Protection of Wages Convention, 1949 (No. 95) - Romania (Ratification: 1973)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2023, published 112nd ILC session (2024)

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It hopes that the next report will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous comments.

Repetition

In order to provide a comprehensive view of the issues relating to the application of ratified Conventions on wages, the Committee considers it appropriate to examine Conventions Nos 131 (minimum wage) and 95 (protection of wages) together.

Minimum wage

Article 2 of Convention No. 131. Appropriate sanctions. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to provide information on the sanctions which may be imposed in relation to the minimum wage. It takes note of the Government’s indication in its report that section 260(1) of the Labour Code provides for fines in case of non-payment of the national guaranteed minimum wage and that the government decisions which are adopted to set the level of the minimum wage provide additional sanctions in case of employment contracts setting wages lower than the national minimum wage.

Article 3. Criteria for determining minimum wage levels. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to provide information on the factors to be taken into consideration in fixing the minimum wage level. It takes note of the Government’s indication that these factors are: (1) the evolution of the macroeconomic indicators; (2) the minimum consumption basket; and (3) the European and national objectives of Romania that include convergence towards the minimum wage levels of the Euro area.

Article 4(2). Participation of the social partners. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to provide detailed information on the consultation of the social partners for the fixing of the minimum wage. The Committee takes note of the Government’s indication that: (1) the level of the national minimum wage is determined by the National Tripartite Council for Social Dialogue (NTCSD); (2) the decision of the NTCSD is then submitted to the Economic and Social Council (ESC) for endorsement; and (3) the decision endorsed by the ESC is subsequently approved by the Government.

Protection of wages

Follow-up to the recommendations of the tripartite committee (representation made under article 24 of the ILO Constitution)

The Committee notes that in June 2017 the Governing Body approved the report of the tripartite committee set up to examine the representation submitted by the Federation of Free Trade Unions of the Chemical and Petrochemical Industries (FSLCP) under article 24 of the ILO Constitution (document GB.330/INS/7/1). Noting that the representation concerned issues related to the application of Articles 11 and 12 of Convention No. 95, the Committee will examine these matters in its comments below.

Article 4 of Convention No. 95. Partial payment of wages in kind. In its previous comments, the Committee requested more information on the conditions in which the partial payment of wages in kind may be authorized. It notes the Government’s indication in its report that in accordance with section 166(3) of the Labour Code, such payment is only possible if expressly stipulated in the applicable collective or individual labour contract, and if the conditions established under section 165 of the Code are respected. Section 165 provides that where payment in food, housing or other facilities is stipulated in the collective or individual labour contract, the amount of money due for the work performed shall not be lower than the gross national minimum wage. The Committee notes that the terms “other facilities” may cover a large range of possible allowances in kind and that, while the threshold of payment in cash corresponding to the minimum wage is an important protective measure, section 165 does not address the determination of the value attributed to allowances in kind. The Committee recalls that in accordance with Article 4(2), appropriate measures shall be taken to ensure that: (a) allowances in kind are appropriate for the personal use and benefit of the worker and his family; and (b) the value attributed to such allowances is fair and reasonable. The Committee therefore requests the Government to provide information on the measures taken or envisaged in this respect.

Article 11. Protection of workers’ wage claims in the event of the employer’s bankruptcy. With regard to its previous comments on this matter, the Committee notes that pursuant to section 161 of Law No. 85/2014 on insolvency prevention procedures and insolvency procedures, wage claims are ranked third in the order of privilege, after debts resulting from the expenses related to the insolvency procedure and debts from loans granted to the debtor during the observation period.

Article 12. Regular payment of wages and final settlement upon termination. The Committee notes that, in its report, the tripartite committee requested the Government to provide information on the application of Article 12. It takes note of the Government’s reference to section 166(1) of the Labour Code which provides that wages shall be paid at least once a month and section 166(4) which provides that the employer may be obligated to pay damages to cover the loss resulting from unjustified delays in the payment or the non-payment of wages. In addition, the Committee notes that wage claims, including claims concerning the final settlement upon termination, may be brought before labour courts, in application of sections 266–275 of the Labour Code and are adjudicated under an emergency procedure.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2017, published 107th ILC session (2018)

In order to provide a comprehensive view of the issues relating to the application of ratified Conventions on wages, the Committee considers it appropriate to examine Conventions Nos 131 (minimum wage) and 95 (protection of wages) together.

Minimum wage

Article 2 of Convention No. 131. Appropriate sanctions. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to provide information on the sanctions which may be imposed in relation to the minimum wage. It takes note of the Government’s indication in its report that section 260(1) of the Labour Code provides for fines in case of non-payment of the national guaranteed minimum wage and that the government decisions which are adopted to set the level of the minimum wage provide additional sanctions in case of employment contracts setting wages lower than the national minimum wage.

