This reflection has a direct impact on Antitrust Law

[mahbubamim077]

Antitrust Law
In fact, one of the reflections of the recent – ​​and correct – concern of Antitrust Law with labor markets is the observation that abusive practices that result from the monopsony or oligopsony power of employers can harm women in particular – and, within this group, affect certain groups more intensely, such as black and immigrant women, among others.

In the context of mergers, empirical data from mergers show that one of the common consequences is the reduction of women in the workforce, especially in management positions [2] . However, as already mentioned, the problem is not restricted to female workers, but also to consumers and entrepreneurs.

Such findings raise the discussion about the extent to which the consumer welfare standard propagates gender and racial inequalities [3] . After all, such a standard , normally linked to the notion of efficiency, is bulk sms india applied through the analytical equality of all and is also measured by criteria that, as is the case of Kaldor-Hicks allocative efficiency, focus on the sum of total welfare, being indifferent to who loses and who wins. Thus, there may be situations considered efficient in which the losers are precisely those who, because they are already vulnerable, could not lose at all.

Furthermore, as we have seen, the Chicago School, rather than leading to a true deconstitutionalization of Antitrust Law [4] , ended up having as a consequence the “dejuridicization” of this area, which was reduced to an economic methodology [5] constructed and developed by white men from the Northern Hemisphere, based on their worldviews and without considering real inequalities. Consequently, it is not surprising that gender issues and other inequalities, such as racial ones, have been neglected.