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

Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87) - Croatia (Ratification: 1991)

Display in: French - Spanish

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

Previous comment

The Committee notes the observations of the Independent Trade Unions of Croatia (NHS) submitted by the Government, which concern matters addressed by the Committee in this present comment.

The Committee previously requested the Government to reply to the 2018 observations of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) denouncing an increase in the number of injunctions against legal strikes and to the allegations raised by the ITUC, the Union of Autonomous Trade Unions of Croatia (UATUC) and the NHS in 2016, concerning specific instances of intimidation of trade union members and attempts to weaken trade unions by prohibiting trade union activities, withholding union dues and cancelling election of works councils. The Committee notes with regret that the Government provides no information in respect of the above allegations and reiterates its previous request.

Article 2. Right of workers and employers, without distinction whatsoever, to establish and join organizations. In its previous comment, having noted that only adult persons with legal capacity could establish workers’ or employers’ associations, the Committee requested the Government to clarify whether, in a sector with a high prevalence of minors who are allowed to conclude labour contracts, minors could avail themselves of legal procedures to help form a union that includes fewer than the ten adults required under section 171(1) of the Labour Act. The Committee notes the Government’s reiteration that the acquisition of business capacity is linked to the condition of majority and indicates that there are no areas with a high prevalence of minor workers, considering that the Government encourages education and higher education for all citizens. The Government adds that the issue will be further discussed with the social partners. Taking note of the above and recalling that minors who have reached the minimum age for admission to work should be able to exercise their trade union rights, the Committee encourages the Government to consider revising the relevant legislation to this effect, in consultation with the social partners.

The Committee previously noted that the definition of worker in section 4(1) of the Labour Act did not include self-employed workers. In view of the Government’s indication that national legislation provides the right to form and join unions to different categories of self-employed workers, the Committee requested the Government to specify the relevant legislative provisions, as well as those applicable to workers in the informal economy. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that self-employed workers are tradespersons who are natural persons, as are workers in liberal professions. While noting that according to the Government, there is thus no obstacle to the unionization of self-employed persons, the Committee observes that the Government does not refer to any specific legal provisions that grant the rights enshrined in the Convention to self-employed workers and workers in the informal economy. The Committee therefore reiterates its previous request. Should no such legal provisions exist, the Committee requests the Government to consider revising the relevant legislation to include a comprehensive definition of worker, including self-employed workers and workers in the informal economy.

Article 3. Right of workers’ and employers’ organizations to organize their administration. The Committee recalls that, since 1996, it has been commenting on the issue of the distribution of trade union assets and has been requesting the Government to determine the criteria for their division. In its previous comment, the Committee expressed its firm expectation that the Government would take all necessary measures to ensure that an agreement on the distribution of trade union assets would be reached in the near future. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that to resolve this issue, a working group of the Government, which includes trade union representatives, prepared a working draft of the Act on the division of trade unions’ property, which should be finalized during autumn 2023 and subsequently submitted for public consultation. Taking note of the progress made, the Committee expects that the issue of the distribution of trade unions’ property will now be resolved and requests the Government to provide information on developments in this regard, including a copy of the legislation upon enactment.

In its previous comment, having noted the observations of the UATAC and the NHS, which pointed to broad obligations regarding notification of changes in workers’ and employers’ organizations under the Ordinance on the Content and the Manner of Keeping the Register of Associations No. 32/15, the Committee requested the Government to provide its observations thereon and to review the application of the different procedures used to notify organizational changes with the social partners. The Government indicates that to further reduce the burden on the procedure, it abolished the payment of the administrative fee required under section 180 of the Labour Act. While welcoming the Government’s efforts, the Committee notes that it does not provide any information on the procedure applicable under the Ordinance, which the trade unions considered overly broad. The Committee therefore requests the Government to provide information in this respect and encourages it to continue to discuss with the social partners ways of simplifying the procedure regarding notification of organizational changes under the applicable legislation.

Right of workers’ and employers’ organizations to organize their activities and formulate their programmes. The Committee notes the NHS allegation that, in relation to disputes on the conclusion, amendment and renewal of a collective agreement, only representative trade unions that negotiated the collective agreement can call and undertake a strike, leaving aside unions which are not representative, which have not participated in collective bargaining or which obtained their representative status after the conclusion of the collective agreement (section 205(2) of the Labour Act). The Committee observes, however, that, besides strikes in relation to collective agreements, section 205(1) and (5) of the Labour Act allow trade unions, irrespective of their representativity, to call a strike in order to protect and promote the economic and social interests of their members, in case of non-payment of remuneration or compensation and in case of solidarity strikes. The Committee further notes the NHS allegation that the Labour Act does not recognize the right to strike for higher-level trade unions (confederations) and that there is no legal framework for organizing and undertaking a general strike. The Committee observes, however, that, in line with section 168 of the Act, higher-level associations enjoy all rights and freedoms guaranteed to associations. The Committee therefore trusts that the right to strike, as an essential means for trade unions to defend the interests of their members, can be exercised by organizations at all levels, including higher-level workers’ organizations. Noting that the legislative protection exists to some extent, the Committee requests the Government to clarify the scope of the right to strike under law and to provide information on the exercise of the right to strike in practice, responding in the context of the NHS allegations.

Article 4. Administrative dissolution. Distribution of assets. The Committee previously requested the Government to repeal section 182(3) of the Labour Act, which provides that in the event of dissolution of an association its assets could not be allocated to its members. Noting the Government’s indication that the amendment of section 182(3) of the Labour Act will be discussed with the social partners as part of possible amendments to the legislation, the Committee expects that the provision will be repealed in line with the Convention and requests the Government to provide information on any progress made in this respect.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2020, published 109th ILC session (2021)

The Committee takes note of the supplementary information, provided by the Government in light of the decision adopted by the Governing Body at its 338th Session (June 2020), on measures undertaken to assist the economy and mitigate the social and economic consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic. The Committee notes that the Government indicates that these measures were adopted in intense dialogue with trade unions and employers’ associations and that no changes were introduced to the labour legislation. According to the Government, protection of workers and trade unions has thus remained unchanged and measures taken did not diminish the rights deriving from the Convention.

As to other pending matters, the Committee reiterates the content of its direct request adopted in 2019 and reproduced below.

The Committee notes the observations of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) received on 1 September 2018 referring to the application of the Convention in practice and denouncing the increase since 2017 in the number of injunctions against legal strikes. It further notes the Government’s indication that the Labour Act offers protection against the withholding of union dues and for taking part in a lawful strike (sections 183(1) and 189 and 215(2) of the Labour Act). Observing that the Government does not provide its observations regarding the allegations raised by the ITUC, the Union of Autonomous Trade Unions of Croatia (UATUC) and the Independent Trade Unions of Croatia (NHS) in 2016, the Committee reiterates its previous request. It also requests the Government to provide its observations with respect to the alleged increasing number of injunctions against legal strikes.

