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

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

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

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 direct request, which read as follows:

1. Part III (Sickness benefit), Article 16; Part IV (Unemployment benefit), Article 22; Part V (Old-age benefit), Article 28; Part X (Survivors’ benefit), Article 62 (in conjunction with Article 65 or Article 66) of the Convention. In its previous comments, the Committee has asked the Government to supply the statistical information for each of the abovementioned benefits in the manner set out by the report form in the corresponding Titles under Articles 65 or 66 of the Convention, depending on which method is selected for the purpose of the calculation of the amount of the benefit in question by reference to a wage of a standard beneficiary who could be either a skilled manual male employee (Article 65) or an ordinary adult male labourer (Article 66).

In reply, the Government states that the calculation of benefits in Slovenia follows different rules which focus on the individual’s previous earnings within a defined period. Sickness benefit, for example, is calculated at the level of between 80 and 100 per cent of the previous earnings of the insured person in the calendar year before the year in which sickness occurred. Unemployment benefit amounts to 70 per cent for the first three months of unemployment and 60 per cent for the subsequent period of the average monthly earnings of the insured person in the three months prior to the termination of employment. Moreover, taking into account that nearly half of the active population is constituted by women and that an average Slovene family does not have two children, the Government cannot find a standard beneficiary used in the Convention typical for Slovenia. In this situation, the Government considers that calculation of the benefit by reference to the rate of the earnings of men can be useful simply from the point of view that women’s salaries turn out to be lower than men’s for the majority of economic activities. By way of example, it indicates that in the manufacture of metal products, where the highest proportion of men are employed and women constitute only 27.5 per cent of all employees, in 1993 average gross monthly pay was 62,566 tolars for men and 51,189 tolars for women.

The Committee notes this information as well as the fact that the report does not contain the statistical information requested in its previous comments. As regards the method of the calculation of benefits used in Slovenia in comparison to the methods specified in the Convention, the Committee wishes to point out that Article 65, paragraph 1, of the Convention provides for the calculation of benefits at a certain percentage of the previous earnings of the beneficiary, while paragraphs 2 and 4 stipulate that such earnings shall be calculated according to prescribed rules and for the specified time basis. It therefore appears that the rules of calculating benefits under the Slovenian legislation do not differ in principle from the method established by these provisions of the Convention. As regards the definition of a standard beneficiary which the Government considers to be untypical for Slovenia inasmuch as it refers to a man with two children, the Committee wishes to point out that this definition is specific to each benefit branch. Thus, with respect to the branches accepted by Slovenia, a standard beneficiary is defined as man with wife and two children for Parts III (Sickness benefit) and IV (Unemployment benefit), man with wife of pensionable age for Part V (Old-age benefit), and widow with two children for Part X (Survivors’ benefit). These definitions are not aimed at reflecting the composition of the persons protected by sex, family responsibilities, age or any other factor, but have a purely instrumental role of providing some measure of the actual maintenance of the previous standard of living of the beneficiaries under different national benefit systems in comparison with that prescribed by the Convention. This is done by asking governments to calculate the amount of the benefit for a hypothetical beneficiary having "standard" family responsibilities and earnings by applying the rates and rules prescribed by national law, taking into account any ceiling on earnings that may be prescribed, and adding, where provided, dependants’ supplements or general family allowances for a wife and two dependent children. The amount of the benefit paid to such beneficiary under the national scheme should attain at least the same percentage of the total of his previous earnings and family allowances as the percentage indicated in the Schedule appended to Part XI of the Convention. Furthermore, it is precisely to take the fullest possible account of the differences in national conditions that the Convention offers member States the flexibility of choosing as a standard beneficiary for each branch either an ordinary labourer or a skilled employee and of selecting the latter according to four different methods laid down in Article 65, paragraph 6, two of which, provided for in subparagraphs (c) and (d), are particularly suited to take account of the high proportion of women in the labour force with lower salaries. According to these provisions, a standard beneficiary shall be a person whose earnings are such as to be equal to or greater than the earnings of 75 per cent of all the persons protected, such earnings to be determined on the basis of annual or shorter periods as may be prescribed (subparagraph (c)), or a person whose earnings are equal to 125 per cent of the average earnings of all the persons protected. It should be pointed out that determination of the wage of a standard beneficiary by reference to the average earnings in the country would permit generally to take into account the existing differences in salaries between men and women, as is the case in Slovenia. More specifically, the level of the benefit for the beneficiary who is a woman employee or a childless widow could be appraised on the basis of the information which the governments are requested to supply under Article 65, Part V of the report form on the Convention adopted by the Governing Body. Finally, as regards other beneficiaries, whose situation differs from the standard one, Article 65, paragraph 5 stipulates that their benefit shall bear a reasonable relation to the benefit for the standard beneficiary.