Article 3. Criteria for determining minimum wage levels. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to provide information on the factors to be taken into consideration in fixing the minimum wage level. It takes note of the Government’s indication that these factors are: (1) the evolution of the macroeconomic indicators; (2) the minimum consumption basket; and (3) the European and national objectives of Romania that include convergence towards the minimum wage levels of the Euro area.

Article 4(2). Participation of the social partners. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to provide detailed information on the consultation of the social partners for the fixing of the minimum wage. The Committee takes note of the Government’s indication that: (1) the level of the national minimum wage is determined by the National Tripartite Council for Social Dialogue (NTCSD); (2) the decision of the NTCSD is then submitted to the Economic and Social Council (ESC) for endorsement; and (3) the decision endorsed by the ESC is subsequently approved by the Government.

Protection of wages

Follow-up to the recommendations of the tripartite committee (representation made under article 24 of the ILO Constitution)

The Committee notes that in June 2017 the Governing Body approved the report of the tripartite committee set up to examine the representation submitted by the Federation of Free Trade Unions of the Chemical and Petrochemical Industries (FSLCP) under article 24 of the ILO Constitution (document GB.330/INS/7/1). Noting that the representation concerned issues related to the application of Articles 11 and 12 of Convention No. 95, the Committee will examine these matters in its comments below.

Article 4 of Convention No. 95. Partial payment of wages in kind. In its previous comments, the Committee requested more information on the conditions in which the partial payment of wages in kind may be authorized. It notes the Government’s indication in its report that in accordance with section 166(3) of the Labour Code, such payment is only possible if expressly stipulated in the applicable collective or individual labour contract, and if the conditions established under section 165 of the Code are respected. Section 165 provides that where payment in food, housing or other facilities is stipulated in the collective or individual labour contract, the amount of money due for the work performed shall not be lower than the gross national minimum wage. The Committee notes that the terms “other facilities” may cover a large range of possible allowances in kind and that, while the threshold of payment in cash corresponding to the minimum wage is an important protective measure, section 165 does not address the determination of the value attributed to allowances in kind. The Committee recalls that in accordance with Article 4(2), appropriate measures shall be taken to ensure that: (a) allowances in kind are appropriate for the personal use and benefit of the worker and his family; and (b) the value attributed to such allowances is fair and reasonable. The Committee therefore requests the Government to provide information on the measures taken or envisaged in this respect.

Article 11. Protection of workers’ wage claims in the event of the employer’s bankruptcy. With regard to its previous comments on this matter, the Committee notes that pursuant to section 161 of Law No. 85/2014 on insolvency prevention procedures and insolvency procedures, wage claims are ranked third in the order of privilege, after debts resulting from the expenses related to the insolvency procedure and debts from loans granted to the debtor during the observation period.

Article 12. Regular payment of wages and final settlement upon termination. The Committee notes that, in its report, the tripartite committee requested the Government to provide information on the application of Article 12. It takes note of the Government’s reference to section 166(1) of the Labour Code which provides that wages shall be paid at least once a month and section 166(4) which provides that the employer may be obligated to pay damages to cover the loss resulting from unjustified delays in the payment or the non-payment of wages. In addition, the Committee notes that wage claims, including claims concerning the final settlement upon termination, may be brought before labour courts, in application of sections 266–275 of the Labour Code and are adjudicated under an emergency procedure.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2013, published 103rd ILC session (2014)

Article 4 of the Convention. Partial payment of wages in kind. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that section 166(3) of the Labour Code, which currently authorizes the payment of wages in kind if provided for in an individual employment contract, will be amended at the next suitable occasion to fully comply with the requirements of this Article of the Convention. The Committee accordingly requests the Government to keep the Office informed of any progress made in this regard.

Article 11. Protection of workers’ wage claims in the event of the employer’s bankruptcy. Further to its previous comment, the Committee notes the Government’s statement that the Wage Guarantee Fund established by Act No. 200/2006 is in fact rarely used in practice although the number of beneficiaries has increased from 618 in 2007 to over 11,000 persons in 2010. The Committee would appreciate receiving more detailed information on the operation of the wage guarantee fund (administrating institution, rate of compulsory contribution, number of beneficiaries, claims processed and sums paid per year) and invites once more the Government to consider favourably the ratification of the Protection of Workers’ Claims (Employer’s Insolvency) Convention, 1992 (No. 173).