Article 2 of the Convention. Right of workers and employers, without distinction whatsoever, to establish and join organizations. In its previous comments, the Committee had noted that, under section 171(1) of the Labour Act, only adult persons with legal capacity can establish workers’ or employers’ associations and requested the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that minors could also form and join workers’ and employers’ organizations. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that no restriction impedes minors from participating in the process of forming a trade union or of joining a union. However, pursuant to section 171(1) of the Labour Act, a trade union must be established by at least ten adult persons with legal capacity and, under Croatian legislation, minors under the age of 18 have not fully acquired their legal capacity to conclude contracts, undertake legal actions or perform some other activities necessary for the normal functions of trade unions. Recalling that minors who have reached the minimum age for admission to work should be able to exercise their trade union rights, the Committee requests the Government to clarify whether, in a sector with a high prevalence of minors who are allowed to conclude labour contracts, minors could avail themselves of legal procedures to help form a union that includes fewer than the ten adults required under section 171(1) of the Labour Act.

In its previous comments, the Committee had noted that the definition of workers provided by section 4(1) of the Labour Act does not cover self-employed workers. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that, despite the lack of a universal definition of self-employed workers, the national legislation allows the right to join and form unions to the different categories of self-employed workers such as craft workers, workers who practice liberal professions and freelancers (such as journalists, artists, and athletes). The Committee notes however that the Government does not provide information on the applicable legal provisions. The Committee requests the Government to specify the legislative provisions granting the rights enshrined in the Convention to self-employed workers, such as craft workers, workers who practice liberal professions and freelancers. Furthermore, it requests the Government to specify which provisions recognize these rights to workers in the informal economy.

Right of workers and employers to establish organizations of their own choosing. In reply to the previous requests of the Committee to clarify the relationship between works councils and trade unions, the Government points out that: (i) works councils are an institutionalized form of workers’ participation in decision-making at the enterprise level on issues related to their economic and social rights and interests, while trade unions represent workers at an industry or enterprise level with an aim of improving working conditions, wages and other material rights (section 140 of the Labour Act); (ii) collective bargaining and the exercise of any form of industrial action is a prerogative of trade union organizations, notwithstanding an agreement between works council and the employer can be concluded, but it must not regulate wages, working hours and other matters regulated by collective agreement, except when parties to a collective agreement have given authorization (sections 148(4) and 160(3) of the Labour Act); (iii) the procedure for the establishment of works councils can be initiated upon the proposal of a trade union or at least 20 per cent of the workers employed, therefore only workers can decide whether they want to be represented solely by a trade union or if it is necessary to establish work councils; if no work council has been established, all the rights and obligations pertaining to works councils are exercised by one or more trade union representatives, elected by trade unions (section 153(3) and (4) of the Labour Act); and (iv) under the Act, employers have the obligation to inform, consult and ask for the consent of works councils, while works councils have the obligation to regularly inform the workers and trade unions about the work of the councils, and to receive their initiatives and proposals (sections 149, 150 and 151 of the Labour Act). Trusting that the Government will ensure that works councils will not be used to undermine trade unions and their activities, the Committee takes due note of this information.

Article 3. Right of workers’ and employer’s organizations to organize their administration. The Committee recalls that, since 1996, it has been commenting on the issue of the distribution of trade union assets and has been requesting the Government to determine the criteria for their division. It also recalls that in its previous comments, it had noted that an Agreement on the Division of Trade Union Property was concluded in 2010 and that a working group consisting of union and Government representatives was set up to create a legal framework to address the issue of trade union property. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that no further progress has been made since its last report. Recalling that the distribution of assets is a long-standing issue, the Committee firmly expects that the Government will take all the necessary measures to ensure that an agreement on the distribution of trade union assets will be reached in the near future and requests the Government to provide information on any progress achieved in this regard.

The Committee had previously invited the Government to consider simplifying the procedure of notifying changes in workers’ and employers’ organizations, as laid down in section 180 of the Labour Act. The Committee recalls that the UATUC and the NHS have pointed out that Ordinance on the Content and the Manner of Keeping the Register of Associations No. 32/15 prescribes even broader obligations in this regard. The Committee takes note of the Government’s indication that: (i) section 180 of the Labour Act plays an important role in gathering the most relevant information regarding workers organizations and determining their representativeness, as well as keeping a record of employers and workers organizations; and that (ii) the procedure is simple and the administrative fees of 35 Croatian Kuna (4.7 euros) cannot be regarded as an excessive burden. While taking note of these indications concerning the procedure under the Labour Act, the Committee observes that no information was provided on the obligations arising from the Ordinance on the Content and the Manner of Keeping the Register of Associations No. 32/15. The Committee requests the Government to provide its observations thereon and to review the application of the different procedures used to notify organizational changes with the social partners.

Right of workers’ organizations to organize their activities and formulate their programmes. The Committee had previously requested the Government to provide clarifications on whether workers in the State administration and public services can effectively exercise in practice their right to strike under the Labour Act. The Committee takes due note of the Government’s indication that: (i) the collective agreement for civil servants expressly provides for the right to strike in the event of a dispute concerning the conclusion, modification or renewal of a collective agreement; (ii) all public servants, with exception of those employed in the health sector, can exercise their trade union rights without any special restrictions; and (iii) as regards the health sector, section 198 of the 2018 Health Care Act prohibits strikes in emergency services and its section 199(1) provides that in healthcare activities of healthcare institutions strikes must not begin before a mediation procedure.

With regard to the application in practice of section 205(2) of the Labour Act, which provides for the right to call and undertake a strike of higher-level trade union organizations, the Committee takes due note of the Government’s indication that from 2016 to 2018, no industrial action has been carried out by a higher-level trade union organization and no industrial action has been questioned or challenged by the Government.

In its previous comments, the Committee had requested the Government to clarify whether the agreement on the maintenance of certain minimum activities during a strike or lockout under section 214(1) of the Labour Act must be established in all public and private enterprises. The Committee notes that there is no obligation to conclude an agreement on the maintenance of production activities and essential services, but that most public services, such as elementary school, have concluded that type of agreement.

As to the application of section 107 of the Labour Act, which provides for a worker’s liability to indemnify an employer for any damage at the workplace intentionally caused or due to gross negligence, the Committee recalls that it had previously requested the Government to ensure that this provision is not used in a manner to penalize the lawful exercise of the right to strike. The Committee notes that according to the Government, section 107 of the Labour Act should not be interpreted extensively, and the worker should not be held liable for participating in a lawfully organized strike. The Government adds that only courts can decide on the worker’s liability, the burden of proof falls on the employer and to be applicable, three conditions must be met, namely, the existence of damage, the work-related origin and the existence of either an intentional action (dolus) or gross negligence. The Committee takes note of the information provided and trusts that domestic courts will ensure that this provision will not be interpreted in a manner that restricts the lawful exercise of the right to strike.

Article 4. Administrative dissolution. In its previous comments, the Committee had requested the Government to provide clarification on whether a decision to delete an association from the register made by the body authorized for registration under section 190(3) of the Labour Act can be appealed to the relevant courts. The Committee takes due note of the Government’s indication that since the dissolution is a sole instance procedure, there is no possibility of appeal, but the decision may be challenged before an administrative court within 30 days of its adoption; and that a stay of execution prevails during such appeal.

The Committee also recalls that in its previous observations it had requested the Government to repeal section 182(3) of the Labour Act, which provides that in the event of dissolution of an association its assets could not be allocated to its members. While taking note of the Government’s indication that the Ministry of Labour and Pensions System is evaluating the amendment of the above-mentioned provision to ensure its conformity with the Convention, the Committee reiterates its previous request.

