214 KB56 KB201320252023Šuta, Živaletnik:49številka:5str. 733-752ISSN:0353-6521COBISSID:161785347URN:URN:NBN:SI:doc-609Y0ZAOslGospodarski vestnikInštitut za delo pri Pravni fakultetiZveza Društev pravnikov v gospodarstvu SlovenijePodjetje in delodelavcidelovna razmerjadelovno pravodiskirminacijapogodba o zaposlitvipravo EUsamozaposlitevspolna usmerjenostzakonodajne direktivezunanji sodelavciŠiroka opredelitev samozaposlitve v luči prepovedi diskriminacije na podlagi spolne usmerjenosti|Under EU law, workers are afforded a high level of protection. Their dependent and subordinate position grants them the status of a weaker party and entitles them to a variety of rights recognised by both EU legislation and CJEU case law. In the twenty-first century, types of work that resemble the traditional employment relationship are emerging; however, their protection at the EU level remains unclear. Should the definition of a worker be expanded to include self-employed persons as well as those who provide goods and services on a regular basis and in a way that allows them to earn a living? This question becomes especially pressing when it is linked to the prohibition of discrimination. In the recent case TP (C-356/21), the CJEU addressed the issue of discrimination in (self-)employment, overturning the classic binary distinction between workers and self-employed persons. It clarified the scope of anti-discrimination protection enjoyed by self-employed workers, as well as the relationship between the contractual freedom of choice of contractual party and the prohibition of discrimination based on sexual orientation. The decision has been praised for its progressive interpretation that EU anti-discrimination law applies to all those who work, including self-employed individuals. This article analyses the decision C-356/21 and addresses the concerns of self-employed workers with the aim of framing their protection in EU anti-discrimination legislation and case lawDelavci uživajo v pravu EU visoko stopnjo zaščite. Zaradi svojega odvisnega in podrejenega položaja imajo status šibkejše stranke, na podlagi katerega uživajo vrsto pravic, ki jih priznavata tako zakonodaja na ravni EU kot tudi sodna praksa Sodišča EU. Po drugi strani se v 21. stoletju pojavljajo oblike dela, ki se približujejo klasičnemu delovnemu razmerju, vendar je njihova zaščita na ravni EU še nejasna. Ali je zaščito na podlagi prava EU smiselno priznavati širše, tudi za situacije, v katerih oseba opravlja neko delo na drugi podlagi, ne v okviru pogodbe o zaposlitvi? To vprašanje postane še posebej pereče, če je povezano z diskriminatornim obravnavanjem. Nedavno se je s primerom diskriminacije pri (samo)zaposlovanju ukvarjalo Sodišče EU v zadevi TP (C-356/21), v kateri je ovrglo klasično binarno delitev na delavce in samozaposlene. Pojasnilo je, kakšen obseg varstva pred diskriminacijo uživajo samozaposleni delavci ter kako na pravice in obveznosti, predvsem na prepoved diskriminacije na podlagi spolne usmerjenosti, vpliva pogodbena svoboda pri izbiri pogodbene stranke. Sodba pomeni pomembno prelomnico zaradi progresivne razlage, da protidiskriminacijsko pravo EU varuje vse osebe, ki delajo, vključno s samozaposlenimi delavci. Avtorica v prispevku preučuje sodno odločbo C-356/21 in obravnava vprašanja samozaposlenih delavcev z namenom, da uokviri njihovo zaščito v protidiskriminacijski zakonodaji EU in sodni praksiTEXTznanstveno časopisjejournalsSlovenian National E-content AggregatorNational and University Library of Slovenia