All Comments

Home Page | 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

Labour Relations (Public Service) Convention, 1978 (No. 151) - Netherlands (Ratification: 1988)

Display in: French - Spanish

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2014, published 104th ILC session (2015)

The Committee notes the observations submitted by the Netherlands Trade Union Confederation (FNV) in a communication received on 29 August 2014, which raise the following concerns: (i) misuse of legal constructions in the civil service, such as “flex workers” hired from temporary employment agencies who are excluded from collective agreements for the civil service while being hired for several years and doing the same work as civil servants with the same authority and responsibilities; (ii) the impossibility since 2010 to bargain collectively concerning wage increases for civil servants due to “no rise” Government policies; and (iii) lack of consultation of public sector unions before and during the law-making process of a bill concerning the legal position and protection of civil servants, presently under examination in the Upper Chamber of Parliament following approval by the Lower Chamber. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments in respect to the FNV’s observations and to submit these questions to consultations with the appropriate representative organizations of workers and employers.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1994, published 81st ILC session (1994)

The Committee takes note of the Government's report.

With reference to its previous comment that section 106(2) of the General Public Service Regulations referring to "conflict with the general interest" might limit the means that should be available to public employees' organizations to negotiate their conditions of employment with the public authorities concerned pursuant to Article 7 of the Convention, the Committee notes the Government's statement that, in the period covered by the report, this section has not been applied.

The Committee asks the Government to continue to indicate in its future reports whether section 106(2) has been applied and to define the scope of the notion "conflict with the general interest".

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1992, published 79th ILC session (1992)

The Committee takes note of the information communicated by the Government in reply to its previous comments.

It notes that the Government states that access to the Central Commission for Organised Consultations has never been denied to an organisation representing public servants on the grounds that its admission would conflict with the general interest under section 106(2) of the General Public Service Regulations.

However, since it considers that that section might limit the means that should be available to public employees' organisations to negotiate their conditions of employment with the public authorities concerned pursuant to Article 7 of the Convention, the Committee asks the Government to indicate in its future reports whether section 106(2) has been applied and if so to define the scope of the notion "in conflict with the general interest".

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1991, published 78th ILC session (1991)

The Committee takes note of the information supplied in the Government's first report on this Convention.

It requests further information on the following points:

1. Article 4. Please explain how section 114a of the General Civil Service Regulations, and the other provisions referred to in the report, provide adequate protection against acts of anti-union discrimination in respect of public employees' employment. For example, what proceedings of redress are available where a civil servant claims he or she has been dismissed, transferred or otherwise prejudiced because of trade union membership or activities?

2. Article 5. Please supply more precise information on how adequate protection is ensured to public employees' organisations against acts of interference by public authorities in their functioning. For example, what means of redress are available if an organisation feels it is being pressured, coerced or receiving unfavourable treatment?

3. Article 6. Please explain the "trade union ten guilders" referred to in the report as a facility under this Article: under what provisions or agreement does the Government pay it into the joint fund; for what purpose is it paid; who has access to the joint fund?

4. Article 7. As regards section 106(2) of the General Civil Service Regulations, what is the practice for refusing admission to the Central Commission for Organised Consultation of a representative public servants' organisation on grounds that "its further admission conflicts with the general interest"?