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

Right of workers and employers to establish organizations of their own choosing. In reply to the previous requests of the Committee to clarify the relationship between works councils and trade unions, the Government points out that: (i) works councils are an institutionalized form of workers’ participation in decision-making at the enterprise level on issues related to their economic and social rights and interests, while trade unions represent workers at an industry or enterprise level with an aim of improving working conditions, wages and other material (section 140 of the Labour Act); (ii) collective bargaining and the exercise of any form of industrial action is a prerogative of trade union organizations, notwithstanding an agreement between works council and the employer can be concluded, but it must not regulate wages, working hours and other matters regulated by collective agreement, except when parties to a collective agreement have given authorization (sections 148(4) and 160(3) of the Labour Act); (iii) the procedure for the establishment of works councils can be initiated upon the proposal of a trade union or at least 20 per cent of the workers employed, therefore only workers can decide whether they want to be represented solely by a trade union or if it is necessary to establish work councils; if no work council has been established, all the rights and obligations pertaining to works councils are exercised by one or more trade union representatives, elected by trade unions (section 153(3) and (4) of the Labour Act); and (iv) under the act, employers have the obligation to inform, consult and ask for the consent of works councils, while works councils have the obligation to regularly inform the workers and trade unions about the work of the councils, and to receive their initiatives and proposals (sections 149, 150 and 151 of the Labour Act). Trusting that the Government will ensure that works councils will not be used to undermine trade unions and their activities, the Committee takes due note of this information.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2017, published 107th ILC session (2018)

In its previous comments, the Committee had requested the Government to provide comments on the observations of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) received on 31 August 2016, of the Union of Autonomous Trade Unions of Croatia (UATUC) and the Independent Trade Unions of Croatia (NHS) received on 31 August 2016, and of the Association of Croatian Trade Unions (MATICA) received on 14 October 2016. Observing that the Government’s comments do not address all of the concerns raised, the Committee requests the Government to provide a detailed reply with respect to the allegations of intimidation of trade union members and attempts to weaken trade unions by prohibiting trade union activities, withholding union dues and cancelling election of works councils.

The Committee takes notes of the Labour Act adopted on 18 July 2014.

Article 2 of the Convention. Right of workers and employers, without distinction whatsoever, to establish and join organizations. The Committee notes that, under section 171(1) of the Labour Act, only adult persons with legal capacity can establish a trade union or an employers’ association, whereas in line with section 19, minors between 15 and 18 years of age who are not subject to compulsory full-time education may be employed. Recalling that minors who have reached the minimum legal age for admission to employment should be able to exercise their trade union rights, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that minors who can be employed under the national law can also form and join workers’ and employers’ organizations. Further observing that the definition of workers provided in section 4(1) of the Labour Act does not cover self-employed workers, the Committee requests the Government to indicate the provisions granting self-employed workers the rights enshrined in the Convention.

Right of workers and employers to establish organizations of their own choosing. The Committee notes that the Labour Act provides for the establishment of both trade unions and works councils but observes that the relationship between these entities is unclear, despite section 153 regulating this matter, as some provisions of the Labour Act appear to give priority to trade unions, while others to works councils. The Committee requests the Government to clarify the relationship between works councils and trade unions, and to take the necessary measures to ensure that works councils do not undermine the role of trade unions.

Article 3. Right of workers’ and employers’ organizations to organize their administration. The Committee recalls that, since 1996, it had been commenting on the issue of the distribution of trade union assets and had been requesting the Government to determine the criteria for their division. In its previous comments, the Committee had expressed the hope that an agreement on the distribution of trade union assets would be reached in the near future. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the Croatian Trade Union Association (HUS), the MATICA, the NHS, the UATUC and the Croatian Association of Workers’ Trade Unions concluded the Agreement on the Division of Trade Union Property in July 2010 and are authorized to participate in the division of union property. A working group consisting of representatives of the State and the unions involved was thus set up with the aim of creating a legal framework to address the issue of trade union property. The Committee notes that according to the UATUC and the NHS, the participating confederations have not yet managed to agree with the Government on the method or the legal framework for the return of trade union property. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the progress made in this regard.

The Committee observes that, in line with section 180 of the Labour Act, any change of name, seat, information on whether it operates in one or more counties or on the territory of the State, name of the body, authorized representatives and termination of its operations must be communicated within 30 days to the authority responsible for registration, and registered. The Committee notes that the UATUC and the NHS point to the unnecessary financial burden this can create on union activities, where any small change has to be communicated and registered, especially considering that an administrative cost applies for such changes, and that the UATUC and the NHS allege that Ordinance on the Content and the Manner of Keeping the Register of Associations No. 32/15 prescribes even broader obligations in this regard. The Committee also observes that, in line with section 230, penalties consisting of a fine of HRK5,000–20,000 (US$780–3,119) can be imposed for a violation of this provision. The Committee considers that amendments to union by-laws should be effective once approved by the competent bodies of a trade union and notified to the competent authority. In view of the concerns raised by workers’ organizations, the Committee invites the Government, in consultation with the social partners, to consider simplifying this procedure, for example by requesting a simple notification of important changes instead of their registration, so as not to unduly interfere in the lawful exercise of trade union rights.

Right of workers’ organizations to organize their activities and formulate their programmes. In its previous comment, having noted that under section 220 of the Labour Act, strikes in the armed forces, police, public administration and public services shall be regulated by specific provisions, the Committee had requested the Government to provide information on and a copy of the specific provisions adopted in this regard. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that, in line with section 15 of the Act on Service in the Croatian Armed Forces, active military personnel do not have the right to form trade unions or to strike, whereas clerks and employees in the armed forces can form trade unions in accordance with general labour regulations, but may not organize a strike in a state of war or immediate threat to the independence, unity or existence of the State, which is directly related to preparedness measures or to the combat readiness of the armed forces or which threatens the vital functions of the armed forces. The Committee further notes the Government’s statement that, pursuant to section 40 of the Police Act, police officers have the right to form trade unions but their right to strike can be limited under section 39 in situations of war or immediate threat to the independence and unity of the State or other situations qualifying as acute national or local crisis, and that even when participating in a strike, police officers must apply their powers to protect the lives and safety of people, arrest persons caught in a criminal act or prevent the perpetration of crimes. The Committee notes that with regard to the State administration and public service, the Government indicates that no separate legislation which would limit the right to form trade unions or the right to strike, has been enacted. Taking due note of this information, the Committee requests the Government to clarify whether, in the absence of specific legislation under section 220, workers in the State administration and public service can in practice effectively exercise their right to strike under the Labour Act.

