CMNT_TITLE

Workers with Family Responsibilities Convention, 1981 (No. 156) - Finland (RATIFICATION: 1983)

Other comments on C156

Observation

Direct Request

DISPLAYINEnglish - French - SpanishAlle anzeigen

The Committee notes the observations of the Central Organisation of Finnish Trade Unions (SAK), the Confederation of Unions for Professional and Managerial Staff in Finland (AKAVA), the Finnish Confederation of Professionals (STTK) and the Confederation of Finnish Industries (EK), integrated into the Government’s report. With regard to EK’s comments, whereby the Convention does not require equal distribution of family leave between men and women nor flexible working time solutions or work arrangements, the Committee emphasizes that the Convention aims to create effective equality of opportunity and treatment for men and women workers with family responsibilities and that the Committee examines the implementation of the provisions of the Convention both in law and in practice. In doing so, the Committee assesses to which extent the measures adopted are efficient in guaranteeing that persons with family responsibilities who are engaged or wish to engage in employment are able to exercise their right to do so without being subject to discrimination and, to the extent possible, without conflict between their employment and family responsibilities.

Legislative developments. Prohibition of discrimination on the basis of family responsibilities. The Committee recalls its latest comment under the Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1958 (No. 111), in which it noted the entry into force of a new Non-Discrimination Act (1325/2014) on 1 January 2015. The Committee notes with interest that, in this new Act, the scope of the prohibition of discrimination has been expanded and now includes, inter alia, the ground of “family status” (section 8(1)). The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the application of section 8(1) of the Non-Discrimination Act (1325/2014) in practice, including any judicial decision taken or any discrimination case filed with the Ombudsperson.

Articles 3 and 4(b) of the Convention. National policy and leave entitlements. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that legislative amendments concerning paternity leave, which entered into force on 21 December 2012, extended the length of such leave to nine weeks and the period during which the leave can be taken to two years after childbirth or placement in the case of adoption. The Government further indicates that, according to the National Social Insurance Institution, there was an increase of 11 per cent in the number of fathers receiving the parental allowance between 2014 and 2015 but that mothers are still the primary users of parental leave despite an increase in the use of the overall permitted parental leave by fathers which increased from 8.3 to 9.7 per cent in 2015 (it was 7.1 per cent in 2010). It adds that, as from 13 December 2013, a new flexible care allowance can be paid to parents who participate in the care of a child under 3 years of age and work no more than 30 hours per week on average. As of 18 March 2016, mothers no longer earn leave days for the whole period of parental leave but only for six months during this period. The Government explains that this is to promote a better distribution of parental leave between mothers and fathers by encouraging fathers to take part of the parental leave more frequently, allowing the mothers to go back to work earlier. In their comments, SAK, AKAVA and STTK regret, however, that the Government has decreased the income-based parental allowance and limited the accrual of annual leave during parental leave. They consider that these and other measures will, in practice, affect the status of women in the labour market as women still take 90 per cent of all the family leave allowance. The Committee notes that, in the country report the Government produced in May 2014 on the implementation of the Beijing Platform for Action (1995) and the Outcome of the twenty-third special session of the United Nations General Assembly (2000), it indicated that, since January 2014, care subsidy was paid also to parents working part time with the objective to encourage women with small children to return to work earlier and to urge both parents to share the child care. The Government indicated that one of the most difficult issues was to enhance the equal sharing of family leave between mothers and fathers. In this regard, the Committee notes that, in its final observations, the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) regretted that the percentage of men who take parental leave remained low and that family leave available to men and single parents remained considerably low. It recommended that the Government, inter alia, “continue efforts to ensure the reconciliation of family and professional responsibilities and promote the equal sharing of domestic and family tasks between women and men, including by developing incentives to encourage more men to avail themselves of parental leave” (CEDAW/C/FIN/CO/7, 10 March 2014, paragraphs 26 and 27(d)). The Committee further notes that the Government Action Plan for Gender Equality 2016–19 sets long-term and mid-term objectives and envisages a set of measures to be taken such as: (i) a lump-sum of €2,500 for employers to compensate costs incurred due to family leave; (ii) introducing more flexibility in the starting date of the maternity allowance period; (iii) fostering family-friendly practices in the workplace; and (iv) improving the possibilities for workers to take care of their relatives. The Committee asks the Government to continue to provide information on any legislative amendments or other measures with regard to the parental leave system (including on the implementation of the Government Action Plan for Gender Equality 2016-19) as well as statistical information relating to the use of parental leave by men and women. To ensure improved application of the Convention, the Committee requests the Government to provide more detailed information on the impact of the measures taken, in particular the decrease in the income-based parental allowance and limitation the accrual of annual leave during parental leave to which SAK, AKAVA and STTK refer, and their effect on the situation of women and the frequency of leave taken by men.

Articles 7 and 8. Return to work, following family leave and protection from dismissal. In reply to the Committee’s request to provide information on the practical application and effects of the provisions concerned with the ability of workers returning from family leave to remain integrated in the labour force, the Government cites the Employment Contracts Act (55/2001), Chapter 4, section 9, according to which, at the end of a family leave, employees are entitled to return to their former duties. If this is not possible, employees shall be offered equivalent work in accordance with their employment contract; and if this is not possible either, other work in accordance with their employment contract. The Government adds that if it is not possible to offer an employee who returns from family leave any work that corresponds to the employment contract, the general provisions of the Act on terminating employment contracts and lay-offs, as well as the provisions on the related training and relocation obligations, are utilized when assessing the employer’s right to terminate or lay off the employee. It also refers to Chapter 7, section 9, of the Act which, not only, expressly prohibits termination of an employment contract on the ground of pregnancy or use of family leave but also reverses the burden of proof which is placed on the employer in case of dismissal. The Committee further notes that, in the previously mentioned country report of May 2014, the Government indicated that, according to studies, women faced discrimination at the workplace on grounds of pregnancy and family responsibilities. In this regard, the Committee recalls that, in its final observations, the CEDAW reiterated its concern regarding the illegal dismissal of women owing to pregnancy, childbirth and maternity leave and recommended that the Government “amend legislation to specifically prohibit employers from not renewing fixed-term employment contracts based on family leave and from limiting their duration on that basis” (CEDAW/C/FIN/CO/7, 10 March 2014, paragraphs 26 and 27(c)). The Committee notes the information provided by the Government concerning court decisions relevant to the principles covered in the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any measures taken: (i) to examine the relevance of implementing awareness-raising measures to engender broader understanding by employers, workers and the general public, of the problems encountered by male and female workers with family responsibilities; and (ii) to prohibit the non-renewal or limitation of the duration of fixed-term contracts based on the mere basis of family responsibilities of the worker. It asks the Government to continue providing information on any relevant court decisions.

The Committee is raising other matters in a request addressed directly to the Government.