Solicitud directa (CEACR) - Adopción: 2015, Publicación: 105ª reunión CIT (2016)

Convenio sobre el derecho de sindicación y de negociación colectiva, 1949 (núm. 98) - Rumania (Ratificación : 1958)

Otros comentarios sobre C098

Observación

Solicitud directa

Visualizar en: Francés - EspañolVisualizar todo

Articles 1, 2 and 3 of the Convention. Effective protection against acts of anti-union discrimination and interference. In its previous comments, the Committee had noted that sections 10 of Act No. 62 of 2011 concerning Social Dialogue (Social Dialogue Act) and 220(2) of the Labour Code prohibited acts of anti-union discrimination, but that neither the Social Dialogue Act nor the Labour Code appeared to contain sanctions for the violation of these provisions; and that Government Ordinance No. 137 of 2000 sanctioned discrimination on various grounds but not by reason of union affiliation or engagement in legitimate trade union activities. The Committee had requested the Government to specify the legal provisions which sanction acts of anti-union discrimination, and to provide statistical information on sanctions imposed for acts of anti-union discrimination or interference.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that: (i) the labour and social dialogue legislation correlates with the provisions in general law, and the resolution of cases of anti-union discrimination and interference falls under the remit of the monitoring institutions and courts that are able to take remedy measures; and (ii) trade unions could play a more active role in informing workers and assisting members in gaining access to the national mechanisms for the resolution of abuse. The Committee also notes the information supplied by the Government under the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), on eleven cases relating to infringements of the right to organize brought before the National Council for Combating Discrimination (CNCD) since the beginning of 2013, with fines being imposed in certain cases. The Committee once again requests the Government to specify the various legal provisions, which, according to the Government, sanction acts of anti-union discrimination, including the legal basis for the fines imposed by the CNCD. The Committee also requests the Government to provide detailed information on the number of cases of anti-union discrimination and employer interference brought to the various competent authorities, the average duration of the relevant proceedings and their outcome, as well as the sanctions and remedies applied in such cases.

Tripartite discussion of recent anti-union practices. The Committee had previously noted from the observations of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) and the Block of National Trade Unions (BNS) the occurrence in recent years of certain anti-union practices, and requested the Government to discuss this situation with the most representative organizations of workers and employers. The Committee had welcomed the Government’s indication that a debate on the subject might be included on the agenda of the National Tripartite Council for Social Dialogue. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that: (i) during the consultations before the Council in 2014 and 2015, neither the labour inspection nor the trade unions have signalled any cases of making employment conditional upon non-affiliation to a union; and (ii) recent cases signalled to the competent authorities concerned the refusal by employers based in another State to recognize legally established national trade unions. The Committee trusts that the occurrence of all anti-union practices relating to Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention will be included on the agenda of the National Tripartite Council for Social Dialogue and invites the Government to report on the outcome of the discussion and any agreed follow-up measures, including as to cases concerning the refusal by employers based in another State to recognize legally established national trade unions.

Article 4. Promotion of collective bargaining. The Committee previously noted with concern that the Government indicated, in a recent request for ILO technical assistance with regard to a draft Emergency Ordinance, substantially amending the Social Dialogue Act, that one of the consequences of the Social Dialogue Act had been a drastic decrease in the number of collective agreements concluded at the enterprise level and at the level of sector of activity (due to delay in the determination of the sectors of activity by the social partners). The Committee had requested the Government to provide detailed information on any developments in regard to this decrease and to communicate comparative and other statistics on the coverage of collective bargaining. The Committee notes that the Government refers to enclosed data on collective agreements negotiated and concluded in 2014 as compared to 2012, but observes that the information was not attached to the report. The Committee requests the Government to provide detailed information and statistics relating to the impact of the recent legislative changes on the application of the Convention and to communicate comparative and other statistics for the reporting period on the number of collective agreements concluded at the levels of the enterprise and the sector of activity, including the number of workers and the sectors of activity covered.