations. Like industrial relations legislation and approaches, each country will have a unique set of equity policies and legislation, reflecting their history and culture. Yet while most books on employment and industrial relations deal with issues of equity in a separate chapter (most commonly on equity for women or more recently on ‘diversity’), the reality in the workplace is that all types of legislation and policies which impact on the wages and working conditions interact, and their impact cannot be disentangled one from another. When discussing equity in workplaces in the twenty-first century we are now faced with a plethora of different terms in English. Terms used include discrimination, equity, equal opportunity, affirmative action and diversity with all its variants (workplace diversity, managing diversity, and so on). There is a lack of agreed definitions, particularly when the terms are used outside of a legislative context. This ‘shifting linguistic terrain’ (Kennedy-Dubourdieu, 2006b, p. 3) varies from country to country and changes over time even within the one country. There is frequently a division made between equity and its related concepts and the range of expressions using the term ‘diversity’ (Wilson and Iles, 1999; Thomas and Ely, 1996). These present dilemmas for practitioners and researchers due to the amount and range of ideas prevalent – and the breadth of issues that are covered when we say ‘equity and diversity in employment’. To add to these dilemmas, the literature on equity and diversity has become bifurcated: the literature on workplace diversity/management diversity appears largely in the business literature while that on equity in employment appears frequently in legal and industrial relations journals. Workplaces of the twenty-first century differ from those of the nineteenth and twentieth century not only in the way they deal with individual and group differences but also in the way they interpret what are fair and equitable outcomes for different individuals and groups. These variations are the result of a range of social conditions, legislation and workplace constraints that have influenced the development of employment equity and the management of diversity. Attempts to achieve employment equity have primarily been dealt with through legislative means, and in the last fifty years this legislation has included elements of anti-discrimination, affirmative action, and equal employment opportunity in virtually all OECD countries (Mor Barak, 2005, pp. 17–52). Established on human rights and social justice principles, this legislation is based on the premise that systemic discrimination has and/or continues to exist in the labour force and particular groups of citizens have less advantageous employment outcomes. It is based on group identity, and employment equity programmes in general apply across all workplaces and are mandatory. The more recent notions of diversity in the workplace are based on ideas coming principally from the USA in the 1980s which have spread widely in the Western world since the 1990s. Broadly speaking, diversity ideas focus on individual differences either on their own or in concert with the idea of group differences. The diversity literature is based on a business case: that is diversity is profitable in a variety of ways for business, and generally lacks a social justice or human rights justification (Burgess et al., 2009, pp. 81–2). Managing diversity is represented at the organizational level as a voluntary and local programme. This chapter discusses some major models and theories for equity and diversity. It begins by charting the history of ideas about equity in employment and then briefly discusses what is meant by equality and equity. The chapter then analyses the major debates about the ways in which equity can be achieved. The more recent ideas about diversity are then discussed, including the history of these ideas and the principles which guide this concept. The following section discusses both major frameworks of equity and diversity. The chapter then raises some ways in which insights from the equity and diversity literature can inform employment relations. Finally, the future of equity and diversity ideas is discussed.

Proportionality in Age Discrimination Cases - a Model Suitable for Socially Embedded Rights

This chapter discusses the use of proportionality in age discrimination cases before the Court of Justice of the European Union. It argues that the Court does not use this concept systematically - indeed it exposes some contradiction that make the case law seem arbitrary - and proposes a more fruitful use of the principle, which is in line with a modern conception of human rights. The chapter argues that the principle of proportionality stems from the time when human rights served the recently liberated burgeois elite in guarding their rights to property and liberty against the state. Today, states not only respect human rights (which is fully sufficient for this elite, who can rely on their inherited wealth to fend for themselves). They also protect and promote human rights, and these activities are a precondition for human rights to be practically relevant for the whole population. This also means that state activity, which is experienced as a limitation of rights to property and liberty by some, may constitute a measure to promote and protect human rights of others. In employment law - the only field where the EU ban on age discrimination is applied - this is a typical situation. If such a situation occurs, the principle of proportionality must be applied in a bifurcated way.It is not sufficient that the limitation of property rights is proportionate for the achievement of a public policy aim. If the aim of public policy is to enable the effective use of human rights, the limitation of the state action must be proportionate to the protection and promotion of those human rights. It is argued that the principle of proportionality is superior to less structures balancing acts (e.g. the Wednesbury principle), if it is applied both ways. Going over to the field of age discrimination, the chapter identifies a number of potentially colliding aims pursued in this field. Banning age discrimination may relate to genuine aims of anti-discrimination law if bias against older or very young workers is addressed. However, the EU ban of discrimination against all ages also serves to restructure employment law and policy to the age of flexibilisation, replacing the synchronisation principle that has been predominant for the welfare states of the 20th century. The former aim is related to human rights protection, while the latter aim is not (at least not always). This has consequences for applying the proportionality test. The chapter proposes different ways to argue the most difficult age discrimination cases, where anti-discrimination rationales and flexibilisation rationales clash

