Search results

Abstract
This article examines what kind of personal data disclosure may make it difficult to get employed and what kind of excessive (unlawful) data is collected when selecting candidates in Lithuania. The analysis reveals that there have been a number of justified complaints regarding the selection of employees via recruitment platforms and the provided application forms that specifically requested an excessive amount of information, or situations in which the conditions indicated in job listings were adapted to a specific circle of people, thus eliminating other potential candidates, such as persons of pre-retirement age, young families, persons with children, persons of a particular gender and similar groups of people. The purpose of this article is to identify methods of unlawful collection of personal data, as well as the types of requested personal data, the origin of which may lead to discrimination during the recruitment process in Lithuania. The article analyses the legality of documents requested from candidates, data collected from them by filling out application forms and providing preliminary or additional information during job interviews, or information gathered from former employers or social networks.

Annual leave is granted to employees in order for them to rest and regain their efficiency at work. Article 49 of the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania provides that every employed individual has the right to paid annual leave. For this right to be implemented, the employee should be paid for this period of leave. On 1 July 2017, the new Labour Code of the Republic of Lithuania came into effect. It not specified, how this right to annual leave should be implemented, but also provided for a new legal term – "leave pay" (lith. atostoginiai). This paper seeks to assess the peculiarities of payment for the annual leave after the reform of Lithuanian labor law taking into account the case law. It analyses component parts of leave pay, the rules of granting, prolonging and transferring of leave, as well as possibility of reimbursement for unused annual leave. This research was conducted using the usual methods for this type of research: systemic and document analysis, linguistic, logical and comparative. The paper takes into account the case law of the European Court of Justice interpreting the provisions of the Directive 2003/88/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 November 2003 concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time.

Annual leave is granted to employees in order for them to rest and regain their efficiency at work. Article 49 of the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania provides that every employed individual has the right to paid annual leave. For this right to be implemented, the employee should be paid for this period of leave. On 1 July 2017, the new Labour Code of the Republic of Lithuania came into effect. It not specified, how this right to annual leave should be implemented, but also provided for a new legal term – "leave pay" (lith. atostoginiai). This paper seeks to assess the peculiarities of payment for the annual leave after the reform of Lithuanian labor law taking into account the case law. It analyses component parts of leave pay, the rules of granting, prolonging and transferring of leave, as well as possibility of reimbursement for unused annual leave. This research was conducted using the usual methods for this type of research: systemic and document analysis, linguistic, logical and comparative. The paper takes into account the case law of the European Court of Justice interpreting the provisions of the Directive 2003/88/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 November 2003 concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time.

Not only labour relations have changed, but also the attitude towards work and labour relations, therefore, it requires new legal regulation. The possibility to reconcile work and family obligations, work at home, qualification development, seek a career and many other things might motivate more efficient and productive work, influence work quality and satisfy the concept of decent work. The concept of "Decent work," embedded in the Law on Support for Employment of the Republic of Lithuania (further—LSE) does not correspond to the concept of "Decent work" declared at the international and European Union level (further—EU), thus a lot of space for interpretation is left. However, consolidation of the concept of "Decent work" in the Labour Code of the Republic of Lithuania (further—LC) in principle would allow to implement the principle of balance between labour market flexibility and employment security (flexicurity). ; Pasikeitė ne tik darbo santykiai, bet ir pats požiūris į darbą, darbo santykius ir reikalauja kitokio jų teisinio reguliavimo. Galimybė suderinti darbą ir šeimos pareigas, dirbti namie, kelti kvalifikaciją ir daryti karjerą ir dar daug dalykų gali motyvuoti našiam ir produktyviam darbui, darbo kokybei, kas gali atitikti ir tinkamo darbo sampratą. Tinkamo darbo sąvoka įtvirtinta Lietuvos Respublikos užimtumo rėmimo įstatyme neatitinka tarptautiniu ir Europos Sąjungos lygiu deklaruojamos tinkamo darbo sampratos, todėl palieka daug vietos interpretacijai. Tačiau tinkamo darbo sąvokos įtvirtinimas Lietuvos Respublikos darbo kodekse kaip pagrindas leistų įgyvendinti lankstumo ir užimtumo saugumo pusiausvyros (angl.– flexicurity) principą.

