Research Handbook on Transnational Labour Law
Show Less

Research Handbook on Transnational Labour Law

Edited by Adelle Blackett and Anne Trebilcock

The editors’ substantive introduction and the specially commissioned chapters in the Handbook explore the emergence of transnational labour law as a field, along with its contested contours. The expansion of traditional legal methods, such as treaties, is juxtaposed with the proliferation of contemporary alternatives such as indicators, framework agreements and consumer-led initiatives. Key international and regional institutions are studied for their coverage of such classic topics as freedom of association, equality, and sectoral labour standard-setting, as well as for the space they provide for dialogue. The volume underscores transnational labour law’s capacity to build bridges, including on migration, climate change and development.
Buy Book in Print
Show Summary Details
You do not have access to this content

Chapter 22: The ILO’s supervisory bodies’ ‘soft law jurisprudence’

Claire La Hovary


At the June 2012 session of the ILO’s International Labour Conference (ILC), the Employers’ Group took the unprecedented step of causing the proceedings of the Committee on the Application of Standards to come to a standstill. They did so in the context of their long-standing opposition to the pronouncements of the Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations (CEACR) regarding the right to strike. Their actions can also be understood as reflecting an underlying concern about the legal effect of the CEACR’s work, however. In particular, the Employers’ Group is worried that in recent years, the CEACR’s ‘observations [are] being viewed by the outside world as a form of soft law labour standards jurisprudence.’ This chapter considers what is meant by ‘soft law jurisprudence’ by first examining what is meant by ‘jurisprudence’ and by ‘soft law’ in international law, before then turning to the legal effects of the CEACR’s comments. It highlights how the CEACR’s guidance may have increased with the growing attention that domestic legal orders have exhibited toward international law, whether binding or non-binding, and with the increased mention of (vague) international labour standards in initiatives taken outside the ILO. Employers wish to avoid seeing CEACR pronouncements crystallize into hard law on a broad scale, or have a broader influence, yet this is something that is beyond the CEACR’s control. The Employers’ explicit fear of the CEACR’s growing influence have led them to attack not only the interpretation of the right to strike, but the entire ILO supervisory system, and this may ultimately have broader consequence for the influence – and even the existence – of international labour standards.

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.

Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

Further information

or login to access all content.