All Comments

Home Page | English | Français | Español |

ILO is a United Nations Agency

RSS Feed | Newsroom | Contact us

NORMLEX

Information System on International Labour Standards

Instruments
Key documents
Ratification of ILO Conventions
Supervising the application of International Labour Standards: Supervision by country; Search comments by the supervisory bodies; Complaint procedures; Freedom of association cases; Representations (Art. 24); Commission of Inquiry (Art. 26)
Regular reporting
Country profiles
Comparatives
Maritime Labour Convention (2006)

MLC, 2006

NATLEX *new look*
National Legislation on Labour and Social Rights

LEGOSH
Global database on occupational safety and health legislation

EPLex
Employment protection legislation database

Compendium of court decisions

NORMLEX Home > Country profiles > > Comments > All Comments

Protection of Wages Convention, 1949 (No. 95) - Belgium (RATIFICATION: 1970)

DISPLAYINEnglish - French - Spanish

CMNT_TITLE

In order to provide a comprehensive view of the issues relating to the application of the ratified Conventions on wages, the Committee considers it appropriate to examine Conventions Nos 26 and 99 (minimum wage) and 95 (protection of wages) together.

Minimum wage

Articles 1 and 2 of Convention No. 26, Article 1 of Convention No. 99. Scope of application of the minimum wage fixing machinery. Further to its previous comment on this matter, the Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that in 2013 the National Labour Council (CNT) removed the sliding scales that were applied to the monthly average interoccupational minimum wage level for young persons between 18 and 21 years.

Articles 3(2)(3), and 4 of Convention No. 26, Articles 3(4) and 4 of Convention No. 99. Binding nature of minimum wages. Supervision and sanctions. Further to its previous comments on this matter, the Committee notes the Government’s information that confirms, in particular, that a sectoral collective agreement fixing a minimum wage lower than the minimum wage fixed by the collective labour agreement adopted by the CNT for the interoccupational level is null and void. It also notes the adoption of the Social Criminal Code in 2010 and the joint liability mechanism for the payment of wages incorporated in 2012 into the Act on the protection of remuneration for workers.

Wage protection

Article 11 of Convention No. 95. Protection of wage claims in the event of bankruptcy. Further to its previous comments on this matter, the Committee notes that the 2009 Act on the Continuity of Enterprises was repealed by the Act of 11 August 2017 incorporating Chapter XX, on insolvency in enterprises, into the Code of Economic Law. In accordance with the new mechanism, workers’ remuneration owed to them because of the termination of their employment relationship is admitted as a preferential claim, irrespective of whether the termination occurred before or after the declaration of bankruptcy.

CMNT_TITLE

Article 11 of the Convention. Protection of wage claims in the event of bankruptcy. The Committee notes the joint comments submitted by the Confederation of Christian Trade Unions (CSC), the General Federation of Liberal Trade Unions of Belgium (CGSLB) and the General Labour Federation of Belgium (FGTB) concerning the Act on the Continuity of Enterprises of 31 January 2009, which repeals the Act on Judicial Composition Proceedings of 17 July 1997. The new Act allows enterprises in difficulty to opt for judicial reorganization proceedings so as to continue with all or part of their activities. Under these proceedings, the employer–debtor is granted a moratorium that must not exceed six months, with a view to reaching an amicable agreement with the creditors on a restructuring plan that must specify the periods of payment, the reduction of outstanding debts and, if applicable, the conversion of receivables into shares and the differentiated settlement of certain categories of debts, depending on the extent or nature of these debts. This plan has to be approved by the majority of creditors representing at least half of the claims involved. The CSC, the CGSLB and the FGTB, for their part, state that the conditions for approving the reorganization plan do not guarantee that workers are adequately informed of their rights during the proceedings and tend to benefit other creditors, such as banks or large suppliers, to the detriment of wage earners who, in practice, have to bear a reduction of 50–70 per cent of their wage debts, and sometimes even more, under the majority of plans. On the assumption that wages constitute a vital component guaranteeing the subsistence level of workers and their families, the three trade union organizations believe that wage debts should not be exposed to commercial risk or be conditional upon procedures undertaken from a purely market standpoint. In their observations, the CSC, the CGSLB and the FGTB also point out that wage earners, considered as ordinary creditors, have no privileges whatsoever and that the commercial courts, who are the only ones competent in the matter, systematically refuse to apply the Protection of Remuneration Act of 12 April 1965, citing the principle of speciality. The Committee requests the Government to submit comments concerning the joint observations by the CSC, the CGSLB and the FGTB.

CMNT_TITLE

Part V of the report form. The Committee notes the statistical data communicated by the Government concerning the total number of inspections conducted and the number of violations reported of the legislation regarding the protection of wages. It notes that the infringements observed represent approximately 10 per cent of all inspected cases. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide general indications on the application of the Convention in practice, in particular information concerning the sanctions imposed and the results achieved, as well as any other measures taken to reduce the number of violations of the legislation on the protection of wages.

CMNT_TITLE

Further to its previous direct request, the Committee notes the Royal Order of 3 February 1998 modifying article 19bis of the Royal Order of 28 November 1969 referring to the conditions under which meal vouchers are not to be considered as pay. The Committee requests the Government to provide information in future reports on any significant change in this practice or other measures related to the partial payment of wages in the form of allowances in kind.

In addition, the Committee notes with interest the adoption of the Royal Order of 10 January 1999 by which enterprises already maintaining payroll records in euros are under the obligation throughout the transition period to issue wage statements and keep wage records in both Belgian francs and euros.

Part V of the report form. While noting the statistical information concerning the results of labour inspection with regard to observance of wage protection legislation, the Committee requests the Government to continue to supply information on the application of the Convention in practice, including, for example, extracts of official reports, and information on infringements of relevant laws and regulations reported and sanctions imposed.

CMNT_TITLE

Further to its previous comments the Committee notes the Government's explanations concerning the granting of meal vouchers. It also notes under section 19bis of the Royal Order of 28 November 1969, as amended by the Royal Order of 31 January 1994, an allowance in the form of a meal voucher is considered as pay if it is granted as a replacement or conversion of pay, bonuses, allowances in kind or other allowances.

Furthermore, the Committee notes the Government's indication that Parliament is currently debating a Bill on meal vouchers. It therefore asks the Government to provide information on any development in this respect.

CMNT_TITLE

The Committee takes note of the summary record of the meeting of the Social Affairs Committee of the Belgian Chamber of Representatives of 15 January 1991 concerning the use of meal vouchers. The Committee notes from the summary record that a motion was adopted declaring the meal voucher system to be contrary to the Act of 12 April 1965 concerning the protection of remuneration and to Convention No. 95. In the same motion, the Chamber asks the Government to take measures within the next 12 months to ensure that all remuneration for work is paid only in accordance with the national law, in both the public and private sectors.

The Committee asks the Government to provide information on the practice as gegards the use of the meal vouchers and on the measures taken or envisaged to apply the above-mentioned motion. It would be grateful if the Government would provide a copy of the Act of 28 December 1969 specifying the nature of the meal vouchers, referred to in the above-mentioned record.