20.500.12556/DiRROS-24915 Ugovor vesti med osebnim imperativom in svobodo vesti ter delovnimi obveznostmi Ugovor vesti: med osebnim imperativom in svobodo vesti ter delovnimi obveznostmi Nedavna sprememba Zakona o lekarniški dejavnosti (ZLD- 1D), ki je ukinila pravico do ugovora vesti za farmacevtske strokovne delavce, je oživila strokovno in splošno razpravo o tej ustavni pravici. Pravica do ugovora vesti, ki je splošno urejena v Zakonu o zdravstveni dejavnosti (ZZDej), srečamo pa jo še na področju vojaške službe oziroma obrambe države, je zdaj izrecno urejena tudi za farmacevtske strokovne delavce, s čimer so se ti kot poklicna skupina izenačili s poklicno skupino zdravnikov, za katere je ugovor vesti urejen v zanje področnem zakonu, in sicer Zakonu o zdravniški službi (ZZdrS).3 Vendar pa se lekarniški delavci v razmerju do zdravnikov in drugih zdravstvenih delavcev po novem nahajajo v pomembno drugačnem položaju, saj je ZLD-1D uveljavljanje ugovora vesti zanje izrecno prepovedal. To odpira številna (ustavno)pravna vprašanja, ne nazadnje pa tudi vprašanja o razmerju med delovnimi in drugimi obveznostmi delavcev v delovnem razmerju, ki segajo onkraj področja zdravstvene dejavnosti, oziroma različne vidike ravnanja delavca in delodajalca v zvezi z ugovorom vesti in širše ustavne kategorije svobodo vesti ter pluralnih delovnih okolij. The recent amendment to the Pharmacy Services Act, which abolished the right to conscientious objection for pharmacists, has reignited professional and public debate concerning this constitutional right. The right to conscientious objection, which is regulated by the lex generalis Health Services Act and recognised in the context of military service and defence, is now explicitly addressed with respect to pharmaceutical services. This legislative development has aligned pharmacists, as a professional group, with physicians, for whom the right to conscientious objection is regulated by the sector-specific Medical Services Act. However, pharmacists now also find themselves in a significantly different legal position compared to physicians and other healthcare professionals, as their lex specialis statutory legislation explicitly prohibits the exercise of conscientious objection for their profession. This raises numerous constitutional and legal issues and broader questions regarding the relationship between employees’ professional obligations and other personal duties within the employment context. It also focuses on various dimensions of the conduct of employees and employers concerning conscientious objection and the broader concept of freedom of conscience and pluralistic workplace environments. ugovor vesti svoboda vesti osebna prepričanja delovno razmerje enaka obravnava conscientious objection freedom of conscience personal beliefs employment relationship equal treatment true true true Slovenski jezik Angleški jezik Neznano 2025-12-24 10:06:16 2025-12-24 10:06:16 2025-12-25 03:44:42 0000-00-00 00:00:00 2025 0 0 str. 235-256 [št.] 2/3 Letn. 25 2025 0000-00-00 Zaloznikova Objavljeno NiDoloceno 0000-00-00 0000-00-00 2025-06-02 17:349:614 1580-6316 235909891 Revija_2-3-2025_MISIC.pdf Revija_2-3-2025_MISIC.pdf 1 80AF11D68BADAB015104D4C4617FAE93 f2897571bb0dd9b2902815fc1eef698e2c734ae834c2fdaa1cc33de311c31f88 e8bbbfd4-e0a7-11f0-94a7-001a4af901a5 https://dirros.openscience.si/Dokument.php?lang=slv&id=37296 Inštitut za delo pri Pravni fakulteti v Ljubljani 0 0 0