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

Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98) - Ukraine (Ratification: 1956)

Display in: French - Spanish

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2023, published 112nd ILC session (2024)

Previous comment

The Committee notes the observations of the Confederation of Free Trade Unions of Ukraine (KVPU), received on 31 August 2023, referring to the matters addressed below.

In its previous comments, the Committee had noted the allegation of the Federation of Trade Unions of Ukraine (FPU) and the KVPU that Law No. 2434-IX on Amendments to Some Legislative Acts Regarding Simplification of Regulation of Labour Relations in the Sphere of Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises and Reduction of Administrative Burden on Businesses, which amended the Labour Code, infringed the right to collective bargaining by providing that the employment contract was the main tool for regulating labour relations in enterprises with less than 250 employees. The Committee had noted the Government’s indication that it was working on a draft Law on Labour which did not contain the provisions set out in Law No. 2434-IX and requested the Government to ensure that the reform fully complied with the Convention. The Committee notes that the Government indicates that: (i) the adoption of the comprehensive draft Law on Labour will allow Ukraine to abandon the Soviet legislative legacy in the field of employment and labour relations, and introduce internationally recognized principles and standards for regulating labour relations; (ii) the draft Law does not provide for any restrictions on the right to organize, and a copy was sent to the Office in October 2022; and (iii) the Ministry of Economy is currently conducting extensive consultations with the social partners and hearings with experts with a view to finalizing the draft Law. The Committee further notes that the KVPU, in its 2023 observations, reiterates its concerns regarding Law No. 2434-IX, and states that the draft Law on Labour aims to deregulate labour relations.

The Committee observes that the Committee on Freedom of Association (CFA), when it examined Case No. 3390 (403rd Report of the CFA, June 2023, paragraphs 534–597), welcomed the Government’s engagement with the Office with respect of the draft Law on Labour, which intends to replace the current Labour Code. The Committee also observes that the draft Law on Labour does not regulate collective labour relations and notes in this respect that Law No. 2937-IX on Collective Agreements and Contracts was adopted by Parliament on 23 February 2023. The Committee notes that, according to the Government, Law No. 2937-IX: (i) was developed by the National Tripartite Socio-Economic Council; (ii) defines the mechanism for concluding a collective agreement; (iii) provides protection against discrimination and anti-union interference; and (iv) will enter into force six months after the termination of martial law. Taking note of the above, the Committee will examine the conformity of Law No. 2937-IX with the Convention once the translation thereof becomes available. The Committee understands, therefore, that pending the adoption of the Law on Labour and the entry into force of the Law on Collective Agreements and Contracts, section 49 of the Labour Code, which was added by Law No. 2434-IX and allows individual contracts to prevail over collective agreements in enterprises employing less than 250 persons, remains in force with the effect of undermining the rights of workers in such enterprises. In this regard, the Committee recalls that the Convention covers all workers and employers, and their respective organizations, in both the private and the public sectors, regardless of the size of the enterprises or institutions. It further recalls that the obligation to promote collective bargaining set out in Article 4 of the Convention requires that the individual negotiation of the terms of the contract of employment cannot derogate from the rights and guarantees provided in the applicable collective agreements, on the understanding that contracts of employment can always set out more favourable terms and conditions of work and employment. The Committee recalls that this principle is explicitly set out in Paragraph 3 of the Collective Agreements Recommendation, 1951 (No. 91). In light of the above, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to amend this provision so as to ensure that a negotiation with individual workers is not detrimental to collective negotiation with trade union organizations. It requests the Government to provide information on all measures taken to that end.The Committee hopes that the draft Law on Labour will be finalized in the near future, in consultation with the social partners and with the technical assistance of the Office and will give full effect to the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any developments in this regard and to transmit a copy of the Law once adopted.

