Historical analysis reveals the transformation of collective labour rights in EAEU states due to digitalization, suggesting new legal approaches.
In the context of integration processes within the Eurasian Economic Union and digital transformation of society, affecting the sphere of labor and directly related relations, an urgent problem arises of reevaluating the concept of collective labor rights, which, like individual labour rights, are being modified due to the introduction of digital technologies, artificial intelligence, and the automation of collective negotiations, among other factors. The purpose of this article is to assess, based on historical analysis, doctrinal studies, and an analysis of the latest labor legislation of the EAEU countries, the ways in which digitalization impacts collective labour rights. The research objectives are: 1) to trace how collective labour rights separated from individual rights in the legislation of Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Russia during the Soviet period, in the 1990s, and in the first quarter of the 21st century; 2) to identify the essential features and show how collective labour rights and collective (social partnership) legal relations are transforming in the digital age; 3) to develop scientifically sound proposals for adjusting the norms of Russian labour legislation in the aspect of digitalization of social partnership relations, including in the area of trade union activities. The article employed a combination of general scientific and specific research methods: dialectical, historical‑legal, systems analysis, comparative‑legal, formal‑legal, and logical techniques. The research findings are expressed in the formulation of several theoretical conclusions regarding the historical stages of the formation of collective labor rights in the EAEU countries, the differentiation of these rights from individual labour rights, the identification of essential characteristics and the search for a new concept of collective labour rights, subject to transformation under the influence of the development of digital technologies in the modern era.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kirill L. Tomashevski (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: