Tort liability and employment law have a long and intertwined history. The "control test," initially used by English courts to determine employee status, originated in tort law. Employers can be held liable for damages caused by their employees to third parties and property, provided an employment relationship exists and the employee acted under the employer's control or direction. The evolution of tort liability has often mirrored developments in employment law. A crucial element in establishing employer liability is whether the individual who caused the damage was indeed an employee. This determination rests on the definition of "employee" as established by employment law. Civil courts adjudicating tort claims must interpret the Employment and Labor Law to ascertain the existence of an employment contract between the employer and the injured party. The court cannot apply a different standard for employee identification than the one defined in the Employment ...
The Ethiopian Labour Proclamation No. 1156/2011, while designed to govern employment relationships, has a defined scope of application, with certain categories of workers and situations excluded.
Defining "Employer": A Comparative Lens
Different countries adopt diverse approaches to defining "employer," reflecting their unique socio-economic contexts and labor policies.
- China: Uses a variety of designations (enterprise, individual economic organization, state organs, institutions, public organizations), each with potentially different legal implications. The applicability of specific labor laws may vary depending on the employer's designation.
The Ethiopian Approach: Broad Inclusion with Specific Exclusions
Ethiopia opts for a broad definition of "employer," encompassing all for-profit and non-profit organizations, including administrative bodies. However, this broad inclusion is tempered by specific exclusions detailed in Article 3, which identifies categories of employees not covered by the proclamation.
- Example: Article 3(2)(e) excludes employees of government departments, even though it doesn't exclude government employees per se. Employees of government departments often fall under separate legislation, such as Proclamation No. 1064/2010.
Determining Applicability: A Two-Stage Process
Determining whether the proclamation applies in a particular case involves a two-stage process:
- Establishing Employee Status: The relevant labor dispute resolution body must first ascertain whether the claimant meets the proclamation's definition of "employee." If not, the case is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
- Checking for Exclusions under Article 3(2): If the claimant is deemed an employee, the next step is to determine whether their employment relationship falls under any of the six exclusions listed in Article 3(2).
Exceptions to General Applicability
Even when an individual is classified as an "employee" and not explicitly excluded under Article 3(2), the proclamation's application can be nuanced, with certain provisions having limited scope:
- Probationary Period: Regulations concerning notice periods and severance pay do not apply to employees during their probationary period. This recognizes the provisional nature of the employment relationship during this initial phase.
- Sector-Specific Exemptions: Construction workers and organizations with fewer than twenty employees are exempt from specific provisions, such as the retrenchment procedure outlined in Article 29. These exemptions likely reflect the specific characteristics of these sectors.
- Essential Services Limitations: While the rights to strike and lockout are constitutionally recognized, they are restricted for workers in essential public service organizations, as defined in Article 136(2). This limitation balances worker rights with the public interest in uninterrupted essential services.
- Professional Exemptions: The provisions governing working hours and weekly rest periods under Part Four of the Proclamation (Articles 61–64 and 69–71, respectively) do not apply to commercial envoys and commercial agents.
- Apprenticeship Regulations: Apprentices are subject to specific regulations (Articles 48-52). While other employment conditions may apply, certain key provisions, like those related to termination, severance pay, compensation, and reinstatement, do not. This recognizes the primarily educational purpose of apprenticeships.
Conclusion
The Ethiopian Labour Proclamation's scope is defined through a combination of a broad definition of "employer," a crucial initial determination of "employee" status, and specific exclusions outlined in Article 3(2). Furthermore, certain provisions have limited applicability, creating a nuanced framework. Understanding these complexities is essential for accurately determining the proclamation's reach and ensuring the protection of workers' rights within its intended scope. Clear and consistent application of these provisions is vital for fostering a stable and equitable labor environment.
Comments
Post a Comment