Page 320 [320]
OCR
CSILLA LEHOCZKY-KOLLONAY is considered as a founding element of those rights — then dignity is present and guaranteed in employment if those rights are effectively protected. This somewhat simplified explanation leaves questions behind. First, there is a lack of any clear delineation of the rights whose guarantee realizes the presence of dignity, apart from unspecified references to Article 31 CFREU on “fair and just working conditions”, an umbrella term, or a random list of a number of specific labour rights. Usually reasonable working time, fair pay, safe and healthy working conditions, non-discrimination, involvement in enterprise matters are mentioned.” Even if Article 1 may be invoked before the CJEU either in a preliminary ruling procedure, or in an action for annulment, no case was brought to it yet. Similarly, the CJEU has not yet referred to Article 1 CFREU at all up to now, neither in matters dealing with labour relations nor in any other matter. Not only CFREU Article 1, but “dignity” as such is not present in the employment related case law of the CJEU. A few decisions can be found under the title of “consumer protection” dealing with “professional dignity”, the reputation of persons and their profession providing goods or services (e.g. dentist, pharmacist”°) — confirming the return to the “classic” meaning of dignity: a moral prestige, reputation, respectfulness. Then we get to the second question: connecting dignity to the guarantee of fundamental labour rights, at least a floor of all important conditions, would it mean that dignity in employment is ensured if those rights are ensured? In the light of this concept of dignity we come to the same conclusion as under Article 26 of the Social Charter: certain forms of treatment might violate dignity even under high standards of material conditions in employment. Involvement in enterprise matters seem to be the exception: if it is genuinely guaranteed, written or unwritten rules of daily life potentially can prevent systemic violation of dignity. THE EUROPEAN HUMAN RIGHTS COURT — RECENT LESSONS. PANOPTICON RETURNS? Recent decisions of the European Court of Human Rights (“the Court”) confirm the need of paying closer attention to the “non-material” conditions of employment, to the protection of dignity in terms of respect for privacy, and the boundaries of private life by the employer. The special attention is made necessary by the revolutionary developments of high technology and the gradual transformation 25 Kresal, Article 1, 203. 26 Case C-339/15, Case C-649/18. + 318 *
