ILO-en-strap
NORMLEX
Information System on International Labour Standards
NORMLEX Home > Country profiles >  > Comments > All Comments

Display in: French - Spanish

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

Previous comment

The Committee takes note of the observations of the Confederation of Independent Trade Unions of Bulgaria (CITUB) transmitted with the Government’s report in 2019 concerning issues examined in the present comment.
The Committee welcomes the Government’s indication that the Labour Code was amended in 2020 to promote social dialogue and collective bargaining and that the amendments were drafted with active participation of experts of the social partners and adopted after consultations with the nationally representative organizations of workers and employers in the National Council for Tripartite Cooperation. The relevant amendments are assessed in more detail below.
The Committee further notes the adoption of the Protection of Persons Who Report or Publicly Disclose Information on Breaches Act, 2023. The Government indicates that the Law is also applicable to public disclosure of information on violations of labour legislation and legislation related to the performance of public service.
Article 1 of the Convention. Adequate protection against acts of anti-union discrimination. In its previous comment, the Committee invited the Government to collect statistical information on the application of the existing mechanisms against anti-union discrimination. It also encouraged the Government to hold consultations with the most representative organizations to assess, in light of the statistical information, the need for any additional measures in this respect. While observing that the Government does not provide any updated information in this regard, the Committee takes note of the judicial decisions provided in the Government’s report, which mainly concern preliminary protection of trade union officials in the event of dismissal set out in section 333 of the Labour Code. The Committee requests the Government to collect statistical information on the application of the existing mechanisms to protect against anti-union discrimination and to provide information in this regard.
Article 2. Adequate protection against acts of interference. In its previous comment, having observed that national legislation does not provide adequate protection of workers’ organizations against acts of interference by employers or employers’ organizations, the Committee requested once again the Government to take the necessary measures to amend the national legislation accordingly. Noting the absence of a reply from the Government on this issue, the Committee reiterates its previous request.
Article 4. Promotion of collective bargaining. The Committee welcomes the Government’s indication that the 2020 amendments to the Labour Code aim to renew the interest in collective bargaining and notes the Government’s indication that: (i) section 2 sets that the State shall regulate industrial relations through dialogue with the workers and employers and their organizations; (ii) section 57 allows workers who are not members of a trade union party to a collective agreement to accede to the agreement by an application to the employer or to the leadership of the union, and provides that any monetary contributions from these workers shall be determined by the parties to the collective agreement; and (iii) section 51b improves and supports the procedure for extending sectoral or branch collective agreements (a joint request by the parties to the collective agreement and a written consent of all workers’ and employers’ organizations representatives at the national level), thereby increasing the coverage of collective bargaining. The Committee takes due note of these amendments and requests the Government to provide information on the practical application of the new extension procedure and its impact on the collective bargaining coverage.
Articles 4 and 6. Collective bargaining in the public sector. In its previous comment, the Committee urged the Government to take, as soon as possible, the steps necessary to amend the Civil Servants Act so as to ensure the right to collective bargaining of public servants not engaged in the administration of the State. In the absence of any information from the Government on this point, the Committee reiterates its request and trusts that the Government will be in a position to provide updates on this matter in its next report.
Application of the Convention in practice. In its previous comment, the Committee requested the Government to provide statistics on collective bargaining and to inform on the measures taken to promote it. The Committee notes that the Government: (i) refers to the annual reports of the National Institute for Conciliation and Arbitration (NICA) for detailed information on the dynamics of collective agreements and collective labour disputes (available in Bulgarian) without giving details to the Committee on the statistical information requested; and (ii) states that the Ministry of Labour and Social Policy promotes social dialogue and collective bargaining mechanisms through, inter alia, capacity-building of the social partners and the development of an online information resource on collective bargaining agreements and collective labour disputes, which was welcomed by the CITUB. The Committee observes at the same time that, according to the CITUB: (i) there are many cases of employers who refuse to negotiate, delay negotiations or violate concluded collective agreements; (ii) measures to encourage the full development of collective bargaining in line with Article 4 of the Convention are absent; and (iii) there is a need to develop a methodology for calculating the coverage of collective agreements and monitoring the process at different levels, involving the expertise of the General Labour Inspectorate and the NICA. Based on the above, the Committee once again requests the Government to provide information on the number of collective agreements concluded and in force, the sectors concerned and the percentage of the workforce covered by these agreements. The Committee further requests the Government to continue to take measures to encourage and promote the full development and utilization of collective bargaining at all levels and to provide information in this respect.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2019, published 109th ILC session (2021)

The Committee notes the Government’s comments on previous observations of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC).
Article 1 of the Convention. Protection against acts of anti-union discrimination. In its previous comments, the Committee had invited the Government to take the necessary steps to strengthen the sanctions and remedy measures available in cases of acts of anti-union discrimination and to provide specific information on the application of the relevant national legislation in practice. The Committee had requested the Government to: (i) provide statistics as to the average length of reinstatement proceedings; (ii) specify the number of reinstatement orders issued in cases of anti-union dismissal; and (iii) clarify whether a worker alleging anti-union dismissal may initiate proceedings both under the Labour Code (LC, sections 344 and 225) and the Protection against Discrimination Act (sections 71 and 78). The Committee notes that the Government states that: (i) no statistical information is maintained on the average length of the recovery procedure and the number of decisions to reinstate a worker fired with anti-union motives (however, pursuant to section 344 of the LC, these disputes are examined by the regional court within three months after receipt of the application, and by the district court within one month of receipt of the appeal); (ii) workers concerned may file both a claim for compensation for staying unemployed under section 225 of the LC, and a claim contesting the dismissal and seeking reinstatement pursuant to section 344 of the LC; (iii) section 225 of the LC aims to compensate the worker for the harm arising from the missed opportunities to receive remuneration due to an unlawful dismissal; (iv) however, it limits the amount of possible compensation to the amount of the employee’s gross remuneration for the time of unemployment due to unlawful dismissal, up to a maximum of six months, in order to motivate the worker to look for a job on the labour market; and (v) if the worker has suffered harm on other grounds, including because of discrimination, he or she has the opportunity to seek compensation for them under the general civil law or through the mechanisms provided for in the Protection against Discrimination Act. Having duly noted the information provided by the Government, the Committee invites it to collect statistical information on the application of the existing mechanisms to protect against anti-union discrimination, including anti-union dismissals, noting in particular the number and type of requests for remedies brought under the LC, the Protection against Discrimination Act, and/or general civil law, as well as their outcome detailing the number of reinstatement orders and the amount of compensation awarded. The Committee further encourages the Government to hold consultations with the most representative organizations to assess, in light of this statistical information, the need for any additional measures to ensure that the remedies to protect against anti-union discrimination provide a sufficiently dissuasive sanction both in law and in practice.
Article 2. Protection against acts of interference. In its preceding comments the Committee had: (i) observed that national legislation does not provide adequate protection of workers’ organizations against acts of interference by employers or employers’ organizations; (ii) taken note of the ITUC allegations of acts of harassment and interference on the employer’s side, and of the insistence by the Confederation of Independent Trade Unions in Bulgaria (CITUB) on the need to adopt penal sanctions against acts of interference; and (iii) requested the Government to indicate the legislative measures taken or envisaged to this end. Regretting the lack of information provided by the Government in this respect, and recalling that national legislation should explicitly prohibit all acts of interference mentioned in the Convention and make express provision for rapid appeal procedures, coupled with dissuasive sanctions, the Committee once again requests the Government to take the necessary measures in the near future to amend the national legislation accordingly. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any progress achieved in this respect.
Articles 4 and 6. Collective bargaining in the public sector. The Committee recalls that for a number of years it has been requesting the Government to amend the Civil Servants Act so that the right to collective bargaining of public service workers not engaged in the administration of the State is duly recognized. The Committee notes that the Government provides no information in this regard, and observes that the 2016 amendments to the Civil Servants Act did not address the need to bring this aspect of national legislation into conformity with the Convention. The Committee must recall that, although Article 6 of the Convention allows public servants engaged in the administration of the State to be excluded from its scope, other categories of public servants should enjoy the guarantees of the Convention and therefore be able to negotiate collectively their conditions of employment, including wages.  The Committee urges the Government to take, as soon as possible, the steps necessary to amend the Civil Servants Act so as to ensure the right to collective bargaining of public servants not engaged in the administration of the State. The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the near future.
Application of the Convention in practice. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the number of collective agreements concluded and in force, the sectors concerned and the percentage of the workforce covered by these agreements, as well as on any measures undertaken to promote the full development and utilization of collective bargaining under the Convention.