In its previous comment, the Committee had also requested the Government to provide comments on the 2015 ITUC allegations, according to which the new Labour Act does not appear to recognize the right to strike of higher-level trade union organizations. The Committee notes that, according to the Government, this allegation is incorrect, as, pursuant to section 205 of the Labour Act, the right to call and undertake a strike in the event of a dispute related to the conclusion, amendment and renewal of a collective agreement, is given to trade unions determined, under specific provisions, as representative for the purposes of collective bargaining, which have negotiated the collective agreement. In this regard, section 4(4) of the Act on Trade Unions and Employers’ Associations’ Representativeness, 2014 specifies that representative higher-level trade unions participating in tripartite bodies at the national level have the right to participate in collective bargaining covering employees who work for employers who are members of a higher-level employer organization. The Government thus affirms that since higher-level organizations can bargain collectively, they are entitled to call a strike in the event of a dispute related to the conclusion, amendment or renewal of a collective agreement which they have negotiated. The Committee also observes that, under section 168 of the Labour Act, federations and other forms of higher-level associations enjoy all the rights and freedoms granted to associations, which would also imply the right to strike. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the application in practice of section 205(2) of the Labour Act with regard to higher-level trade unions, and to indicate, in particular, whether any industrial action has been carried out by or with the participation of higher-level organizations, and whether any such industrial actions have been questioned or challenged by the Government.

The Committee also notes that section 214(1) of the Labour Act provides that upon a proposal by the employer, the trade union and the employer shall prepare and adopt an agreement on the rules applicable to maintenance of production activities and essential activities, which must not be stopped during a strike or lockout. The Committee recalls in this regard that the maintenance of minimum negotiated services in the event of strikes should only be possible in essential services in the strict sense of the term, in services in which strikes of certain magnitude and duration could cause acute crisis threatening the normal conditions of existence of the population or in public services of fundamental importance. The Committee requests the Government to clarify whether an agreement on the maintenance of certain minimum activities during a strike or lockout under section 214 of the Labour Act must be established in all public and private enterprises and, if that is the case, to take the necessary measures to review this provision so as to ensure that minimum negotiated service is only used in the above-enumerated situations.

The Committee further notes that section 107 of the Labour Act provides for a worker’s liability to indemnify the employer, if the worker, either intentionally or due to gross negligence, causes the employer to suffer damage at the workplace or in relation to work. Observing the broad wording of section 107, the Committee recalls that in the context of industrial actions, sanctions should only be imposed on workers in case of abuses while exercising the right to strike, such as deliberate injury or damage deliberately caused to property. The Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that section 107 of the Labour Act is not misused to punish the lawful exercise of the right to strike.

Article 4. Administrative dissolution. The Committee notes that under section 190(2)–(3) of the Labour Act, an association must, after its highest body has convened, submit a report on the session of the highest body to the authority for registration and if this report indicates that the number of the association’s members has decreased below the minimum number specified in the Act (ten for trade unions and three for employers’ associations – section 171), the body authorized for registration shall delete the association from the register. Recalling that the dissolution of trade union organizations constitutes an extreme forms of interference by the authorities in the activities of organizations and should be accompanied by all necessary guarantees, and that this can only be ensured through a normal judicial procedure, which should also have the effect of a stay of execution, the Committee requests the Government to clarify whether a decision to delete an association from the register made by the body authorized for registration under section 190(3) of the Labour Act can be appealed to the relevant courts, and whether a stay of execution prevails during any such appeal.

The Committee further observes that under section 182(2)–(3) of the Labour Act, if an association ceases to operate, its assets will be dealt with as provided for by the articles of association but may not be allocated to its members. The Committee recalls in this regard that in the event of dissolution, the assets of a trade union should be used for the purposes for which they were acquired, distributed in accordance with its own rules, handed over to the association that succeeds it or, where there is no specific rule, the assets should be at the disposal of the workers concerned. The Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to repeal section 182(3) of the Labour Act.

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

The Committee notes the observations of the International Organisation of Employers (IOE) received on 1 September 2016 which are of a general nature.

The Committee also notes the observations of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) received on 31 August 2016, of the Union of Autonomous Trade Unions of Croatia (UATUC), and the Independent Trade Unions of Croatia (NHS), received on 31 August 2016, and of the Association of Croatian Trade Unions (MATICA) received on 14 October 2016. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments in this respect.

The Committee notes with concern that the Government’s report has not been received. It expects that the next report will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous comments.

The Committee notes the observations received on 1 September 2015 from the ITUC, according to which the new Labour Act, which entered into force on 7 August 2014, does not appear to recognize the right to strike of higher level trade union organizations. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments in this respect.

Article 3 of the Convention. Right of employers’ and workers’ organizations to organize their activities and to formulate their programmes. The Committee had previously noted that, under section 284 of the 2009 Labour Act, strikes in the armed forces, police, state administration and public services were regulated by a separate law. Observing that, according to the ITUC, that law had not yet been enacted, the Committee trusted that the relevant piece of legislation would be adopted in the near future and would take fully into account the freedom of association principles on this matter. The Committee notes that, under the new Labour Act of 2014, strikes in the armed forces, police, public administration and public services shall be regulated by specific provisions (section 220). The Committee requests the Government to provide information on and a copy of the specific provisions adopted under section 220 of the new Labour Act.

Right of employers’ and workers’ organizations to organize their administration and activities. The Committee had previously recalled that, since 1996, it had been commenting on the issue of the distribution of trade union assets and had been requesting the Government to determine the criteria for their division. The Committee noted in its previous comments the Government’s indication that: (i) the new count of the unions’ membership had been completed as early as 2009; (ii) the required formal inter-union agreement on property division entered into by the unions’ central bodies had still not been reached; and (iii) currently, the union property was to the largest extent being used by the UATUC; a smaller portion of real estate belonged to the graphics industry, school and civil service trade unions; and the remaining central union bodies operated out of leased properties, except for the Croatian Association of Trade Unions to which the UATUC had given its premises. The Committee hoped that the parties concerned would soon reach an agreement on the distribution of trade union assets. The Committee once again expresses the hope that an agreement on the distribution of trade union assets will be reached in the near future and requests the Government to provide information on any progress achieved in this regard.

Noting the adoption of the new Labour Act in 2014, the Committee invites the Government to provide information on the provisions giving effect to the Articles of the Convention, and their application in practice.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2015, published 105th ILC session (2016)

The Committee notes the observations received on 1 September 2015 from the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), according to which the new Labour Act, which entered into force on 7 August 2014, does not appear to recognize the right to strike of higher level trade union organizations. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments in this respect.

The Committee notes the observations of the International Organisation of Employers (IOE) received on 1 September 2015, which are of a general nature.

The Committee notes with regret that the Government’s report has not been received. It expresses concern in this respect. The Committee hopes that the next report will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous comments.

Right of employers’ and workers’ organizations to organize their administration and activities. The Committee had previously recalled that, since 1996, it had been commenting on the issue of the distribution of trade union assets and had been requesting the Government to determine the criteria for their division. The Committee noted in its previous comments the Government’s indication that: (i) the new count of the unions’ membership had been completed as early as 2009; (ii) the required formal inter-union agreement on property division entered into by the unions’ central bodies had still not been reached; and (iii) currently, the union property was to the largest extent being used by the Union of Autonomous Trade Unions of Croatia (UATUC); a smaller portion of real estate belonged to the graphics industry, school and civil service trade unions; and the remaining central union bodies operated out of leased properties, except for the Croatian Association of Trade Unions to which the UATUC had given its premises. The Committee hoped that the parties concerned would soon reach an agreement on the distribution of trade union assets. The Committee once again expresses the hope that an agreement on the distribution of trade union assets will be reached in the near future and requests the Government to provide information on any progress achieved in this regard.

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

The Committee notes with regret 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 comments.