The Committee hopes that, taking account of the above explanations, the Government will not fail to provide in its next report all the detailed statistical information requested in the report form on the Convention under the corresponding Titles of either Article 65 or Article 66, as selected. It would also hope that, in the light of the comments of the Association of Free Trade Unions of Slovenia concerning the prescribed minimum and maximum amounts of the unemployment benefit, the Government, in supplying the information requested, will pay particular attention to the requirements of Article 65, paragraph 3, of the Convention.

As regards other questions raised in its previous comments, the Committee notes that the Government’s report does not contain any elements of reply. It would therefore hope that the Government will not fail to include in its next report full information on the following points raised in its previous direct request.

2. Part III (Sickness benefit), Article 18, paragraph 1. The Committee notes that section 29 of the Act of 12 February 1992 on health care and health insurance sets out a waiting period of 30 working days for the payment of sickness benefit, whereas the Convention permits not to pay the benefit only for the first three days of suspension of earnings. It further notes, from the Government’s report, that under collective agreements made under the Labour Relations Act, the payment of benefit during the waiting period is generally ensured by the employer. The Committee therefore asks the Government to supply examples of the relevant provisions of the collective agreements in force and to indicate the provisions of the legislation which ensure that the benefit actually is paid by the employers until it is assumed by compulsory insurance even in the absence of such collective agreements.

3. Part IV (Unemployment benefit), Article 20 (in conjunction with Article 69). The Committee notes that sections 16, 19 and 32 of the Act on employment and unemployment insurance list grounds and criteria on the basis of which an insured person might not be recognized as unemployed, be refused unemployment benefit, or lose his right to such benefit. As some of these provisions may go beyond what is permitted by the Convention, the Committee would like the Government to provide in its next report detailed information and explanations on the following points:

(a)  According to section 16 of the Act, an insured person will not be regarded as unemployed in case he is an owner or co-owner of an enterprise, or owns, rents or uses land, forests, etc., if this permits him to get income on which he can live, provided that the annual income is not less than the guaranteed unemployment benefit. Please indicate whether this provisions applies only to persons who are effectively working in their enterprises or on the land they own or use.

(b)  Please explain the exact scope and practical application of clauses 1, 2, 6 to 9, and 11 of section 19 of the Act.

(c)  Please supply detailed information on the nature of the breaches of discipline, acts of misconduct and gross negligence that can lead to cessation of employment relations and involve withdrawal of unemployment benefit under clauses 10, 13 and 14 of said section 19 of the Act, taking into account that Article 69(f) of the Convention authorizes suspension of benefit only in case the contingency has been caused by the wilful misconduct of the person concerned.

(d)  Section 32 of the Act, which lists grounds for the loss of right to unemployment benefit, provides, in particular, that the criteria to be applied in cases mentioned in clauses 4, 6, 8 and 10 are to be determined by the competent authority. Please supply the rules in question and further information on the content and the practical application of said clauses as well as of the provisions contained in clauses 5 and 7 of this section.

(e)  With regard to clause 11 of said section 32, which establishes maximum age-limits for receipt of unemployment benefit equivalent to the prescribed age of retirement, the Committee wishes to point out that the Convention does not authorize setting any age-limits with respect to unemployment benefit but permits to suspend it as long as the person concerned is in receipt of another social security benefit, including old-age pension. As such ground for suspension provided for by the Convention is already made use of in clause 3 of section 32 of the Act, the Committee asks the Government to consider measures aimed at deleting clause 11 of section 32, in order to bring the national legislation into fuller conformity with the Convention on this point.

4. Part IV (Unemployment benefit), in conjunction with Article 70. Please indicate how this Article of the Convention, which provides for a right of appeal in case of refusal of benefit, is applied with respect to unemployment benefit.

5. Finally, the Committee notes from the report that an extensive reform of the pension and disability system is under way in Slovenia. It hopes that the Government’s next report will contain all the particulars in this respect.

