Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
Law & Social Bounds

Articles

No. 2 (2024): Prawo i Więź Nr 2 (49) 2024

Unijne podejście do eksponowania przez zatrudnionych symboli religijnych w miejscu pracy

DOI
https://doi.org/10.36128/PRIW.VI49.513
Submitted
August 29, 2022
Published
2024-05-24

Abstract

Abstract

EU Approach to Display of Religious Symbols in the Workplace by Employees

The author analyzes the judgments of the Court of Justice of the European Union concerning the principle of treatment, the prohibition of displaying any visible religious, ideological and religious symbols in the workplace. It determines that the introduction of internal legal regulations by entrepreneurs prohibiting the wearing of visible religious, ideological and political symbols in the workplace shall not be considered as cases of direct discrimination on the basis of the above-mentioned criteria: religion, belief and politics. A necessary condition for the effectiveness of in-company regulation is that employers apply it to employees in a general manner and without distinction. Different indirect treatment of employees due to religion and religious beliefs, is justified by the intention of the entrepreneur to conduct towards clients and users is the policy of religious, ideological and political neutrality. Indirect discrimination in matters of religion, belief and politics may be justified in the workplace when the prohibitions introduced by the entrepreneur prohibited all visible forms of expressing religious, ideological and political beliefs. Direct discrimination based on religion, world view and politics may be sanctioned by the employer when it is more conspicuous. When establishing the standards for the protection of religious freedom, one should take into account the possibility of using national provisions for the protection of religious freedom, more favorable than the EU protection rules.

    

Key words: permissibility of wearing religious symbols in the workplace, direct and indirect discrimination, politics, religion, worldview, policy of neutrality, symbols, internal rules of the workplace, prohibitions on wearing Islamic headscarves

References

  1. Calderwood Norton Jane, Freedom of Religious Organizations. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016.
  2. Chakim M. Lutfi, „The Margin of Appreciation and Freedom of Religion: Assessing Standards of the European Court of Human Rights” The International Journal of Human Rights, nr 6 (2020): 850-867.
  3. Classen Claus Ditier, „Das kirchliche Arbeitsrecht unter europäischem Druck – Anmerkungen zu den Urteilen des EuGH (jeweils GK) vom 17 April 2018 in der Rs. C-414/16 (Egenberger) und vom 11 September 2018 in der Rs. C-68/17 (IR)” Europarecht, (2018): 752-767.
  4. Chalkiadaki Vasiliki, „L’Affaire du Foulard Islamique a l'Ecole: L'ecole Laique en Crise” Freiburg Law Students Journal, (2010).
  5. Cloots Elke, „Safe harbour or open sea for corporate headscarf bans? Achbita and Bougnaoui” Common Market Law Review, t. LV (2018): 589-624.
  6. Cranmer Frank, „Hijabs in the CJEU again: SCRL” Law & Religion UK, 14 października 2022. https://lawandreligionuk.com/2022/10/14/hijabs-in-the-cjeu-again-scrl/.
  7. Greiner Stefan, „Kirchliche Loyalitätsobliegenheiten nach dem, ‘IR’-Urteil des EuGH” Neue Zeitschrift für Arbeitsrecht, (2018): 1289-1294.
  8. Howard Erica, „Islamic Headscarves and the CJEU: Achbita and Bougnaoui” Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law, t. III (2017): 348-366.
  9. Evelyn Ellis, Philippa Watson, EU Anti-Discrimination Law, 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012.
  10. Keuchenius Anna, „Intersectionality on the go: The Diffusion of Black Feminist Knowledge Across Disciplinary and Geographical Borders” British Journal of Sociology, nr 2 (2021): 360-378.
  11. Laborde Christine, „State Paternalism and Religious Dress Code” International Journal of Constitutional Law, (2012): 398-410.
  12. Loenen Titia, „In search of an EU approach to headscarf bans: where to go after Achbita and Bougnaoui?” Review of European Administrative Law, nr 2 (2017): 47-73.
  13. O'Sullivan Michael, „Religion, Modernity, and Democracy in Central Europe: Toward a Gendered History of Twentieth-Century Catholicism” Central European History, 4 (2019): 713-730.
  14. Radford Reuther R., „Sexism and Misogyny in the Christian Tradition: Liberating Alternatives” Buddhist-Christian Studies, nr 1 (2014): 83-94.
  15. Rivers Julian, The Law of Organized Religions: Between Establishment and Secularism. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010.
  16. Ronline TCL, „The False Neutrality of Anti-Intersectional Interpretation” Trinity College Law Review. https://trynitycollegelawreview.org.
  17. Salem Sara, „Feminist Critique and Islamic Feminism: The Question of Intersectionality” The Postcolonial Journal, (2013).
  18. Seedat Fatima, „Islam, Feminism, and Islamic Feminism: Between Inadequacy and Inevitability” Journal of Feminist Studies in Religion, t. XXIX (2013): 25-45.
  19. Thiel Marcus, Understanding Diversity In The European Integration Project. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009.
  20. Weiler Joseph H.H., „Je sui Achbita: à propos d’un arrêt de la Cour de justice de l’ Union européenne sur le hijab mudulman (CJUE 14 mars 2017, aff. C-157/15” Revue trimestrielle de droit européen, (2019): 85-104.
  21. Zuther David Antonio, „The Headscarf Debate Returns to Luxembourg. A Second Chance for Religious Freedom?” LSE Law Review, nr 1 (2021). https://lawreview.lse.ac.uk.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.