The Committee had further noted the allegation of the FPU and the KVPU that Law No. 2136-IX on Organisation of Labour Relations Under Martial Law suspended certain collective agreement provisions for the period of martial law. The Committee notes that the Government indicates that article 64 of the Constitution provides that in conditions of war or state of emergency, separate restrictions on rights and freedoms may be established. The Government adds that the final provisions of Law No. 2136-IX specify that the Law loses its validity from the date of termination of martial law, except for its provisions which relate to the compensation of employees and employers for monetary sums lost as a result of the armed aggression against Ukraine. The Committee further notes that the KVPU, in its 2023 observations, alleges that Law No. 2136-IX was adopted without any consultation of the social partners, and, consequently, contains a number of provisions which restrict the rights of workers and are not fully justified by the conditions of martial law. While recognizing the extremely difficult situation in the country and the necessity to adopt urgent measures to mitigate the resulting economic and social effects, the Committee emphasizes that the Employment and Decent Work for Peace and Resilience Recommendation, 2017 (No. 205) underlines the importance of social dialogue in general and collective bargaining in particular in responding to crisis situations by encouraging the active participation of employers’ and workers’ organizations in planning, implementing and monitoring measures for recovery and resilience. The Committee encourages the Government to review Law No. 2136-IX in full consultation with the most representative employers’ and workers’ organizations with a view to limiting the impact and the duration of the above-mentioned measures. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any developments in this regard. The Committee also reminds the Government that it may avail itself of ILO technical assistance if it so wishes.

The Committee had also noted the allegation of the FPU and the KVPU that draft Law No. 2682 on Strikes and Lockouts proposed to exclude the collective labour disputes procedure from the legislation so as to resolve all disputed issues via the strike procedure. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that draft Law No. 2682 was submitted by the people’s deputies of Ukraine as a legislative initiative but has not been considered by Parliament so far. The Committee further notes that the KVPU, in its 2023 observations, reiterates its concerns with respect to draft Law No. 2682, and states that it remains pending for consideration and that the above-mentioned change would violate the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to engage with the social partners with a view to ensuring that any draft legislative reform considered for adoption by Parliament is in full conformity with the Convention.

The Committee had also requested the Government to provide its comments on allegations of violations of the Convention in practice, including acts of anti-union union discrimination and interference, submitted by the KVPU in its 2017 and 2018 observations, the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) in its 2018 observations, and the FPU in its 2018 observations. Noting that the Government has not responded to these allegations, the Committee once again requests it to provide its comments thereon.

Article 4 of the Convention. Promotion of collective bargaining in practice. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that, as of 31 December 2021, 43,154 collective agreements covering 5,064,400 workers (70.2 per cent of the registered number of full-time employees) had been concluded and registered across Ukraine. The Government adds that 95 sectoral and two inter-sectoral agreements, as well as 26 territorial agreements, have been concluded at the regional level. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on signed collective agreements and the number of workers covered by such agreements, and to specify the sectors concerned.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2022, published 111st ILC session (2023)

The Committee notes the joint observations of the Federation of Trade Unions of Ukraine (FPU) and the Confederation of Free Trade Unions (KVPU), received on 31 August, 6 October and 12 October 2022, alleging that: (i) Law No. 2434-IX on Amendments to Some Legislative Acts Regarding Simplification of Regulation of Labour Relations in the Sphere of Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises and Reduction of Administrative Burden on Businesses infringes the right to collective bargaining by providing that the employment contract is the main tool for regulating labour relations in enterprises with less than 250 employees; (ii) Law No. 2136-IX on Organisation of Labour Relations Under Martial Law suspended certain collective agreement provisions for the period of martial law; (iii) Bill No. 2682 on Strikes and Lockouts proposes to exclude the collective labour disputes procedure from the legislation so as to resolve all disputed issues via the strike procedure; (iv) Bill No. 3204 on Amendments to Certain Legislative Acts of Ukraine Concerning the Validity of Collective Agreements proposes restrictions on the application of collective agreements; and (v) Bill No. 7628 on Collective Agreements and Treaties proposes to remove legislative regulation of the content of collective agreements, which weakens the protection of workers’ rights.

