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

Unemployment Provision Convention, 1934 (No. 44) - Bulgaria (Ratification: 1949)

Display in: French - Spanish

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

In order to provide a comprehensive view of the issues relating to the application of ratified Conventions on social security, the Committee considers it appropriate to examine Conventions Nos 44 (unemployment benefit) and 102 (minimum standards) together.

Part II (Medical care), in conjunction with Article 71(3) of Convention No. 102. General responsibility for the due provision of the benefits. In its previous comments, the Committee referred to the 2010 conclusions of the European Committee of Social Rights (ECSR) on article 11 of the European Social Charter (ESC) indicating that the medical services available in Bulgaria for poor or socially vulnerable persons who lost entitlement to social assistance were not sufficient and requested the Government to provide information on the application of this Part of the Convention by the national social assistance and social insurance schemes. The Committee notes the information submitted by the Government in its report regarding the provision of medical care benefits under the Health Insurance Act of 1998 and the indication that, within the framework of the medical services package guaranteed by the National Health Insurance Fund (NHIF), all citizens have equal rights of access to medical aid. The Committee also notes the information provided by the Government in its report submitted under article 19 of the ILO Constitution in 2018, indicating that the Ministry of Health grants subsidies to hospitals and medical treatment facilities located in regions difficult to access across the country. On this issue, the Committee notes the observations of the Confederation of Independent Trade Unions in Bulgaria (CITUB) communicated with the Government’s report under article 19 of the ILO Constitution in 2018, which point out the insufficient funding of healthcare institutions at the municipal level. In addition, the Committee observes that the 2017 conclusions of the ECSR, state that “it has not been established that sufficient measures have been taken to effectively guarantee the right of access to health care”. In particular, the ESCR refers to the 2015 European Commission Country Report Bulgaria, which indicates that “the healthcare system faces major challenges, including limited accessibility, low funding, and poor health outcomes”. The 2017 conclusions of the ECSR further point out that “limited access to healthcare is illustrated by the high share of reported unmet medical needs, mainly due to costs”. Recalling that, in accordance with Article 71(3) of the Convention, a Member shall accept general responsibility for the due provision of the benefits provided in compliance with the Convention, and shall take all measures required for this purpose, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the measures taken or envisaged to improve the access to medical care benefits for all persons protected.

Article 10(1)(b) of Convention No. 44 and Article 20 of Convention No. 102, in conjunction with Article 69. Concept of suitable employment. In its previous comments on Convention No. 44, the Committee requested the Government to indicate whether, under the current definition of suitable employment established by the Supplementary provisions to the Employment Promotion Act of 2016, a beneficiary could be deprived of the right to unemployment benefit if he or she does not accept a job where the minimum wage would be less than the amount of the unemployment benefit otherwise due to this beneficiary. The Government indicates in its report that the amount of labour remuneration in relation to the unemployment cash benefit is not taken into account in the determination of what constitutes an “appropriate job”, according to subparagraph 4(1) of the Supplementary provisions to the Employment Promotion Act of 2016. It further indicates that in accordance with article 20(4) of the Employment Promotion Act of 2002, the registration of unemployed persons shall be terminated if they refuse to accept an appropriate job offered to them. The Committee notes that the amount of unemployment benefit, according to section 54(b) of the Social Insurance Code of 1999, is determined as a percentage of the unemployed person’s former wages (60 per cent). It noted subsequently that where the wages for a job offered to an unemployed person are lower than the amount of unemployment benefit this person is entitled to, these wages will necessarily be lower than the unemployed person’s previous wages or remuneration. In this regard, the Committee recalls that, according to Article 10(1)(b) of Convention No. 44, claimants may be disqualified for the receipt of benefit or of an allowance for an appropriate period if they refuse an offer of suitable employment and that employment shall not be deemed to be “suitable”, among other, if the rate of wages offered is lower than those which unemployed persons might reasonably have expected to obtain and where the employment offered is employment in the claimants’ usual occupation and in the district where they were last ordinarily employed, or in all other cases lower than the standard generally observed at the time in the occupation and district in which the employment is offered. In light of the above, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that the payment of unemployment benefits will not be suspended in case of refusal by an unemployed person to accept a job where the minimum wage is less than the amount of the unemployment benefit otherwise due. The Committee further requests the Government to provide statistical data on the number of cases where unemployment benefits were suspended as a result of refusal to accept a job where a salary is lower than the amount of received unemployment benefit.

