Demande directe (CEACR) - adoptée 1990, publiée 77ème session CIT (1990)

1. The Committee takes note of the information supplied by the Government in reply to its previous direct request concerning Part IX (Invalidity benefit), Article 54, of the Convention.

2. Part IV (Unemployment benefit), Article 24 (in conjunction with Article 69(f)). In reply to the Committee's previous comments concerning the application, in practice, of section 14, subsection 1(b), of the Act of 1 June 1987 consolidating legislation on unemployment, the Government indicates that unemployment benefit is refused if, in accordance with the legislation on labour contracts, a contract is terminated without notice for one or more reasons arising out of the action or misconduct of the worker. It adds that, for the purposes of the application of this legislation, "serious grounds" are considered to be any action or misconduct which makes the labour relationship immediately and definitively impossible.

The Committee takes note of this information. It would be grateful if, in its next report, the Government would provide examples of cases where the seriousness of the grounds invoked has given rise to dismissal without notice and, consequently, the refusal of unemployment benefit, enclosing copies or extracts of the relevant judicial decisions, in view of the fact that Article 69(f) of the Convention authorises the suspension of the benefit only in the event of wilful misconduct on the part of the person concerned.

3. Part XI (Standards to be complied with by periodical payments), Articles 65 and 66 (in conjunction with articles 56 and 62). The Committee takes note of the statistical information provided by the Government concerning the amount of invalidity benefit (Article 56) and survivors' benefit (Article 62), recourse being had to Article 66 (Calculation of periodical payments). It notes, however, that the amounts of these benefits have been calculated mainly for situations where the worker - or, as the case may be, the breadwinner - is 40 years of age when the contingency arises. It would be grateful if the Government would provide statistical information on the amount of invalidity and survivors' benefits in cases where the worker - or, as the case may be, the breadwinner - is older when the contingency arises (55 and 60 years of age for each contingency, for example) and has completed a contribution period not exceeding 15 years. Please provide the information required by Titles I, II and IV of Article 65 or - in so far as the minimum benefits are granted in such cases - of Article 66.

Furthermore, the Committee notes from the information provided by the Government in its report under Title I of Article 56 and Article 62 of the report form, that the wage of the standard labourer selected is equal to the legal minimum wage for a worker with dependants whereas, according to the information provided under Title I of Article 44, the minimum legal wage increased by 25 per cent is adopted as the average wage of an ordinary labourer. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide information on the reasons for the difference in the definition of the wage of the ordinary male labourer (see, in this connection, the rules laid down in paragraphs 4 and 5 of Article 66 for the definition of the ordinary adult male labourer, which are also referred to by Article 44).

Lastly, the Committee hopes that the Government will have no difficulty in providing the statistical information requested, basing its calculations on amounts which have been updated to take account of the cost-of-living index in force for the period covered by the report. [The Government is asked to report in detail for the period ending 30 June 1991.]