Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 2010, Publication: 99th ILC session (2010)

Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87) - Belarus (Ratification: 1956)

The Government communicated the following written information concerning measures taken to implement the recommendations of the Committee on the Application of Standards (“Conference Committee”) of the Commission of Inquiry since the last examination of this case by the Conference Committee in June 2009.

Over the past few years, the Government of Belarus has been taking concrete steps to develop social dialogue in the country. The Government initiated the inclusion of all trade unions, including those not affiliated to the largest trade union association, the Federation of Trade Unions of Belarus (FPB), and employers’ associations into the social dialogue process and intensified negotiations with the ILO regarding the implementation of the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry. The Government, together with the social partners and with the assistance of the ILO, is promoting respect for the ILO fundamental principles and their full observance in Belarus.

In June 2009 during the 98th Session of the International Labour Conference, the Government of Belarus informed in detail the Conference Committee about the work of the tripartite Council for the Improvement of Legislation in the Social and Labour Sphere which is empowered to examine the whole set of issues resulting from the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry: from specific situations related to trade union registration or conclusion of collective agreements, to consideration of amendments to the legislation.

Following the wishes expressed by the members of the Council and the recommendations made by the ILO, the Council’s sitting held on 26 November 2009 had an open agenda. All the parties represented on the Council had an opportunity to propose for discussion those issues which they believed were of high importance. During the sitting the Council discussed the issues of legislative regulation of trade union registration and conclusion of collective agreements.

The main topic of the Council’s sitting held on 14 May 2010 was the legislation and prospects of work aimed at fulfilment of the Plan of Action on implementation of the Commission’s recommendations. The Council made an important decision on the improvement of the procedure for preparation and consideration of legislative issues. In particular, the Council decided to establish a working group (six members), which should include the representatives of all parties concerned (the Government, the FPB, the Congress of Democratic Trade Unions (CDTU) and employers’ associations), to examine the issues identified by the Council’s members and prepare suggestions regarding the Council’s decisions, taking into account positions of all parties.

The tripartite Council is carrying out its work relying on fully transparent and democratic principles and taking into account interests of all the parties represented on the Council. In its work the Council is adhering to the principle which has been supported by the social partners and according to which conclusions on the most important and fundamental issues are to be adopted on the basis of a position approved by all members of the Council. At the same time, the Council’s members and other persons invited to participate in its sittings have an opportunity to express their opinion freely and are completely independent as concerns developing their points of view.

In the course of its work aimed at the implementation of the Plan of Action, the tripartite Council managed to resolve a number of issues related to the promotion of trade unions’ rights:

- The primary-level organization of the Belarusian Independent Trade Union (BITU) at enterprise “Belshina” (Bobruisk) was rendered assistance in the registration. This primary-level organization was registered on 10 October 2009.

- On the basis of the conclusions made by the tripartite Council, the Ministry of Justice issued an Explanation note according to which the requirement to have 10 per cent of employees to establish a trade union in an enterprise, laid down in Presidential Decree No. 2, does not concern primary trade union organizations. Since, at the moment, there are only primary trade union organizations acting at the enterprise level (which are organizational structures of sectoral trade unions), the Explanation of the Ministry of Justice is to be applied to all trade union organizations acting at the enterprise level without any exception.

- There are no cases of unjustified refusals to register trade unions. In 2009, the competent authorities did not register three trade union organizations (structures of the REWU in Mogilev, Vitebsk and Gomel). Before that, on 14 April 2009, the tripartite Council examined the situation with those three trade union structures and, following the discussion all members of the Council, including representatives of the FPB and the CDTU, unanimously decided that those trade union structures could not be registered as trade union organizations.

At present, there are 35 registered trade unions and more than 22,000 registered trade union organizational structures, including primary-level trade union organizations in Belarus. There are also two trade union associations – the Federation of Trade Unions of Belarus (FPB) and the Congress of Democratic Trade Unions (CDTU).

The work carried out by the Government in cooperation with the social partners and the ILO to implement the Commission’s recommendations creates conditions for the employers to pay attention to the observance of trade unions’ rights and stimulates courts and prosecutors to examine complaints alleging violation of trade unions’ rights in a thorough way. Where violations of the current legislation are confirmed, trade unions and trade union members have their rights reinstated.