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

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 reads as follows:

The Committee notes the information provided in the Government’s report, as well as the comments made by the Association of Free Trade Unions of Slovenia, together with the attached legislation and court decisions. It thanks the Government for including in the report information on Parts VII (Family benefit) and IX (Invalidity benefit), which have not been accepted by Slovenia, as well as on Part VI (Employment injury benefit) which has ceased to be applied following ratification of Convention No. 121.

1. Part III (Sickness benefit), Article 16; Part IV (Unemployment benefit), Article 22; Part V (Old-age benefit), Article 28; Part X (Survivors’ benefit), Article 62 (in conjunction with Article 65 or Article 66) of the Convention. In its previous comments, the Committee has asked the Government to supply the statistical information for each of the abovementioned benefits in the manner set out by the report form in the corresponding Titles under Articles 65 or 66 of the Convention, depending on which method is selected for the purpose of the calculation of the amount of the benefit in question by reference to a wage of a standard beneficiary who could be either a skilled manual male employee (Article 65) or an ordinary adult male labourer (Article 66).

In reply, the Government states that the calculation of benefits in Slovenia follows different rules which focus on the individual’s previous earnings within a defined period. Sickness benefit, for example, is calculated at the level of between 80 and 100 per cent of the previous earnings of the insured person in the calendar year before the year in which sickness occurred. Unemployment benefit amounts to 70 per cent for the first three months of unemployment and 60 per cent for the subsequent period of the average monthly earnings of the insured person in the three months prior to the termination of employment. Moreover, taking into account that nearly half of the active population is constituted by women and that an average Slovene family does not have two children, the Government cannot find a standard beneficiary used in the Convention typical for Slovenia. In this situation, the Government considers that calculation of the benefit by reference to the rate of the earnings of men can be useful simply from the point of view that women’s salaries turn out to be lower than men’s for the majority of economic activities. By way of example, it indicates that in the manufacture of metal products, where the highest proportion of men are employed and women constitute only 27.5 per cent of all employees, in 1993 average gross monthly pay was 62,566 tolars for men and 51,189 tolars for women.

The Committee notes this information as well as the fact that the report does not contain the statistical information requested in its previous comments. As regards the method of the calculation of benefits used in Slovenia in comparison to the methods specified in the Convention, the Committee wishes to point out that Article 65, paragraph 1, of the Convention provides for the calculation of benefits at a certain percentage of the previous earnings of the beneficiary, while paragraphs 2 and 4 stipulate that such earnings shall be calculated according to prescribed rules and for the specified time basis. It therefore appears that the rules of calculating benefits under the Slovenian legislation do not differ in principle from the method established by these provisions of the Convention. As regards the definition of a standard beneficiary which the Government considers to be untypical for Slovenia inasmuch as it refers to a man with two children, the Committee wishes to point out that this definition is specific to each benefit branch. Thus, with respect to the branches accepted by Slovenia, a standard beneficiary is defined as man with wife and two children for Parts III (Sickness benefit) and IV (Unemployment benefit), man with wife of pensionable age for Part V (Old-age benefit), and widow with two children for Part X (Survivors’ benefit). These definitions are not aimed at reflecting the composition of the persons protected by sex, family responsibilities, age or any other factor, but have a purely instrumental role of providing some measure of the actual maintenance of the previous standard of living of the beneficiaries under different national benefit systems in comparison with that prescribed by the Convention. This is done by asking governments to calculate the amount of the benefit for a hypothetical beneficiary having "standard" family responsibilities and earnings by applying the rates and rules prescribed by national law, taking into account any ceiling on earnings that may be prescribed, and adding, where provided, dependants’ supplements or general family allowances for a wife and two dependent children. The amount of the benefit paid to such beneficiary under the national scheme should attain at least the same percentage of the total of his previous earnings and family allowances as the percentage indicated in the Schedule appended to Part XI of the Convention. Furthermore, it is precisely to take the fullest possible account of the differences in national conditions that the Convention offers member States the flexibility of choosing as a standard beneficiary for each branch either an ordinary labourer or a skilled employee and of selecting the latter according to four different methods laid down in Article 65, paragraph 6, two of which, provided for in subparagraphs (c) and (d), are particularly suited to take account of the high proportion of women in the labour force with lower salaries. According to these provisions, a standard beneficiary shall be a person whose earnings are such as to be equal to or greater than the earnings of 75 per cent of all the persons protected, such earnings to be determined on the basis of annual or shorter periods as may be prescribed (subparagraph (c)), or a person whose earnings are equal to 125 per cent of the average earnings of all the persons protected. It should be pointed out that determination of the wage of a standard beneficiary by reference to the average earnings in the country would permit generally to take into account the existing differences in salaries between men and women, as is the case in Slovenia. More specifically, the level of the benefit for the beneficiary who is a woman employee or a childless widow could be appraised on the basis of the information which the governments are requested to supply under Article 65, Part V of the report form on the Convention adopted by the Governing Body. Finally, as regards other beneficiaries, whose situation differs from the standard one, Article 65, paragraph 5 stipulates that their benefit shall bear a reasonable relation to the benefit for the standard beneficiary.

