This thesis analyses the aims and objectives of the EU Acquired Rights Directive (ARD) in the context of the larger evolution of EU labour law itself. The thesis presents the overall goal of the ARD as that of striking an appropriate balance between the employer’s prerogative to transfer the business and the employee’s interest in not having the security of the job unduly threatened by such transfers. Given the current complexity and incoherence of the law regulating economic dismissals in the context of transfers, the central argument of the thesis is that there is a need for a clearer conceptual framework for defining and understanding the rights and obligations in the Acquired Rights Directive (ARD). It is suggested that the principles of legitimate expectations and proportionality are ideally adapted to play this role. In analyzing the teleology of the ARD based on these principles, this study not only assists in understanding and explaining the ARD itself, but also has wider implications for understanding the challenges facing European social policy in the field of employment protection. In its attempts to reconcile fundamental economic freedoms of employers on the one hand, and fundamental rights of employees on the other, the Court of Justice has frequently relied upon the proportionality principle to achieve a ‘fair balance’ between both parties. Following the interpretations of ‘proportionality’ in Viking and Laval, there is admittedly a fear that the proportionality balancing is likely to accord an almost absolute priority to the employers’ economic freedoms. The thesis is cognizant of this danger, and therefore advocates a ‘symmetrical’ approach to balancing. In this way the thesis offers some insight into the potential for the ARD to remain continuously effective in times of economic crisis. The study therefore finds reason to be optimistic about the prospects for the ARD and other standard-setting directives in the future of social Europe.

Conçu dans la période postérieure aux guerres révolutionnaires européennes, renforcé à la veille des relations internationales contemporaines, le fonctionnaire international, plus qu’un concept, témoigne de la dynamique qui est née et qui caractérise les relations interétatiques. Mieux appréhendé par leurs interactions dans de multiples arènes (économie, consultations, études, diplomatie, politique, actions de terrains), les fonctionnaires internationaux sont définis par un nouveau type d’organisations par le biais desquelles ils incarnent et réalisent leurs buts. Ils caractérisent ainsi tant les agents des organisations internationales dites “traditionnelles” (Société des Nations, Organisation des Nations Unies, Organisation du Traité de l’Atlantique Nord, Union Africaine, Conseil de l’Europe) que celles “spécifiques” (Union Européenne, Communauté Economique des Etats d’Afrique de l’Ouest, La Communauté Andine des Nations, le Marché du Cône Sud). De cette situation, le concept unique de fonctionnaire international a évidemment émergé par la systématisation de plusieurs auteurs. Il ne pouvait en être autrement, ce par la convergence des statuts juridiques (en matière de règles relatives au recrutement, de privilèges et d’immunités fonctionnels, droits acquis) de ceux qu’on considère comme les piliers de l’organisation, notamment les agents de l’Union européenne et ceux de l’Organisation des Nations Unies. Toutefois, malgré cette première évidence, il est certain, et l’analyse comparative à laquelle cette étude s’élit en fournit les clefs, que le concept de fonctionnaire international unique ne soit pas approprié pour les agents que nous considérons archétypes de deux types d’organisations mues par des finalités complémentaires certes mais divergentes à plus d’un titre. A ces fins, l’étude de l’insertion institutionnelle des fonctionnaires et la loyauté, somme toute, cardinale qui en découle définitivement écarte toute prétention d’unité des fonctionnaires par l’érection d’un fonctionnaire extraétatique qui serait ce concept unifiant ces agents des gouvernants spéciaux. / Created after the european revolutionary wars and reinforced in the run up of the contemporary international relations, the international civil servant more than a concept, testifies of dynamics that generated and which characterizes interstates relations. International civil servants are defined through new types of organizations they embody and through which they achieve their purposes. The different arenas in which they interact (economics, consultancies, studies, diplomacy, politics, and field actions) underline their function. They therefore represent both the agents of international organizations known as "traditional" (League of Nations, United Nations Organization, North Atlantic Treaty Organization, African Union, Council of Europe) as well as those of the “specific" ones (European Union, Economic Community of West African States, Andean Community of Nations, Common Market of Southern Cone). From this situation a single concept for the international civil servant as emerged through the systemization of several authors. It could not be any other way, because of the similarities in the legal status (relating to recruitment rules, functional privileges and immunities, acquired rights) of those considered as the pillars of the organizations, in particular between the European Union and the United Nations Organization’s agents. However, despite this first conclusion, the present study obviously shows through a comparative analysis that a single (common) concept of the international civil servant is not appropriated for the agents we considere as archetypes of two types of organizations driven by purposes that are complementary but different for more than one reason. For those purposes, the study of the institutional insertion of the civil servants and the loyalty that derives from it definitely eliminates the theory of a single concept for civil servants through the institution of an extrastate civil servant, a concept meant to unify these special rulers’ agents.