In December 2009, following a complaint from the Belarusian Free Trade Union (BFTU), the court of Chashniksky Region (Vitebsk Oblast) examined a case of dismissal for the reason of trade union membership (a complaint of this kind was lodged by trade unions for the first time) and took a decision in favour of the trade union. Following the court decision, Mr Aleksey Gabriel, the dismissed leader of a primary-level organization of the BFTU at the Lukoml Power Station (Lukomlskaya GRES, Vitebsk Oblast), was reinstated in his previous employment.

Positive changes can also be noted in the sphere of collective bargaining. According to the Labour Code of Belarus, the right to collective bargaining can be enjoyed by all trade unions regardless of their representativeness. It means that all trade unions have equal opportunities as concerns their participation in the collective bargaining process. For example, at some of the largest enterprises of the country, the Republican Unitary Enterprise “Belaruskaliy” and Joint Stock Company “Mozyr Oil Refinery” collective agreements have been signed by several trade unions affiliated to both the FPB and the CDTU.

After the International Labour Conference of June 2009, issues of concluding collective agreements at the Open Joint Stock Company “Naftan” and the Lukoml Power Station were settled positively: structures of the BITU and the BFTU joined the collective agreements signed by the employers and trade unions affiliated to the FPB.

Collective bargaining is taking place at the national, sectoral and local levels, as well as at the enterprise level in Belarus. On 1 April 2010, there were: one general agreement, 46 sectoral tariff agreements, 483 local agreements and 18,181 enterprise-level collective agreements concluded in Belarus.

On 8 April 2010, the National Council for Labour and Social Issues decided to start the process of preparation of a new general agreement for 2011–13 to be signed by the Government of Belarus and the republic-level employers’ and trade unions’ associations.

While implementing the Plan of Action adopted on 20 February 2009, the Government of Belarus has made considerable progress as regards the observance of the freedom of association principles. Measures taken by the Government of Belarus were given a positive assessment by the Committee of Experts, which welcomed the commitment to social dialogue demonstrated by the Government.

The Government of Belarus demonstrates its firm attitude and consistency in its work aimed at the implementation of the Commission’s recommendations. It is evident that the progress observed during the 98th Session of the International Labour Conference in June 2009 is of a stable nature and has a real impact on due observance of the trade unions’ rights in Belarus.

In addition, before the Committee, a Government representative indicated that over the past few years the Government of Belarus had been taking concrete steps to develop social dialogue in the country. All trade unions, including those not affiliated to the Federation of Trade Unions of Belarus (FPB), the largest trade union organization, and employers’ associations had been participating in this process. The FPB and the Congress of Democratic Trade Unions (CDTU) were both members of the National Council of Labour and Social Issues (NCLSI), the main social dialogue body. The following positive developments had taken place in the country in previous years: a General Agreement for 2009–10 had been signed by both trade union organizations, the FPB and the CDTU; at the beginning of 2009, a tripartite seminar on the implementation of the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry had been held in Minsk with the participation of the Government and the social partners, the ILO, the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) and the International Organisation of Employers (IOE); a plan of action on the implementation of the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry had been adopted and approved by the NCLSI; and the tripartite Council for the Improvement of Legislation in the Social and Labour Sphere had been established. The latter had been empowered to examine the whole range of issues resulting from the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry. In 2009, the Council had held three meetings to discuss the issues of the registration of trade union organizations, anti-union discrimination, collective bargaining and the improvement of trade union legislation. All the members of the Council could express their views freely and the Council’s decisions reflected the opinions of all the interested parties. As a result of the work of the Council, Mr Stukov had been reinstated without loss of benefits and Mr Shaitor had found new employment. Furthermore, the primary trade union organization of the “Belshina” enterprise in Bobruisk had been registered in October 2009.

On the issue of collective bargaining, pursuant to the Labour Code, the right to collective bargaining could be enjoyed by all trade unions, regardless of their representativeness. That meant that all trade unions had equal opportunities in terms of their participation in the collective bargaining process. In practice, at some of the largest enterprises of the country, such as “Belaruskaliy” and the “Mozyr Oil Refinery”, collective agreements had been signed by several trade unions affiliated to both the FPB and the CDTU. After the 2009 International Labour Conference, issues of collective bargaining at the “Naftan” enterprise and the “Lukoml Power Station” had been settled: the structures of the Belarusian Independent Trade Union (BITU) and the Belarusian Free Trade Union had joined the collective agreements signed by the employers and trade unions affiliated to the FPB. Those were concrete examples of cooperation between large and smaller trade unions, whether or not they were affiliated to the FPB.