Repetition
Article 3 of the Convention. Right of employers’ and workers’ organizations to organize their activities and to formulate their programmes. The Committee notes the adoption of the Labour Act on 4 December 2009 (Act No. 3635) and, in particular, that, under section 284 of the Labour Act, strikes in the armed forces, police, state administration and public services are regulated by a separate law. Observing that, according to the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), the special law that will regulate this matter has not yet been enacted, the Committee trusts that the relevant piece of legislation will be adopted in the near future and will take fully into account the freedom of association principles on this matter (see General Survey of 2012 on the fundamental Conventions concerning rights at work in light of the ILO Declaration on Social Justice for a Fair Globalization, 2008, paragraphs 127–141). The Committee requests the Government to provide information in its next report on any developments in this regard.
Right of employers’ and workers’ organizations to draw up their constitutions and rules, to elect their representatives in full freedom and to organize their administration and activities. The Committee previously recalled that, since 1996, it had been commenting over the issue of the distribution of trade union assets and had been requesting the Government to determine the criteria for their division. In its previous observation, the Committee expressed the firm hope that, given that the representativeness criteria had already been defined, the Government would take the necessary measures in the very near future to address this issue.
The Committee notes that the Government indicates in its report that: (i) the new count of the unions’ membership was completed as early as 2009; (ii) the required formal inter-union agreement on property division entered into by the unions’ central bodies has still not been reached; and (iii) currently, the union property is to the largest extent being used by the Union of Autonomous Trade Unions of Croatia (UATUC), a smaller portion of real estate belongs to the graphics industry, school and civil service trade unions, and the remaining central union bodies operate out of leased properties, except for the Croatian Association of Trade Unions to which the UATUC gave its premises. In this respect, the Committee hopes that the parties concerned will reach an agreement on the distribution of trade union assets in the near future and requests the Government to provide in its next report any information thereon.

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

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 comments.

Repetition
Article 3 of the Convention. Right of employers’ and workers’ organizations to organize their activities and to formulate their programmes. The Committee notes the adoption of the new Labour Act on 4 December 2009 (Act No. 3635) and, in particular, that, under section 284 of the newly adopted Labour Act, strikes in the armed forces, police, state administration and public services are regulated by a separate law. Observing that, according to the ITUC, the special law that will regulate this matter has not yet been enacted, the Committee trusts that the relevant piece of legislation will be adopted in the near future and will take fully into account the freedom of association principles on this matter (see General Survey of 2012 on the fundamental Conventions concerning rights at work in light of the ILO Declaration on Social Justice for a Fair Globalization, 2008, paragraphs 127–141). The Committee requests the Government to provide information in its next report on any developments in this regard.
Right of employers’ and workers’ organizations to draw up their constitutions and rules, to elect their representatives in full freedom and to organize their administration and activities. The Committee previously recalled that, since 1996, it had been commenting over the issue of the distribution of trade union assets and had been requesting the Government to determine the criteria for their division. In its previous observation, the Committee expressed the firm hope that, given that the representativeness criteria had already been defined, the Government would take the necessary measures in the very near future to address this issue.
The Committee notes that the Government indicates in its report that: (i) the new count of the unions’ membership was completed as early as 2009; (ii) the required formal inter-union agreement on property division entered into by the unions’ central bodies has still not been reached; and (iii) currently, the union property is to the largest extent being used by the Union of Autonomous Trade Unions of Croatia (UATUC), a smaller portion of real estate belongs to the graphics industry, school and civil service trade unions, and the remaining central union bodies operate out of leased properties, except for the Croatian Association of Trade Unions to which the UATUC gave its premises. In this respect, the Committee hopes that the parties concerned will reach an agreement on the distribution of trade union assets in the near future and requests the Government to provide in its next report any information thereon.

Finally, the Committee notes the comments submitted by the Association of Croatian Trade Unions (MATICA) concerning the Representativeness Act, which will be dealt with within the framework of the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98), as soon as the Government has provided its observations thereon.

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

The Committee notes the comments of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) dated 31 July 2012 on the application of the Convention.

Article 3 of the Convention. Right of employers’ and workers’ organizations to organize their activities and to formulate their programmes. The Committee notes the adoption of the new Labour Act on 4 December 2009 (Act No. 3635) and, in particular, that, under section 284 of the newly adopted Labour Act, strikes in the armed forces, police, state administration and public services are regulated by a separate law. Observing that, according to the ITUC, the special law that will regulate this matter has not yet been enacted, the Committee trusts that the relevant piece of legislation will be adopted in the near future and will take fully into account the freedom of association principles on this matter (see General Survey of 2012 on the fundamental Conventions concerning rights at work in light of the ILO Declaration on Social Justice for a Fair Globalization, 2008, paragraphs 127–141). The Committee requests the Government to provide information in its next report on any developments in this regard.

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

The Committee notes that the Government indicates in its report that: (i) the new count of the unions’ membership was completed as early as 2009; (ii) the required formal inter-union agreement on property division entered into by the unions’ central bodies has still not been reached; and (iii) currently, the union property is to the largest extent being used by the Union of Autonomous Trade Unions of Croatia (UATUC), a smaller portion of real estate belongs to the graphics industry, school and civil service trade unions, and the remaining central union bodies operate out of leased properties, except for the Croatian Association of Trade Unions to which the UATUC gave its premises. In this respect, the Committee hopes that the parties concerned will reach an agreement on the distribution of trade union assets in the near future and requests the Government to provide in its next report any information thereon.

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

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

The Committee notes the comments submitted by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) dated 4 August 2011.

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It is therefore bound to reiterate the issues raised by the Committee in its previous observation.

Article 3 of the Convention. Right of employers’ and workers’ organizations to draw up their constitutions and rules, to elect their representatives in full freedom and to organize their administration and activities. In its previous comments, the Committee had recalled that since 1996, it has been commenting over the issue of the distribution of trade union assets and urged the Government to determine the criteria for the division of trade union assets in consultation with workers’ organizations and to fix a specific time frame for completing the division of the property. The Committee had noted the Government’s indication that: (i) for the division of trade union assets to be addressed, it was first necessary to establish the criteria for determining the representativeness of trade unions; and (ii) the Minister of the Economy, Labour and Entrepreneurship issued a decision specifying the names of the associations meeting the requirements laid down in section 2 of the Act on the Method of Determining the Representation of Trade Union Associations of a Higher Level in Tripartite Bodies at the National Level (OG 18/99) and the number of trade unions affiliated to these associations. In these circumstances, given that the representativeness criteria have already been defined, the Committee expresses the firm hope that the Government will take the necessary measures in the very near future to address the issue of the distribution of trade union assets and requests the Government to provide information thereon in its next report.

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

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

In its previous comments, the Committee recalled that it had noted the adoption in July 2007 of the Ordinance on the methods of keeping the register of association, and had requested the Government to transmit a copy of the said law. The Committee requests the Government to transmit a copy of its 2007 Ordinance in its next report.

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

The Committee notes the comments submitted by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) dated 24 August 2010.