The Committee hopes that, taking account of the above explanations, the Government will not fail to provide in its next report all the detailed statistical information requested in the report form on the Convention under the corresponding Titles of either Article 65 or Article 66, as selected. It would also hope that, in the light of the comments of the Association of Free Trade Unions of Slovenia concerning the prescribed minimum and maximum amounts of the unemployment benefit, the Government, in supplying the information requested, will pay particular attention to the requirements of Article 65, paragraph 3, of the Convention.

As regards other questions raised in its previous comments, the Committee notes that the Government’s report does not contain any elements of reply. It would therefore hope that the Government will not fail to include in its next report full information on the following points raised in its previous direct request.

2. Part III (Sickness benefit), Article 18, paragraph 1. The Committee notes that section 29 of the Act of 12 February 1992 on health care and health insurance sets out a waiting period of 30 working days for the payment of sickness benefit, whereas the Convention permits not to pay the benefit only for the first three days of suspension of earnings. It further notes, from the Government’s report, that under collective agreements made under the Labour Relations Act, the payment of benefit during the waiting period is generally ensured by the employer. The Committee therefore asks the Government to supply examples of the relevant provisions of the collective agreements in force and to indicate the provisions of the legislation which ensure that the benefit actually is paid by the employers until it is assumed by compulsory insurance even in the absence of such collective agreements.

3. Part IV (Unemployment benefit), Article 20 (in conjunction with Article 69). The Committee notes that sections 16, 19 and 32 of the Act on employment and unemployment insurance list grounds and criteria on the basis of which an insured person might not be recognized as unemployed, be refused unemployment benefit, or lose his right to such benefit. As some of these provisions may go beyond what is permitted by the Convention, the Committee would like the Government to provide in its next report detailed information and explanations on the following points:

(a)  According to section 16 of the Act, an insured person will not be regarded as unemployed in case he is an owner or co-owner of an enterprise, or owns, rents or uses land, forests, etc., if this permits him to get income on which he can live, provided that the annual income is not less than the guaranteed unemployment benefit. Please indicate whether this provisions applies only to persons who are effectively working in their enterprises or on the land they own or use.

(b)  Please explain the exact scope and practical application of clauses 1, 2, 6 to 9, and 11 of section 19 of the Act.

(c)  Please supply detailed information on the nature of the breaches of discipline, acts of misconduct and gross negligence that can lead to cessation of employment relations and involve withdrawal of unemployment benefit under clauses 10, 13 and 14 of said section 19 of the Act, taking into account that Article 69(f) of the Convention authorizes suspension of benefit only in case the contingency has been caused by the wilful misconduct of the person concerned.

(d)  Section 32 of the Act, which lists grounds for the loss of right to unemployment benefit, provides, in particular, that the criteria to be applied in cases mentioned in clauses 4, 6, 8 and 10 are to be determined by the competent authority. Please supply the rules in question and further information on the content and the practical application of said clauses as well as of the provisions contained in clauses 5 and 7 of this section.

(e)  With regard to clause 11 of said section 32, which establishes maximum age-limits for receipt of unemployment benefit equivalent to the prescribed age of retirement, the Committee wishes to point out that the Convention does not authorize setting any age-limits with respect to unemployment benefit but permits to suspend it as long as the person concerned is in receipt of another social security benefit, including old-age pension. As such ground for suspension provided for by the Convention is already made use of in clause 3 of section 32 of the Act, the Committee asks the Government to consider measures aimed at deleting clause 11 of section 32, in order to bring the national legislation into fuller conformity with the Convention on this point.