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

The Committee notes the observations of the Confederation of Independent Trade Unions in Bulgaria (KNSB/CITUB) received on 29 August 2016 with the Government’s report, concerning issues being raised by the Committee. The Committee also notes the observations received on 31 August 2016 from the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) referring to issues under examination by the Committee as well as allegations of acts of anti-union discrimination and harassment, of a fall in the number of employers signing collective agreements and of cases of non-compliance of employers with concluded collective agreements in the energy, light industry and education sectors. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments thereon. The Committee once again requests the Government to provide its comments on the 2013 and 2014 ITUC observations and the 2014 observations of the KNSB/CITUB on the practical application of the Convention.
Article 1 of the Convention. Protection against acts of anti-union discrimination. In its previous observation, the Committee had invited the Government to take the necessary steps to strengthen the sanctions and remedy measures available in cases of acts of anti-union discrimination in consultation with the most representative employers’ and workers’ organizations and to provide specific information on the application of the relevant national legislation in practice. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that: (i) as regards section 71(1)(No. 3) of the Protection against Discrimination Act, which provides in cases of discrimination for a compensation with no upper limit for both material and non-material damages, the vast majority of indemnities granted in recent years have been in the range of 500–2,000 Bulgarian Lev (BGN) (€250–€1,000); and (ii) according to the Supreme Court of Cassation, setting monetary compensation for non-pecuniary damage takes note of particular circumstances of the offence, injury, and its intensity; standard of living in the country as a base for a cash consideration of non-pecuniary damage; and the reference set by case law in similar cases. The Committee also notes the judicial decisions supplied by the Government to illustrate the application of sections 71 and 78 of the Protection against Discrimination Act and sections 225(1) and 333(3) of the Labour Code.
Noting the compensation imposed in practice (BGN500 to BGN2,000 (€250–€1,000)) under section 71(1)(No. 3) and the fine in section 78(1)(No. 2) of the Protection against Discrimination Act (BGN250 to BGN2,000 (€125–€1,000)) as well as the compensation under section 225(1) of the Labour Code (up to six months’ wages), the Committee observes that the minimum wage in Bulgaria was €215 in January 2016. The Committee recalls that under section 344(1) of the Bulgarian Labour Code, a factory or office worker shall be entitled to contest the legality of the dismissal thereof before the employer or before the court and to claim that the dismissal be pronounced wrongful and be revoked; that the worker be reinstated to the previous work; that the worker be paid compensation for the period of work suspension due to the dismissal; and that the grounds for the dismissal, as entered in the workbook or in other documents, be corrected. The Committee considers that where a State opts for the principle of reinstatement, it is important to ensure that the system also envisages retroactive wage compensation as well as compensation for the prejudice suffered, with a view to ensuring that all of these measures taken together constitute a sufficiently dissuasive sanction. Noting the acts of anti-union discrimination alleged by the ITUC, the Committee hopes that the Government will take the necessary steps to strengthen the existing remedy measures in consultation with the most representative employers’ and workers’ organizations so as to ensure that the package of measures against anti-union discrimination constitutes a sufficiently dissuasive sanction, in order to give effect to Article 1 of the Convention in practice. The Committee also requests the Government to: (i) provide statistics as to the average length of reinstatement proceedings; (ii) specify the number of reinstatement orders issued in cases of anti-union dismissal; and (iii) clarify whether a worker alleging anti-union dismissal may initiate proceedings both under the Labour Code (sections 344 and 225) and the Protection against Discrimination Act (sections 71 and 78).
Article 2. Protection against acts of interference. The Committee had previously noted that national legislation does not provide adequate protection of workers’ organizations against acts of interference by employers or employers’ organizations and had requested the Government to indicate the legislative measures taken or envisaged to this end. Noting that the Government provides no information in this respect, the Committee takes note of the ITUC allegations of acts of harassment and interference on the employer’s side, and observes that the KNSB/CITUB insists on the need to adopt penal sanctions against acts of interference. Recalling that national legislation should explicitly prohibit all acts of interference mentioned in the Convention and make express provision for rapid appeal procedures, coupled with dissuasive sanctions, in order to ensure the application in practice of Article 2 of the Convention, the Committee once again requests the Government to take the necessary measures in the near future to amend the national legislation accordingly. In this respect, the Committee hopes that the work of the inter-institutional working group created in the framework of the National Coordination Mechanism on Human Rights will accelerate the bringing of national legislation into conformity with the Convention, taking due account of the Committee’s long-standing comments. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any progress achieved in this respect, including on the proposals made by the working group and on relevant deliberations in plenary.
Articles 4 and 6. Collective bargaining in the public sector. The Committee recalls that for a number of years it has been requesting the Government to amend the Civil Servants Act so that the right to collective bargaining of public service workers not engaged in the administration of the State, is duly recognized in national legislation. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that: (i) on 9 September 2015, the Council of Ministers adopted a decision approving the bill amending the Civil Servants Act to regulate the right to bargain collectively for civil servants; (ii) the bill was approved by the Administrative Reform Council and the National Council for Tripartite Cooperation, and was then submitted for discussion by the Council of Ministers to the National Assembly; (iii) the Committee on Labour, Social and Demographic Policy approved the bill and advised Parliament to support the amendments at first reading; (iv) on 10 February 2016, the National Assembly adopted at first reading the amendments to the Civil Servants Act, which entitle civil servants to sign collective bargaining agreements; and (v) on 29 June 2016, the bill was submitted for consideration to the Committee on Legal Affairs of the National Assembly. The Committee also notes that the KNSB/CITUB confirms that the final adoption of the bill amending the Civil Servants Act by the National Assembly is expected at the end of 2016. The Committee welcomes this information. The Committee trusts that the bill amending the Civil Servants Act to regulate the right to collective bargaining for civil servants will be adopted in the very near future and requests the Government to provide a copy of the Act once it is adopted.