As a result of the collaboration between the Government, the social partners and the ILO, employers had been paying due attention to trade union rights and there had been no complaints alleging interference by employers in trade union affairs. At the same time, the courts and prosecutors had been examining allegations of violations of trade union rights and had imposed appropriate remedies in cases where the violations where proven. In this respect, she referred to the case in Soligorsk where the court had taken a decision in favour of the BITU, ordering the employer to transfer trade union dues using the check-off facility.

In 2009, there had been no cases of unfounded denial of registration. While she confirmed that three trade union structures of the Radio Electronics Workers Union (REWU) had not been registered, she noted that this question had been discussed by the tripartite Council and that all of its members, including the CDTU representatives, had supported the decision. She underlined that there had been no cases of denial of registration due to the absence of a legal address. She added that the issue of trade union legislation was one of the questions that had been constantly discussed by the Council.

At the Council’s meeting of 14 May 2010, it had been decided to establish a tripartite working group, consisting of six people responsible for examining the issues raised by the members of the Council and preparing suggestions for Council decisions taking into account the positions of all the parties concerned.

The Government of Belarus considered that all these positive developments demonstrated its positive attitude and the consistency of its action in the implementation of the Commission of Inquiry’s recommendations. This had been already acknowledged by the Committee of Experts, which had welcomed the Government’s commitment to social dialogue. It was evident that the progress observed at the 98th Session of the International Labour Conference in June 2009 had been of a stable nature and had a real impact on the due observance of trade union rights in Belarus.

The Worker members thanked the Government for the information provided verbally and in writing. They recalled that the case had been discussed without interruption since 2000 and that the Government had had all the elements for the implementation of freedom of association in accordance with Convention No. 87 since the Commission of Inquiry had made 12 clear and firm recommendations following its visit in 2003. However, despite that, the Conference Committee had re-examined the case on several occasions, including in 2007, when it had taken due note of the progress achieved in relation to certain recommendations, while at the same time expressing concern at the draft Trade Union Law; in 2008, when it had expressed confidence in the Government for organizing a seminar on anti-union discrimination with the participation of the ILO; and in 2009, when it had noted the establishment of the Council for the Improvement of Legislation in the Social and Labour Sphere to deal with future developments in trade union legislation, as well as the Government’s commitment to begin discussions on firm proposals, which would include the members of the CDTU. The Worker members noted that the Government reported holding meetings in November 2009 and May 2010 on, among other matters, a plan of action for the implementation of the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry. However, they questioned the establishment within the Council of groups and subgroups.

The Worker members noted that the information provided to the Conference by the Government on trade union rights had already been mentioned in the report of the Committee of Experts, which had indicated that the issue of the registration of trade unions had not been resolved due to the lack of dialogue. The Government’s instructions relating to the registration of trade unions, to which reference was made in the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry, were unclear and had only resulted in the registration of certain trade unions that had succeeded in obtaining a legal address. The requirement of a legal address raised difficulties and continued to act as an obstacle, according to the CDTU, to the establishment and functioning of trade unions.

The Worker members regretted that the Government had confined itself to reporting the continuation of work on trade union legislation, without specifying the measures taken to amend Presidential Decree No. 2 and the texts issued thereunder, even though it had been criticized by the Commission of Inquiry since 2003. Moreover, despite the repeated expressions of concern by the Committee of Experts, various trade unions, including the CDTU, were still facing a refusal by the Government to authorize picketing and meetings. The legislative provisions which prevented the exercise of trade union rights in accordance with Conventions Nos 87 and 98 had still not been repealed, despite the time that had passed. It was therefore difficult to believe the Government’s claims that substantial progress had been made in achieving compliance with the principles of freedom of association or the strength of its conviction in implementing the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry. The Worker members regretted that, despite the lack of progress in the situation, the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) and the European Union (EU) would intensify exchanges and cooperation with Belarus without taking into account the violations of fundamental workers’ rights. It was unacceptable for a Government to fail to respect the work of this Committee, or of the Organization in general. The Committee’s conclusions would need to reflect this point.