Part V (Old-age benefit). Article 26(2) of Convention No. 102, in conjunction with Article 29(2). Pensionable age for reduced old-age pension. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that pursuant to section 68 of the Social Security Code of 1999, as of 31 December 2016, the insurance period required for receiving full old-age pension will be increased each year by two months until attainment of 37 years for women and 40 years for men by 2027. It further notes, as indicated by the Government, that the pensionable age will be also increased by two months every year until attainment of 65 years for women and men by 2037. The Government further points out that if a person has an insufficient period of insurance, the right to the old-age pension will be acquired after having completed 15 years upon reaching 66 years and four months for men and women in 2019 and 67 years by 2023. The Committee recalls that, in accordance with Articles 26 and 29(2) of the Convention, a reduced old-age pension shall be secured to persons protected who have completed a qualifying period of at least 15 years of contribution or employment upon reaching pensionable age, which shall be not more than 65 years or such higher age as may be fixed by the competent authority with due regard to the working ability of elderly persons. The Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate whether a reduced old-age pension is provided to persons protected who have completed a qualifying period of 15 years of insurance or employment upon reaching the normal statutory pensionable age.

Part VI (Employment injury benefit). Article 34 and Part VIII (Maternity benefit), Article 49. Cost-sharing. The Committee once again requests the Government to confirm that cost-sharing of medical services is not required for the contingencies of employment injury and pregnancy, confinement and their consequences in accordance with Articles 34 and 49 of the Convention, and to supply the corresponding legal provisions.

Part VI (Employment injury benefit). Article 36. Payment for permanent incapacity below 50 per cent. The Committee once again requests the Government to indicate what benefit is provided to the victims of employment injuries who have permanently lost less than 50 per cent of their working capacity.

Article 38. Duration of the benefit. The Committee once again requests the Government to explain what coverage exists for persons whose occupational diseases manifest themselves over a month after the termination of their employment contract or insurance coverage.

Part VII (Family benefit). Article 44. Total value of family benefits. The Committee requests the Government to provide statistical data on the total value of family benefits in accordance with the report form for the Convention.

Part XI (Standards to be complied with by periodical payments). The Committee reiterates its request to provide statistical information on the level of old-age, employment injury and survivors’ benefits and their substantial changes in the cost of living required by Titles I-VI of the report form under Articles 65 and 66 of the Convention.

Part XII (Equality of treatment of non-national residents). Article 68, in conjunction with Article 1(1)(b). The Committee reiterates its request to explain the qualifying conditions for achieving permanent residence in Bulgaria and supply the relevant legal provisions.

Part XIII (Common provisions). Article 69. Suspension of benefits. The Committee reiterates its request to explain how section 46 of the Social Insurance Code, according to which cash benefits for temporary incapacity for work are suspended where insured persons have lost their capacity for work due to “hooliganism and other anti-social behavior”, is applied in practice and provide examples of the types of activities that would lead to the suspension of benefits.

Article 71(3). General responsibility of the State. The Committee once again requests the Government to indicate whether actuarial studies and calculations concerning financial equilibrium are made periodically and, in any event, prior to any change in benefits, the rate of insurance contributions or the taxes allocated to covering the above contingencies.

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

Article 10(1) of the Convention. Concept of suitable employment. According to the report, the national minimum wage can be a generally valid criterion for determining what constitutes suitable employment in terms of remuneration. The social partners have bilaterally agreed to establish minimum wages per area of economic activity for the purpose of social insurance which play the role of minimum wages for each category of employment positions in these areas of activity. Taking due note of the establishment of this mechanism, the Committee would be grateful if the Government would indicate whether, under the current definition of suitable employment established by the Supplementary provisions to the Employment Promotion Act, a beneficiary could be deprived of the right to unemployment benefit if he or she does not accept a job where the minimum wage would be less than the amount of the unemployment benefit otherwise due to this beneficiary.

The Committee notes the Government’s statement that the ratification procedure for accepting Part IV of the Social Security (Minimum Standards) Convention, 1952 (No. 102), was initiated on 31 January 2013 and would like to be informed of the progress made in this respect.

