Following criticism of the current system of posted work in the European Union, the Revised Posted Workers Directive 2018/957 was adopted in June 2018. This paper examines the extent to which the Revised Directive is likely to achieve the stated objective, as put forward by the Member States that criticised the current system and as explained in the Commission’s original proposal, of ensuring ‘equal pay for equal work in the same place’. The article begins by providing a brief overview of posted work within the European Union, including the adoption of the Original Directive and its interpretation by the Court of Justice. By looking at the key decisions of Laval, Ruffert and Commission v Luxembourg, it explains how the Court’s acquis created a system whereby foreign service providers are able to compete unfairly on a national market by circumventing national wage demands in order to gain a competitive advantage, thereby fostering a system of unequal pay for equal work. Following this, the article examines some of the wider implications of the Court’s case law. First, it explains how the current system of posted work underlines the normative tension between the ideas of wage competition and social dumping in Europe. Second, it assesses the extent to which the Original Directive acted to deregulate the labour legislation of various Member States, thereby undermining their ability to pursue social policies, as well as their national autonomy. Then, it explains how the Directive is based solely on Treaty provisions relating to service provision and establishment, and what effect this has on the Court’s approach to posted workers’ cases. Finally, the article assesses the Revised Directive. It explains the concrete changes to the Directive and then evaluates the extent to which the Revised Directive will achieve the ambition of equal pay for equal work. In this respect, the article claims that the Revised Directive will likely mitigate the more damaging consequences arising from the Court’s acquis, although given the more fundamental challenges that exist this may be limited.

中文翻译：

---

在同一个地方从事同工同酬？评估对发布的工人指令的修订

在对欧盟当前的岗位工作制度提出批评之后，于2018年6月通过了《 2018/957年岗位工作人员修订指令》。本文研究了修订后的指令可能在多大程度上实现了既定目标，批评当前制度的会员国，并在委员会最初的提案中作了解释，要求确保“在同一个地方从事同工同酬”。本文首先简要概述了欧盟内部已发布的工作，包括对原始指令的采用以及法院的解释。通过查看Laval，Ruffert和Commission v Luxembourg的关键决定，它解释了法院的收购如何建立一种制度，使外国服务提供者能够通过规避本国的工资要求而在国内市场上进行不公平竞争，从而获得竞争优势，从而促进同工同酬的制度。在此之后，本文研究了法院判例法的更广泛含义。首先，它解释了当前的职位发布系统如何强调欧洲工资竞争和社会倾销观念之间的规范张力。其次，它评估了原始指令在多大程度上放松了对各成员国劳动立法的管制，从而破坏了他们奉行社会政策的能力以及民族自治。然后，它解释了该指令如何仅基于与服务提供和建立有关的条约规定，以及这对法院处理已公布工人案件的方式有何影响。最后，本文对修订后的指令进行了评估。它解释了对指令的具体更改，然后评估了修订后的指令将在多大程度上实现同工同酬的雄心。在这方面，该条称，修订后的指令可能会减轻法院的收购产生的更具破坏性的后果，尽管鉴于存在更为根本的挑战，这可能是有限的。它解释了对指令的具体更改，然后评估了修订后的指令将在多大程度上实现同工同酬的雄心。在这方面，该条称，修订后的指令可能会减轻法院的收购产生的更具破坏性的后果，尽管鉴于存在更为根本的挑战，这可能是有限的。它解释了该指令的具体变化，然后评估了修订后的指令将在多大程度上实现同工同酬的雄心。在这方面，该条称，修订后的指令可能会减轻法院的收购产生的更具破坏性的后果，尽管鉴于存在更为根本的挑战，这可能是有限的。