Article 3 of the Convention. In its previous comments, the Committee recalled that since 1996, it has been commenting over the issue of the distribution of trade union assets and urged the Government to determine the criteria for the division of trade union assets in consultation with workers’ organizations and to fix a specific time frame for completing the division of the property. The Committee had noted the Government’s indication that for the division of trade union assets to be addressed, it was first necessary to establish the criteria for determining the representativeness of trade unions. The Committee notes that the Government indicates in its report that, in April 2009, the Minister of the Economy, Labour and Entrepreneurship issued a decision specifying the names of the associations meeting the requirements laid down in article 2 of the Act on the Method of Determining the Representation of Trade Union Associations of a Higher Level in Tripartite Bodies at the National Level (OG 18/99) and the number of trade unions affiliated to these associations. In these circumstances, taking into account that the representativeness criteria has been defined, the Committee hopes that the Government will take the necessary measures in the very near future to address the issue of the distribution of trade union assets and requests the Government to provide information thereon in its next report.

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

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

The Committee recalls that in its previous comments it had noted the adoption, in July 2007, of the Ordinance on the methods of keeping the register of association, and had requested the Government to transmit a copy of the said law. Noting that the Government has not provided a copy of the 2007 Ordinance, the Committee once again requests the Government to transmit a copy thereof in its next report.

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

The Committee notes the Government’s reply to the 2007 International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) comments concerning the right to strike as well as the imposition of sanctions against strikers in specific cases mentioned by the ITUC. In this instance, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that the law prescribes that trade unions and their higher level associations have the right to call and undertake a strike in order to protect and promote the economic and social interests of their members or on the ground of non-payment of salary or salary compensation within 30 days of their maturity date, and that a worker may be dismissed only if he or she organized or participated in a strike which was not organized in compliance with the law, collective agreement or trade union rules, or if in the course of a strike he or she commits some other grave violation of a labour contract. Furthermore, the Committee notes that, as regards the cited cases of strikers dismissed, the Government indicates that those cases were before the courts and that it would send the relevant court decisions.

Article 3 of the Convention. The Committee recalls that for several years it has been commenting on the issue of the distribution of trade union assets. In this respect, it had urged the Government to determine the criteria for the division of trade union assets, in consultation with workers’ organizations, and to fix a specific time frame for completing the division of the property. Noting that the Government has not provided information in regard to this matter, the Committee once again urges the Government to undertake the abovementioned measures and to indicate developments in this regard.

Finally, the Committee notes the comments made by the ITUC in a communication dated 26 August 2009 with regard to violations of the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to submit its observations thereon.

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

The Committee notes the Government’s report.

It notes, in particular, the adoption, in July 2007, of the Ordinance on the Methods of Keeping the Register of Association. The Committee requests the Government to transmit a copy thereof. The Committee further requests the Government to transmit copies of the Supreme Court’s rulings in six cases in connection with strikes, to which the Government refers in its report.

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

The Committee notes the Government’s report. The Committee recalls that it had previously requested the Government to provide its observations on the comments of the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU, now ITUC – the International Trade Union Confederation), dated 10 August 2006, referring to issues of the distribution of trade union assets and to obstacles to the exercise of trade union rights by organizations in the commercial sector. The Committee notes the Government’s statement that, for the division of trade union assets to be addressed, it is first necessary to establish the exact criteria for determining the representativeness of trade unions. The criteria for determining representativeness of trade unions and their participation in the Economic and Social Council (ESC) is currently established by the Act on the Method of Determining the Representation of Trade Union Associations of a Higher Level in Tripartite Bodies at the National Level of 1999. Currently, only six out of 24 higher level associations meet the criteria of representativeness. Furthermore, the ESC is yet to decide how to determine the number of representatives of any given trade union who should participate in negotiations. The Coordinating Body of Trade Union Confederations has gathered a working group to draw a proposal for the Trade Union Representativity Act. The Committee recalls that it has been commenting on the issue of the distribution of trade union assets since 1996 and regrets that no significant progress has been made to date in this regard. Recalling that the transmission of trade union assets is an extremely serious issue for the viability and free functioning of trade unions, the Committee once again urges the Government to determine the criteria for the division of assets in consultation with workers’ organizations and to fix a specific time frame for completing the division of the property. The Committee requests the Government to keep it informed in this respect.

The Committee notes the comments on the application of the Convention submitted by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) in a communication dated 28 August 2007, which concern obstacles to the deduction of trade union dues, sanctions against strikers in the power, chemistry and non-metal sectors. The Committee requests the Government to provide its observations thereon, as well as on the ICFTU’s previous allegation of obstacles to the exercise of trade union rights by organizations in the commercial sector.

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

The Committee notes the comments of the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) of 10 August 2006, which refer to issues relating to the application of the Convention in practice (distribution of trade union assets) that are already under examination. The ICFTU also refers, among other matters, to obstacles to the exercise of trade union rights by organizations in the commercial sector. In this respect, the Committee requests the Government to provide its observations on the comments made by the ICFTU.

The Committee also requests the Government, in the context of the regular reporting cycle, to provide its comments for the Committee’s next session in November-December 2007 on all the matters raised in its previous direct request in 2005 (see 2005 direct request, 76th Session).

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

The Committee notes the Government’s report. It also notes the comments of 31 August 2005 sent by the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) on the application of the Convention. The Committee notes that the abovementioned comments refer to matters that the Committee has already raised and to the application of Convention No. 98.

In its previous comments, the Committee referred to the distribution of trade unions’ assets. It notes from the information sent by the Government that the President of the Government met with representatives of the unions on 12 July 2005 to discuss the legal status and potential manner of distributing union resources. At the meeting, the following conclusions were adopted: (1) the Central State Office for the Management of State Property, other state bodies and representatives of the union head offices undertook to establish a list of real estate properties, on the basis of suitable documentation, to be distributed among unions, and determine a suitable legal solution for the distribution of union property; and (2) the Union of Autonomous Trade Unions of Croatia will deliver a list of the court proceedings, detailing the properties for the establishment of the rights of ownership, to the Office of the State Attorney for the purpose of immobilizing them pending a decision by the Government on the distribution of trade union assets.

In these circumstances, the Committee asks the Government to provide information in its next report on any progress regarding the distribution of trade union assets.

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

The Committee takes note with interest of the information supplied by the Government in its report concerning, in particular, the latest amendments to the Labour Law (Official Gazette No. 114/03) which allow for the exercise of solidarity strikes.

Noting, however, that the Government’s report contains no reply to previous comments concerning the division of trade union assets, the Committee would recall that, in its previous comments, it had noted that trade unions were excluded from the scope of new legislation which gave all other associations a right of property over assets with respect to which they used to have a right of disposal (sections 1(2) and 43(1) of the new Associations Act, Official Gazette No. 88/01). The Committee had also observed that the old legislation continued to apply in the case of trade unions, providing that the Government would undertake the distribution of immovable assets which were owned by trade unions prior to World War II, if the trade unions failed to negotiate an agreement for the distribution among themselves (section 38, paragraphs 3 and 4, of the old Associations Act). The Committee had further recalled that, in Case No. 1938, the Committee on Freedom of Association had regretted that neither negotiations nor agreement had taken place in order to determine the division of trade union assets and that no significant progress had been made on this case, which had been pending for more than four years (see 328th Report, paragraph 27). The Committee requests the Government to provide information in its next report on the current situation with regard to the distribution of trade union assets and urges the Government once again to take all necessary measures, including the fixing of reasonable criteria for the division of assets and the establishment of a strict timetable, in consultation with all trade unions, in order to resolve this question. The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the very near future.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2002, published 91st ILC session (2003)

The Committee takes note of the information supplied by the Government in its report.