The Committee notes the Government’s reply to the observations of 31 August 2022, indicating that: (i) section 49 of the Labour Code, as amended by Law No. 2434-IX, provides that if not inconsistent with other provisions of the Code, employers and workers may, by mutual agreement, specify the terms of their employment relationship; and (ii) it is currently working on a draft Labour Code which does not contain the provisions set out in Law No. 2434-IX; and (iii) neither Law No. 2434-IX nor the draft Labour Code include restrictions on the right to collective bargaining. The Committee also takes note that the Government sent on 8 December 2022 its reply to the FPU and KVPU observations of 6 and 12 October 2022, which it will examine at its next session.

The Committee recalls that, with the only possible exception of the armed forces, the police and the public servants engaged in the administration of the State, the Convention applies to all companies and all workers. While noting the extremely difficult situation in the country since 24 February 2022, the Committee requests the Government to ensure that the legal reforms mentioned above fully comply with the Convention.

Recalling the importance placed on creating an enabling environment for the establishment, restoration or strengthening of employers’ and workers’ organizations in responding to crisis situations as set out in the Employment and Decent Work for Peace and Resilience Recommendation, 2017 (No. 205), the Committee reminds the Government of the availability of ILO technical assistance in this regard.

In the absence of a report from the Government on the application of the Convention, the Committee repeats its previous comments:

The Committee notes the observations of the Confederation of Free Trade Unions (KVPU) received on 9 October 2017 and 31 August 2018, of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) received on 1 September 2018, as well as of the Federation of Trade Unions of Ukraine (FPU) received on 11 October 2018. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments on the alleged violations of the Convention in practice, in particular acts of anti-union discrimination and interference contained therein.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication that a draft Collective Agreements Law had been drafted by the National Tripartite Socio-Economic Council and is being prepared for submission to the Cabinet of Ministers for consideration. The Government indicates that the draft will be submitted to the Office for comments. The Committee requests the Government to inform it of all developments in this regard.

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government on the number of collective agreements concluded at sectoral and territorial levels and the number of workers covered. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide this type of information.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2018, published 108th ILC session (2019)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2016, published 106th ILC session (2017)

The Committee notes the Government’s reply to the 2012, 2014, 2015 and 2016 observations of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), as well as the 2012 observations made by the Confederation of Free Trade Unions (KVPU) and 2015 observations made by the Federation of Trade Unions of Ukraine (FPU) on the application of the Convention.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication that a draft new Collective Agreements Law is being discussed by the National Tripartite Socio-Economic Council. It reminds the Government that it can avail itself of the technical assistance of the Office in this respect.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2012, published 102nd ILC session (2013)

The Committee notes a communication dated 4 August 2011 from the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) on the application of the Convention, alleging, in particular, acts of anti-union discrimination and interference, poor protection against such acts and reluctance of employers to bargain collectively. The Committee notes the Government’s detailed observations thereon.

The Committee further notes the communications dated 8 September 2011 and 5 July 2012 from the Confederation of Free Trade Unions of Ukraine (KVPU) providing its comments on the Act on Social Dialogue, which, with the adoption of the draft Labour Code, will become one of its chapters. In this respect, the Committee notes the conclusions and recommendations of the Committee on Freedom of Association in Case No. 2843 (see 362nd Report) in which the latter examined in detail the provisions of the new legislation and concluded that the set thresholds and privileges granted to representative organizations were acceptable under the Convention.

The Committee further notes the ITUC and KVPU communications dated 31 July and 31 August 2012, respectively, referring to the alleged cases of anti-union discrimination, employers’ interference in trade union affairs, and refusal by employers to bargain collectively. While noting that in its report the Government indicates that the number of collective agreements in the country increased in 2012 (from 98,500 agreements in 2011 to 101,700 agreements in 2012), the Committee will examine the Government’s reply once it is translated into one of the ILO working languages.