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

The Committee notes the observations of the Confederation of Independent Trade Unions in Bulgaria (KNSB/CITUB) submitted with the Government’s report, and requests the Government to provide its comments on the information concerning the practical application of the Convention.
The Committee notes the observations received on 1 September 2014 from the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), as well as the Government’s comments on the legislative matters raised by the ITUC in 2013 and 2014. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments on the 2013 and 2014 ITUC observations concerning the practical application of the Convention.
Article 1 of the Convention. Protection against acts of anti-union discrimination. In its previous observation, the Committee had invited the Government to compile data on the average duration in practice of court proceedings related to discrimination on the grounds of trade union activities, including appeals procedures, and also on the average compensation paid and sanctions imposed, and to communicate this information in its next report. The Committee notes from the Government’s report that: (i) the equal treatment provisions of the Labour Code are supplemented by the provisions of the Protection against Discrimination Act with its own specialized anti discrimination proceedings before the Commission for Protection against Discrimination; (ii) as a preventive measure, section 333(3) of the Labour Code protects certain trade union officials against dismissal by requiring the prior consent of the trade union throughout the period of office and six months after it; (iii) in terms of compensation, section 225(1) of the Labour Code provides in all cases of unlawful dismissal for a compensation amounting to the worker’s gross remuneration for the period of unemployment but not more than six months; and section 71(1)(No. 3) of the Protection against Discrimination Act provides in cases of discrimination for a compensation with no upper limit for both material and non-material damages; (iv) section 71(1)(No. 2) of the Protection against Discrimination Act provides for the possibility to establish an obligation to cease violation, restore the situation before the violation and refrain from further discriminatory action; and (v) in terms of sanctions, section 78(1)(No. 2) of the Protection against Discrimination Act imposes a fine of BGN250 to BGN2,000 (€125 to €1,000) on the established perpetrator of discrimination (amount doubles in case of repeated offences). The Committee also notes the detailed information provided by the Government in relation to examples of application of the Protection against Discrimination Act in cases of discrimination due to trade union membership or activities.
The Committee considers that the applicable compensation for unlawful dismissal under section 225(1) of the Labour Code (up to six months’ wages) may be a deterrent for a certain number of small and medium-sized enterprises, but that this is unlikely so for large enterprises or high productivity or profitability enterprises; and that, similarly, the fine imposed under section 78(1)(No. 2) of the Protection against Discrimination Act lacks a deterrent effect. Taking note of the acts of anti-union discrimination alleged by the KNSB/CITUB and the ITUC, and recalling the importance, in cases of anti-union discrimination, of imposing deterrent fines and paying adequate compensation which would represent a sufficiently dissuasive sanction, so as to ensure the application of Article 1 of the Convention in practice, the Committee invites the Government to take the necessary steps to strengthen these sanctions and remedy measures in consultation with the most representative employers’ and workers’ organizations. In view of the case examples provided, the Committee further requests the Government to indicate: (i) the maximum and the average amounts of compensation ordered in recent years under section 71(1)(No. 3) of the Protection against Discrimination Act; (ii) whether, and in what circumstances, reinstatement under section 71(1)(No. 2) of the Protection against Discrimination Act may be and has already been ordered; and (iii) the average duration in practice of court proceedings (including appeal procedures) related to anti-union discrimination, as well as of proceedings before the Commission for Protection against Discrimination. The Committee requests the Government to clarify concrete cases in which the following provisions would be applicable: (a) section 225(1) of the Labour Code, and (b) sections 71 and 78 of the Protection against Discrimination Act.
Article 2. Protection against acts of interference. The Committee had previously noted that national legislation does not provide adequate protection of workers’ organizations against acts of interference by employers or employers’ organizations and had requested the Government to indicate the legislative measures taken or envisaged in this respect. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that no relevant legislative amendments were adopted during the reference period. The Committee recalls that national legislation should explicitly prohibit all acts of interference mentioned in the Convention and make express provision for rapid appeal procedures, coupled with dissuasive sanctions, in order to ensure the application in practice of Article 2 of the Convention. The Committee again requests the Government to take the necessary measures in order to modify the national legislation accordingly and to provide information on any developments in this regard.
Articles 4 and 6. Collective bargaining in the public sector. The Committee recalls that for a number of years it has been requesting the Government to amend the Civil Service Act so that the right to collective bargaining of all public service workers, other than those engaged in the administration of the State, is duly recognized in national legislation. Observing the Government’s statement that an interdepartmental working group was set up to develop proposals to the Civil Service Act, the Committee expressed the firm hope that the Civil Servant Act would soon be brought into accordance with the requirements of the Convention. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the interagency expert working group drafted a bill amending the Civil Servant Act at the end of 2012, which proposed the regulation of collective agreements in the public service. The bill was submitted for consideration to the Council for Administrative Reform (CAR), was refused and submitted to the CAR for re-examination at the end of 2013; following a positive decision of the CAR, the bill was discussed in the framework of the Labour Legislation Commission at the National Council for Tripartite Cooperation, but no approval was granted by the representatives of the social partners. Furthermore, the Committee notes that the Government indicates that the Ministry of Labour and Social Policy reported on the instances of non-conformity between the national legislation and international ratified instruments and submitted them for consideration to the National Coordination Mechanism on Human Rights, which has the power to propose that the relevant state bodies and institutions initiate amendments to national legislation on human rights; and that, on 30 May 2014, at the proposal of the Foreign Affairs Minister, a decision was adopted to create an inter-institutional working group, which will propose a mechanism and concrete measures to overcome the instances of non-conformity as soon as possible. The Committee trusts that due account will be taken of its long-standing comments during the works of the inter-institutional working group to be created in the framework of the National Coordination Mechanism on Human Rights. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any developments in this respect, in particular on the measures proposed by the above inter-institutional working group and the outcome of the deliberations within the National Coordination Mechanism on Human Rights itself.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2013, published 103rd ILC session (2014)

