Observation (CEACR) - adoptée 2018, publiée 108ème session CIT (2019)

Convention (n° 98) sur le droit d'organisation et de négociation collective, 1949 - Serbie (Ratification: 2000)

Autre commentaire sur C098

Observation

Demande directe

Afficher en : Francais - EspagnolTout voir

The Committee notes the observations from the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) received on 1 September 2018 that concern: (i) alleged attempts by the Ministry of Education to blacklist trade union members in the education sector by obtaining confidential lists of unionized employees from school principals; and (ii) the alleged Government’s contribution to the persistent and widespread undermining of social dialogue and collective bargaining by favouring yellow unions and the hampering of good faith collective bargaining by unduly delaying the registration and publication of collective agreements. The Committee also notes the observations from the Trade Union Confederation “Nezavisnost” received on 7 November 2018 that concern the alleged poor implementation of good faith collective bargaining in the country, notably the withdrawal of representativeness of certain trade unions during the bargaining process and certain employers’ refusal to start the collective bargaining process or inappropriately extending this process for long periods. The Committee further notes the observations from the Confederation of Autonomous Trade Unions of Serbia (CATUS) received on 7 November 2018 that concern: (i) allegations of anti-union discrimination; (ii) a request to amend the existing Labour Act so as to grant the right to establish and join trade unions to all workers and not only to employees, given that a great number of people in the country are hired for non-standard work and remain completely unable to organize in trade unions or become members of existing organizations. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments with respect to the issues raised by the ITUC, Nezavisnost and CATUS.

Furthermore, the Committee notes with regret that the Government did not provide a reply to previous observations from the following workers’ and employers’ organizations: (i) CATUS and the Trade Union of Judiciary Employees of Serbia (TUJES) (2013); (ii) the International Organisation of Employers (IOE) and the Serbian Association of Employers (SAE) (2013); (iii) the Union of Employers of Serbia (UES) (2012 and 2014); (iv) the ITUC (2015); (v) Nezavisnost (2012); and the Confederation of Free Trade Unions (2012). The Committee urges the Government to provide its comments to the mentioned outstanding trade unions’ observations.

Article 1 of the Convention. Protection against anti-union discrimination in practice. In its previous comments, the Committee had requested further details to be provided on proceedings related to anti-union discrimination, including judicial proceedings, and their average duration. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the Commissioner for the protection of equality, who is in charge of receiving and reviewing complaints relating to anti-union discrimination, is authorized to initiate strategic lawsuits and/or provide recommendations to persons accused of discrimination. Even though the person accused of discrimination does not have to follow the recommendations, the Government indicates that action was taken on the basis of the recommendations, in 89.1 per cent of the cases in 2015, in 76.7 per cent of the cases in 2016, and in 75.86 per cent of the cases in 2017. While noting that the Government indicates that the biggest number of complaints lodged against the Commissioner belongs to the field of labour and employment (36.3 per cent in 2015; 33.9 per cent in 2016; and 31.2 per cent in 2017), no information is provided on the number of anti-union discrimination cases handled by the Commissioner nor on the type of action and recommendations issued by the Commissioner. The Committee therefore requests the Government to: (i) provide more details on the cases handled by the Commissioner for the protection of equality specifically related to anti-union discrimination, and (ii) provide information on labour inspection and judicial proceedings related to anti-union discrimination cases, their average duration and outcomes.

Article 4. Promotion of collective bargaining. Representativeness of workers’ and employers’ organizations. The Committee recalls that for many years it has been examining the conditions and mechanism for the establishment of the representativeness of trade unions and employers’ organizations. In its last comment, the Committee had requested the Government to provide information on the efficiency and operations of the amended section 229 of the Labour Act, which establishes decision-making by majority and allow the Minister to decide upon a request for representativeness without the Board’s approval if it fails to submit a proposal to the Minister within 30 days from the date of the request. The Committee notes with regret that the Government did not provide any information in this regard and that, at the same time, it continues to receive trade union observations raising representativeness determination issues. Reiterating that methods for the determination of the most representative organizations should be based on objective, pre-established and precise criteria, the Committee requests once again the Government to indicate whether the new amendments have improved the Representativeness Board’s operation and efficiency when dealing with requests to grant representativeness and whether the Government is developing any further amendments to the Labour Act in this regard.

Percentage required for collective bargaining. In its previous comments, having noted that the Government and the social partners had started an initiative to review the Labour Act, the Committee trusted that the Government would take the necessary measures to lift the 10 per cent requirement for employers’ organizations to be entitled to engage in collective bargaining. The Committee notes with regret that the Government provides no information in this respect. Recalling that the mentioned percentage is particularly high, especially in the context of negotiations at the sectoral or national level, the Committee requests once again the Government to take, in consultation with the representative social partners, the necessary measures to lower the above-mentioned percentage and to provide information on any developments in this regard.

The Committee expresses once again the hope that the Government will take the necessary measures without delay in order to bring the legislation into conformity with the requirements of the Convention, taking into account the preceding comment, and requests the Government to indicate the progress made in this respect.

The Committee is raising other matters in a request addressed directly to the Government.