4. Part IV (Unemployment benefit), in conjunction with Article 70. Please indicate how this Article of the Convention, which provides for a right of appeal in case of refusal of benefit, is applied with respect to unemployment benefit.

5. Finally, the Committee notes from the report that an extensive reform of the pension and disability system is under way in Slovenia. It hopes that the Government’s next report will contain all the particulars in this respect.

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

The Committee notes the information provided in the Government's report, as well as the comments made by the Association of Free Trade Unions of Slovenia, together with the attached legislation and court decisions. It thanks the Government for including in the report information on Parts VII (Family benefit) and IX (Invalidity benefit), which have not been accepted by Slovenia, as well as on Part VI (Employment injury benefit) which has ceased to be applied following ratification of Convention No. 121.

1. Part III (Sickness benefit), Article 16; Part IV (Unemployment benefit), Article 22; Part V (Old-age benefit), Article 28; Part X (Survivors' benefit), Article 62 (in conjunction with Article 65 or Article 66) of the Convention. In its previous comments, the Committee has asked the Government to supply the statistical information for each of the abovementioned benefits in the manner set out by the report form in the corresponding Titles under Articles 65 or 66 of the Convention, depending on which method is selected for the purpose of the calculation of the amount of the benefit in question by reference to a wage of a standard beneficiary who could be either a skilled manual male employee (Article 65) or an ordinary adult male labourer (Article 66).

In reply, the Government states that the calculation of benefits in Slovenia follows different rules which focus on the individual's previous earnings within a defined period. Sickness benefit, for example, is calculated at the level of between 80 and 100 per cent of the previous earnings of the insured person in the calendar year before the year in which sickness occurred. Unemployment benefit amounts to 70 per cent for the first three months of unemployment and 60 per cent for the subsequent period of the average monthly earnings of the insured person in the three months prior to the termination of employment. Moreover, taking into account that nearly half of the active population is constituted by women and that an average Slovene family does not have two children, the Government cannot find a standard beneficiary used in the Convention typical for Slovenia. In this situation, the Government considers that calculation of the benefit by reference to the rate of the earnings of men can be useful simply from the point of view that women's salaries turn out to be lower than men's for the majority of economic activities. By way of example, it indicates that in the manufacture of metal products, where the highest proportion of men are employed and women constitute only 27.5 per cent of all employees, in 1993 average gross monthly pay was 62,566 tolars for men and 51,189 tolars for women.

The Committee notes this information as well as the fact that the report does not contain the statistical information requested in its previous comments. As regards the method of the calculation of benefits used in Slovenia in comparison to the methods specified in the Convention, the Committee wishes to point out that Article 65, paragraph 1, of the Convention provides for the calculation of benefits at a certain percentage of the previous earnings of the beneficiary, while paragraphs 2 and 4 stipulate that such earnings shall be calculated according to prescribed rules and for the specified time basis. It therefore appears that the rules of calculating benefits under the Slovenian legislation do not differ in principle from the method established by these provisions of the Convention. As regards the definition of a standard beneficiary which the Government considers to be untypical for Slovenia inasmuch as it refers to a man with two children, the Committee wishes to point out that this definition is specific to each benefit branch. Thus, with respect to the branches accepted by Slovenia, a standard beneficiary is defined as man with wife and two children for Parts III (Sickness benefit) and IV (Unemployment benefit), man with wife of pensionable age for Part V (Old-age benefit), and widow with two children for Part X (Survivors' benefit). These definitions are not aimed at reflecting the composition of the persons protected by sex, family responsibilities, age or any other factor, but have a purely instrumental role of providing some measure of the actual maintenance of the previous standard of living of the beneficiaries under different national benefit systems in comparison with that prescribed by the Convention. This is done by asking governments to calculate the amount of the benefit for a hypothetical beneficiary having "standard" family responsibilities and earnings by applying the rates and rules prescribed by national law, taking into account any ceiling on earnings that may be prescribed, and adding, where provided, dependants' supplements or general family allowances for a wife and two dependent children. The amount of the benefit paid to such beneficiary under the national scheme should attain at least the same percentage of the total of his previous earnings and family allowances as the percentage indicated in the Schedule appended to Part XI of the Convention. Furthermore, it is precisely to take the fullest possible account of the differences in national conditions that the Convention offers member States the flexibility of choosing as a standard beneficiary for each branch either an ordinary labourer or a skilled employee and of selecting the latter according to four different methods laid down in paragraph 6 of Article 65, two of which, provided for in subparagraphs (c) and (d), are particularly suited to take account of the high proportion of women in the labour force with lower salaries. According to these provisions, a standard beneficiary shall be a person whose earnings are such as to be equal to or greater than the earnings of 75 per cent of all the persons protected, such earnings to be determined on the basis of annual or shorter periods as may be prescribed (subparagraph (c)), or a person whose earnings are equal to 125 per cent of the average earnigs of all the persons protected. It should be pointed out that determination of the wage of a standard beneficiary by reference to the average earnings in the country would permit generally to take into account the existing differences in salaries between men and women, as is the case in Slovenia. More specifically, the level of the benefit for the beneficiary who is a woman employee or a childless widow could be appraised on the basis of the information which the governments are requested to supply under Article 65, Title V, of the report form on the Convention adopted by the Governing Body. Finally, as regards other beneficiaries, whose situation differs from the standard one, paragraph 5 of Article 65 stipulates that their benefit shall bear a reasonable relation to the benefit for the standard beneficiary.

The Committee hopes that, taking account of the above explanations, the Government will not fail to provide in its next report all the detailed statistical information requested in the report form on the Convention under the corresponding Titles of either Article 65 or Article 66, as selected. It would also hope that, in the light of the comments of the Association of Free Trade Unions of Slovenia concerning the prescribed minimum and maximum amounts of the unemployment benefit, the Government, in supplying the information requested, will pay particular attention to the requirements of paragraph 3 of Article 65 of the Convention.

As regards other questions raised in its previous comments, the Committee notes that the Government's report does not contain any elements of reply. It would therefore hope that the Government will not fail to include in its next report full information on the following points raised in its previous direct request.

2. Part III (Sickness benefit), Article 18, paragraph 1. The Committee notes that section 29 of the Act of 12 February 1992 on health care and health insurance sets out a waiting period of 30 working days for the payment of sickness benefit, whereas the Convention permits not to pay the benefit only for the first three days of suspension of earnings. It further notes, from the Government's report, that under collective agreements made under the Labour Relations Act, the payment of benefit during the waiting period is generally ensured by the employer. The Committee therefore asks the Government to supply examples of the relevant provisions of the collective agreements in force and to indicate the provisions of the legislation which ensure that the benefit actually is paid by the employers until it is assumed by compulsory insurance even in the absence of such collective agreements.

3. Part IV (Unemployment benefit), Article 20 (in conjunction with Article 69). The Committee notes that sections 16, 19 and 32 of the Act on employment and unemployment insurance list grounds and criteria on the basis of which an insured person might not be recognized as unemployed, be refused unemployment benefit, or lose his right to such benefit. As some of these provisions may go beyond what is permitted by the Convention, the Committee would like the Government to provide in its next report detailed information and explanations on the following points:

(a) According to section 16 of the Act, an insured person will not be regarded as unemployed in case he is an owner or co-owner of an enterprise, or owns, rents or uses land, forests, etc., if this permits him to get income on which he can live, provided that the annual income is not less than the guaranteed unemployment benefit. Please indicate whether this provisions applies only to persons who are effectively working in their enterprises or on the land they own or use.

(b) Please explain the exact scope and practical application of clauses 1, 2, 6 to 9, and 11 of section 19 of the Act.

(c) Please supply detailed information on the nature of the breaches of discipline, acts of misconduct and gross negligence that can lead to cessation of employment relations and involve withdrawal of unemployment benefit under clauses 10, 13 and 14 of said section 19 of the Act, taking into account that Article 69(f) of the Convention authorizes suspension of benefit only in case the contingency has been caused by the wilful misconduct of the person concerned.

(d) Section 32 of the Act, which lists grounds for the loss of right to unemployment benefit, provides, in particular, that the criteria to be applied in cases mentioned in clauses 4, 6, 8 and 10 are to be determined by the competent authority. Please supply the rules in question and further information on the content and the practical application of said clauses as well as of the provisions contained in clauses 5 and 7 of this section.

(e) With regard to clause 11 of said section 32, which establishes maximum age-limits for receipt of unemployment benefit equivalent to the prescribed age of retirement, the Committee wishes to point out that the Convention does not authorize setting any age-limits with respect to unemployment benefit but permits to suspend it as long as the person concerned is in receipt of another social security benefit, including old-age pension. As such ground for suspension provided for by the Convention is already made use of in clause 3 of section 32 of the Act, the Committee asks the Government to consider measures aimed at deleting clause 11 of section 32, in order to bring the national legislation into fuller conformity with the Convention on this point.

4. Part IV (Unemployment benefit), in conjunction with Article 70. Please indicate how this Article of the Convention, which provides for a right of appeal in case of refusal of benefit, is applied with respect to unemployment benefit.

5. Finally, the Committee notes from the report that an extensive reform of the pension and disability system is under way in Slovenia. It hopes that the Government's next report will contain all the particulars in this respect.

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

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

The Committee has examined the first report of the Government and would like to receive additional information on the following points:

1. Part III (Sickness benefit), Article 16; Part IV (Unemployment benefit), Article 22; Part V (Old-age benefit), Article 28; Part X (Survivors' benefit), Article 62 (in conjunction with Article 65 or Article 66) of the Convention. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would supply in its next report, as requested in the report form on the Convention adopted by the Governing Body, the statistical information for each of the above-mentioned benefits in the manner set out by the report form in the corresponding Titles of Article 65 or Article 66 of the Convention, depending on which Article is selected for the purpose of the calculation of the amount of the benefit in question. Please also indicate the manner in which the previous earnings of the insured person, taken into account for the purpose of the calculation of the level of the benefit, are adjusted in practice to take account of inflation.

2. Part III (Sickness benefit), Article 18, paragraph 1. The Committee notes that section 29 of the Act of 12 February 1992 on health care and health insurance sets out a waiting period of 30 working days for the payment of sickness benefit, whereas the Convention permits not to pay the benefit only for the first three days of suspension of earnings. It further notes, from the Government's report, that under collective agreements made under the Labour Relations Act, the payment of benefit during the waiting period is generally ensured by the employer. The Committee therefore asks the Government to supply examples of the relevant provisions of the collective agreements in force and to indicate the provisions of the legislation which ensure that the benefit actually is paid by the employers until it is assumed by compulsory insurance even in the absence of such collective agreements.

3. Part IV (Unemployment benefit), Article 20 (in conjunction with Article 69). The Committee notes that sections 16, 19 and 32 of the Act on employment and unemployment insurance lists grounds and criteria on the basis of which an insured person might not be recognized as unemployed, be refused unemployment benefit, or lose his right to such benefit. As some of these provisions may go beyond of what is permitted by the Convention, the Committee would like the Government to provide in its next report detailed information and explanations on the following points:

(a) According to section 16 of the Act, an insured person will not be regarded as unemployed in case he is an owner or co-owner of an enterprise, or owns, rents or uses land, forests, etc., if this permits him to get income on which he can live, provided that the annual income is not less than the guaranteed unemployment benefit. Please indicate whether this provision applies only to persons who are effectively working in their enterprises or on the land they own or use.

(b) Please explain the exact scope and practical application of clauses 1, 2, 6 to 9, and 11 of section 19 of the Act.

(c) Please supply detailed information on the nature of the breaches of discipline, acts of misconduct and gross negligence that can lead to cessation of employment relations and involve withdrawal of unemployment benefit under clauses 10, 13 and 14 of said section 19 of the Act, taking into account that Article 69(f) of the Convention authorizes suspension of benefit only in case the contingency has been caused by the wilful misconduct of the person concerned.

(d) Section 32 of the Act, which lists grounds for the loss of right to unemployment benefit, provides, in particular, that the criteria to be applied in cases mentioned in clauses 4, 6, 8 and 10 are to be determined by the competent authority. Please supply the rules in question and further information on the content and the practical application of said clauses as well as of the provisions contained in clauses 5 and 7 of this section.

(e) With regard to clause 11 of said section 32, which establishes maximum age-limits for receipt of unemployment benefit equivalent to the prescribed age of retirement, the Committee wishes to point out that the Convention does not authorize setting any age-limits with respect to unemployment benefit but permits to suspend it as long as the person concerned is in receipt of another social security benefit, including old-age pension. As such ground for suspension provided for by the Convention is already made use of in clause 3 of section 32 of the Act, the Committee asks the Government to consider measures aimed at deleting clause 11 of section 32, in order to bring the national legislation into fuller conformity with the Convention on this point.

4. Part IV (Unemployment benefit), in conjunction with Article 70. Please indicate how this Article of the Convention, which provides for a right of appeal in case of refusal of benefit, is applied with respect to unemployment benefit.

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

The Committee has examined the first report of the Government and would like to receive additional information on the following points:

1. Part III (Sickness benefit), Article 16; Part IV (Unemployment benefit), Article 22; Part V (Old-age benefit), Article 28; Part X (Survivors' benefit), Article 62 (in conjunction with Article 65 or Article 66) of the Convention. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would supply in its next report, as requested in the report form on the Convention adopted by the Governing Body, the statistical information for each of the above-mentioned benefits in the manner set out by the report form in the corresponding Titles of Article 65 or Article 66 of the Convention, depending on which Article is selected for the purpose of the calculation of the amount of the benefit in question. Please also indicate the manner in which the previous earnings of the insured person, taken into account for the purpose of the calculation of the level of the benefit, are adjusted in practice to take account of inflation.

2. Part III (Sickness benefit), Article 18, paragraph 1. The Committee notes that section 29 of the Act of 12 February 1992 on health care and health insurance sets out a waiting period of 30 working days for the payment of sickness benefit, whereas the Convention permits not to pay the benefit only for the first three days of suspension of earnings. It further notes, from the Government's report, that under collective agreements made under the Labour Relations Act, the payment of benefit during the waiting period is generally ensured by the employer. The Committee therefore asks the Government to supply examples of the relevant provisions of the collective agreements in force and to indicate the provisions of the legislation which ensure that the benefit actually is paid by the employers until it is assumed by compulsory insurance even in the absence of such collective agreements.

3. Part IV (Unemployment benefit), Article 20 (in conjunction with Article 69). The Committee notes that sections 16, 19 and 32 of the Act on employment and unemployment insurance lists grounds and criteria on the basis of which an insured person might not be recognized as unemployed, be refused unemployment benefit, or lose his right to such benefit. As some of these provisions may go beyond of what is permitted by the Convention, the Committee would like the Government to provide in its next report detailed information and explanations on the following points:

(a) According to section 16 of the Act, an insured person will not be regarded as unemployed in case he is an owner or co-owner of an enterprise, or owns, rents or uses land, forests, etc., if this permits him to get income on which he can live, provided that the annual income is not less than the guaranteed unemployment benefit. Please indicate whether this provision applies only to persons who are effectively working in their enterprises or on the land they own or use.

(b) Please explain the exact scope and practical application of clauses 1, 2, 6 to 9, and 11 of section 19 of the Act.

(c) Please supply detailed information on the nature of the breaches of discipline, acts of misconduct and gross negligence that can lead to cessation of employment relations and involve withdrawal of unemployment benefit under clauses 10, 13 and 14 of said section 19 of the Act, taking into account that Article 69(f) of the Convention authorizes suspension of benefit only in case the contingency has been caused by the wilful misconduct of the person concerned.

(d) Section 32 of the Act, which lists grounds for the loss of right to unemployment benefit, provides, in particular, that the criteria to be applied in cases mentioned in clauses 4, 6, 8 and 10 are to be determined by the competent authority. Please supply the rules in question and further information on the content and the practical application of said clauses as well as of the provisions contained in clauses 5 and 7 of this section.

(e) With regard to clause 11 of said section 32, which establishes maximum age-limits for receipt of unemployment benefit equivalent to the prescribed age of retirement, the Committee wishes to point out that the Convention does not authorize setting any age-limits with respect to unemployment benefit but permits to suspend it as long as the person concerned is in receipt of another social security benefit, including old-age pension. As such ground for suspension provided for by the Convention is already made use of in clause 3 of section 32 of the Act, the Committee asks the Government to consider measures aimed at deleting clause 11 of section 32, in order to bring the national legislation into fuller conformity with the Convention on this point.

4. Part IV (Unemployment benefit), in conjunction with Article 70. Please indicate how this Article of the Convention, which provides for a right of appeal in case of refusal of benefit, is applied with respect to unemployment benefit.