The Committee notes the comments submitted by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) in 2013. The Committee requests the Government to provide its observations thereon.
The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It must therefore repeat its previous observation.
Article 1 of the Convention. Protection of workers against acts of anti-union discrimination. The Committee in its latest observation has requested the Government to supply information regarding the average length of anti-union discrimination proceedings in practice and the compensations paid or sanctions imposed in case of anti-union dismissals, and to indicate the status of the process of establishing specialized labour courts.
The Committee invites the Government to compile data on the average duration in practice of court proceedings related to discrimination on the grounds of trade union activities, including appeals procedures and also on the average compensation paid and sanctions imposed, and to communicate this information in its next report.
Article 2. Protection against acts of interference. The Committee had previously noted that national legislation does not provide full protection against acts of interference by employers or employers’ organizations and has requested the Government to indicate the legislative measures taken or envisaged to ensure adequate protection, including by means of dissuasive sanctions, against such acts of interference.
The Committee recalls that, under Article 2 of the Convention, all acts which are designed to promote the establishments of workers’ organizations under the domination of employers’ organizations, or to support workers’ organizations by financial means with the object of placing such organizations under the control of employers or employers’ organizations, shall be deemed to constitute acts of interference. The Committee further reminds that national legislation should explicitly prohibit all such acts of interference and make express provision for rapid appeal procedures, coupled with dissuasive sanctions against acts of interference, in order to ensure the application in practice of Article 2. Therefore, the Committee again requests the Government to take the necessary measures in order to modify the national legislation accordingly and ensure the application of Article 2 as indicated, and to meanwhile provide information about the steps taken towards an adequate protection against such acts of interference.
Articles 4 and 6. Collective bargaining in the public sector. The Committee has previously taken note of the comments made by the ITUC and the KNSB/CITUB regarding collective bargaining rights of public servants and requested the Government to amend the Civil Service Act so that the right to collective bargaining of all public service workers, other than those engaged in the administration of the State, is duly recognized in the national legislation.
The Committee observes that the Government had stated that an interdepartmental work group was set up with the mission to develop proposals and amendments to the law on railway transport and the Civil Service Act in order to meet the standards of the International Labour Organization. The Committee expresses the firm hope that the Civil Servant Act will soon be brought into accordance with the requirements of the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to inform on the evolution of the process and to include the text of the amended Articles in one of the ILO’s official working languages in its next report.
The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the near future.

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

The Committee notes the comments submitted by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) on 4 August 2011 and 31 July 2012, concerning the dismissal of trade union leaders in several enterprises. The Committee requests the Government to provide its observations thereon.
Article 1 of the Convention. Protection of workers against acts of anti-union discrimination. The Committee in its latest observation has requested the Government to supply information regarding the average length of anti-union discrimination proceedings in practice and the compensations paid or sanctions imposed in case of anti-union dismissals, and to indicate the status of the process of establishing specialized labour courts. This request was based on the previous comments received from the ITUC and the Confederation of Independent Trade Unions in Bulgaria (KNSB/CITUB), which indicated that legal proceedings for the reinstatement of dismissed workers can take a long time and sometimes even years, and that the sanctions against employers for unfair dismissal are too weak to be dissuasive.
The Committee notes the detailed information provided by the Government with regard to the amended Civil Procedure Code in 2010, and especially, with regard to the provisions on the summary labour procedure being now applied to cases concerning illegal dismissals. The Committee welcomes the information provided by the Government that the summary procedure may now be ruled on definitively within a reasonable period of six months. Nevertheless, the Committee invites the Government to compile data on the average duration in practice of court proceedings related to discrimination on the grounds of trade union activities, including appeals procedures and also on the average compensation paid and sanctions imposed, and to communicate this information in its next report.
Article 2. Protection against acts of interference. The Committee had previously noted that national legislation does not provide full protection against acts of interference by employers or employers’ organizations and has requested the Government to indicate the legislative measures taken or envisaged to ensure adequate protection, including by means of dissuasive sanctions, against such acts of interference.
The Committee notes that no amendments to the legislation were made according to the information provided in the Government’s report. The Committee therefore recalls that under Article 2 of the Convention, all acts which are designed to promote the establishments of workers’ organizations under the domination of employers’ organizations, or to support workers’ organizations by financial means with the object of placing such organizations under the control of employers or employers’ organizations, shall be deemed to constitute acts of interference. The Committee further reminds that national legislation should explicitly prohibit all such acts of interference and make express provision for rapid appeal procedures, coupled with dissuasive sanctions against acts of interference, in order to ensure the application in practice of Article 2. Therefore, the Committee again requests the Government to take the necessary measures in order to modify the national legislation accordingly and ensure the application of Article 2 as indicated, and to meanwhile provide information about the steps taken towards an adequate protection against such acts of interference.
Article 4. Promotion of free and voluntary collective bargaining. The Committee has requested article 51(b)(1) and (2) of the Labour Code to be amended in order to enable representative organizations of workers and employers to bargain collectively and to conclude collective agreements in sectorial and branch level without the need to be affiliated to a national representative organization, and thereby, comply with the requirements of Article 4 of the Convention. The Committee notes with satisfaction that, according to the government report, amendments were made to article 51(b)(1) and (2) of the Labour Code, which no longer mentions the need to be affiliated to a national representative organization in order to be entitled to collective bargaining.
Articles 4 and 6. Collective bargaining in the public sector. The Committee has previously taken note of the comments made by the ITUC and the KNSB/CITUB regarding collective bargaining rights of public servants and requested the Government to amend the Civil Service Act so that the right to collective bargaining of all public service workers, other than those engaged in the administration of the State, is duly recognized in the national legislation.
The Committee observes that the Government states that an interdepartmental work group was set up with the mission to develop amendments to the Law on Railway Transport and the Civil Service Act in order to meet the standards of the International Labour Organization; these proposals were drawn up to introduce legislative amendments to the Civil Service Act and were included in a report of the Minister of Labour and Social Policy which was presented to the Council of Ministers achieving thereon its material consent to the proposed amendments. The Committee takes note that, according to the Government, the process of proposing amendments to the Civil Servant Act is still open and that the discussion of those amendments needs to be postponed for 2012. In these circumstances the Committee expresses the firm hope that the Civil Servant Act will soon be brought into accordance with the requirements of the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to inform on the evolution of the process and to include the text of the amended Articles in one of the ILO’s official working languages in its next report.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2011, published 101st ILC session (2012)

