Advanced

Åldersdiskriminering - Berättigad särbehandling på grund av ålder enlig 2 kap. 2 § 4 DiskL och dess förenlighet med principen om likabehandling och icke-diskriminering

Östergren, Kenny (2016) JURM02 20161
Department of Law
Abstract (Swedish)
I DiskL regleras arbetsgivares möjligheter att beakta ålder i förhållande till arbetstagare och arbetssökande. Regleringen av arbetsgivarens handlingsutrymme har praktisk betydelse eftersom de flesta någon gång är aktiva på arbetsmarknaden och att ålder är universellt. Förbudet mot åldersdiskriminering beskär arbetsgivarens handlingsutrymme genom skyldigheten att inte beakta ålder vid beslut. Skyldigheten ger upphov till en korresponderande rättighet hos motparten att inte bli åldersdiskriminerad. Från diskrimineringsförbudet finns undantag för berättigad särbehandling.

Uppsatsens syfte har varit att fastställa arbetsgivarens handlingsutrymme i detta avseende genom att utreda omfattningen av undantaget för berättigad särbehandling i 2... (More)
I DiskL regleras arbetsgivares möjligheter att beakta ålder i förhållande till arbetstagare och arbetssökande. Regleringen av arbetsgivarens handlingsutrymme har praktisk betydelse eftersom de flesta någon gång är aktiva på arbetsmarknaden och att ålder är universellt. Förbudet mot åldersdiskriminering beskär arbetsgivarens handlingsutrymme genom skyldigheten att inte beakta ålder vid beslut. Skyldigheten ger upphov till en korresponderande rättighet hos motparten att inte bli åldersdiskriminerad. Från diskrimineringsförbudet finns undantag för berättigad särbehandling.

Uppsatsens syfte har varit att fastställa arbetsgivarens handlingsutrymme i detta avseende genom att utreda omfattningen av undantaget för berättigad särbehandling i 2 kap. 2 § 4 DiskL samt att etablera en utgångspunkt för en vidare de lege ferenda diskussion genom att relatera dess innebörd till principen om likabehandling och icke-diskriminering. Syftet har uppnåtts genom utredningen av de lege lata avseende 2 kap. 2 § 4 DiskL samt innebörden av principen för att sedan avgöra huruvida dessa är förenliga med varandra. Genomförandet har skett genom användandet av den rättsdogmatiska metoden vilken inkluderar krav på transparens och ett kritiskt förhållningssätt.

I uppsatsen har konstaterats att principens innebörd är beroende av kontext vilket resulterade i valet att använda ett teoretiskt ramverk avseende dess innebörd bestående av fyra olika tolkningar. Tolkningarna samt principens innebörd som allmän rättsprincip inom EU-rätten ställdes sedan mot de lege lata avseende 2 kap. 2 § 4 DiskL. Av utredningen framkom att undantagsmöjligheterna för berättigad särbehandling är förhållandevis stora. Förutsättningarna för berättigandet är att de uppfyller kraven enligt den bedömningsmodell som utvecklats av EU-domstolen. 2 kap. 2 § 4 DiskL är med största sannolikhet förenlig med den allmänna rättsprincipen inom EU eftersom arbetslivsdirektivet, som den utgör ett införlivande av, anses utgöra en specifik tillämpning av sagda princip. Avseende dess förenlighet med de olika tolkningarna där principen utgår från en vidare kontext blev slutsatsen att den var förenlig med de tre minst restriktiva tolkningarna. Den fjärde och sista tolkningen, vars utveckling ännu är på ett tidigt stadium, erkänner antagligen inte så vida undantagsmöjligheter från direkt diskriminering på grund av ålder. Om en diskussion skulle föras de lege ferenda avseende 2 kap. 2 § 4 DiskL och med beaktan av den fjärde tolkningens innehåll skulle den förespråkade rättsutvecklingen sannolikt vara att ta bort möjligheterna att berättiga fall av direkt åldersdiskriminering. Min uppfattning är att en sådan rättsutveckling skulle förutsätta att förbudet mot åldersdiskriminering frikopplades från de ekonomiska motiv som historiskt har motiverat den och istället enbart motiverades av att det är en mänsklig rättighet att inte bli diskriminerad på grund av sin ålder. (Less)
Abstract
DiskL regulates the possibility for an employer to consider age in relation to workers and job seekers. The regulation of the employer's discretion has a practical importance because of the fact that everyone has an age, and that most people at some point participates in the labor market. The prohibition of age discrimination limits employer's discretion by restricting the use of the consideration of age in making decisions. This obligation gives rise to a corresponding right not to be discriminated because of age. But there are exceptions to this prohibition under which certain kinds of differences in treatment on grounds of age are justified.

The purpose of this thesis has been to determine the limits of employer's discretion in this... (More)
DiskL regulates the possibility for an employer to consider age in relation to workers and job seekers. The regulation of the employer's discretion has a practical importance because of the fact that everyone has an age, and that most people at some point participates in the labor market. The prohibition of age discrimination limits employer's discretion by restricting the use of the consideration of age in making decisions. This obligation gives rise to a corresponding right not to be discriminated because of age. But there are exceptions to this prohibition under which certain kinds of differences in treatment on grounds of age are justified.

