Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2009, published 99th ILC session (2010)

Holidays with Pay Convention (Revised), 1970 (No. 132) - Hungary (Ratification: 1998)

The Committee notes the explanations provided by the Government concerning the application of Articles 5(1) and 8(2) of the Convention and wishes to obtain further clarifications on the following points.

Article 6, paragraph 2, of the Convention. Periods of incapacity not to be counted as annual holidays. The Committee notes the Government’s reference to decision BH 1997.87 in which the Supreme Court ruled that, although there are no statutory provisions for the procedure to be followed in the event of receiving sick pay during annual leave, in established judicial practice, the working days during which employees are verified to have been incapable of working are not considered as part of their annual leave. While noting this important judicial pronouncement, the Committee requests the Government to consider taking appropriate measures in order to determine the conditions under which periods of incapacity for work resulting from sickness or injury may not be counted as part of the minimum annual holiday with pay, as prescribed by this Article of the Convention.

Article 7, paragraph 1. Remuneration during annual leave. The Committee has been commenting on section 26 of Government Order No. 24/1994 which provides that the holiday pay for homeworkers should not be less than 30 per cent of the amount of the statutory minimum wage, therefore being inconsistent with Article 7(1) of the Convention which requires the payment of the worker’s normal or average remuneration for the full period of the annual holiday. In its response, the Government states that homeworkers are not considered as employees and therefore, they do not fall within the Convention’s scope of application. In this connection, the Committee is bound to observe that, by virtue of its Article 2(1), the Convention applies to all employed persons with only the exception of seafarers, and consequently homeworkers are fully covered by its provisions, since they are indeed employees who do paid work out of their own homes for an employer. While noting that the Government’s statement seems in contradiction with Government Order No. 24/1994 which recognizes at least four weeks’ paid annual holidays to homeworkers, the Committee requests the Government to provide additional explanations in this regard and also to indicate how it is ensured that these workers receive no less than their normal or average remuneration in respect of the entire period of their annual leave, as required under this Article of the Convention.

Article 9. Postponement of annual holidays. The Committee notes the Government’s reference to the decision of the Constitutional Court of March 2007, according to which the postponement of annual leave on account of the employer’s economic interests of particular importance, as provided for in section 134(3)(a) of the Labour Code, was declared unconstitutional mainly on the understanding that the ill-defined concept of “economic interests of particular importance” would risk to arbitrarily and disproportionately restrict the workers’ constitutional right to rest. Following this decision, the Labour Code was amended by Act XIX of 2007 and, as a result, the Labour Code now specifies in section 134(3)(a) the time limits within which the annual leave must be granted and taken. The Committee also notes the Government’s indication that the tripartite National Interest Reconciliation Council (OÉT) was consulted in the process of amending the Labour Code.

Part V of the report form. Application in practice. The Committee notes the copies of the judicial decisions as well as the labour inspection results provided by the Government in its report. It would appreciate if the Government would continue providing up to date information on the manner in which the Convention is applied in practice.