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

Convenio sobre el derecho de sindicación y de negociación colectiva, 1949 (núm. 98) - Armenia (Ratificación : 2003)

Otros comentarios sobre C098

Observación

Solicitud directa

Visualizar en: Francés - EspañolVisualizar todo

Article 4 of the Convention. Collective bargaining. The Committee had previously noted that pursuant to sections 23, 25, 45, 55 and 56 of the Labour Code, both trade unions and “workers’ representatives” enjoyed the right to negotiate collective agreements at the enterprise level and requested the Government to amend its legislation so as to ensure that in cases where there is no trade union representing 50 per cent of the company’s workers, the existing unions are entitled to bargain collectively on behalf of their own members.

The Committee notes the Government’s explanation that for the purpose of collective bargaining, a trade union is entitled to represent all workers of an undertaking if this union represents over half of the company’s workers. A collective agreement signed by that union would apply to all workers of the enterprise in question. If a union represents less than half of all workers of an enterprise, it can only negotiate on behalf of its own members. In the absence of a trade union, the representation functions can be transferred to the relevant regional or sectoral trade union. The Committee notes, however, that pursuant to section 23 of the Labour Code, if no trade union exists at an enterprise, or if the existing unions represent less than half of the employees of the undertaking, the staff meeting may elect other representatives. The Committee notes what appears to be a contradiction between the wording of section 23 of the Labour Code and its application in practice, as explained by the Government. Recalling that direct negotiation between the undertaking and its employees, bypassing representative organizations, where these exist, is detrimental to the principle that negotiation between employers and organizations of workers should be encouraged and promoted, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to amend its legislation so as to bring it into conformity with the Convention, as well as the existing practice, as explained by the Government. It requests the Government to indicate all progress made in this respect.

The Committee had previously noted that according to section 59(4) and section 61(2) of the Labour Code, if an enterprise is restructured or privatized, the collective agreement is considered to be unilaterally terminated, irrespective of its validity period. Recalling that neither the restructuring nor the privatization of an enterprise should in itself automatically result in the extinction of all the obligations resulting from the collective agreement, and that the parties should in any case be in a position to advocate the application of relevant clauses such as those concerning severance pay, the Committee had requested the Government to amend these provisions accordingly.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication that, following discussions with the social partners, and taking into account that in practice, new socio-labour guarantees can be established through collective bargaining with a new employer, a decision was made not to amend the Labour Code in this respect. The Committee nevertheless considers that before a new collective agreement can be negotiated and signed, the previous agreement shall remain in force. The Committee therefore reiterates its previous request and asks the Government to provide information on the progress made in this respect.