The Committee notes the comments made by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) in a communication dated 4 August 2011 on matters being examined by the Committee. It requests the Government to provide its observations thereon.
The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It is therefore bound to reiterate the issues raised in its previous observation.
Article 1 of the Convention. Protection of workers against acts of anti union discrimination. The Committee had previously requested the Government to provide its observations on earlier comments submitted by the ITUC and the Confederation of Independent Trade Unions in Bulgaria (CITUB) on the lengthiness of anti-union discrimination proceedings. In its previous observation, the Committee noted the Government’s reference to section 310(1) of the Code of Civil Procedure, according to which claims of illegal dismissal, reinstatement and compensation are examined through summary procedure, and asked it to indicate the average length of anti-union discrimination proceedings in practice. The Committee notes that the ITUC indicates that the process of setting up specialized labour courts has continued with ILO assistance, that the legal proceedings for the reinstatement of dismissed workers can take a long time and sometimes even years, and that the sanctions against employers for unfair dismissal are too weak to be dissuasive. The Committee urges the Government to supply practical information regarding the average length of anti-union discrimination proceedings and the compensations paid or sanctions imposed in case of anti-union dismissals, and to indicate the status of the process of establishing specialized labour courts.
Article 2. Protection against acts of interference. In its previous comment, the Committee had requested the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure adequate protection, including by means of dissuasive sanctions, against acts of interference by employers’ organizations. The Committee had previously noted that the Government once again referred to section 33 of the Labour Code, which provides for the autonomy of workers’ and employers’ organizations in formulating their statutes, electing their representatives and adopting their programmes of action stating that it is not considered necessary to have an explicit ban on the acts of interference. In this respect, the Committee once again recalls that under Article 2 of the Convention, all acts which are designed to promote the establishment of workers’ organizations under the domination of employers’ organizations, or to support workers’ organizations by financial means with the object of placing such organizations under the control of employers or employers’ organizations, shall be deemed to constitute acts of interference. The Committee further recalls that legislation should explicitly prohibit all such acts of interference and make express provision for rapid appeals procedures, coupled with effective and sufficiently dissuasive sanctions against acts of interference, in order to ensure the application in practice of Article 2 (see General Survey on freedom of association and collective bargaining, 1994, paragraph 232). Noting that national legislation does not provide full protection against acts of interference by employers or employers’ organizations, the Committee requests the Government to indicate the legislative measures taken or envisaged to ensure adequate protection, including by means of dissuasive sanctions, against such acts of interference.
Article 4. Promotion of free and voluntary collective bargaining. The Committee had previously noted that sections 51(b)(1) and (2) of the Labour Code provided that collective agreements at the level of the branch or industry are concluded between the representative workers’ and employers’ organizations on the basis of an agreement between the national organizations to which they are respectively affiliated. It further noted, in this respect, the Government’s statement that organizations not affiliated to a national representative organization cannot conclude collective agreements at the branch and sectoral levels, though they may do so at the enterprise level. Considering that requiring organizations to be affiliated with a national organization in order to be able to conclude sectoral and branch level agreements is incompatible with the principle of free and voluntary collective bargaining established in Article 4 of the Convention, the Committee requested the Government to amend sections 51(b)(1) and (2) of the Labour Code. With reference to the Government’s earlier commitment to conducting the necessary consultations with the aim of reaching a mutually acceptable decision on this matter, the Committee expects that the necessary legislative amendments will be adopted in the very near future and requests the Government to provide information on any developments in this regard.
Articles 4 and 6. Collective bargaining in the public sector. In its previous comment, the Committee had taken note of the comments made by the ITUC and the CITUB on the denial of collective bargaining rights to public servants and requested the Government to take the steps necessary to amend the Civil Service Act. The Committee had previously noted the Government’s indications that: (i) legislatively regulated issues could not be subject to collective bargaining; (ii) despite the absence of the right of collective bargaining in the narrow sense of the term, under section 44(3) of the Civil Service Act, trade unions are able to represent and defend the rights of civil servants on civil service and social security issues through proposals, requests, and participation in the drafting of relevant internal regulations and ordinances, as well as in the discussion of issues of economic and social interest; (iii) representatives of organizations of civil servants may take part in the competition commission for the selection of candidates to the civil service, as well as participate in the process for the appraisal of civil servants; and (iv) issues related to income and social security in the public service are discussed in the National Council for Tripartite Cooperation, in which all nationally representative employers’ and workers’ organizations are represented. The Committee recalls that all public service workers, other than those engaged in the administration of the State, should enjoy the right to collective bargaining. With reference to the Government’s earlier commitment to conducting the necessary consultations with the aim of reaching a mutually acceptable decision on this matter, the Committee expects that the necessary legislative amendments will be adopted in the very near future and requests the Government to indicate any development in this regard.
The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the near future. It reminds the Government that it may continue to avail itself of ILO technical assistance in dealing with all the points raised.

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

The Committee recalls that it had previously requested the Government to provide its observations on the comments submitted by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) and the Confederation of Independent Trade Unions in Bulgaria (CITUB) on the lengthiness of anti-union discrimination proceedings. The Committee notes that the Government refers to section 310(1) of the Code of Civil Procedure (entered into force in 2008), according to which, claims of illegal dismissal, reinstatement, compensation are examined through summary procedure. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the average length of anti-union discrimination proceedings in practice.

Article 2 of the Convention. Protection against acts of interference. Previously, the Committee had requested the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure adequate protection, including by means of dissuasive sanctions, against acts of interference by employers’ organizations. The Committee notes that the Government once again refers to section 33 of the Labour Code – which provides for the autonomy of workers’ and employers’ organizations in formulating their statutes, electing their representatives, and adopting their programmes of action. The Government considers that it is not necessary to have an explicit ban on the acts of interference. In this respect, the Committee once again recalls that under Article 2 of the Convention, all acts which are designed to promote the establishment of workers’ organizations under the domination of employers’ organizations, or to support workers’ organizations by financial means with the object of placing such organizations under the control of employers or employers’ organizations, shall be deemed to constitute acts of interference. The Committee further recalls that legislation should explicitly prohibit all such acts of interference and make express provision for rapid appeals procedures, coupled with effective and sufficiently dissuasive sanctions against acts of interference, in order to ensure the application in practice of Article 2. Moreover, to ensure that these measures receive the necessary publicity and are effective in practice, the relevant legislation should explicitly lay down these substantive provisions, as well as appeals and sanctions to guarantee their application (see General Survey of 1994 on freedom of association and collective bargaining, paragraph 232). Noting that the legislation contains no provisions concerning such protection as described above, the Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to ensure adequate protection, including by means of dissuasive sanctions, against acts of interference by employers’ organizations.