Comparative Law and European Harmonisation - a Match Made in Heaven or Uneasy Bedfellows?

Developing the controversy indicated in the heading, this article will proceed as follows. It establishes a notion of critical comparative law, by showing how comparative law may be capable of providing critique and analysis of law-making through judicial and legislative activity at a European level. This is followed by an exemplary discussion of how comparative law is actually used in relation to European harmonisation through case law, legislation and “soft law”. The question will then be asked whether and how these uses would change under a critical approach to comparative law. The discussion will focus on industrial relations and equality law.
In both fields, recent ECJ case law has proved controversial: This article submits that such controversy could partly be avoided by making better use of critical comparative law in deciding cases and in choosing adequate forms and content of legislation.

Igual consideração e respeito, independência ética e liberdade de expressão em Dworkin : uma reconciliação entre igualdade e liberdade e a possibilidade do discurso do ódio em um ordenamento coerente de princípios

Dissertação (mestrado)—Universidade de Brasília, Faculdade de Direito, Pós-Graduação Stricto Sensu em Direito, 2016.

Effects of disclosure of sexual identity at work for gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender and intersex (GLBTI) employees in Queensland

All Australian businesses are governed by legislation aiming to prevent workplace discrimination based on sexual orientation and sexual identity and serious penalties apply to companies found contravening legislation. While other Australian studies have examined these issues, Queensland has either not been included or relevant data is not easily identified. This paper presents the results of an exploratory study using a quantitative survey to determine the consequences of disclosure of a person’s sexual orientation or gender identity to colleagues in workplaces in Queensland. Results suggest GLBTI workers are disclosing their sexuality more and are experiencing more discrimination in the workplace, despite anti-discrimination policies. This suggests the need to further investigate companies’ compliance with workplace legislation.

The WTO, the national security exception and climate change

Article XX has been a valuable instrument to justify exceptions from the anti-discrimination provisions of the GATT 1994. In general, this Article is considered by experts to be the most likely defence for any climate change mitigation measure in breach GATT 1994 obligations. That assumption is not in dispute here; rather, this article considers the requirements of the Article XX exceptions, but also explores the conditions of the National Security exception contained in Article XXI. Although it is possible that this exception could be used for climate change mitigation measures, this paper argues that it is unlikely that the National Security exception could be legitimately applied in these circumstances without member agreement to the contrary.

Back to the future : prohibiting surrogacy for singles, same-sex and shorter-term heterosexual couples in Queensland

This article considers the regulatory position concerning altruistic surrogacy in Queensland, focusing on the intended changes to the current legal framework announced by the government in June 2012. The previous government had made significant progress by reforming surrogacy laws in 2010. However, that progress is at risk of being reversed. The proposed changes to the law would make it a criminal offence to enter into an altruistic surrogacy arrangement for certain individuals or couples. If enacted, the offence would only apply in altruistic surrogacy cases where the intended parent or parents are either single, in a same-sex relationship, or are in a heterosexual relationship of less than two years. Moreover, if enacted, the offence would apply extra-territorially. The authors argue that these changes represent a retrograde step for the law and urge the government to reconsider. This is based on the fact that they are out of step with current social attitudes, are contrary to the spirit of anti-discrimination laws, and that they are unjustified in terms of child welfare concerns.