The Employer members recalled that this serious and longstanding case had been discussed every year since 2001 and had resulted in a Commission of Inquiry. In 2007, the Government’s position had changed: the Government had recognized that the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry did not need to be adjusted to national conditions, had dropped legislative proposals going in the wrong direction and had instituted social dialogue. At present, the Government cooperated with the ILO and a positive social dialogue process was ongoing. However, there was still a long way to go, since fundamental legislative issues had failed to be addressed. While noting that the Government was faced with the diverging interests of employers and workers, the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry concerned, among others, issues such as anti-union discrimination and registration of trade unions, that could be addressed regardless of the difference of opinion between the social partners. The Employer members therefore believed that it was time for the Government of Belarus to implement the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry in law and in practice. They were looking forward to discussing at next year’s Conference Committee the substance of legislative proposals submitted to the ILO for review.

The Employer member of Belarus stated that, in the opinion of employers in Belarus, the action taken by the Government to give effect to the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry to improve relations with workers and to normalize the trade union situation had been constructive and had resulted in tangible improvements in the situation with regard to social dialogue. In particular, the tripartite Council had been functioning on the basis of consensus and mutual understanding and all trade union organizations could participate and conclude collective agreements. While not all the problems had been resolved, he considered that there had been sustained progress on the major points. While there were cases of dismissals, they were due to the non-renewal of contracts and workers could seek protection against anti-union discrimination in the courts. There was still friction between the FPB and the CDTU, but that was normal trade union life. The employers wanted to see the Government improve the climate for enterprise activity and create more favourable conditions for foreign investments. Belarus was a member of the European Union Eastern Partnership Programme and it was to be hoped that its membership would continue. He emphasized that partnership with the EU was of great importance in developing the economy of Belarus and in helping workers find employment. The sanctions imposed by the EU had been preventing small and medium-sized enterprises from flourishing. He therefore called for the removal of the sanctions in the interests of all the workers in Belarus.

The Worker member of Belarus explained that there were two trade union centres in Belarus. His organization, the FPB, with its 28 member organizations, was by far the largest trade union structure. The CDTU represented not more than several thousand workers and was composed of five trade unions. Despite this, both trade union centres had the same rights. His organization welcomed the opportunity of working together will all trade unions in Belarus. He stressed the following positive developments in his country: despite the recent financial crisis, there had been no major mass dismissals; pensions and salaries had been paid on time; social dialogue had continued; problems with the registration of trade unions and collective bargaining had been solved; there had been no further allegations of interference and abuse; and the tripartite Council had been established and functioned. With regard to the latter, he was pleased that all the members of the Council could freely express their opinions and that the Council had an open agenda, thereby allowing members to bring their issues before it. While the Government could do more and the Council could be more active, substantial progress had been made. The Government would continue working hard to achieve compliance with Convention No. 87 in cooperation with the social partners in Belarus and with its international partners.

An observer representing the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) recalled that this year marked the tenth anniversary since Case No. 2090 had been lodged with the ILO. In 2009, the Conference Committee had noted the progress made by the Government of Belarus and, in particular, the plan of action it had adopted and the first steps taken towards its implementation. He noted with regret, however, that the Government had missed the chance given to it the previous year. The number of violations of trade union rights had been increasing. Members of trade unions affiliated to the CDTU were still suffering from anti-union discrimination, including dismissals and the non-renewal of labour contracts, pressure and harassment. In these circumstances, the real problem was to preserve the existing trade union organizations and to establish and register new ones. The Government had deliberately waged a campaign against independent trade unions and thereby confirmed that it was not ready to implement the ILO’s recommendations. The Government refused to use the tripartite Council to discuss in substance the issues of the violation of trade union rights. As a result, millions of workers in Belarus were deprived of the right to establish and join trade unions of their own choosing. Despite this negative background, he would not call on the Committee to deliver a guilty verdict for several reasons. Firstly, the position of the Minister of Labour and Social Protection had remained vacant for some time, which of course affected the implementation of the ILO’s recommendations. Secondly, throughout the year, social dialogue had continued at all levels with the participation of independent trade unions. Thirdly, all interested parties had made common efforts to find mutually agreed solutions. The Government should show flexibility and patience and look for ways to implement all the recommendations.

