Solicitud directa (CEACR) - Adopción: 2016, Publicación: 106ª reunión CIT (2017)

Convenio sobre las agencias de empleo privadas, 1997 (núm. 181) - Polonia (Ratificación : 2008)

Otros comentarios sobre C181

Solicitud directa

2016
2014
2011

Visualizar en: Francés - EspañolVisualizar todo

The Committee notes the observations presented by the Independent and Self-Governing Trade Union Solidarnosc in August 2016 and the Government’s response thereto, received in October 2016.

Articles 1(2) and 3(2) of the Convention. Conditions governing the legal status and operation of private employment agencies. Application of the Convention in practice . The Committee notes the information provided in the Government’s report regarding relevant legislative developments, particularly changes made or envisaged with respect to the Act on Employment Promotion and Labour Market Institutions (hereinafter the Employment Promotion Act) and the Act on the Employment of Temporary Workers (hereinafter the Temporary Workers Act). The Committee further notes the comprehensive information from the State Labour Inspectorate (SLI) indicating that, in 2015, out of the 479 private employment agencies inspected, 278 private employment agencies were acting as mediators, with 122 of these agencies mediating workers abroad. In addition, 81 agencies provided human resources consulting services, 47 offered career guidance, and six delegated persons to entities in order for them to acquire practical skills. According to the SLI, 12 private employment agencies did not require a license under section 18(c)(2) of the Employment Promotion Act. In this regard, the Committee recalls that Article 3(2) of the Convention calls for the conditions governing the operation of private employment agencies to be determined under a licensing or certification system, except where they are otherwise regulated or determined by national law and practice. The Committee further notes that the 285 temporary work agencies inspected by the SLI employed a total of 141,600 persons, of which 43 per cent were working under civil law contracts that do not provide for certain employment benefits and offer less occupational safety and health protection than employment contracts. In its 2016 observations, Solidarnosc indicates that despite the ongoing changes in the regulatory framework involving the social partners, the simplified procedures for establishing and operating temporary work agencies still fail to ensure adequate protection for workers in regard to working conditions and salaries, making them particularly vulnerable and subject to social exclusion. This is reflected in the high number of irregularities detected by the SLI. In its response to Solidarnosc’s observations, the Government stresses that the legislative amendments to date seek to enhance protection for clients of private employment agencies and partially reverse the deregulation of the private employment agency market that followed the adoption of the Act of 13 June 2013. The Committee requests the Government to provide further information on how the conditions governing the operation of unregistered private employment agencies operating under the Employment Promotion Act is regulated or determined under national law and practice. It further requests the Government to continue to provide updated information on the practical implementation of the Convention and to provide information regarding developments in amending the Employment Promotion Act and the Temporary Workers Act.

Article 5(2). Special services and programmes for disadvantaged jobseekers. In reply to the Committee’s previous comments, the Government indicates that, by the end of 2015, a total of 20,455 long-term unemployed persons and 476 persons in difficult labour market positions benefited from commissioned activation measures under agreements between voivodship marshals with private employment agencies pursuant to the Employment Promotion Act. In this regard, Solidarnosc observed that the outsourcing of activation measures to private employment agencies on the basis of section 61b of the Employment Promotion Act left room for abuse, as agencies were exempt from the obligation to return funds received for conducting activation measures in the event of a disciplinary dismissal of a worker to be activated, or in case of termination of a civil law contract by the worker. In its response, the Government disagreed, pointing out that private employment agencies offering activation measures were selected based on their competence and assume the economic risks related to mediation. Furthermore, since the remuneration that agencies receive is calculated on the basis of the duration of the employment found for their clients, they have an interest in finding them sustainable employment. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide specific information regarding the special services and programmes designed to assist the most disadvantaged jobseekers in their job seeking activities, including information on the outcomes and the evaluation of the commissioned activation measures, particularly in relation to the time frame for activation agreements and their success rate.

