Bibliographic citations
Ortega, R., (2017). El derecho de huelga vs el derecho de continuar laborando, una mirada bajo la perspectiva del test de ponderación [Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú]. http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12404/8386
Ortega, R., El derecho de huelga vs el derecho de continuar laborando, una mirada bajo la perspectiva del test de ponderación []. PE: Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú; 2017. http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12404/8386
@misc{sunedu/2655640,
title = "El derecho de huelga vs el derecho de continuar laborando, una mirada bajo la perspectiva del test de ponderación",
author = "Ortega Cordero, Ricardo Julio",
publisher = "Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú",
year = "2017"
}
Right to strike or right to continue working? During the exercise of the right to strike, it is common to find situations in which the interests of the strikers conflict with the rights of third parties; One of these cases is presented in respect of workers who do not agree with the stoppage measure - non-striking worker - and who wish to continue working in order to continue generating the economic income necessary to guarantee their subsistence and that of their family. According to our legislation, when the strike is decided by the majority of workers in a given area, it suspends the employment relationship of the total number of workers who comprise it; including those who do not agree with the stoppage measure. In this context, this article, through the so-called proportionality test, will determine whether the legal deprivation of Article 62 of D.S. 011-92-TR, is a truly indispensable measure to achieve the aims pursued by the exercise of the strike or if, on the contrary, the right of those who wish to continue working would be unnecessarily violated.
This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License