Bibliographie sélective OHADA

The obsession with looks is predominant in our societies. The question of looks-based (weight, height, general attractiveness, attire, hair style, hygiene, piercings or tattoos, .. ) discrimination or lookism in the workplace is a multi-disciplinary question in relation to legal, social, ethical psychological, and business-related aspects, having a global and historical impact. Stereotypes are directly reflected in the job market (mainly in recruitment, salaries, promotion and firing). Has an employer the right to only hire tall and thin woman, to prohibit piercing or jogging or even (fire a woman for being too 'attractive'? In which cases and jobs? Should we legally prohibit lookism? How can the law and case law create a balance between the rights and liberties at stake? This thesis will shed the light on (i) the international, European, French and American (federal, sta1 and local) legal framework; (ii) major obstacles to a lookism-prohibition (difficulty of proof subjectivity, absence of a defined legal category; the employers' counter-arguments, ...), (iii) the reactions of American and French case law; and (iv) will conceive an ideal law, in balance between the rights and interests at hand. One question arises : is the law sufficient by itself? Does society changes the laws or is it the other way around?

Les discriminations à l'embauche, qui consistent en le refus pour un employeur de recruter un ou plusieurs candidats pourtant compétents sur le fondement de considérations non-objectives prohibées par la loi française, portent atteinte au principe d'égalité de traitement entre les individus cher à la République. C'est la raison pour laquelle, depuis quelques années maintenant, on assiste à la mise en place d'un ensemble de mesures destinées à lutter contre le phénomène discriminatoire lors de l'embauche. Ce vaste ensemble de mesures constitue ce qu'on appelle la politique criminelle de lutte contre les discriminations à l'embauche. S'y intéresser, objet du présent travail de thèse, c'est se poser et répondre à la question de savoir si l'ensemble des moyens mis en œuvre en France aujourd'hui pour lutter contre le phénomène discriminatoire spécifié permettent effectivement d'y répondre avec pertinence. Autrement dit, la politique criminelle de lutte contre les discriminations à l'embauche, telle qu'envisagée et conçue aujourd'hui dans notre pays, permet-elle de maîtriser, voire même d'enrayer, les pratiques discriminatoires énoncées ? Pour y parvenir, nous procédons ici à une analyse critique des mécanismes et procédés mis en place par les acteurs œuvrant pour la lutte contre les discriminations à l'embauche. Aussi, notre analyse s'organise autour des deux volets constitutifs de cette politique criminelle que sont le volet répressif et d'aide aux victimes, ainsi que le volet préventif.

L’unité économique et sociale, communément appelée « UES » est une pure création jurisprudentielle. Elle est apparue au début des années 1970 afin de mettre fin à la fraude de certains employeurs qui entendaient scinder leur société en de petites sociétés pour éviter la mise en place des institutions représentatives du personnel. Ces petites structures étaient alors considérées par le juge comme formant une seule et même entreprise pour la représentation du personnel puisque la même personne dirigeait une communauté de travail laquelle travaillait autour de la même activité. Utilisée rapidement en dehors des seules hypothèses de fraude, l’UES s’est également émancipée du droit de la représentation salariale. Ce travail d’émancipation est essentiellement le fruit de la jurisprudence, le législateur ayant très peu légiféré sur l’UES. Les relations collectives de travail essentiellement et les relations individuelles de travail dans une moindre mesure sont ainsi devenues accessibles à l’UES. Jusqu’au début des années 2000, la doctrine était très enthousiaste sur la notion d’UES et estimait même que l’UES devait être considérée comme l’entreprise en droit du travail. Aujourd’hui, cet élan est quelque peu retombé. L’UES est constituée de plusieurs personnes juridiques, lesquelles gardent leurs caractéristiques propres malgré la reconnaissance de l’UES. L’application de l’UES dans l’ensemble des domaines du droit du travail apparaît alors aujourd’hui inenvisageable. Mais, pour autant, l’UES constitue l’un des périmètres sociaux de l’entreprise en droit du travail. Il s’agira alors de savoir quelle place doit être conférée à l’UES en droit du travail.