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

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

Repetition
Article 10(1) of the Convention. Concept of suitable employment. The Committee notes that suitable employment is defined by the national legislation as employment corresponding to the training, qualifications and state of health of the insured person, and situated in the same locality or up to 30 kilometres from the insured person’s place of residence, on condition that there are adequate public transport facilities. In view of the fact that the Convention defines suitable employment essentially by reference to rates of pay (previous wages or typical wages for the occupation), the Committee requests the Government to explain the reasons for the absence of a criterion taking into account rates of pay in the definition of suitable employment.
Loss of unemployment benefit if an offer of suitable employment is refused. The Committee notes that, under section 20(4)(4) and (5) of the Act on employment promotion, an insured person who refuses an offer of suitable employment shall lose his right to unemployment benefit and shall only qualify again for unemployment benefit after a period of 12 months from the date on which he or she was disqualified. It also notes that the minimum period for the payment of unemployment benefit is four months for any person who has completed three years of service and the maximum period is 12 months for a person who has been insured for more than 25 years. The Committee draws the Government’s attention to the fact that the 12-month disqualification period appears disproportionate to the minimum period of unemployment benefit payments and may cause hardship for the persons concerned.

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

The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government in reply to its previous comments and, in particular, the adoption in 2001 of the Act on employment promotion, repealing the Act of 1999 on protection against unemployment.

The Committee also notes with interest the recent ratification by Bulgaria of the Social Security (Minimum Standards) Convention, 1952 (No. 102), and the acceptance of the parts relating to medical care, sickness benefit, old-age benefit, employment injury benefit, family benefit, maternity benefit and survivors’ benefit, namely seven out of the nine branches established by the Convention. This ratification has particular importance in that it enables integrated management and rationalization of all the legal obligations arising from the international social security Conventions ratified by Bulgaria, thereby contributing to lasting economic and social development through the reinforcement of the social security system. In this regard, the Committee also observes that the branch relating to unemployment benefit is not one of those which have been accepted under Convention No. 102 and invites the Government to report on any difficulties encountered in the acceptance of this branch. The Committee will therefore continue to examine issues relating to unemployment insurance in the context of the present Convention, particularly with regard to the following points.

Article 10, paragraph 1, of the Convention. Concept of suitable employment. The Committee notes that suitable employment is defined by the national legislation as employment corresponding to the training, qualifications and state of health of the insured person, and situated in the same locality or up to 30 kilometres from the insured person’s place of residence, on condition that there are adequate public transport facilities. In view of the fact that the Convention defines suitable employment essentially by reference to rates of pay (previous wages or typical wages for the occupation), the Committee requests the Government to explain the reasons for the absence of a criterion taking into account rates of pay in the definition of suitable employment.

Loss of unemployment benefit if an offer of suitable employment is refused. The Committee notes that, under section 20(4)(4) and (5) of the Act on employment promotion, an insured person who refuses an offer of suitable employment shall lose his right to unemployment benefit and shall only qualify again for unemployment benefit after a period of 12 months from the date on which he or she was disqualified. It also notes that the minimum period for the payment of unemployment benefit is four months for any person who has completed three years of service and the maximum period is 12 months for a person who has been insured for more than 25 years. The Committee draws the Government’s attention to the fact that the 12-month disqualification period appears disproportionate to the minimum period of unemployment benefit payments and may cause hardship for the persons concerned.

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

The Committee notes the information contained in the Government's report as well as the adoption of the Act respecting unemployment protection and employment promotion, which came into force on 1 January 1999. In this regard, the Committee wishes to draw the Government's attention to the following points:

Article 10, paragraph 1, of the Convention. The Committee notes that under section 72(2)(2) of the above Act, the payment of unemployment benefit shall cease in the event of an unjustified refusal by the claimant to accept suitable employment. The Committee recalls that under Article 10, paragraph 1, of the Convention, a claimant may only be disqualified from the receipt of benefit for an appropriate period if he refuses an offer of suitable employment. In these circumstances, the Committee would be grateful if the Government would indicate in its next report the measures taken or envisaged to give full effect to this provision of the Convention.

Article 10, paragraph 2(b). The Committee notes the information provided by the Government to the effect that under section 67 of the Act respecting unemployment protection and employment promotion, a worker is entitled to unemployment benefit even if he has lost his employment through his own misconduct or has left it voluntarily without just cause.

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

1. Article 10, paragraph 2(b) of the Convention. The Government states in its report that a worker is entitled to benefit if, inter alia, "without any faults on his side", he has been released on the initiative of the employer in accordance with section 1(1) of Decree No. 57, 1989, as amended. The Committee notes this information. It recalls that Article 10(2)(b) provides that, in a case where a worker has lost his employment through his own misconduct, he may be disqualified for the receipt of benefit only for an appropriate period. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on what faults would disqualify a worker from receipt of benefit and for what period of time. The Committee would appreciate receiving a copy of any relevant regulatory or administrative provisions.

2. The Committee asks the Government to supply in the next report the statistics requested under point V of the report form approved by the Governing Body.