Article 4 of the Convention. Right to collective bargaining. The Committee had previously requested the Government to provide its observations on the ITUC allegation that, pursuant to the 2004 Model Statutes and Internal Rules for public limited companies, works councils have a mandate for collective bargaining. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that, pursuant to the legislation in force (section 12 of the Code of Labour Laws and section 6 of the Act on Social Dialogue), in collective bargaining at the enterprise level, workers are represented by primary trade unions, and that other workers’ representatives can be mandated to bargain collectively only in the absence of trade union organizations.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2010, published 100th ILC session (2011)

The Committee notes a communication dated 24 August 2010 from the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) submitting its comments on the application of the Convention and alleging, in particular, acts of anti-union discrimination and interference, as well as poor enforcement of court decisions examining cases of violations of trade union rights. The Committee also notes the Government’s observations thereon.

The Committee had previously noted the Government’s indication that work on drafting of the new Labour Code was ongoing and requested the Government to provide information on developments in this respect. The Committee notes that the National Forum of Trade Unions of Ukraine (NFTU) and the Confederation of Free Trade Unions of Ukraine (KVPU) submitted, in communications dated
30 April and 8 July 2010, respectively, that such legislation, if adopted, would have a negative impact on trade union rights and activities. The Committee notes, in particular, the concerns raised by the KVPU with regard to the issue of representativity and collective bargaining rights. The Committee notes the Government’s reply thereon. According to the Government, by its decision of 20 May 2008, the Supreme Rada of Ukraine instructed the Committee on Labour and Social Policy to develop further the draft Labour Code in cooperation with representatives of the Cabinet of the Ministers, All-Ukrainian trade unions and All-Ukrainian employers’ organizations. To that end, a working group was established on 4 June 2008. The Committee notes the Government’s indication in its latest report, that a new version of the Code was drafted, taking into account the ILO’s advice, which had been discussed by the Committee on Labour and Social Policy and the social partners. The Government further points out that the representativity thresholds were established by the unions after several consultations. The Committee requests the Government to provide the latest version of the draft Labour Code and encourages it to continue its cooperation with the social partners and the ILO in this respect and requests it to provide information on all progress made with regard to the adoption of the Labour Code.

Article 4 of the Convention. The Committee notes that, in its communication, the ITUC refers to the 2004 Model Statutes and Internal Rules for public limited companies, which, according to the ITUC, stipulates that works councils have a mandate for collective bargaining; however, the legislation does not provide for the establishment of such councils. The Committee requests the Government to provide its observations thereon.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2008, published 98th ILC session (2009)

Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention. The Committee had previously noted the comments submitted by the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) in its communication dated 10 August 2006 alleging cases of anti-union discrimination and interference in trade union internal affairs and insufficient protection against such acts, as well as the refusal of employers to bargain collectively with independent trade unions. The Committee notes that some of these matters were dealt with in Case No. 2388 by the Committee on Freedom of Association, which concluded that this case did not call for further examination (see 350th Report). The Committee notes the comments submitted by the Independent Trade Union of Miners (ITUM) of the coalmine named after MP Barakov, Kzasnodon on the application of the Convention in communications dated 24 March and 19 April 2008 and the Government’s reply thereon. The Committee notes the comments submitted by the Confederation of Free Trade Unions of Ukraine (KSPU) in a communication dated 28 August 2008 and by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) in a communication dated 29 August 2008, referring to the new cases of anti-union discrimination and interference, as well as violation of the right to bargain collectively in the public and private sectors. While noting the ITUC’s statement that some of the incidents of trade union discrimination have been effectively addressed by the courts and that the Government has been making efforts to resolve the complaints reported to the Committee on Freedom of Association, the Committee requests the Government to provide its observations on the comments submitted by the KSPU and the ITUC.