With reference to its previous comments, the Committee notes with interest from the Government’s report that the Act on the Amendments and Supplements to the Labour Act, which entered into force on 10 March 2001, amended article 165(2) of the Labour Act by reducing from ten to three the minimum number of legal or natural persons required for the establishment of employers’ organizations, and amended the first paragraph of article 210 of the Labour Act by including among the legal grounds for declaring a lawful strike the non-payment of salaries or salary compensations within 30 days of the maturity date.

Concerning the issue of the division of trade union assets, the Committee notes that although new legislation has been enacted concerning association assets, trade unions are excluded from its scope. The Government reports that although section 43 of the new Associations Act (Official Gazette No. 88/01) provides that assets in respect of which an association used to have the right of disposal or the right of utilization will become the property of the association, sections 1(2) and 43(1) of this law exclude trade unions from its scope and state that section 38, paragraphs 3 and 4, of the old Associations Act continue to apply in their case. The Committee notes moreover the conclusions of the Committee on Freedom of Association in this respect (Case No. 1938) in which it regretted that neither negotiations nor agreement had taken place in order to determine the division of trade union assets and that no significant progress had been made on this case, which had been pending for more than four years (see 328th Report, paragraph 27). The Committee urges the Government once again to take all necessary measures, including the fixing of reasonable criteria for the division of assets and the establishment of a strict timetable, in consultation with all trade unions, in order to resolve this question in the very near future. The Committee draws the Government’s attention to the availability of the technical assistance of the Office in this respect should it so desire.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2000, published 89th ILC session (2001)

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

Referring to its previous comments in which it had requested the Government to amend the Croatian Railways Act of 1994 to ensure that minimum services to be maintained during a strike are limited to operations that are strictly necessary to avoid endangering the life or normal living conditions of the whole or part of the population, the Committee notes with satisfaction that the Act amending the Croatian Railways Act (Official Gazette, No. 162/99) sets out, in its article 16(a), the manner for determining minimum rail services during a strike. Article 16(a) provides that, inter alia, with regard to passenger traffic, the management shall, in consultation with trade unions, specify in annual timetables which trains for transportation of passengers and goods must operate during a strike. If the trade union does not accept the management’s decision, it may file a complaint to a special arbitration board.

Article 2 of the Convention. The Committee had noted that article 165 of the new Labour Act provides that a minimum of ten individuals of full age is necessary to establish an employers’ association. The Committee notes that the Government indicates that it has initiated a procedure aimed at amending article 165(2) of the Act which would now provide that an employers’ association can be established by at least three legal or physical persons. The Committee takes note with interest of this information and requests the Government to send it a copy of the proposed amendment once it has been adopted.

Article 3. The Committee had noted that the Union of Autonomous Trade Unions of Croatia had criticized the Law on Associations, particularly as regards its provisions concerning the property and the transfer of the assets of social organizations. In this respect, the Committee had noted the recommendations of the Committee on Freedom of Association in Case No. 1938 (see 309th Report, paragraph 185, and 310th Report, paragraph 17) in which it requested the Government to determine the criteria for the division of immovable assets formerly owned by the trade unions in consultation with the trade unions concerned should they be unable to reach an agreement among themselves, and fix a clear and reasonable time frame for the completion of the division of the property once the period of negotiation has passed. In its latest report, the Government indicates that it has not proposed to the Parliament the criteria for division for trade union property since the trade unions have informed it that an agreement was reached among trade union confederations for the solution of the problem without the Government’s interference. The Committee takes note of this information with interest.

Articles 3 and 10. Finally, the Committee had requested the Government to comment on the observations made by the Union of Autonomous Trade Unions of Croatia and the Croatian Associations of Unions concerning two decisions of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Croatia of 15 May 1996 and 11 July 1996. In these decisions, the Court, referring to article 209 of the Labour Act, declared that strikes for the purpose of protesting against unpaid salaries were unlawful. The Court stated that such strikes did not meet the prerequisites for a strike to be legitimate as regards its purpose. In its latest report, the Government indicates that in the two decisions referred above, the Supreme Court had to consider whether the strike to be carried out was really motivated by the reasons stated in article 210 of the Labour Act and it was for it to determine when an employee’s individual labour dispute on non-payment of salaries represented an action to protect economic and social interests of trade union members. Nevertheless, the Government indicates that it has assessed that the provisions of article 210 are not sufficiently clear and has therefore proposed that this article be amended by adding an explicit provision stating that "non-payment of wage or sickness benefit within 30 days of it being due is a legitimate reason for a strike". The Committee takes note with interest of this information and requests the Government to send it a copy of the proposed amendment once it has been adopted.

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

The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government in its report as well as the recommendations of the Committee on Freedom of Association in Cases Nos. 1923 and 1938 (see 308th Report, paragraph 224, 309th Report, paragraph 185, and 310th Report, paragraphs 15 to 17).

The Committee notes the recommendations of the Committee on Freedom of Association in Case No. 1923 (see 308th Report, paragraph 224) in which it requested the Government to amend the Croatian Railways Act of 1994, to ensure that minimum services to be maintained during a strike are limited to operations that are strictly necessary to avoid endangering the life or normal living conditions of the whole or part of the population. In this regard, the Committee notes with satisfaction that according to the information provided by the Government, a decision of the Constitutional Court of 15 July 1998 has invalidated the provisions restricting the right to strike in the railway and post and telecommunication sectors (article 23(4) of the Croatian Railways Act and article 16 of the Establishment of the Croatian Public Post and Telecommunication Enterprise Act). The provisions of the Croatian Railways Act relating to minimum services during a strike will, therefore, be submitted for amendment to the Croatian Parliament.

The Committee had requested the Government to provide it with a copy of the Law on Civil Servants and Government Employees and on the Salaries of the Officials in Judicial Bodies, as well as any text issued under the new Labour Law under the terms of article 237(1) which relates to freedom of association. The Committee notes with satisfaction that the Government has sent the collective agreement in force for civil servants which provides, amongst other things, for the right to strike of civil servants as well as solidarity strikes, and a copy of the Civil Servants and Government Employees and Holders of Judicial Functions Act, article 4 of which provides for the right to organize of civil servants.

Article 2 of the Convention. The Committee had noted that article 165 of the new Labour Law provides that a minimum of ten individuals of full age is necessary to establish an employers' association. The Committee notes that the Government indicates that employers' organizations can be established jointly by legal and physical persons and that it is not considering modifying this provision. The Committee, however, requests the Government to decrease the required number of individuals in order to establish an employers' organization so as not to hinder the right of employers to form organizations of their choice.

Article 3. The Committee had noted that the Union of Autonomous Trade Unions of Croatia had criticized the Law on Associations, particularly as regards its provisions respecting the property and the transfer of the assets of social organizations. In this respect, the Committee notes the recommendations of the Committee on Freedom of Association in Case No. 1938 (see 309th Report, paragraph 185, and 310th Report, paragraph 17) in which it requested the Government to determine the criteria for the division of immovable assets formerly owned by the trade unions in consultation with the trade unions concerned should they be unable to reach an agreement among themselves, and fix a clear and reasonable time frame for the completion of the division of the property once the period of negotiation has passed.

