BazEkon

As the one of the main aim of the reform of Lithuanian labour law was indicated the need for providing more flexibility in employment relationships based on the Danish model of flexicurity, according to which the lower level of employment permanence is compensated by the system of effective benefits and facilities for employees in undertaking suitable work. This aim was accompanied by redefining of different instruments and legal regulations of individual labor law focused on fundamental changes related to employment protection and rights of dismissed employees, the types of employment contracts and working terms, as well as by introducing the new quality into collective labour relations. The changes introduced into Lithuanian labour law are along with the contemporary discussion on working standards in employment relationships and are demonstrating the new direction for development of Lithuanian labour law followed by Lithuanian legislator. Accordingly, the presented study is concentrated on legal analyses of the new types of employment contracts, which are aimed at providing more flexibility for parts of employment contracts accompanied by appropriate guarantees and security for employees.

This paper examines the possible Brexit scenarios and their impacts on the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) of the European Union (EU) with particular focus on Lithuania. The paper outlines the scientific discourse on the imminent modifications of the CAP after the Brexit along with changes in the EU budget. The paper was prepared during the beginning of Brexit negotiations, with withdrawal terms not being publicly disclosed. Thus, the most likely assumptions have been accepted in order to model the scenarios. The possible effects of Brexit on the agriculture of the small EU Member States are discussed taking the case of Lithuania as an example. The empirical analysis showed that, in the case of three different Brexit-induced CAP modifications, Lithuanian agricultural sector may lose 1% to 20% of financial support under the CAP direct payment mechanism. The corresponding loss under these scenarios is quantified for agricultural sectors of all the EU Member States.

Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland all have democratic constitutions. Latvia returned to the original basic law of 1922 so several provisions were added later on, including those on the local self-government. All four countries ratified the EChLSG in 1990s so the new constitutions (except for Latvia) were drafted with the EChLSG in mind. The Charter is nowadays part and particle of legal orders of the four countries and is directly applied in the administrative and judicial procedures. The EChLSG is subordinate to the national constitutions but the former takes precedence over the statutes passed by the parliaments as well as regulation adopted by the administrative bodies. The presence of the municipal self-government is explicitly guaranteed by the Constitutions of Estonia, Lithuania and Poland. Only few provisions of the Constitution of Latvia deal explicitely with the municipal self-government but art.1 alone is considered the strong declaration of the democratic local self-government. The idea of a substantial share of public affairs being administered by the self-governed municipalities is treated with caution by the national constitutions. Employing different wording, the three Constitutions declare decentralization of administrative powers to the municipalities. However, close examination of the constitutional guaranties for this substantial share, results in not clear conclusion. The constitution of Lithuania focuses its attention on general declaration without substantive regulations. The Estonian one contain a little bit only more detailed declarations. The Chapter 1. of the Poland’s Constitution declares explicitly the principle of the substantial share of public duties managed by the municipalities and other units of the territorial self-government. The chapter 7 is focused solely on the territorial self-government. Still last 12 years under this Constitution have proved that these provisions were insufficient protection of the local self-governance.