Articles 7 and 8. Fees and adequate protection in a cross-border context. In response to the Committee’s comments, the Government indicates that the number of cases of illegal fee charging has decreased significantly. Steps taken by the SLI to prevent illegal fee charging include an education campaign, media monitoring and improved inspection methods. The SLI indicates, however, that the number of infringements of the requirement that workers receive written information of costs, fees and other charges relating to their mediation abroad has increased from 6 to 9 per cent. The Committee notes the cooperation agreement concluded between the SLI and the Dutch Inspectorate of Social Affairs and Employment to improve the protection of Polish citizens mediated to the Netherlands; moreover, the SLI indicates that foreign workers, particularly Ukrainian citizens, who are frequently mediated to work in Poland under false pretexts, are subject to significant abuse, including through use of civil contracts. In this regard, the SLI indicates that out of the 122 agencies inspected that were engaged in cross-border mediation, 70 had violated one or more requirements of the Employment Promotion Act as amended and concludes that substantive legislative and practical measures are necessary to reduce the number of irregularities. In this regard, the Committee notes that the amendments to the Employment Promotion Act and the Temporary Workers Act aim to improve the protection of workers mediated in a cross-border context, for example by laying down the specifics to be contained in written employment contracts of foreign workers mediated to work in Poland. The Committee asks the Government to continue to provide information in this regard, including information on the measures taken to eliminate unlawful fee charging in both domestic and cross border contexts. It also requests the Government to provide information on the measures adopted and envisaged to provide adequate protection for and prevent abuses of migrant workers recruited or placed in its territory by private employment agencies.

Articles 10 and 14. Investigation of complaints and adequate remedies. The information provided by the SLI reflects an increase in the scale of violations of the Employment Promotion Act, as 49 private employment agencies were found to be operating illegally and general irregularities were found in 60 per cent of the inspected entities (compared to 53 per cent in 2014). The most common violations involved irregularities involving mediation of persons to work abroad, including agencies’ failure to maintain lists of foreign entities to which persons were mediated, failure to maintain lists of persons mediated to work abroad, and failure to conclude written contracts with foreign employers and persons mediated to work abroad. The SLI indicates that during 2012–15, due to its activities, 147 entities were removed from the register of employment agencies. In response to Solidarnosc’s previous observations, the SLI indicates that use of civil law contracts instead of the appropriate employment contracts has increased from 19 per cent in 2014 to 29 per cent in 2015. In addition, the number of temporary workers performing work outside the scope of the definition of temporary work has been on the rise: from 7 per cent in 2013 to 15 per cent in 2015. The Committee notes the Government’s statement that violations of the Temporary Workers Act are not criminal offences and that possible fines are capped at 5,000 Polish zloty (PLN). In 2015, in addition to warnings and improvement notices, temporary employment agencies and user enterprises received fines totalling PLN120,010 and 50 cases were referred to court. The SLI expresses the view that this framework provides insufficient deterrents to prevent violations. The Committee notes Solidarnosc’s observation that the user enterprises have increasingly complied with the requirement that they inform trade union organizations about their intention to hire temporary workers. It also notes Solidarnosc’s concerns regarding the practice of circumventing the time limits set by the Temporary Workers Act where workers remain in the same user enterprise, but are made available in turn by different temporary work agencies. In order to effectively prevent this practice, the Government refers to envisaged legislative changes that will set time limits and strengthen the supervisory and penal framework. The Committee asks the Government to provide information on any measures taken or envisaged to ensure that adequate remedies are provided for and effectively applied in case of violations of the Convention.

Articles 11 and 12. Adequate protection and allocation of responsibilities. The SLI indicates that difficulties exist in the cooperation between temporary work agencies and user enterprises and that every third document allocating responsibilities showed irregularities. Furthermore, it indicates that in 88 temporary work agencies, salary payments and payments of benefits were delayed, while 27 per cent did not pay their workers at all. The Government concurs with Solidarnosc’s observations that workers of temporary work agencies are only allowed to form and join trade unions in the agency and not in the user enterprise. However, the Government observes that collective-bargaining agreements applicable to the user enterprise may require temporary work agencies to employ workers on the same terms as those enjoyed by workers employed directly by the user enterprise. The Government further indicates that pregnant temporary employees are afforded the same protections as other employees. The Committee asks the Government to specify how it is ensured that workers enjoy adequate protection and how such is determined and allocated between the temporary work agency and the user enterprise in regard to all areas described in Articles 11 and 12.

Article 13. Cooperation. In reply to the Committee’s previous request, the Government states that it was currently evaluating the implementation of the 2014 amendments to the Employment Promotion Act in regard to the cooperation between public and private actors, including official statistics on the implementation of activation measures. The Committee requests the Government to provide concrete examples, including statistics, on the cooperation between the public employment service and private employment agencies.