Special "flexicurity" (English compound from "flexibility" and "security") term has been used since the middle of the 1990's. Most authors think that this phenomenon should be related to the success of Denmark and Netherlands, where after the enactment of appropriate acts (for example, "The Flexibility and Security Act" of the Netherlands and Act on the Distribution of Workers by Agents) and the operation of labor unions, the unemployment level was reduced significantly. However, as T. Wilthagen and F. Tros state, "flexicurity" is the first and most important concept/strategy in the employment policy as such and it has been applied in most of the states. Until 2006 this term has been discussed basically only among narrow academic layers. Nowadays, this term is included in the European Agenda, since, in 2006-2007 "flexicurity" became a fundamental element in the Europe-wide debates, first of all on employment policy and on social and economic policy overall. However, as a result of absence of corresponding conditions, the transition of the experience of Northern countries to other states was impossible. For example, there were no active labour unions, beneficial tax policy and etc. During two last decades one of the main objectives of European policy became a task to increase both labour market flexibility and the security of employees. Now used term "flexicurity" has obtained its real meaning only since 2006, when European Council noticed that European Employment Strategy enacted in 1997 did not bear any consolable results and decided to reform it. In 2007, after the establishment of Common Principles of Flexicurity, this topic evoked many scientific researches (T. Wilthagen, S. Bekker, S. Kloste, M. J. Huiskamp, K. J. Vos, Dale T. Mortensen and others) and other assessments. Latest scientific research was dedicated to the analysis of issues on "flexicurity" implementation, state practice and etc. However, there weren't a lot uch works, since too little time passed in order to see the effectiveness and change of the latter principles in the field of employment. The more especially as economic crisis of the world put a spoke in the wheel of both tendentious economic and employment development. [.] ; Europos Vadovų Taryba priėmė Užimtumo lankstumo ir saugumo garantijų bendruosius principus, padėsiančius valstybėms narėms įgyvendinti užimtumo politiką. ES valstybių narių neįpareigojantys dokumentai sukelia skirtingą užimtumo lankstumo ir saugumo sampratos interpretaciją. Šiame straipsnyje siekiama atskleisti flexicurity sampratą bei lankstumo ir saugumo pusiausvyros įgyvendinimo galimybes Lietuvoje. Taip pat nagrinėjami teisinio reguliavimo ypatumai nustatant lankstumo ir saugumo santykį bei valstybės vaidmuo įtvirtinant jį, pateikti siūlymai dėl lankstumo ir saugumo derinimo plėtojant Lietuvos užimtumo politiką.

ABSTRACT
This article assesses the significance of social partnership in the regulation of employment relations. It is pointed out that the legal regulation of employment relations in Lithuania lacks stability, and the hypothesis is raised that this situation has been partly determined by the vanishing, negligible role of social partnership. The presumption is put forward that the regulation of employment relations can result in an effective and sustainable balance between the interests of employees and employers only if the possibilities of social partnership are used to their full extent and an optimal balance is achieved between contractual law-making and state law-making. The Lithuanian social partnership model is defined as gravitating from quasipartnership towards real social partnership; therefore, ways are still being sought as to how to strengthen the impact of social partnership on the regulation of employment relations by means of legislation and the use of soft law. To reveal the impact of social partnership on the regulation of employment relations in Lithuania, the article identifies and assesses the key indicators revealing the influence of social partnership on the regulation of employment relations and examines the positive legal regulation related to social partnership.

Abstract
Freedom to provide services and free movement of workers are linked to the processes of permanent intra-EU migration, which are regulated, inter alia, by the national legislation implementing PWD. Consequently, the posting of workers within EU is not only part of the work organization process, but also part of a wider phenomenon of internal migration of workers. Accordingly, posted workers are to be considered as internal labour migrants. The regulation of the posting of workers must consider the legitimate interest of Member States in protecting their markets from social dumping as well as ensure minimum guarantees for posted workers. These circumstances presuppose changes in the regulation of the posting of workers. This article identifies four stages in the transposition of PWD into Lithuanian national law that are causally related to changes in European legislation and Lithuanian labour law reform as of 2017. It presents the legal assessment of national legal regulation and case law, identifying the related legal problems. The article pays special attention to the legal regulation of the remuneration of a posted worker, established by PWD (Directive 96/71/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on 16 December 1996 concerning the posting of workers in the framework of the provision of services (Official Journal (EU), 2004, no. L 18) [Directive 96/71/EC], with the amendments introduced by Directive 2014/67/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council from 15 May 2014 on the enforcement of Directive 96/71/EC concerning the posting of workers in the framework of the provision of services and amending Revision 4 of the EU Posting of Workers Directive Regulation (EU) No 1024/2012 on administrative cooperation through the Internal Market Information System ('the IMI Regulation') (Official Journal (EU), 2014, no. L 159) [Directive 2014/67/EU] and Directive 2018/957/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council on June 2018 amending Directive 96/71/EC concerning the posting of workers in the framework of the provision of services (Official Journal (EU), 2018, no. L 173) [Directive 2018/957/EU]). It also explains the impact on the regulation of employment relations for posted workers in Lithuania stemming from Directive 2019/1152 on transparent and predictable working conditions in the EU.