The use of temporary employment services as a means to achieve flexibility in die labour market led to various complications due to a lack of proper regulation. The atypical formation of the triangular employment relationship, limited rights and less favourable employment conditions of the temporary employees, multiple authority figures and their liabilities under various circumstances and the impact thereof on such employee’ collective bargaining rights caused legal uncertainty in the absence of sufficient legislation to govern it. Temporary employment agencies developed certain methods in order to evade the restrictive labour legislation and employer duties imposed on them, namely by making use of automatic termination clauses (resolutive conditions) and by categorising the temporary employee as an independent contractor. Last mentioned would effectively exclude the temporary employee from labour legislation and the protection it provides. In reaction to abovementioned problems, trade unions have been objecting to the use of temporary employment agencies and went as far as demanding the total ban thereof. This raised the question in the South African Government whether said agencies should indeed be banned. The other option is a less restrictive approach and entails the attempt to regulate these agencies by amending the current labour legislation in order to accommodate temporary employment services. In light of the fact that various proposals to amend the current South African labour legislation (especially with regard to temporary employment services) have been published in the Government Gazette, it can be deduced that the social partners ultimately chose to regulate temporary employment agencies rather than ban them altogether. From an early stage the International Labour Organisation (ILO) provided rules and regulations for the management of employment agencies in general by way of conventions and recommendations. In 1997, in order to give effect to the labour standards identified by it, the ILO brought the Private Employment Agencies Convention into existence. This document could be applied to all temporary employment agencies on an international level. This document provides for administrative regulations, the duties of the agency and the client as well as the rights of the temporary employees concerned. The ILO recommends that all of its member states incorporate the principles contained within this document in their own legislation. Temporary employment services are also used in other legal systems. For purposes of this study, the English law (United Kingdom (UK)) and the Namibian law will be scrutinised. Similar issues to those recognised in the South African law have been identified in these countries. However, each has approached said problems in different ways. The Namibian Government banned the conducting and provision of these services by way of legislation in 2007. The constitutionality of the ban has however been questioned by the Supreme Court of Namibia, after which it had been found to infringe upon the fundamental freedom to carry on any business, trade or occupation. The ban was struck down as unconstitutional. The Namibian Government has since promulgated new legislation in which it removed the ban and replaced it with numerous amendments providing for the regulation of temporary employment services. Since 1973 the UK has been promulgating various instruments for the thorough regulation of temporary employment agencies. These instruments provide for the management of temporary employment agencies and the rights of the employees involved. The relevant legislative instruments have been updated regularly with the purpose of ensuring that the needs of all the parties concerned are met. The UK, as a member state of the European Union (EU), (which has also been providing for the regulation of temporary employment services in various directives), promulgated legislation specifically with the aim to give effect to the principles in the mentioned directives. By way of doctrines and the creation of a third category ―worker‖ the UK has been attempting to prevent any loopholes in their legal system with regard to temporary employment services and the rights of the employees involved. The aim of this study is to investigate all the important complications experienced with temporary employment agencies in order to indicate the impact the atypical circumstances have on the rights of the temporary employees. The degree to which, if at all, the South African law complies with the preferred labour standards identified by the ILO will be pointed out. A comparative study will be conducted, first by ascertaining in detail how the comparable issues in the UK and Namibian law are dealt with, and second by identifying which aspects in these legal systems could be of value to the South African law. Finally the potential effectiveness of the proposed amendments to the South African labour legislation will be analysed, during which recommendations for the unresolved issues will be provided. The recommendations are mainly aimed at achieving sufficient rights and legal certainty for the temporary employees associated with temporary employment agencies.

The objectives of this research paper are: to examine the status of collective agreements under the common law; highlight impacts of statutory intervention on common law perception of collective agreements, and discuss how the National industrial Court (NIC) and the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as altered) have broadened the horizon of enforceability of collective agreements in Nigeria. Reliance is placed principally on statutes, judicial decisions, textbooks written by learned authors as well as international best standard and practices championed by the International Labour Organization (ILO) and practices in some foreign jurisdictions. The findings of the research were that under the common law, collective agreements are ordinarily not binding, they are considered as a ‘gentleman's agreement‘, a product of a trade unionist's pressure, binding only in honour or on the goodwill of the parties thereto, unless and until it is incorporated expressly or impliedly into the contract of employment. However, statutory intervention has slightly altered the common law notion of collective agreements, e.g. where the Minister of Labour and Productivity is empowered to declare, by order, that part or the whole of an agreement deposited in his office is binding on the parties. Furthermore, with the enactment of the NIC Act and the listing of the NIC in the 1999 Constitution as a superior court of record (following the alteration of the Constitution, necessitated by the N.U.E.E. V BPE case), the Court now has exclusive jurisdiction to adjudicate on a wide range of labour matters, industrial relations and application of international best practices such as the standard and principles of the International Labour Organization (ILO), and practices in foreign jurisdictions. It has been argued that the enforceability of collective agreements is in tandem with international best practices, which the NIC can readily give effect to, if it is pleaded and established/ proved as a fact. This has invariability expanded the frontiers of enforceability of such agreements. Therefore, the common law position on the status of collective agreements has been rendered otiose and obsolete, giving way to the sparkling provisions of enforceability guaranteed by the NIC Act and the Constitution respectively. Notwithstanding, it is highly recommended that parties to a collective agreement should expressly state their intention whether or not to be bound; the duration of the agreement should be stated and whether, and when, it should, be reviewed; experts and other stakeholders should be properly consulted before an agreement is entered into; an arbitration clause may be included in case a party breaches its own part of the agreement. Industrial democracy ought to be promoted in all sectors. Strikes and lock outs should be used only as a last resort for enforcing compliance with a collective agreement, because these industrial actions cause devastating effects on the economy and on the lives of the citizenry generally.