Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2005, published 95th ILC session (2006)

Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87) - Bulgaria (Ratification: 1959)

The Committee takes note of the Government’s report. It observes, however, that it does not reply in sufficient detail to some of the points raised in its previous comments. The Committee also notes the observations of the Confederation of Independent Trade Unions of Bulgaria (CITUB) received with the Government’s report, which address some of the points already raised by the Committee.

Article 3 of the Convention. Right of workers’ and employers’ organizations to organize their activities freely without interference by the public authorities. 1. The Committee requested information on the mechanisms for determining whether trade unions are representative, pursuant to sections 34 and 35 of the Labour Code. It noted with concern that the Association of Democratic Trade Unions (ADS) and PROMYANA (which had become the NTU - National Trade Union) had been unable to participate in a poll to determine whether they were representative at national level. The Committee also notes the CITUB’s comment that there is no controlling mechanism for verifying whether an organization meets the prerequisites for representativeness and that this is harming social dialogue in the country (CITUB is also recognized as representative at national level). The Committee notes that this issue has been examined by the Committee on Freedom of Association and that in its last examination this Committee took note of the Government’s indication that the PROMYANA Alliance had been declared representative at the national level and that ADS and NTU have not requested such status (see 338th Report, approved by the Governing Body at its 294th Session, paragraphs 29-31). The Committee asks the Government to continue to provide information on the mechanisms available for determining whether trade unions are representative and to keep it informed of any new requests in this regard.

2. As regards the requirements for exercising the right to strike, pursuant to section 11(2) and (3) of the Act of March 1990 on the settlement of collective labour disputes, the Committee asked the Government: (1) to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to amend section 11(2) of the Act of March 1990 to ensure that, in strike ballots, only the votes cast would be counted and the quorum would be fixed at a reasonable level; (2) to amend section 11(3) of the Act so as to eliminate the obligation to notify the duration of a strike. In its last report, the Government indicates that decisions for starting strikes must be adopted by an absolute majority of the votes cast and that the requisite quorum is half of "all workers". In order to be able to adequately assess this matter, the Committee asks the Government to indicate whether sections 11(2) and 11(3) of the Act of March 1990 on the settlement of collective labour disputes have been amended as advised by the Committee.

3. With regard to negotiated minimum services, the Committee noted previously that, under section 51 of the Railway Transport Act of 2000, in the event of action under the abovementioned Act regarding the settlement of collective labour disputes, workers and their employers must provide the population with satisfactory transport services of no less than 50 per cent of the volume of transportation that was provided before the strike. The Committee is of the view that, since the establishment of a minimum service restricts one of the essential means of pressure available to workers to defend their economic and social interests, workers’ organizations should be able, if they so wish, to participate in establishing the minimum service, together with employers and the public authorities. The Committee again points out that a minimum requirement of 50 per cent of the volume of transportation may considerably restrict the right of railway workers to undertake industrial action. Consequently, it once again asks the Government to indicate in its next report the measures taken or envisaged to amend this provision in order to ensure that workers’ organizations may participate in negotiations to determine and organize a minimum service and that, where no agreement is possible, the matter is referred to an independent body.

4. With regard to the provision of compensatory guarantees for workers in the energy, communications and health sectors whose right to strike is denied, the Committee noted the creation, in March 2001, of the National Institute for Conciliation and Arbitration. Since the Institute has been in operation since April 2003, the Committee again asks the Government to keep it informed of the use made of the machinery provided under the auspices of the Institute.

5. With regard to the restricting of the exercise of the right to strike by civil servants, pursuant to section 47 of the Civil Servant Act, the Committee recalls that in its report for 2002 the Government indicated that the Ministry of Labour had submitted a Bill to amend and supplement the abovementioned Act and extend the right to strike to civil servants. The Committee noted that section 24 of the Bill was to amend section 47 of the current Act so as to enable public servants not only to strike symbolically but actually to discontinue their work. It also noted that under the Bill, a decision to go on strike should be taken by a majority vote by an assembly attended by more than half of the public servants concerned. In its report, the Government states that it is unable to report on progress on this point. The Committee expresses the firm hope that the Government will be in a position to indicate in its next report any measures adopted to guarantee effectively the right to strike of all civil servants who cannot be considered to be exercising authority in the name of the State, and to send any relevant bills or final texts.