In 2017, the municipality of Copenhagen made exercise mandatory for social workers performing physical tasks, such as lifting patients, cooking and cleaning. Private Danish companies have also started to impose exercise on their employees, including sedentary employees. Rationale behind mandatory exercise in the workplace is that it makes employees healthier and more productive, which is a win-win for employees and employers. However, mandatory exercise can put employees in a vulnerable position as employers potentially interfere with some of the fundamental rights of employees, namely their bodily autonomy and privacy. In addition, the increased emphasis on exercise at work and being ‘physically fit’ can indirectly lead to unlawful discrimination practices in recruitment, during employment, and at termination, as employers may exclude or sanction people who are not be able, or do not want, to exercise on various grounds, ranging from age, disability, pregnancy, religion, to health conditions. Therefore, this article examines the lawfulness of mandatory exercise at work in light of the fundamental rights of employees in two selected jurisdictions (Denmark and France), as well as under relevant European Union (EU) law, and the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and related case law. Using a comparative and European perspective, the article examines the legality of mandatory exercise at work in the selected jurisdictions. It analyses and compares the level of protection of employees’ rights to privacy, autonomy and non-discrimination in France and Denmark. It also assesses whether mandatory exercise could qualify as an occupational health and safety measure in the selected jurisdictions. The article examines these questions in light of the increasing recognition and integration of fundamental rights in labour law at European, EU, and national levels. The article finds that the French and Danish labour laws offer different levels of protection of employees’ rights to autonomy, privacy and the right to non-discrimination. As a result, mandatory exercise would likely be deemed to be legal in Denmark, and illegal in France. However, the legality of mandatory exercise under Danish law could be challenged in light of the strong protection of employees’ fundamental rights at EU and European levels. The article concludes that rather than an obligation, exercise should be framed as a right for employees.

2017年，哥本哈根市政府强制社会工作者进行体育锻炼，例如抬高病人，做饭和打扫卫生。丹麦私营公司也已开始对其员工（包括久坐的员工）施加锻炼。工作场所强制性锻炼背后的理由是，它可以使员工更健康，更有生产力，这对员工和雇主都是双赢的。但是，强制性锻炼会使雇员处于弱势地位，因为雇主可能会干扰雇员的一些基本权利，即他们的身体自主权和隐私权。此外，越来越强调工作中的锻炼和“身体健康”，可能会间接导致招募，雇用，解雇时的非法歧视行为，因为雇主可能会排斥或制裁无法或不愿基于各种理由进行锻炼的人，包括年龄，残疾，怀孕，宗教信仰和健康状况。因此，本文根据两个选定辖区（丹麦和法国）以及相关欧盟法律和《欧洲人权公约》（ ECHR）和相关判例法。本文采用比较和欧洲的观点，研究了在选定司法管辖区进行强制性行使的合法性。它分析并比较了法国和丹麦对员工的隐私权，自主权和不歧视权的保护水平。它还评估强制性锻炼是否可以在选定的司法管辖区作为职业健康与安全措施。本文根据欧洲，欧盟和国家层面对劳动法中基本权利的日益认识和整合来研究这些问题。该文章发现，法国和丹麦的劳动法为雇员的自治权，隐私权和非歧视权提供了不同级别的保护。结果，强制性行使在丹麦可能被视为合法，而在法国则被视为非法。但是，鉴于在欧盟和欧洲各级对雇员基本权利的有力保护，丹麦法律下强制性锻炼的合法性可能会受到挑战。该文章的结论是，应将行使而不是义务视为雇员的权利。