Demande directe (CEACR) - adoptée 2015, publiée 105ème session CIT (2016)

Convention (n° 158) sur le licenciement, 1982 - Slovaquie (Ratification: 2010)

Autre commentaire sur C158

Demande directe

2016
2015
2012

Afficher en : Francais - EspagnolTout voir

The Committee notes the communication of August 2014 whereby the International Organisation of Employers (IOE) included Slovakia in its observations concerning the application of the Convention.

Article 2(4) and (6) of the Convention. Exclusions. Civil and public servants. The Committee notes the detailed information provided by the Government in reply to its 2012 direct request. With respect to exclusions, the Government indicates that civil and public servants are granted protection by virtue of Act No. 200/2009 on the Civil Service and are thereby excluded from the application of the Labour Code. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the relevant provisions of the Act on the Civil Service affording protection to civil servants that is at least equivalent to the protection available under the Convention.

Article 7. Procedure prior to, or at the time of, termination. The Government indicates that the written notice required by section 63(1)(d)(4) of the Labour Code with respect to the employee’s performance is a precondition of termination and must contain concrete information illustrating how the employee does not fulfil the tasks which are directly related to the work responsibilities specified in the employment contract and why the employer considers it that way. It also indicates that the period given to the employee to rectify the insufficiencies has to be reasonable and the employee’s work results are required to be measurable, objective and recoverable. The Committee notes that if the employer sets a very short deadline, or none at all, the notice would be invalid. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the practical application of the Labour Code with regard to the workers’ opportunity to defend themselves against the allegations made prior to termination, including examples of the leading court decisions pertaining to this issue.

Article 9(3). Operational requirements of the undertaking. The Government refers to section 63(1)(b) of the Labour Code on the notice of redundancy given by the employer and indicates that a decision motivated by organizational changes must be done in writing. It adds that the entry into force of the organizational change should not occur after the notice has been given to the employee. Referring to Supreme Court decisions of 2003 and 2008, the Government further indicates that the causal link between the organizational change and the employee made redundant has to be proved by the employer in case of a trial. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information concerning this provision of the Convention, including court decisions examining the employer’s reasons for termination related to the operational requirement of the undertaking.

Article 10. Adequate compensation. The Committee notes that amendments made to the Labour Code in 2012 increased the period for which an employee could receive wage compensation. It notes from section 79(2) of the Labour Code that a court may reduce the employer’s obligation to pay wage compensation in excess of 12 months. Wage compensation cannot be awarded for a period over 36 months. The Committee requests the Government to provide practical information on the differences in compensation awarded by courts for unjustly dismissed workers.

Article 11. Serious misconduct. The Committee once again requests the Government to provide copies of the leading court decisions pertaining to serious misconduct.

Article 12. Severance allowance. The Government refers to section 76(7) of the Labour Code which stipulates that an employer may pay an employee a severance allowance in cases other than those provided for in section 76(1) and (2). These latter provisions relate to terminations for the reasons set out in section 63(1)(a) or (b), namely terminations for economic reasons, or for the long-term inability to perform work due to medically certified ill health. Noting that the wording of section 76(7) does not appear to create a legal entitlement to severance, the Committee requests the Government to provide specific information on whether a worker whose employment has been terminated for reasons due to conduct or performance is entitled to a severance allowance or other separation benefits (Article 12(a)) or benefits from unemployment insurance or assistance or other forms of social security (Article 12(b)), or a combination of such allowance and benefits (Article 12(c)).

Articles 13 and 14. Consultation of worker representatives. Notification to the competent authority. The Government refers to section 73(2) and (3) of the Labour Code which provides that the employer shall inform the Office of Labour, Social Affairs and Family at least one month before the commencement of the collective redundancies, including information on the reasons, the number, structure, the period of time of the redundancies, as well as the names and addresses of those affected. The Committee notes that section 73(7) of the Labour Code provides that the Office of Labour, Social Affairs and Family must seek solutions to the problems raised by the projected collective redundancies. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the practical application of section 73 of the Labour Code, including examples of measures taken to mitigate the adverse effects of terminations of employment for economic, technological, structural or similar reasons.

Application of the Convention in practice. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the manner in which the Convention is applied in practice, including, for example, copies of court rulings concerning questions of principle relating to the application of the Convention and available statistics on the activities of the bodies of appeal (such as the number of appeals against unjustified termination, the outcome of such appeals, the nature of the remedy awarded and the average time taken for an appeal to be decided upon) and on the number of terminations for economic or similar reasons in the country.