Article 4. The Committee had previously noted the Government’s indication that the work on drafting the new Labour Code was still ongoing and the draft chapter on collective agreements had been sent for consideration to the Committee on social and labour issues of the Supreme Council of Ukraine. It requested the Government to indicate the developments regarding the adoption of the new Labour Code. The Committee notes from the Government’s report that on 20 May 2008, the Supreme Council of Ukraine adopted in the first reading, the draft Labour Code submitted by the people’s deputies. The Committee notes, in this respect, the KSPU’s communication dated 4 June 2008 submitting comments on the draft Labour Code (the version adopted in the first reading), which, in its opinion, would have a negative impact on trade union activities. The Committee notes that the Office is providing technical assistance to the Government and trusts that the new Labour Code will be in full conformity with the Convention. It requests the Government to indicate any developments in this respect.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2006, published 96th ILC session (2007)

The Committee notes the Government’s report.

The Committee notes the communication from the Confederation of Free Trade Unions of Lugansk Region (KSPLO) dated 6 April 2006, alleging refusal of the Zorinsk city council to register a collective agreement signed by the KSPLO and the administration of the “Nikanor Novaya” mine, and the communication of the Federation of Trade Unions of Ukraine (FPU) dated 7 June 2006, submitting general comments on the application of the provisions of the Convention and alleging unilateral breach of the General Agreement by the Government, and the Government’s observations thereon. In particular, the Committee notes with interest that the collective agreement at the “Nikanor Novaya” mine was duly registered by the relevant authorities. It further notes with interest the Government’s statement that in order to increase the role of trade unions and employer’s organizations in formulating national economic and social policy and further developing social dialogue, the National Tripartite Socio-Economic Council was established and held its first meeting on 15 June 2006.

The Committee notes the comments submitted by the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) in its communication dated 10 August 2006. The Committee notes that the ICFTU alleges that trade union members are often subject to discrimination and that while anti-union discrimination is prohibited under the law and that the Criminal Code provides for sanctions of violation of trade union rights, no employer has ever been held liable under the provisions of the Code even when the courts have recognized cases of discrimination against trade union members. The ICFTU further alleges cases of employers’ interference in trade union activities and the refusal of employers to bargain collectively with independent trade unions. The Committee requests the Government to provide its observations thereon.

The Committee further notes the Government’s indication that the work on drafting of the new Labour Code was still ongoing and the draft chapter on collective agreements was sent for consideration to the Committee on social and labour issues of the Supreme Council of Ukraine. Noting with interest that the Government has accepted the technical assistance of the ILO in this respect, the Committee requests the Government to keep it informed of the developments regarding the adoption of the new Labour Code. It trusts that the new legislation will be in full conformity with the Convention.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2005, published 95th ILC session (2006)

The Committee notes the comments of the Government in relation to the observations received from the Confederation of Free Trade Unions of Ukraine (CFTUU) in September 2004. The Committee recalls that the CFTUU alleged that, while a range of legislative acts ensuring the application of the Convention exist in Ukraine, these regulations were not brought into effect in practice and sanctions for the violations of trade union rights enshrined under the Convention were not applied. The Committee notes that, according to the Government, State monitoring has now improved considerably. In total, 19,594 employers have been found guilty of administrative offences for violation of the labour legislation in 2004.

The Committee further notes the comments submitted by the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) in its communication of 31 August 2005 concerning the application of the Convention in law and in practice and relating to the matters raised in Cases Nos. 2038 and 2388, examined by the Committee on Freedom of Association. The Committee requests the Government to provide its observations thereon in its next report.

The Committee will examine other matters raised in its previous direct request (see direct request 2004, 75th session) in respect of the application of the Convention during the regular reporting cycle of 2006.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2004, published 93rd ILC session (2005)

The Committee takes note of the information contained in the Government’s report. It further notes the comments made by the Confederation of Free Trade Unions of Ukraine (KSPU) on the application of the Convention in practice.

Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention. In its previous request the Committee had asked the Government to indicate sanctions applicable in case of acts of anti-union discrimination other than dismissals, as well as the procedures which could be enacted to obtain reparation. The Committee further requested the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to ensure full protection of workers’ and employers’ organizations against any acts of interference in the establishment, functioning or administration of workers’ or employers’ organizations, including the establishment of expeditious procedures accompanied by sufficiently dissuasive sanctions against such acts. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the responsibility of the officials for the violation of the trade union legislation is set forth by article 46 of the Law on Trade Unions which provides that persons who prevent citizens from exercising the right to establish and join trade unions shall bear disciplinary, administrative or criminal responsibility. The Government further refers to the Penal Code of Ukraine of 2001. The Committee notes that according to article 170 of the Code, "wilful preclusion of legal activities of trade unions is punishable by correctional labour for a term of up to two years or imprisonment for a term of up to three years, with the loss of the right to occupy certain positions or engage in certain activities for a term of up to three years". According to article 172, unlawful dismissal of an employee in violation of labour law is punishable by a fine of up to 50 tax-free incomes or loss of the right to occupy certain positions or engage in certain activities for a term of up to three years, or correctional labour for a term of up to two years. The Committee notes that according to the KSPU, although the legislation provides for the protection against acts of anti-union discrimination and acts of interference, in practice, numerous cases of anti-union discrimination and acts of interference in trade union affairs (the KSPU provides details on 29 such cases) remain unpunished. The Committee requests the Government to transmit its observations thereon.

Article 4. With reference to its previous request to indicate whether the representatives of the Independent Trade Union of Miners were able to participate in the joint representatives body, as required by section 4 of the Law on Collective Agreements and Accords, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that the KSPU, to which the Independent Trade Union of Miners is affiliated, was a member of the joint representative body established in accordance with the Law on Collective Agreements and Accords to conclude the General Agreement at the national level for 2004-05. The sectoral agreement between the Ministry of Fuel and Energy of Ukraine, State Coal Production Corporation and the All-Ukrainian trade unions of the coal industry of Ukraine was signed on behalf of the trade unions by the Independent Trade Union of Miners and the Trade Union of the Workers of the Coal Industry of Ukraine.

Finally, the Committee notes the Government’s statement that on 26 May 2004, the draft Law on Introducing Changes in the Law on Collective Agreements and Accords was examined and approved by the National Council on Social Partnership. The Committee requests the Government to provide a copy thereof.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2001, published 90th ILC session (2002)

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its report.

Article 1 of the Convention. In its previous request the Committee had asked the Government to amend its legislation so that workers who are not trade union leaders were granted adequate protection against acts of anti-union discrimination other than dismissal (transfers, demotions and any other prejudicial acts), accompanied by effective and sufficiently dissuasive sanctions. The Committee notes that according to the Government, article 22 of the Labour Code protects workers against any acts of anti-union discrimination and prohibits limitations on the rights of workers when concluding, changing or terminating a labour agreement. The Government also indicates that by virtue of article 5 of the Trade Unions Law, membership in a trade union shall not imply any limitations of the labour, socio-economic, political or personal rights and freedoms of citizens. The Committee asks the Government to indicate sanctions applicable in case of acts of anti-union discrimination other than dismissals as well as the procedures which could be enacted to obtain reparation.

Articles 2 and 3 of the Convention. In its previous request the Committee had also asked the Government to take measures to amend the legislation so that workers’ and employers’ organizations were granted adequate protection against acts of interference by each other in the establishment, functioning or administration of workers’ or employers’ organizations, and so that such protection be accompanied by effective and sufficiently dissuasive sanctions. The Committee notes that according to the Government article 6 of the Law on Collective Agreements and Contracts prohibits any interference which may restrict the vested rights of workers and their representatives, or forbid the implementation of these rights, on the part of bodies of the executive authority, economic management, political parties or owners, in the process of the conclusion and execution of collective agreements and contracts. The Committee considers that the need to protect workers’ organizations against acts of interference by employers or their organizations in their establishment, functioning or administration goes beyond the protection afforded by the Law on Collective Agreements which appears to be limited to the process of collective bargaining. The Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to ensure full protection of workers’ and employers’ organizations against any acts of interference in the establishment, functioning or administration of workers’ or employers’ organizations, including the establishment of expeditious procedures accompanied by sufficiently dissuasive sanctions against such acts.

