ARE WE SAYING THE SAME THING, BUT ACTUALLY SOMETHING DIFFERENT? - EXTRACTS FOR A THEORY OF LEGAL INTERPRETATION IN LABOUR LAW.

As a cross-cutting area of law, labour law presents many difficulties in interpretation. Although legal interpretation issues are essentially dealt with in legal theory, the specificities of labour law raise a number of issues that need to be treated specifically from a labour law perspective. One feature of labour law, which practitioners and the literature no longer dispute, is that it mixes private and public law norms, which can provide a number of novae for research into the methodology of interpretation. Labour law is a status law, which is meant that it seeks to regulate exclusively the organized work of the human being. The interpretative horizon of labour law is affected by the fact that this area of law is regulated at several levels. While the classical private law framework is dominated by national sources of law, labour law is also extensively influenced by the products of European Union law. There is no doubt that the private law roots of contract-based labour law are still dominant, but there is a growing trend towards the use of legal interpretation methods derived from EU law, which is devoid of private law doctrine. There is often a conflict of terminology and interpretative methods between domestic and international law, including EU law, which cannot be resolved by classical methods. In light of the above, my essay will focus on the legal interpretation methods of labour law, with particular attention to both theoretical and practical positions. Among the methods of interpretation, I will examine their relevance and prevalence at the EU and national level, and attempt to draw conclusions from these findings for the sustainability of labour law. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]