Article 4. The Committee had previously noted that sections 51(b)(1) and (2) of the Labour Code provided that collective agreements at the level of the branch or industry are concluded between the representative workers’ and employers’ organizations on the basis of an agreement between the national organizations to which they are respectively affiliated. It further noted, in this respect, the Government’s statement that organizations not affiliated to a national representative organization cannot conclude collective agreements at the branch and sectoral levels, though they may do so at the enterprise level. Considering that requiring organizations to be affiliated with a national organization in order to be able to conclude sectoral and branch level agreements is incompatible with the principle of free and voluntary collective bargaining established in Article 4 of the Convention, the Committee requested the Government to amend sections 51(b)(1) and (2) of the Labour Code. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that it is ready to conduct the necessary consultations with the aim of reaching a mutually acceptable decision on this matter. The Committee welcomes the statement of the Government and expects that the necessary legislative amendments will be adopted in the near future and requests the Government to provide information on any developments in this regard.

Articles 4 and 6. The Committee had previously taken note of the comments made by the ITUC and the CITUB on the denial of collective bargaining rights to public servants and requested the Government to take the steps necessary to amend the Civil Service Act so as to ensure the right to collective bargaining of all public servants, with the only possible exception being those engaged in the administration of the State. The Committee notes that the Government reiterates that, despite the absence of the right of collective bargaining in the narrow sense of the term, under section 44(3) of the Civil Service Act, trade unions are able to represent and defend the rights of civil servants on civil service and social security issues through proposals, requests, and participation in the drafting of relevant internal regulations and ordinances, as well as in the discussion of issues of economic and social interest. Legislatively regulated issues could not be subject to collective bargaining. The Government adds that representatives of organizations of civil servants may take part in the competition commission for the selection of candidates to the civil service, as well as participate in the process for the appraisal of civil servants. Issues related to income and social security in the public service, however, are discussed in the National Council for Tripartite Cooperation, in which all nationally representative employers’ and workers’ organizations are represented. The Committee further notes the Government’s indication that it is ready to conduct the necessary consultations with the aim of reaching a mutually acceptable decision on this matter. The Committee welcomes the statement of the Government and expects that the necessary legislative amendments will be adopted in the near future and requests the Government to indicate any development in this regard.

The Committee had previously noted the comments of the Bulgarian Industrial Association (BIA) on the application of the Convention. The BIA indicated that section 51(a), (b) and (c) of the Labour Code grants workers’ organizations the right to submit draft collective agreements but that the same right is not extended to employers’ organizations. The Committee requested the Government to respond to the BIA’s comments. The Committee notes that the Government confirms that according to the legislation in force, the draft collective agreement is prepared and presented by trade unions. At the time of negotiations, however, each of the parties is free to propose amendments to the draft. Employers’ organizations are free to make their own proposal and are not obliged to accept the draft as proposed by the union. Only a collective agreement that satisfies the interests of both parties is signed.

The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the very near future. It reminds the Government that it may avail itself of ILO technical assistance.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2009, published 99th ILC session (2010)

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It must therefore repeat its previous observation which read as follows:

The Committee requests the Government to provide its observations on the comments submitted by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) and the Confederation of Independent Trade Unions in Bulgaria (CITUB), particularly those concerning the lengthiness of anti-union discrimination proceedings.

Article 2 of the Convention. Protection against acts of interference. Previously, the Committee had requested the Government to provide information on the provisions which protect against acts of interference by employees’ and employers’ organizations in each other’s affairs. The Committee noted that the Government had referred to section 33 of the Labour Code – which provides for the autonomy of workers’ and employers’ organizations in formulating their statutes, electing their representatives, and adopting their programmes of action. In this respect, the Committee recalls that under Article 2 of the Convention, all acts which are designed to promote the establishment of workers’ organizations under the domination of employers’ organizations, or to support workers’ organizations by financial means with the object of placing such organizations under the control of employers or employers’ organizations, shall be deemed to constitute acts of interference. The Committee further recalls that legislation should explicitly prohibit all such acts of interference and make express provision for rapid appeals procedures, coupled with effective and sufficiently dissuasive sanctions against acts of interference, in order to ensure the application in practice of Article 2. Moreover, to ensure that these measures receive the necessary publicity and are effective in practice, the relevant legislation should explicitly lay down these substantive provisions, as well as appeals and sanctions to guarantee their application (see General Survey of 1994 on freedom of association and collective bargaining, paragraph 232). Noting that the legislation contains no provisions concerning such protection as described above, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure adequate protection, including by means of dissuasive sanctions, against acts of interference by employers’ organizations.

Article 4. The Committee had previously noted that section 51(b)(1) and (2) of the Labour Code provides that collective agreements at the level of the branch or industry are concluded between the representative workers’ and employers’ organizations on the basis of an agreement between the national organizations to which they are respectively affiliated, and had requested the Government to specify whether a majority organization in the industry or the branch can conclude a collective agreement, even if it is not affiliated to a national representative organization, as well as to provide a copy of the general framework agreement concluded between national organizations of employers and workers on collective bargaining at the branch or industry levels. The Committee had noted the Government’s statement that organizations not affiliated to a national representative organization cannot conclude collective agreements at the branch and sectoral levels, though they may do so at the enterprise level. The Government further states that there is no framework agreement providing for collective agreements at the sectoral and branch levels. The Committee considers, in this regard, that requiring organizations to be affiliated with a national organization in order to be able to conclude sectoral and branch level agreements is incompatible with the principle of free and voluntary collective bargaining established in Article 4 of the Convention; it requests the Government to amend section 51(b)(1) and (2) of the Labour Code so as to eliminate this requirement.