Freedom to provide services and free movement of workers are linked to the processes of permanent intra-EU migration, which are regulated, inter alia, by the national legislation implementing PWD. Consequently, the posting of workers within EU is not only part of the work organization process, but also part of a wider phenomenon of internal migration of workers. Accordingly, posted workers are to be considered as internal labour migrants. The regulation of the posting of workers must consider the legitimate interest of Member States in protecting their markets from social dumping as well as ensure minimum guarantees for posted workers. These circumstances presuppose changes in the regulation of the posting of workers. This article identifies four stages in the transposition of PWD into Lithuanian national law that are causally related to changes in European legislation and Lithuanian labour law reform as of 2017. It presents the legal assessment of national legal regulation and case law, identifying the related legal problems. The article pays special attention to the legal regulation of the remuneration of a posted worker, established by PWD (Directive 96/71/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on 16 December 1996 concerning the posting of workers in the framework of the provision of services (Official Journal (EU), 2004, no. L 18) [Directive 96/71/EC], with the amendments introduced by Directive 2014/67/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council from 15 May 2014 on the enforcement of Directive 96/71/EC concerning the posting of workers in the framework of the provision of services and amending Revision 4 of the EU Posting of Workers Directive Regulation (EU) No 1024/2012 on administrative cooperation through the Internal Market Information System ('the IMI Regulation') (Official Journal (EU), 2014, no. L 159) [Directive 2014/67/EU] and Directive 2018/957/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council on June 2018 amending Directive 96/71/EC concerning the posting of workers in the framework of the provision of services (Official Journal (EU), 2018, no. L 173) [Directive 2018/957/EU]). It also explains the impact on the regulation of employment relations for posted workers in Lithuania stemming from Directive 2019/1152 on transparent and predictable working conditions in the EU.

Annual leave is granted to employees in order for them to rest and to regain efficiency at work. In accordance with Article 31 (2) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and Article 7 of the Directive 2003/88/EB of the European Parliament and of the Council regarding certain aspects of work time organization (Working Time Directive), employers must guarantee employees at least 4 [work] weeks of paid annual leave. Furthermore, Article 49 of the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania maintains that every employed individual has the right to paid annual leave. The question arises whether this type of constitutional right can be absolute and if, as a result, employees are able to exercise their discretion to decide for themselves how to use this right. Can employers decide to grant or refuse to grant leave based on their own discretion? This article aims to address the content of the right to paid annual leave and its implementation details. In particular, it seeks to verify the extent to which an employee or an employer can affect the implementation of such a right.

Annual leave is granted to employees in order for them to rest and to regain efficiency at work. In accordance with Article 31 (2) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and Article 7 of the Directive 2003/88/EB of the European Parliament and of the Council regarding certain aspects of work time organization (Working Time Directive), employers must guarantee employees at least 4 [work] weeks of paid annual leave. Furthermore, Article 49 of the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania maintains that every employed individual has the right to paid annual leave. The question arises whether this type of constitutional right can be absolute and if, as a result, employees are able to exercise their discretion to decide for themselves how to use this right. Can employers decide to grant or refuse to grant leave based on their own discretion? This article aims to address the content of the right to paid annual leave and its implementation details. In particular, it seeks to verify the extent to which an employee or an employer can affect the implementation of such a right.

Annual leave is granted to employees in order for them to rest and to regain efficiency at work. In accordance with Article 31 (2) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and Article 7 of the Directive 2003/88/EB of the European Parliament and of the Council regarding certain aspects of work time organization (Working Time Directive), employers must guarantee employees at least 4 [work] weeks of paid annual leave. Furthermore, Article 49 of the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania maintains that every employed individual has the right to paid annual leave. The question arises whether this type of constitutional right can be absolute and if, as a result, employees are able to exercise their discretion to decide for themselves how to use this right. Can employers decide to grant or refuse to grant leave based on their own discretion? This article aims to address the content of the right to paid annual leave and its implementation details. In particular, it seeks to verify the extent to which an employee or an employer can affect the implementation of such a right.

