Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2006, published 96th ILC session (2007)

Employment Promotion and Protection against Unemployment Convention, 1988 (No. 168) - Norway (Ratification: 1990)

In its previous comments, the Committee pointed out that the possibility, under sections 4-5 and 4-20 of the National Insurance Act of 28 February 1997, of compelling unemployed persons to accept jobs offering less income than the unemployment benefit to which they would otherwise be entitled as of right, or to accept self-employment, which would deprive them of further social security coverage against unemployment, if abused by the employment service, could completely undermine the nature and purpose of unemployment benefit as foreseen by the Convention. In reply, the Government states in its report that the legal provisions compelling unemployed persons to accept jobs offering less income than the unemployment benefit or to generate income from self-employment have been abrogated by the decision of the Storting of 16 December 2005. The Committee notes with satisfaction that the corresponding amendments to the National Insurance Act came into force as of 1 January 2006.

As regards other provisions of the National Insurance Act under which a person could be disqualified from receiving unemployment benefit for having refused an unsuitable job offer, the Committee recalls that, according to section G.4 of the guidelines of the Directorate of Labour, in order to be regarded as a genuine jobseeker, an applicant for unemployment benefit must be willing and able to accept any work that is remunerated according to a collective wage agreement or a local custom. Section G.4.1 details that the obligation to take any work means that applicants for employment cannot make reservations as regards the type of occupation they will work in and must be willing to accept any work they are physically and mentally fit for, even in occupations for which they are not trained or in which they have no previous experience. The applicant’s skill, qualification, acquired experience and length of service in the former occupation – criteria which are normally used for assessing the suitability of employment – are not taken into account when the decision on the withdrawal of the benefit is taken following the jobseeker’s refusal to accept the employment offered on these grounds.

The Committee wishes to observe in this respect that, according to the definition of the contingency contained in Article 10, paragraph 1, the aim of the Convention consists precisely of offering unemployed persons protection during the initial period of unemployment from the obligation to take up jobs that are not suitable to their acquired professional and social status. In line with this aim of the Convention, Article 21, paragraph 1, specifies that the entitlement to the benefit in the case of full unemployment may be withdrawn or suspended only when the person concerned refuses to accept suitable employment, taking into account, under prescribed conditions and to an appropriate extent, the criteria of the suitability of employment laid down in paragraph 2 of this Article and, in particular, the length of service in the former occupation and the acquired experience. The Committee would appreciate therefore if the Government would consider the possibility of including in the above guidelines of the Directorate of Labour the reference to the international obligations of Norway under Convention No. 168, so as to instruct the employment offices not to apply sanctions for refusal to accept unsuitable job offers at least during the initial duration of unemployment specified in Article 19, paragraph 2(a).

[The Government is asked to reply in detail to the present comments in 2007.]