Articles 3 and 10. Finally, the Committee notes that the Government has not replied to the comments made by the Union of Autonomous Trade Unions of Croatia and the Croatian Associations of Unions concerning two decisions of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Croatia of 15 May 1996 and 11 July 1996. In these decisions, the Court, referring to article 209 of the Labour Law, declared that strikes for the purpose of protesting against unpaid salaries were unlawful. The Court stated that such strikes did not meet the prerequisites for a strike to be legitimate as regards its purpose. In this respect, the Committee recalls the conclusions of the Committee on Freedom of Association in its 304th Report (paragraph 216) in a case relating to similar issues in the Republic of Congo, where it considered that protest strikes in a situation where workers have for many months not been paid their salaries are legitimate trade union activities and thus, called for the withdrawal of all anti-union reprisals against the strikers, in particular dismissals. The Committee concurs with this opinion and asks the Government to take into consideration the importance it attaches to this principle and to send its observations in its next report on any measures taken in this regard.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1997, published 86th ILC session (1998)

The Committee takes note of the conclusions of the Committee on Freedom of Association with respect to Case No. 1923 (see 308th Report, paragraphs 207-224).

The Committee requests the Government to provide it with a copy of the Croatian Railways Act of 1994.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1997, published 86th ILC session (1998)

The Committee notes the comments made by the Pensioners Trade Union of Croatia (SUH). It also recalls that its previous comments concerned the following:

Article 2 of the Convention. The Committee had noted that section 165 of the new Labour Law provides that a minimum of ten individuals of full age is necessary to establish an employers' association. Considering that this requirement could discourage the persons concerned from constituting organizations of this nature, the Committee had requested the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to amend its legislation to reduce the minimum number set out in the Law for the establishment of employers' associations.

Finally, the Committee requests the Government to provide it with a copy of the Law on Civil Servants and Government Employees and on the Salaries of the Officials in Judicial Bodies, as well as any text issued under the new Labour Law under the terms of section 237(1) which relates to freedom of association.

The Committee notes the comments made by SUH to the effect that even though item 1, section 159, of the Labour Law of the Republic of Croatia -- paragraph on the "Right of association" -- provides that "employees have a right, without any distinction, to found a trade union and to become its member, of their own choice, under conditions which can be stipulated only by the constitution or regulations of this trade union" they have been denied registration on the basis that pensioners are excluded from the scope of this Article. The Committee acknowledges that under Article 2 of the Convention, only workers shall have the right to establish and join organizations. However, the Committee points out that pensioners should have the right to join trade unions if the rules of the said unions so provide.

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

The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government in its report and the comments made by the Union of Autonomous Trade Unions of Croatia.

The Committee notes the coming into force on 1 January 1996 of the new Labour Law, which explicitly provides in article 161 that organizations of employers and workers cannot be disbanded by administrative decision.

Article 2 of the Convention. The Committee notes that article 165 of the new Labour Law provides that a minimum of ten individuals of full age is necessary to establish an employers' association. On this point, the Committee considers that this requirement could discourage the persons concerned from constituting organizations of this nature. In these conditions, the Committee requests the Government to take measures to amend the legislation to reduce the minimum number set out in the Law for the establishment of employers' associations.

Article 3. The Committee notes that the Union of Autonomous Trade Unions of Croatia criticizes the Bill on Associations, particularly as regards its provisions respecting the property and the transfer of the assets of social organizations. The Committee requests the Government to transmit its comments in this respect.

Finally, the Committee requests the Government to provide it with a copy of the Law on Civil Servants and Government Employees and on the Salaries of the Officials in Judicial Bodies, as well as any text issued under the new Labour Law under the terms of article 237(1) which relates to freedom of association.

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

Article 2. The Committee observes that according to section 14 of the Public Organizations and Citizens Organization Act an employers' association may be established by at least ten citizens who have attained their majority. In this connection, the Committee considers that to impose a minimum of ten citizens in order to form an employers' organization might discourage the establishment of such organizations. In these circumstances, the Committee asks the Government to take the necessary measures to amend its legislation by reducing the minimum number of members required for the establishment of employers' organizations.

Article 3. The Committee observes that the Union of Autonomous Trade Unions of Croatia, referring to the Bill regulating the right to strike in public services and companies, complains that: (1) a strike may not be called in these sectors before completion of the compulsory mediation procedure; and (2) a strike may be held only if the employer agrees to the list of services and workers required for the maintenance of a minimum service. With regard to the first issue, the Committee considers that a reasonable period for mediation and conciliation before carrying out a strike is not contrary to the principles of freedom of association. With regard to the second issue, the Committee observes that in the event of disagreement between the parties in determining the minimum service, the matter is decided by arbitration subject to the possibility of appeal. The Committee considers that this is not inconsistent with the principles of freedom of association.

Article 4. The Committee notes that under section 42 of the Public Organizations and Citizens Organization Act, workers' and employers' organizations may be dissolved by a decision of the administrative authority. The Committee considers that the dissolution or suspension of workers' and employers' organizations by administrative means is contrary to Article 4 of the Convention and that, in any event, an organization to which such measures are applied should be able to seek redress before a judicial body. The Committee asks the Government to state whether legal redress may be sought in the event of the dissolution referred to in section 42 of the above Act and if the judge is competent to examine the substance of the case and, if so, whether it has the effect of suspending execution of the administrative decision. If this is not the case, the Committee requests the Government to ensure that provisions to this effect are adopted.

Lastly, since the Government states that it envisages drafting new legislation on freedom of association and the right to organize, the Committee expresses the hope that such legislation will be fully in conformity with the requirements of the Convention and asks the Government to keep it informed of any draft legislation on this matter.

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

The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government in its reports. It also notes the observations of the Union of Autonomous Trade Unions of Croatia and the Government's comments on thereon.

The Committee observes that the above organization's comments refer to certain provisions of the law prohibiting or restricting the exercise of the right to strike in various sectors: the Defense Act prohibits strikes by military personnel and persons directly connected with combat preparations; the Internal Affairs Act prohibits strikes by workers in internal affairs if the strike would prevent the performance of the activities of the Internal Affairs Department; and the Electric Power Industry Act, the Croatian Railways Act, the Forests Act, the Roads Act and the Foundation of Public Croatian Postal and Telecommunications Company Act, provide for a minimum service in the event of a strike.

In this connection the Committee notes the Government's statement that by means of special laws the right to strike in the military forces, the police and certain public services has been restricted to an extent compatible with the continuation of activities needed for the maintenance of production and activities which are essential in order to prevent any danger to the life, health and safety of the population. The Government also refers to the state of danger of immediate war prevailing in the country as a reason for restricting exercise of the right to strike in certain sectors connected with preparations for combat.

The Committee notes that the ban on the exercise of the right to strike concerns only members of the armed forces and is not therefore inconsistent with the Convention. The Committee also observes that, as regards the other sectors, the legislation does not prohibit the exercise of the right to strike but provides for acceptable restrictions (minimum service) which are compatible with the application of the Convention.

The Committee also observes that the comments of the Union of Autonomous Trade Unions of Croatia also refer to a Bill to regulate the right to strike in public services and companies. The Committee examines these comments, together with other matters relating to the application of the Convention, in a direct request addressed to the Government.