CMNT_TITLE

The Committee notes the adoption of the new Labour Code and of the Act on Employers’ Associations of 27 November 2002. In addition, the Committee notes the conclusions and recommendations of the Committee on Freedom of Association in Case No. 2216 (332nd Report, November 2003).

Scope of the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to provide information about the trade union rights of the persons under a civil law contract with an employer, who are excluded from the scope of the Labour Code, and to indicate any restriction concerning trade union rights imposed by the federal law on persons mentioned in section 11 of the Code (in particular, managers of organizations, personnel combining jobs, women, persons bearing family responsibilities, youth, state employees and "other persons").

Article 1. While noting with interest that the Labour Code provides for prohibition of acts of anti-union discrimination and that section 419 states that persons found guilty of violation of laws and other instruments containing standards of labour law bear disciplinary responsibility in the procedure stipulated by the Code, other federal laws, as well as civil law, and also bear administrative and criminal responsibility in the procedure provided for by federal law, the Committee requests the Government to specify the sanctions imposed on employers found guilty of anti-union discrimination and indicate the relevant legislative provisions.

Article 2. While noting the legislative provisions prohibiting acts of interference contained in the Labour Code, the Act on Employers’ Associations and the Act on Trade Unions, the Committee requests the Government to specify the sanctions imposed on those found guilty of acts of interference, and indicate the relevant legislative provisions.

Article 4. The Committee notes that section 28 of the Labour Code provides that peculiarities of application of the norms contained in section II on social partnership (including collective bargaining), with respect to civil servants and employees engaged in military service (bodies and organizations) and bodies of the execution of penal sentences system, are established by federal laws. The Committee recalls that while Article 6 of the Convention allows public servants engaged in the administration of the State to be excluded from its scope, other categories should enjoy the guarantees of the Convention and therefore be able to negotiate collectively their conditions of employment. The Committee also recalls that civilians working in military installations or in the service of the army or police should enjoy the rights provided for in the Convention. The Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate whether the abovementioned categories of workers are granted collective bargaining rights and to specify the relevant legislative provisions.

The Committee notes that there would appear to be a contradiction between sections 31 and 37 concerning workers’ representatives authorized to undertake collective bargaining. The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether there are cases in which representatives of non-unionized workers can negotiate even if a trade union exists at the enterprise.

The Committee further notes that section 45 of the Labour Code does not provide for a possibility to conclude an agreement at the occupational or professional level. The Committee considers that workers’ organizations and employers and their organizations should be free in determining the level of bargaining, including the possibility of concluding agreements at the occupational or professional level and requests the Government to take the necessary measures to that end. The Committee requests the Government to keep it informed in this respect.

Taking into account the content of sections 29(2), 30, 37 and 372 of the Labour Code, the Committee requests the Government to indicate whether primary trade unions could be assisted by higher-level workers’ organizations during collective bargaining.

Finally, the Committee requests the Government to clarify whether the legislation imposes compulsory arbitration in the event where the dispute is not settled with the help of a mediator (sections 402 and 403 of the Labour Code and 6(7) of the Law on Collective Labour Disputes).