In its previous observation, the Committee had asked the Government to indicate whether the representatives of the Independent Trade Union of Miners were able to participate in the joint representatives body, as required by section 4 of the Act on Collective Agreements and Accords. The Committee notes that the Government’s report contains no reply to this matter (it had just stated in the previous report that another collective agreement was signed with the union), and once again requests the Government to provide information in this regard.

Finally, noting the report of the recent technical advisory mission to Ukraine, the Committee requests the Government to keep it informed of any developments in respect of the new draft Act on collective agreements and general agreements.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1999, published 88th ILC session (2000)

The Committee takes note of the Government's report and the enclosed new laws and drafts. Considering that Ukraine is in the process of revising its legislation, the Committee would like to address some points.

1. Article 1 of the Convention. Noting that except for dismissal the legislation does not grant workers adequate and specific protection against other acts of anti-union discrimination during the employment relationship, such as transfers, demotions and any other prejudicial acts, the Committee requests the Government to take measures to amend the legislation in this respect.

2. Article 2. Noting that the legislation does not grant workers' and employers' organizations adequate protection against acts of interference by each other in the establishment, functioning or administration of the workers' or employers' organizations, the Committee requests the Government to take measures to amend the legislation in this respect.

3. The Committee recalls that the legislation should provide effective and expeditious procedures with sufficiently dissuasive sanctions to ensure its application in practice against the acts mentioned in the previous paragraphs.

The Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or contemplated to give full compliance to the Convention.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1999, published 88th ILC session (2000)

The Committee notes the Government's report.

The Committee notes the Government's reply on the pending comments of discrimination against the Independent Trade Union of Miners (NPG) and its members by the management of the Barakov Mine in Krasnodon. The Government, referring to the inspections undertaken by the local labour inspectorate of Lugansk region, to verify compliance with labour legislation, states that no instances of contracts being offered to salaried employees who guarantee that they will not become members of the NPG have come to light. Furthermore, no violations of the Ukrainian Labour Code provisions regarding the lay-off procedure with respect to NPG members have been found and no facts indicating that managers' salaries are dependent on the number of members of the NPG have come to light. The Government adds that the problem of non-payment of wages affects workers in the entire enterprise, not only NPG members. The Government also states that information to the effect that management has taken a decision to shut down the NPG office does not correspond to actual fact: the NPG office is functioning as before in premises provided by the mine management. The Government's report also states that the collective agreement for 1998-99 was signed.

The Committee asks the Government to indicate whether NPG representatives were able to participate in the joint representatives body, as required by section 4 of the Act on Collective Agreements and Accords, in conformity with Article 2 of the Convention.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1998, published 87th ILC session (1999)

The Committee notes the communication from the Independent Trade Union of Miners (NPG) and the information provided by the Government in this respect.

The Committee notes the NPG's statement that the management of the N.P. Bakarov Mine in Krasnodon, violates the provisions of the Convention, the national legislation and the collective agreement and discriminates against the trade union's leaders and its members. In particular, the NPG states that: (1) contracts are offered to employees who guarantee that they will not become members of the NPG; (2) NPG members are the first to be dismissed when dismissals occur; (3) mine managers' salaries are dependent upon a decrease in the number of NPG members; (4) salaries have not been paid to NPG leaders over a significant period of time and a certain number of trade union leaders have been unlawfully dismissed; (5) the management has taken a decision to shut down the NPG office; (6) miners did not receive wages over a period of several months in 1996, 1997 and 1998. According to the NPG, following the trade union picket of Lugansk administrative authority offices in July 1997, demanding the authority's compliance with the Ukrainian Constitution, labour legislation and the collective agreement, the Lugansk administrative authorities gave their assurance that, in future, they would comply with the above legal provisions and agreements, which has not proved to be the case; representatives from the Ministry of Labour and the Ministry of the Coal Industry visited the enterprise without investigating the violations of miners' rights.