Articles 4 and 6. The Committee had previously taken note of the comments made by the ITUC and the CITUB on the denial of collective bargaining rights to public servants. In this respect, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that, despite the absence of the right of collective bargaining in the narrow sense of the term, under section 44(3) of the Civil Service Act trade unions are able to represent and defend the rights of civil servants on civil service and social security issues through proposals, requests, and participation in the drafting of relevant internal regulations and ordinances, as well as in the discussion of issues of economic and social interest. The Government adds that representatives of organizations of civil servants may take part in the competition commission for the selection of candidates to the civil service, as well as participate in the process for the appraisal of civil servants. Issues related to income and social security in the public service, however, are discussed in the National Council for Tripartite Cooperation, in which all nationally representative employers’ and workers’ organizations are represented. The Committee recalled that, although Article 6 of the Convention allows public servants engaged in the administration of the State to be excluded from its scope, other categories of public servants should enjoy the guarantees of the Convention and therefore be able to negotiate collectively their conditions of employment, including wages (see General Survey, op. cit., paragraph 262). The Committee therefore requests the Government to take the steps necessary to amend the Civil Service Act so as to ensure the right to collective bargaining of all public servants, with the only possible exception being those engaged in the administration of the State.

The Committee had noted the comments of the Bulgarian Industrial Association (BIA) on the application of the Convention. Noting that the Government does not respond to the BIA’s comments concerning section 51(a), (b) and (c) of the Labour Code, the Committee requests the Government to indicate in its next report whether employers’ organizations enjoy the same right as workers’ organizations to submit draft collective agreements in the course of negotiations.

The Committee reminds the Government that it may avail itself of ILO technical assistance.

The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the very near future.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2007, published 97th ILC session (2008)

The Committee notes the Government’s report. It further notes the comments submitted by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), which refer mainly to matters previously raised by the Committee. The Committee requests the Government to provide its observations on the ITUC’s comments, particularly those concerning the lengthiness of anti-union discrimination proceedings.

Article 2 of the Convention. Protection against acts of interference. Previously, the Committee had requested the Government to provide information on the provisions which protect against acts of interference by employees’ and employers’ organizations in each other’s affairs. The Committee notes that the Government refers to section 33 of the Labour Code – which provides for the autonomy of workers’ and employers’ organizations in formulating their statutes, electing their representatives, and adopting their programmes of action. In this respect, the Committee recalls that under Article 2 of the Convention, all acts which are designed to promote the establishment of workers’ organizations under the domination of employers’ organizations, or to support workers’ organizations by financial means with the object of placing such organizations under the control of employers or employers’ organizations, shall be deemed to constitute acts of interference. The Committee further recalls that legislation should explicitly prohibit all such acts of interference and make express provision for rapid appeals procedures, coupled with effective and sufficiently dissuasive sanctions against acts of interference, in order to ensure the application in practice of Article 2. Moreover, to ensure that these measures receive the necessary publicity and are effective in practice, the relevant legislation should explicitly lay down these substantive provisions, as well as appeals and sanctions to guarantee their application (see General Survey of 1994 on freedom of association and collective bargaining, paragraph 232). Noting that the legislation contains no provisions concerning such protection as described above, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure adequate protection, including by means of dissuasive sanctions, against acts of interference by employers’ organizations.

Article 4. The Committee had previously noted that section 51(b)(1) and (2) of the Labour Code provides that collective agreements at the level of the branch or industry are concluded between the representative workers’ and employers’ organizations on the basis of an agreement between the national organizations to which they are respectively affiliated, and had requested the Government to specify whether a majority organization in the industry or the branch can conclude a collective agreement, even if it is not affiliated to a national representative organization, as well as to provide a copy of the general framework agreement concluded between national organizations of employers and workers on collective bargaining at the branch or industry levels. The Committee notes the Government’s statement that organizations not affiliated to a national representative organization cannot conclude collective agreements at the branch and sectoral levels, though they may do so at the enterprise level. The Government further states that there is no framework agreement providing for collective agreements at the sectoral and branch levels. The Committee considers, in this regard, that requiring organizations to be affiliated with a national organization in order to be able to conclude sectoral and branch level agreements is incompatible with the principle of free and voluntary collective bargaining established in Article 4 of the Convention; it requests the Government to amend section 51(b)(1) and (2) of the Labour Code so as to eliminate this requirement.

Articles 4 and 6. The Committee had previously taken note of the comments made by the ITUC and the Confederation of the Independent Trade Unions of Bulgaria (CITUB) on the denial of collective bargaining rights to public servants. In this respect, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that, despite the absence of the right of collective bargaining in the narrow sense of the term, under section 44(3) of the Civil Service Act trade unions are able to represent and defend the rights of civil servants on civil service and social security issues through proposals, requests, and participation in the drafting of relevant internal regulations and ordinances, as well as in the discussion of issues of economic and social interest. The Government adds that representatives of organizations of civil servants may take part in the competition commission for the selection of candidates to the civil service, as well as participate in the process for the appraisal of civil servants. Issues related to income and social security in the public service, however, are discussed in the National Council for Tripartite Cooperation, in which all nationally representative employers’ and workers’ organizations are represented. While taking note of this information, the Committee nevertheless recalls that, although Article 6 of the Convention allows public servants engaged in the administration of the State to be excluded from its scope, other categories of public servants should enjoy the guarantees of the Convention and therefore be able to negotiate collectively their conditions of employment, including wages (see General Survey, op. cit., paragraph 262). The Committee therefore requests the Government to take the steps necessary to amend the Civil Service Act so as to ensure the right to collective bargaining of all public servants, with the only possible exception being those engaged in the administration of the State.

The Committee notes the comments of the Bulgarian Industrial Association (BIA) on the application of the Convention. The BIA states that section 52 of the Labour Code does not promote the voluntary implementation of negotiations, but rather obliges employers to negotiate with and submit information to trade unions. Furthermore, section 54 of the Labour Code obliges employers to start negotiations for the conclusion of a new collective agreement no later than three months prior to the expiry of the collective agreement in force. The BIA adds that section 51(a), (b) and (c) of the Labour Code grants workers’ organizations the right to submit draft collective agreements. This same right, however, is not extended to employers’ organizations. The Committee notes that the Government, in its reply to the BIA, indicates that although section 52 of the Labour Code obliges employers to negotiate with and provide relevant financial information to trade unions with a view to concluding collective agreements, the legislation does not require the parties to collective bargaining to conclude an agreement, and there are no limits imposed upon the duration of negotiations; the purpose of section 52, as such, is the promotion of collective bargaining. The Committee takes due note of the above information. Noting however that the Government does not respond to the BIA’s comments concerning section  51(a), (b) and (c) of the Labour Code, the Committee requests the Government to indicate in its next report whether employers’ organizations enjoy the same right as workers’ organizations to submit draft collective agreements in the course of negotiations.