The purpose of this thesis has been to determine the limits of employer's discretion in this regard by investigating the scope of the exemption in 2 c. 2 § 4 DiskL and to establish a basis for a further de lege ferenda discussion by relating its meaning to the principle of equal treatment and non-discrimination. The aim has been achieved through investigating of de lege lata relating to 2 c. 2 § 4 DiskL as well as the meaning of the principle, and then determine whether they are compatible with each other. The method used to achieve this purpose is the dogmatic legal method that includes requirements regarding transparency and a critical approach.

A conclusion made in the thesis is that the meaning of the principle is dependent upon context. From this a decision was made to use a theoretical framework consisting of four interpretations of its meaning. These interpretations and the meaning of the principle as a general principle in EU-law were then related to de lega lata regarding 2 c. § 4 DiskL. The investigation revealed that the scope of the exemption was relatively wide. The conditions under which the exemption is applicable are set by the assessment model developed in the case law of the CJEU. 2 c. 2 § 4 DiskL is with a high degree of certainty consistent with the principal as a general principle in EU-law. This conclusion is made on the fact that the directive it’s based upon is regarded as a specific application of the principle. Regarding its compatibility with the different interpretations of the principle in a wider context, laid down by the chosen theoretical framework. The conclusion was that it was compatible with the three least restrictive interpretations. The fourth and final interpretation, whose development is still at an early stage, is probably not compatible with the exemption possibilities regarding direct discrimination on grounds of age. If a de lege ferenda discussion regarding 2 c. 2 § 4 DiskL was held, under consideration of the content put forward by the fourth interpretation, the legal developments would likely entail removing the possibilities to justify cases of direct age discrimination. It is my opinion that such a legal development is unlikely unless the prohibition of age discrimination is decoupled from its economic justification and instead based on human rights arguments. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Östergren, Kenny
supervisor
organization
alternative title
Age discrimination - Justification of differences of treatment on grounds of age in 2 c. 2 § 4 DiskL and it's accordance with the the principle of equal treatment and non-discrimination
course
JURM02 20161
year
type
H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
subject
keywords
arbetsrätt, EU-rätt, åldersdiskriminering
language
Swedish
id
8872980
date added to LUP
2016-06-08 11:36:28
date last changed
2016-06-08 11:36:28
@misc{8872980,
  abstract     = {DiskL regulates the possibility for an employer to consider age in relation to workers and job seekers. The regulation of the employer's discretion has a practical importance because of the fact that everyone has an age, and that most people at some point participates in the labor market. The prohibition of age discrimination limits employer's discretion by restricting the use of the consideration of age in making decisions. This obligation gives rise to a corresponding right not to be discriminated because of age. But there are exceptions to this prohibition under which certain kinds of differences in treatment on grounds of age are justified.

The purpose of this thesis has been to determine the limits of employer's discretion in this regard by investigating the scope of the exemption in 2 c. 2 § 4 DiskL and to establish a basis for a further de lege ferenda discussion by relating its meaning to the principle of equal treatment and non-discrimination. The aim has been achieved through investigating of de lege lata relating to 2 c. 2 § 4 DiskL as well as the meaning of the principle, and then determine whether they are compatible with each other. The method used to achieve this purpose is the dogmatic legal method that includes requirements regarding transparency and a critical approach.

A conclusion made in the thesis is that the meaning of the principle is dependent upon context. From this a decision was made to use a theoretical framework consisting of four interpretations of its meaning. These interpretations and the meaning of the principle as a general principle in EU-law were then related to de lega lata regarding 2 c. § 4 DiskL. The investigation revealed that the scope of the exemption was relatively wide. The conditions under which the exemption is applicable are set by the assessment model developed in the case law of the CJEU. 2 c. 2 § 4 DiskL is with a high degree of certainty consistent with the principal as a general principle in EU-law. This conclusion is made on the fact that the directive it’s based upon is regarded as a specific application of the principle. Regarding its compatibility with the different interpretations of the principle in a wider context, laid down by the chosen theoretical framework. The conclusion was that it was compatible with the three least restrictive interpretations. The fourth and final interpretation, whose development is still at an early stage, is probably not compatible with the exemption possibilities regarding direct discrimination on grounds of age. If a de lege ferenda discussion regarding 2 c. 2 § 4 DiskL was held, under consideration of the content put forward by the fourth interpretation, the legal developments would likely entail removing the possibilities to justify cases of direct age discrimination. It is my opinion that such a legal development is unlikely unless the prohibition of age discrimination is decoupled from its economic justification and instead based on human rights arguments.},
  author       = {Östergren, Kenny},
  keyword      = {arbetsrätt,EU-rätt,åldersdiskriminering},
  language     = {swe},
  note         = {Student Paper},
  title        = {Åldersdiskriminering - Berättigad särbehandling på grund av ålder enlig 2 kap. 2 § 4 DiskL och dess förenlighet med principen om likabehandling och icke-diskriminering},
  year         = {2016},
}