CMNT_TITLE

The Committee notes with regret that the Government’s report has not been received.

The Committee notes the new Labour Relations Act, promulgated on 22 July 2005, abrogating the former Labour Relations Act (Official Gazette, No. 80/93). The Committee recalls the problems it had raised in its previous comments.

Article 2 of the Convention. Protection against act of interference. The Committee had noted that, in the former Labour Relations Act (article 78, paragraph 2), there was no prohibition or imposition of any penalty against interference by employers or their organizations in the functioning and administration of workers’ organizations and vice versa and, in particular, against the domination of workers’ organizations by employers or employers’ organizations, or the financial support of workers’ organizations by employers’ organizations.

The Committee notes with satisfaction that the new Labour Relations Act contains provisions on the protection against acts of interference, in particular the ban on employers’ interference (articles 195,199 and 202) with dissuasive sanctions and guarantees (articles 10 and 11). Moreover, the new legislation foresees the possibility of seeking court protection in case of acts of interference by employers against freedom of association.

Article 4. Measures to encourage and promote the development of voluntary negotiation between employers’ and workers’ organizations. The Committee had also noted that, when determining salaries (article 97 of the Former Labour Relations Act), the parties to collective negotiations were obliged to consider the defined salary policy and the basic accumulative amounts in the macroeconomic policy of the year. The Committee notes with satisfaction that the new legislation, which expressly abrogates the former Labour Relations Act, no longer contains this provision.

Article 4. Collective bargaining. The Committee had noted the conclusions of the Committee on Freedom of Association in Case No. 2133 that employers’ organizations (in particular, the Confederation of Employers) are unable to engage in collective bargaining at the national level, as they cannot be registered (and therefore recognized) due to the absence of legislation on this issue. The Committee notes with satisfaction that, in a communication dated 7 November 2006, the Confederation of Employers of the Republic of Macedonia indicates that it has obtained its registration. On the other hand, the Committee had noted in its previous comments the legislative gap that existed in the area of registration and recognition of employers’ organizations that constituted obstacles to employers’ participation in collective bargaining, contrary to Article 4 of the Convention. The Committee takes due note that the new legislation foresees registration of employers’ associations and of trade unions organizations as well (articles 190, 191 and 192 of the Labour Relations Act) though, as it is pointed out in the following paragraphs, some problems remain.

Comments made by the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU). The Committee notes the comments made by the ICFTU in a communication dated 30 August 2006. These comments concern problems already examined by the Committee and new problems related to the new Labour Relations Act passed on 22 July 2005 and more particularly: (1) the demand that a trade union must represent 33 per cent of employees at enterprise level, or at higher level, in order to enter into a collective agreement is excessive; (2) the lack of procedures for establishing the negotiation board among unions when none of them represent 33 per cent of the workers of a given level (including national); and (3) the lack of legal criteria for determining the most representative organizations, even at the highest level.

The Committee notes that the points mentioned by the ICFTU are identifiable in the legislation (articles 216, 217, 218 and 219 of the Labour Relations Act) and imply problems of application of the Convention. The Committee notes that the 33 per cent requirement is also highlighted by the Confederation of Employers of the Republic of Macedonia. The Committee considers that the percentage of 33 per cent of employees at all the levels is excessive and does not promote collective bargaining as required by Article 4 of the Convention. The Committee notes also that the procedure to determine the representativeness of the organizations is not developed in the new legislation. The Committee requests the Government to take the necessary steps to modify the legislation in order to remove the requirement to collective bargaining that a trade union and the employers (or the organization of employers) must represent 33 per cent of employees (for all levels), and to take measures in order to adopt provisions for a fair determination of the representativeness of the highest level based on objective and pre-established criteria and for the composition of the negotiation board when no trade union organization represents 33 per cent of employees or no employers’ organization meets the same requirement.