MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4379622547 · doi:10.1353/iur.2016.a838432

Report: German Federal Labour Court orders compensation for illegal strike

2016· article· en· W4379622547 sur OpenAlex

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

aboutLe titre ou le résumé porte un signal canadien du lexique géographique.
no affAucune affiliation canadienne : ce travail est invisible pour une base fondée sur la seule affiliation.
Aucune affiliation canadienne. Une base fondée sur la seule affiliation (le devis habituel) n'aurait jamais vu ce travail. C'est l'un des travaux qui justifient l'inversion de la base.

Notice bibliographique

RevueInternational Union Rights · 2016
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineBusiness, Management and Accounting
ThématiqueCorporate Governance and Law
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésDamagesObligationPrincipal (computer security)LawGermanAction (physics)Political scienceCompensation (psychology)TortCollective actionLaw and economicsBusinessEconomicsHistoryLiabilityPoliticsComputer security

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

In its ruling of 26 July 2016, the German Federal Labour Court (Bundesarbeitsgericht, BAG) held1 that the Air Traffic Controllers Union (Gewerkschaft der Flugsicherung, GdF) has to pay FRAPORT AG high compensation (possibly euro 5 million) for the strike action it organised at Frankfurt Airport in February 2012. The exact amount of damages will now be determined by the Regional Labour Court of the State of Hesse (Landesarbeitsgericht Hessen, LAG). Contrary to the previous instances ruling in the principal proceedings, the BAG found the strike action to be illegal, as the obligation of the collective agreement to keep the industrial peace still applied to some of the union demands. The BAG did however dismiss the damage claims brought against the GdF in the same proceedings by third-party aviation companies for flights cancelled as a result of the collective action. In the previous instances, the Frankfurt/Main Labour Court (Arbeitsgericht Frankfurt am Main, ArbG) and the LAG had ruled that FRAPORT did not have any justified damage claims. Both previous instances were convinced that GdF would have undertaken the strike action at the same place, the same time, and with the same extent even without the ancillary demands violating its obligation to keep the industrial peace, so that the damage would also have occurred with a lawful alternative action by the GdF. Because of this lawful alternative action, GdF would therefore not be liable for the damages claimed by FRAPORT. In the principal proceedings, the previous instances had also dismissed the action insofar as it concerned the damage claims of thirdparty aviation companies, because – as the BAG afterwards confirmed in its final ruling – third parties may not claim damages from the trade union undertaking the strike, even if the strike was unlawful, as it did not constitute a direct intervention in their business activities. The BAG ruling of 26 July 2016, which has only been released as a press statement, constitutes another restriction of the unions’ right to collective action, insofar as it concerns the damage claims awarded to FRAPORT. According to the BAG press statement and contrary to the previous instances, the BAG did not uphold the principle of lawful alternative action, as it did not follow the GdF view that the same damages would have occurred in a strike action without any demands violating the obligation to keep the industrial peace2. The BAG decision is negative for the trade unions and illustrates the risk unions are exposed to in all their strikes. To enforce their bargaining claims and to exercise their right to free collective bargaining enshrined in Article 9 Section 3 of the German Constitution (Grundgesetz), trade unions depend on strike action. Even now, the German unions’ right to strike is subject to multiple restrictions starting with the rulings of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) in the cases of Viking/Laval3, on the employers’ option to be members of an employers’ association without being committed to a collective agreement (OT Membership)4, or the legitimacy of so-called ‘flash’ resignations/changes of membership to an OT membership5, or the requirement that a legitimate strike must have an objective which is suitable for regulation by collective agreement. Furthermore, the coverage of collective agreements has registered a downward trend for years; just short of one third of all companies in Germany are bound by collective agreements (West Germany: 31 percent; East Germany: 21 percent); these same companies employ close to 60 percent of all employees (East Germany: 49 percent)6. Further restrictions of the right to strike are therefore highly problematic. The BAG must be commended for confirming an earlier ruling of 2015 saying that third parties not involved in a strike action cannot claim damages from the striking trade union, as there is no relation of their intervention to the business of said third party. This means for the present case that there was no direct intervention in the business activities of the aviation companies suffering cancelled flights7. Background to the strike The BAG decision of July 2016 was based on the following events: the claimant company FRAPORT AG and GdF had concluded a bargaining agreement for the employees working in apron control and central air traffic...

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,881
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,731

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,001
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,014
Tête enseignante GPT0,249
Écart entre enseignants0,235 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle