Observación (CEACR) - Adopción: 2000, Publicación: 89ª reunión CIT (2001)

The Committee notes the information provided in the Government’s latest report, as well as the observations made by the Confederation of Independent Trade Unions in Bulgaria (CITUB) accompanied with the Government’s report. The Committee further notes the conclusions and recommendations of the Committee on Freedom of Association in Case No. 1989 (see 316th Report, paragraphs 163-195, and 320th Report, paragraphs 299-329, respectively).

Article 3 of the Convention.  The Committee recalls that its previous comments concerned the need to amend section 11(2) of the Act of March 1990 regarding the settlement of collective labour disputes, which provides that the decision to strike shall be taken by a simple majority of the workers of the enterprise or the unit concerned. It notes that the Government has merely reiterated the provisions of this Act, but has not given any indication as to measures taken to amend the section so as to ensure that account in a strike ballot would only be taken of the votes cast and that the quorum is fixed at a reasonable level. It therefore once again requests the Government to indicate in its next report the measures taken or envisaged to bring its legislation into full conformity with the Convention in this respect.

Furthermore, as concerns the provision of compensatory guarantees for workers in the energy, communications and health sectors whose right to strike is denied, the Committee notes that the Government refers to sections 3-7 of the Act regarding the settlement of collective labour disputes and to section 4 of the Labour Code concerning voluntary arbitration. In this regard, the Committee would draw the Government’s attention to paragraph 164 of its 1994 General Survey on freedom of association and collective bargaining which provides in particular that the compensatory guarantee procedures should provide sufficient guarantees of impartiality and rapidity, arbitration awards should be binding on both parties and once issued should be implemented rapidly and completely. The Committee recalls the Government’s indication in its previous report concerning new developments in the field of peaceful settlement of collective disputes. It requests the Government to indicate in its next report the measures taken or envisaged to ensure that workers who are restricted in their right to strike have machinery available to them which receives the confidence of all parties concerned in the event of deadlock.

The Committee notes the observations made by the CITUB concerning the right to organize and the right to strike under the Civil Servants Act of 1999. In particular, the Committee notes that the Civil Servants Act restricts the right to strike to the carrying and placing of suitable signs and symbols, protest posters and armbands. It recalls in this respect that restrictions on the right to strike should be limited to public servants exercising authority in the name of the State (see General Survey, op. cit., paragraph 158). It therefore requests the Government to specify the types of state employees covered under section 2 of the Act, in particular indicating those whom special legislation grants the statute of state employee and whether postal workers, teachers or workers in state enterprises are covered by the Act. It further requests the Government to indicate the machinery available for resolving collective disputes for public servants who have been restricted in their right to strike.

The Committee would also draw the attention of the Government to the availability of the technical assistance of the Office in respect of the abovementioned matters should the Government so desire.