Just as we never get a second chance to make a good first impression, we may equally be deprived of a unique chance to act both as witnesses and evaluators of the centennial after regaining the independence of the Republic of Lithuania if we fail to review and assess this period. Therefore, we have to seize the opportunity and reflect upon the twisting path of our history since regaining the independence of the state until the current situation. The centennial development of law cannot be disembodied from the story of state's development. One can treat law both as a pathfinder and as a legal guide of the state; however it can likewise be applied as an instrument to solely ensure proper functioning of the state. Creating an effective system of law is not a one-day project; it is the process requiring deliberation, constant effort and deep awareness, otherwise the system will be doomed to failure or malfunctioning. Every state or nation is believed to deserve such a legal system as the efforts that the state puts to ascertain and develop it. The centennial period since the restoration of the independence of the Republic of Lithuania can unmistakably be described as a unique one: on the one hand the state was faced with the challenges of restoration and creation in various areas of the state and the society; it later experienced the loss of independence and survived 50 years of occupation; it eventually restored an independent state and was repeatedly faced with fresh challenges of re-establishing a historically-literate, well-structured and well-functioning state-governance system in both national and international levels. On the other hand, the technological and communications progress intensified the recent hundred years to such an extent that it clearly outdistances any previous centennials. Advancement of information technologies intensifies our time, our law, while huge amounts of information and its immense spread accelerate the pace of our life and our history. New forms of social relations and new branches of law emerge all in need of proper legal regulation. The study "The Development of the Lithuanian Law within the Period of 1918-2018: the Centennial Experience and Prospects" is a result of joint research efforts of more than 50 outstanding lawyers representing different areas of law from Mykolas Romeris University, Vytautas Magnus University, and Vilnius University. The study, dedicated to the Centennial of Lithuanian statehood due in 2018, presents the results of scientific research on legal science and major branches of law, covering the period of 1918-beginning of 2018 (information presented in the study covers a period until end-2017); it reflects upon the centennial development of Lithuanian law, discusses its major characteristics, tendencies and preconditions of their formation; it examines its influence on the state and state authorities and envisages possible impact on the development of law in the future. The Lithuanian law of 1918-2018 is analysed from the perspective of three statehood periods. 1918-1940 is the period when the independence of the Republic of Lithuania was declared, the groundwork for the statehood was laid and an independent legal system was being established. 1940- 1990 denotes the period of occupation, when the authentic legal system of Lithuania was destroyed and the Soviet legal system was forcibly entrenched. The latter was based on socialist ideology and the superiority of governmental authority over the civil society. It is not easy to evaluate the span of 1990- 2018 as the impartial assessment of it is seriously hindered by the authors' partial attitude towards the existing surrounding phenomena. [.]

Just as we never get a second chance to make a good first impression, we may equally be deprived of a unique chance to act both as witnesses and evaluators of the centennial after regaining the independence of the Republic of Lithuania if we fail to review and assess this period. Therefore, we have to seize the opportunity and reflect upon the twisting path of our history since regaining the independence of the state until the current situation. The centennial development of law cannot be disembodied from the story of state's development. One can treat law both as a pathfinder and as a legal guide of the state; however it can likewise be applied as an instrument to solely ensure proper functioning of the state. Creating an effective system of law is not a one-day project; it is the process requiring deliberation, constant effort and deep awareness, otherwise the system will be doomed to failure or malfunctioning. Every state or nation is believed to deserve such a legal system as the efforts that the state puts to ascertain and develop it. The centennial period since the restoration of the independence of the Republic of Lithuania can unmistakably be described as a unique one: on the one hand the state was faced with the challenges of restoration and creation in various areas of the state and the society; it later experienced the loss of independence and survived 50 years of occupation; it eventually restored an independent state and was repeatedly faced with fresh challenges of re-establishing a historically-literate, well-structured and well-functioning state-governance system in both national and international levels. On the other hand, the technological and communications progress intensified the recent hundred years to such an extent that it clearly outdistances any previous centennials. Advancement of information technologies intensifies our time, our law, while huge amounts of information and its immense spread accelerate the pace of our life and our history. New forms of social relations and new branches of law emerge all in need of proper legal regulation. The study "The Development of the Lithuanian Law within the Period of 1918-2018: the Centennial Experience and Prospects" is a result of joint research efforts of more than 50 outstanding lawyers representing different areas of law from Mykolas Romeris University, Vytautas Magnus University, and Vilnius University. The study, dedicated to the Centennial of Lithuanian statehood due in 2018, presents the results of scientific research on legal science and major branches of law, covering the period of 1918-beginning of 2018 (information presented in the study covers a period until end-2017); it reflects upon the centennial development of Lithuanian law, discusses its major characteristics, tendencies and preconditions of their formation; it examines its influence on the state and state authorities and envisages possible impact on the development of law in the future. The Lithuanian law of 1918-2018 is analysed from the perspective of three statehood periods. 1918-1940 is the period when the independence of the Republic of Lithuania was declared, the groundwork for the statehood was laid and an independent legal system was being established. 1940- 1990 denotes the period of occupation, when the authentic legal system of Lithuania was destroyed and the Soviet legal system was forcibly entrenched. The latter was based on socialist ideology and the superiority of governmental authority over the civil society. It is not easy to evaluate the span of 1990- 2018 as the impartial assessment of it is seriously hindered by the authors' partial attitude towards the existing surrounding phenomena. [.]