Archiwum
Filozofii Prawa
i Filozofii Społecznej

Journal of the Polish Section of IVR (ISSN:2082-3304)

IVR

Worldview Controversies in a Workplace: Comments from the Theory of Law Perspective on the Cracow IKEA Employee Case

Dr Wojciech Ciszewski

Jagiellonian University

English abstract: The point of departure of my paper is the case of the IKEA employee who lost his job for criticizing the workplace policy followed by his employer. In the paper I analyse two possible versions of the objection discrimination on the ground of belief that can be raised with respect to the employer’s decision. In my opinion neither of these two versions can withstand scrutiny. Regarding the first of these versions – the allegation of belief harassment – I claim that the employer’s action should not be recognized as a form of belief harassment. The criteria that I propose in the paper suggest that the ‘Inclusion of LGBT+…’ regulation was a permissible workplace policy, within the scope of the employer’s authority. Regarding the second version of the allegation of discrimination – the lack of respect for special needs resulting from beliefs – I argue that in this situation the employer was under no obligation to accommodate the employee’s needs resulting from his beliefs. In the light of the criteria formulated in the paper, the employee’s claim for accommodation was weak and it could be overweighed even by a relatively small burden on the employer’s part.

Keywords: principle of nondiscrimination, freedom of religion, freedom of speech, workplace harassment, cultural exemptions

Language: Polish

Published: Number 1(22)/2020, pp. 5-20.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.36280/AFPiFS.2020.1.5

Download: Download
Number of downloads: 163

Republican Party of Minnesota v. White as a Step Towards Greater Politicisation of the Judicial Election in the USA?

Dr Jacek Srokosz

University of Opole

Abstract: The article presents the US Supreme Court judgment issued in 2002 in case Republican Party of Minnesota v. White, in which the Court held unconstitutional the clauses which introduced restrictions in presenting the candidates’ views on controversial legal and social issues during the judicial election campaign in Minnesota. The article discusses the essence of the judicial election, the limitations for the candidates during electoral campaigns, and the general dispute about how judges are selected in the US. Against this background, the facts of the case, the decisions of the courts of first and second instances and of the Supreme Court are presented, as well as Antonin Scalia’s argumentation justifying the ruling and the dissenting opinions. The author’s goal is to analyse the Supreme Court’s ruling in the context of its critics’ forecasts that it would result in politicisation of the judicial election process leading to a lowering of the authority of the judiciary and the emergence of doubts about the impartiality and independence of judges.

Keywords: judicial election, politicisation, Republican Party of Minnesota v. White, impartiality and independence of judges, accountability of judges, freedom of speech, electoral campaign

Language: Polish

Received: 13.06.2018
Accepted: 10.09.2018

Published: Number 3(18)/2018, pp. 51-63.

Download file: Download
Number of downloads: 180