The Committee notes the Government's statement that officials of the Ministry of Labour and Social Security and the Ministry of the Coal Industry visited Bakarov Mine to verify the information provided by the NPG in respect of the violations of Conventions Nos. 87 and 98. Similarly, the Committee notes with interest the Government's statement that the NPG and the mine's management have concluded a collective agreement which requires the management to provide the necessary conditions for the NPG to carry out its activities, including the following provisions: to grant NPG members access to the workplace; to receive information relative to the enterprise's activities; to grant trade union leaders paid leave to carry out their activities; to supply facilities to the NPG; to apply the same rules on the payment of wages, recruitment, dismissal, annual leave and shifts to all workers regardless of whether they are trade union members; the agreement on vacations and redundancy plans for dismissal between the mine management and the trade union, in accordance with the legislation in force. Finally, the Committee notes the Government's information that the other allegations made by the NPG do not constitute violations of the Ukrainian legislation and that the NPG signed other collective agreements in 1997 and 1998.

The Committee regrets the fact that the Government has not provided detailed information on the specific acts of discrimination alleged by the NPG (recruitment subject to non-membership of the trade union, dismissal of trade union leaders and members, etc.). The Committee requests the Government to carry out expeditiously a thorough investigation in this respect and to take the necessary measures to remedy the acts of discrimination which it concludes have occurred. The Committee requests the Government to ensure that the practices of N.P. Bakarov Mine and Krasnodon enterprise are in conformity with Article 1 of the Convention.

The Committee asks the Government to ensure the unimpeded ability of the NPG representatives to participate in the joint representative body as required by section 4 of the Act on Collective Agreements and Accords, in conformity with the requirements of Article 2 of the Convention.

In conclusion, the Committee notes the Government's statement that Parliament is examining bills on trade unions and social partners to amend the Collective Agreements Act and that the Bill in respect of the settlement of collective disputes has been adopted in March 1998. The Committee requests the Government to inform it in its next report on the contents and developments in respect of the above bills and the content and application of the Law of March 1998.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1996, published 85th ILC session (1997)

The Committee notes the communication from the Trade Union Federation of Ukraine and the information supplied by the Government in this connection.

The comments of the above Federation concern the legality of sections 17, 18 and 19 of the Law of 1 July 1993 on collective treaties and agreements, which establish the financial liability of trade union representatives, and sanctions for failure to comply with collective treaties and agreements and for breaches of collective bargaining procedures. The Federation holds that these provisions constitute anti-union discrimination.

In its report, the Government indicates that the Law establishes equality between the parties and provides for administrative and disciplinary sanctions for both workers and employers for non-observance or violation of collective treaties and agreements or breaches of collective bargaining procedures. Decisions concerning sanctions are taken by the courts. According to the Government, these provisions are not in breach of the Convention.

In the Committee's opinion, the provisions in question, which place workers and employers on a par and serve to strengthen the collective bargaining process, do not impair application of the Convention.

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

Article 4 of the Convention. With reference to its previous direct request, the Committee notes that a Bill respecting collective contracts and agreements is being drafted. According to the Government, the Bill extends the legal guarantees of labour organisations with regard to collective bargaining and strengthens the level of autonomy of undertakings at a primary level.

The Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide the text of the Bill with its next report.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1989, published 76th ILC session (1989)

In reply to its previous request, the Committee notes the information supplied by the Government. It asks the Government to continue sending any new information concerning the application of the Convention.