The Government member of Spain, speaking on behalf of the Government members of the Committee Member States of the European Union (EU), and indicating that the Government of Norway aligned itself with the statement, expressed concern at the situation of freedom of association and the right to organize and collective bargaining in Belarus. He welcomed the seminar held in 2009, jointly with the ILO, on the implementation of the Commission of Inquiry’s recommendations, as well as the plan of action adopted by the tripartite National Council on Labour and Social Issues. While noting the positive steps taken by the Government to implement the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry and the 2009 Conference Committee’s conclusions, the EU considered that the current situation did not yet ensure full compliance with ILO Conventions. It was regrettable that national legislation still did not guarantee the right of workers to organize their activities free from interference by the public authorities and that the requirement of a legal address continued to hinder the establishment of trade unions. The EU also expressed regret at the human rights violations that had occurred since the beginning of 2010, such as harassment of national minorities, several death sentences imposed and carried out, and irregularities during the local elections of 25 April 2010. The Government of Belarus needed to address the concerns regarding democracy, and the situation of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the country. The future policy of the EU vis-à-vis Belarus would take into account the conclusions adopted by this Conference Committee.

The EU called on the Government to ensure freedom of association by simplifying the registration procedure for trade unions and removing the prohibition of any activity by non-registered associations. Reiterating its readiness to cooperate with Belarusian authorities, the EU urged the Government to implement Convention No. 87 in close collaboration with the social partners and with ILO assistance.

The Government member of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela said that due account should be taken of the positive aspects and the significant progress that had been made in the framework of the implementation of the recommendations of the Committee of Experts. He mentioned the 2009 plan of action that had been adopted on a tripartite basis for implementing the recommendations and the setting up of a National Council of Labour and Social Affairs and of a Council for Improving Social and Labour Legislation, both of which were tripartite. He recalled that at the 98th Session of the Conference, the Committee on the Application of Standards had recognized that progress had been made in the case and that the report of the Committee of Experts published in 2010 noted with interest the improvements in registering trade unions and the positive developments in the country’s legislation as it related to Conventions Nos 87 and 98, all of which had involved tripartite discussions. He stressed that his Government considered that further progress was being made and that the Committee ought to mention the fact in its conclusions, in the firm belief that the advances would continue.

The Worker member of Poland observed that the situation in Belarus had not changed significantly in law and in practice and that the efforts made by the Government were directed at technical issues instead of the substance of the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry. The Government’s efforts were focused on demonstrating steps rather than making them. This was a case of “process” rather than “progress” as shown by the continuing obstacles to trade union registration under Decree No. 2 and the continuing pressure exercised on independent trade unions through the short-term contract system. In sum, the law and practice in Belarus had not changed in such a way as to ensure a friendly environment for independent trade union activity and social dialogue. Of course, poor social dialogue was better than no dialogue at all, but it still needed to be developed and reinforced. The Government had to do much more to improve the situation of workers, and especially the following: (i) to implement fully the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry; (ii) to amend Decree No. 2 on trade union registration in order to ensure that the right to organize was effectively guaranteed; (iii) to improve legal and administrative measures to ensure that workers enjoyed the rights enshrined in the Convention without any discrimination in law and in practice; (iv) to ensure that social dialogue was authentic and dealt with the substantive issues with the involvement of all social partners, and that the tripartite mechanism set up to address trade union rights was fulfilling its role; and (v) to stop immediately the harassment and discrimination, particularly through massive use of short-term contracts, against independent trade union organizations.

The Government member of the United States noted that, although the Government believed that it had made considerable progress in implementing the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry, her Government was still awaiting firm evidence and tangible progress with regard to the Government’s commitment to social dialogue. She expressed concern that workers still faced obstacles to the registration of trade unions, particularly with regard to the legal address requirement, and that unions were prevented from holding pickets and meetings, organizing their activities and defending their occupational interests. Notwithstanding the requests by the supervisory bodies, the legal provisions in question had not been amended. The Government was urged to take in due course the necessary measures to guarantee the right to organize in law and practice. To this end, she encouraged the Government to continue working closely with the social partners and the ILO, so that the Committee of Experts would be in a position to assess substantive results next year. Her Government was looking forward to the day that full respect for freedom of association was a reality in Belarus, without barriers to the right of workers to organize, register their unions and express their opinions without threat of interference or reprisal.