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

The Committee notes the comments made by the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) in a communication dated 10 August 2006 concerning the application of the Convention. The Committee notes that the ICFTU alleges frequent cases of anti-union discrimination and harassment, employers’ interference in trade union activities, violations of collective bargaining rights and denial of collective bargaining rights to public servants. The Committee requests the Government to provide with its next report its observations on the comments thereon.

The Committee will examine other matters raised in its previous direct request (see direct request 2005, 76th Session) in respect of the application of the Convention during the regular reporting cycle of 2007.

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

1. The Committee takes note of the information contained in the Government’s report. It observes, however, that the report does not contain a reply to the Committee’s previous comments which concerned:

-  the need to provide information on the provisions which protect workers’ organizations against acts of interference by employers’ organizations and vice versa, in particular through dissuasive sanctions, in accordance with Article 2 of the Convention;

-  the need to clarify the conditions for the conclusion of collective agreements at the industry or branch levels: in particular, noting that section 51(b)(1) and (2) of the Labour Code, as amended, provides that collective agreements at the level of the branch or industry are concluded between the representative workers’ and employers’ organizations on the basis of an agreement between the national organizations to which they are respectively affiliated and which determine a general framework, the Committee requested the Government to specify whether a majority organization in the industry or the branch can conclude a collective agreement even if it is not affiliated to a national representative organization and to provide a copy of the general framework agreement concluded between national organizations of employers and workers on collective bargaining at the branch or industry levels.

The Committee once again requests the Government to provide the above information and trusts that the Government’s next report will contain full information in this respect.

2. The Committee also takes note of the comments made by the Confederation of the Independent Trade Unions of Bulgaria (CITUB) and the Bulgarian Chamber of Commerce and Industry (BCC) on the Government’s report. It notes in particular that, according to the CITUB, the Civil Service Act does not regulate the possibility for public servants to conclude collective agreements. The Committee recalls that, under the Convention, civil servants who are not engaged in the administration of the State should have the right to engage in collective bargaining and requests the Government to provide its observations on these comments.

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

The Committee takes note of the comments made by the World Confederation of Labour (WCL) and its affiliate, the Association of Democratic Trade Unions (ADS) in a communication dated 14 July 2004 which have been dealt with in its observations in respect of the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87). The Committee requests the Government to reply to the outstanding matters raised in respect of the application of the Convention (see 2003 observation and direct request, 74th Session), in its next report due for the regular reporting cycle in 2005.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2003, published 92nd ILC session (2004)

The Committee takes note of the report submitted by the Government. The Committee also notes the comments made thereon by the Confederation of the Independent Trade Unions of Bulgaria (CITUB), the Bulgarian Chamber of Commerce and Industry (BCC) and the Bulgarian Industrial Association (BIA). The Committee has also taken note of the entry into force of the Labour Code (Amendments and Additions) Act of 2 March 2001. The Committee requests the Government to reply to the recent comments submitted by the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU).

1. Article 2 of the Convention. Protection of workers’ and employers’ organizations against acts of interference by each other. The Committee requests the Government to indicate, in its next report, the provisions under which workers’ organizations are protected (in particular through dissuasive sanctions) against acts of interference by employers’ organizations and vice versa, in accordance with Article 2.

2. Article 4. In its previous comment, the Committee noted that under section 51(a)(2) and (3) of the Labour Code as amended (conclusion of collective agreements in enterprises where there exist more than one trade union organization), trade unions must submit a common draft agreement; if the trade unions fail to do so, the employer shall conclude the collective agreement with the trade union whose draft is approved by the absolute majority of employees. The Committee requested the Government to provide further information on the practical application of the collective bargaining procedure under section 51(a)(2) and (3), and more particularly to indicate what would happen if a trade union failed to secure the support of at least 50 per cent of the bargaining unit members. In its report, the Government indicates that if the draft collective agreement has not received the support of 50 per cent of the bargaining unit members, the conclusion of the collective agreement is considered to have failed and new negotiations should be initiated. The Committee takes note of this information.

The Committee notes that under section 51(b)(1) and (2) of the Labour Code, as amended, collective agreements at the level of the branch or industry are concluded between the representative workers’ organizations and the representative employers’ organizations on the basis of an agreement between the national organizations to which they are respectively affiliated and which determine a general framework. The Committee requests the Government to clarify whether a majority organization in the industry or the branch can conclude a collective agreement even if it is not affiliated to a national representative organization. The Committee also requests the Government to provide a copy of the agreement concluded between national organizations which provides a general framework to agreements at the level of the branch or industry.

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

The Committee takes note of the Government’s report.

Article 4 of the Convention. The Committee notes that under section 51(a)(2) and (3) of the Labour Code as amended (conclusion of collective agreements in enterprises where there exist more than one trade union organization) the trade unions must submit a common draft agreement; if the trade unions fail to submit a common draft, the employer shall conclude the collective agreement with the trade union whose draft is approved by the absolute majority of employees. Recalling that where no union covers more than 50 per cent of the workers, collective bargaining rights should be granted to all unions in this unit, at least on behalf of their own members (1994 General Survey on freedom of association and collective bargaining, paragraph 241) the Committee requests the Government to provide further information on the practical application of the collective bargaining procedure under section 51(a)(2) and (3), and more particularly to indicate what happens if a trade union fails to secure the support of at least 50 per cent of the bargaining unit members.

The Committee also requests the Government to provide a copy of the amended Labour Code with its next report.

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

The Committee notes the Government's report indicating that no change has taken place since the amendment of the Labour Code which came into force in 1993.

Article 6 of the Convention. The Committee requests the Government once again to specify whether the provisions of the Code are applicable to public servants and officials or whether there are any special regulations whatsoever concerning them; if so, please send a copy.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1995, published 82nd ILC session (1995)

The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government in its report, and the promulgation of a partial reform (the Act of November 1992) of the 1987 Labour Code, which contains certain provisions on freedom of association and collective bargaining.

Article 6. In this connection, the Committee asks the Government to state whether the provisions of the Code apply to public employees and officials or whether this category is covered by special regulations.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1995, published 83rd ILC session (1996)

The Committee notes that the Government's report has not been received. It hopes that a report will be supplied for examination by the Committee at its next session and that it will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous direct request, which read as follows:

The Committee notes the promulgation of a partial reform (the Act of November 1992) of the 1987 Labour Code, which contains certain provisions on freedom of association and collective bargaining.

Article 6. In this connection, the Committee asks the Government to state whether the provisions of the Code apply to public employees and officials or whether this category is covered by special regulations.

© Copyright and permissions 1996-2024 International Labour Organization (ILO) | Privacy policy | Disclaimer