The Government member of the Russian Federation noted that it was evident that clear and substantial progress had been made in the implementation of international labour standards and the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry. Constructive dialogue had been taking place with all social partners on a range of issues, including the implementation of the ILO’s recommendations. In cooperation with the ILO, a tripartite seminar on freedom of association, social dialogue and the implementation of the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry had been held in Minsk. Pursuant to the Plan of Action formulated with the assistance of the ILO, the Council for the Improvement of the Legislation in the Social and Labour Sphere had been empowered to examine the issues of the registration of trade unions and protection against acts of anti-union discrimination. In its meetings in 2009–10, the Council had examined several complaints of denial of registration and acts of anti-union dismissals, and considered the issue of trade union legislation. In accordance with the Council’s decision, the procedures for the registration of primary-level trade unions had been improved, certain dismissed trade union activists had been reinstated and a tripartite working group, responsible for making proposals aimed at improving trade union legislation, was established within the Council. Substantive progress had therefore been achieved on the basis of social partnership. The Government had entered into sincere and constructive cooperation with the ILO as it had repeatedly demonstrated through its actions.

The Government member of Switzerland concurred with the statement made by the Government member of Spain on behalf of the European Union.

The Government member of Canada noted with regret that the principles of human rights and democracy, including the rights of workers to organize and defend their occupational interests peacefully, continued to be disregarded by the Government. The Government was urged to amend the legal address requirement in national legislation, which continued to serve as a barrier to the establishment and functioning of independent trade unions. Furthermore, the Government was requested to create a positive democratic environment by abolishing all obstacles to the development of democratic trade unions, and removing the restrictions on freedom of association and speech for all sectors of civil society. The Government should also fully adopt the recommendations of the supervisory bodies and respond to their requests.

The Government member of India stated that the development of tripartite dialogue, the promotion of ILO standards and the protection of trade union rights constituted some of the encouraging initiatives undertaken by the Government of Belarus to give effect to Convention No. 87. The National Council on Labour and Social Issues and the Council for the Improvement of Legislation in the Social and Labour Sphere had both been strengthened and made more representative. Moreover, the general agreement of cooperation for 2009–10 adopted as a result of social dialogue and tripartism provided a useful plan of action for the implementation of the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry. The manner in which the Government of Belarus had been engaging the social partners in this process represented a useful and participatory approach that needed to be encouraged. He thus concluded that the constructive engagement and cooperation of the Government of Belarus and the progress achieved towards compliance with Convention No. 87 were heartening, and commended the ILO for its technical cooperation and assistance in the Government’s efforts to comply with the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry.

The Government member of the Islamic Republic of Iran considered that the Government of Belarus had shown its determination to implement the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry and comply with the relevant provisions of Convention No. 87, through the prevailing atmosphere of constructive dialogue and consultation with social partners, the efforts to bring national trade union legislation into compliance with relevant ILO Conventions and the constructive cooperation with the various ILO and ITUC missions. Along with the Committee of Experts, her Government therefore welcomed the continued commitment of the Government of Belarus to social dialogue and encouraged the Committee to take positive note of the progress achieved by the Government of Belarus towards compliance with Convention No. 87.

The Government member of China stated that the Government had paid close attention to the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry and had made significant efforts and progress to strengthen tripartism, social dialogue and freedom of association. The Government’s sincere determination to strengthen cooperation with the ILO to improve implementation of the Convention should be noted by the Committee.

The Government representative emphasized that her Government was very open to dialogue and would consider all the issues discussed today as guidance for its future actions. The Government understood that it had to make further efforts in order to improve the legislation and resolve the difficulties arising in practice. The tripartite Council would play an instrumental role in this regard, and had already discussed the issues mentioned in the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry, including the issue of improving the legislation. She acknowledged that it had been difficult to reach unanimous decisions and that certain divergences of opinion existed, particularly with regard to the question of trade union representativeness and the obligation imposed on employers to provide trade unions with office spaces. On these and other matters, while the Government could have taken independent decisions, it preferred to take into account the interests of all the parties concerned. Therefore it had been decided to establish, within the Council, a tripartite working group responsible for examining the issues raised by its members and developing position papers taking into account the views of all the parties concerned. She emphasized that her Government had a great deal of respect for the ILO and its supervisory procedures, had always complied with its reporting obligations, and had cooperated with the ILO, allowing various missions to take place and joint seminars to be organized. The ILO’s support for the constructive dialogue had strengthened the authority of the tripartite Council. The Council, in addition to the regular judicial remedies available, could ensure the protection of workers against acts of discrimination. She called on the social partners to examine such cases in the framework of the Council. Finally, she indicated that the Committee of Experts had welcomed the Government’s commitment to social dialogue and that the Government would continue taking all the necessary measures in order to live up to such a high assessment by the Committee of Experts.

The Employer members stated that there was cause for optimism, particularly in view of the developments that had occurred from 2007 onwards. Nevertheless, the current situation presented a crossroads of sorts: progress could continue as it had, at a gradual, piecemeal rate, or the Government could redouble its efforts to secure compliance with the provisions of the Convention. They stated that the social dialogue process should continue, as it was essential to make progress on the basis of tripartite consensus. Noting nevertheless that social dialogue was time consuming, and at times produced results that were not always solid or broadly applicable, they underscored that full application of the Convention could only be secured through the adoption and strict implementation of the necessary statutes and regulations. They consequently urged the development of legislation as a matter of urgency to implement the 12 recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry.

The Worker members indicated that they had noted the offer of assistance made by the European Union and observed that they had originally considered proposing the inclusion of the present case in a special paragraph of the report in view of the numerous promises made by the Government, which had not yet been kept. Nevertheless, they would not be pursuing their request, for one last time, so as to give a little more time to the Government. The elements that could provide the basis for a negotiated solution to the problems included the recommendations made by the Commission of Inquiry, the consultations held with the ILO up to 2007 and the recommendations made by the Committee on Freedom of Association. The Government should therefore continue its collaboration with the ILO and should pursue social dialogue with all the social partners, including unions that were not affiliates of the FPB, with a view to making the legislative changes required to give full effect to the Convention.

Conclusions

The Committee took note of the written and oral information provided by the Government representative and the discussion that followed.

The Committee noted the information provided by the Government representative in relation to the developments since the discussion of this case last year. In particular, the Committee noted that two sittings of the tripartite Council for the Improvement of Legislation in the Social and Labour Sphere were held in November 2009 and May 2010, at which issues of trade union registration, trade union legislation and collective bargaining had been discussed. The Government explained that the members of the Council had recently decided to establish a working group – which would include representatives of the Federation of Trade Unions of Belarus (FPB), the Congress of Democratic Trade Unions (CDTU) and employers’ associations - responsible for examining the issues raised by the members of the Council and preparing suggestions for the Council’s decisions taking into account the positions of all the parties concerned.

The Committee noted with interest that as the result of the work of the tripartite Council, the primary trade union organization of “Belshina” enterprise in Bobruisk was registered in October 2009 and that CDTU affiliates and the FPB had concluded collective agreements at “Naftan” enterprise and Lukoml Power Station.

While noting this information, the Committee regretted that there were as yet no concrete proposals to amend Presidential Decree No. 2 dealing with trade union registration, the Law on Mass Activities, or Presidential Decree No. 24 concerning the use of foreign gratuitous aid, as requested by the Commission of Inquiry six years ago. The Committee recalled the intrinsic link between freedom of association and democracy and trusted, in particular, that Presidential Decree No. 2 would be amended or repealed so as to eliminate remaining obstacles to organizational rights.

In light of the continued commitment to social dialogue expressed by the Government, the Committee encouraged it to intensify its efforts to ensure full implementation of the Commission of Inquiry recommendations without delay, in close cooperation with all the social partners and with the assistance of the ILO. It expected that the Government would submit detailed information on proposed amendments to the abovementioned laws and decrees, as well as on the time-bound plan requested last year, to the Committee of Experts at its meeting this year and trusted that it would be in a position to note significant progress with respect to all remaining matters at its next session.