Article 14(b). Wage statement. In the absence of the Government’s reply on this point, the Committee requests the Government to indicate any measures it intends to take to ensure that workers are provided, at the time of each payment of wages, with payslips detailing all relevant wage particulars, as required under this Article of the Convention.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2012, published 102nd ILC session (2013)

Article 4 of the Convention. Partial payment of wages in kind. Further to its previous comment, the Committee notes that section 166(3) of the Labour Code, as last amended by Act No. 40/2011, still authorizes the partial payment of wages in kind if provided for in an individual employment contract. The Committee once again recalls that under the Convention, the partial payment of wages in kind may be authorized only by national laws or regulations, collective agreements or arbitration awards but not individual agreements. The Committee accordingly requests the Government to take the necessary measures to bring the national legislation into conformity with the Convention on this point.

Article 11. Protection of workers’ wage claims in the event of the employer’s bankruptcy. The Committee notes with interest the adoption of Act No. 200/2006 on the establishment of the guarantee fund for the payment of employees’ claims. It understands, however, that due to lack of information or the complexity of the procedure, relatively few workers seem to have made use of the guarantee fund despite the fact the current economic crisis has resulted in a number of company insolvencies. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the practical operation of the wage guarantee fund, including data on the number of claims received and amounts paid per year. In addition, the Committee invites the Government to consider ratifying the Protection of Workers’ Claims (Employer’s Insolvency) Convention, 1992 (No. 173), which revises Article 11 of Convention No. 95.

Article 14(b). Wage statements. The Committee notes that under section 168(1) of the Labour Code, as amended, the payment of wages is proved by the employee signing the pay lists or by any other documentary evidence to this effect. The Committee accordingly requests the Government to indicate any measures taken or envisaged to ensure that, at the time of each payment of wages, workers are provided with wage statements containing all relevant information for the pay period concerned such as the gross amount earned, the net amount due, and the amount and reasons for any deductions made.

Article 15(c). Enforcement measures. The Committees notes that under section 261 of the Labour Code, as amended, failure to implement within 15 days a final court order for the payment of wages constitutes an offence punishable by three to six months’ imprisonment or by fine. The Committee requests the Government to specify any additional legal provisions providing for sanctions in case of wages-related offences other than the non-payment of wages.

[The Government is asked to reply in detail to the present comments in 2013.]

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2012, published 102nd ILC session (2013)

Articles 8 and 10 of the Convention. Deductions from wages – Attachment of wages. The Committee notes the comments of the Federation of Free Trade Unions of the Chemical and Petrochemical Industries (FSLCP), which were received on 5 June 2012, concerning the application of the Convention. The FSLCP denounces the 25 per cent wage reduction which was decided by the Government in 2010 and which affects 1.3 million public sector employees as an abusive, illegal and inopportune measure. The FSLCP indicates that this austerity measure was introduced through Act No. 118/2010 without any prior consultations and contrary to the provisions of applicable collective agreements, and therefore amounts to a unilateral alteration of the terms of employment contracts of public employees in clear violation of Articles 8 and 10 of the Convention. The FSLCP further indicates that the 25 per cent wage reduction across the public sector, which was initially introduced for a limited period of six months to restore budgetary stability, continues to apply more than two years after its introduction despite court decisions which have upheld public employees’ claims and confirmed the obligation to return to the pre-2010 salary levels.

In its reply, the Government indicates that the budget expenditure for salaries of public employees is determined within the limits established by the financial agreement concluded with the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and Government priorities for fiscal consolidation measures. It also indicates that taking into account the evolution of macroeconomic indicators and the measures agreed with the international financial institutions, the Government initiated a real and transparent social dialogue with the social partners, and issued an Emergency Ordinance approving measures for the recovery of the wage reductions made under Act No. 118/2010. A first pay increase of 8 per cent was made in June 2012 and another increase of 7.4 per cent is planned for December 2012 aiming at restoring the public wage levels of June 2010. Finally, the Government makes reference to the Constitutional Court Decision No. 872 of June 2010 and the ruling of the European Court of Human Rights in the cases Mihaies v. Romania (44232/11) and Sentes v. Romania (44605/11), which upheld the legitimacy of pay cuts decided in pursuance of public interest imperatives. The Committee requests the Government to continue providing information on the progressive restoration of public wages to their pre-2010 levels in accordance with the abovementioned emergency ordinance and the Letter of Intent addressed to the IMF in June 2012.

In addition, the Committee is raising other points in a request addressed directly to the Government.

[The Government is asked to reply in detail to the present comments in 2013.]

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2011, published 101st ILC session (2012)

Articles 8 and 10 of the Convention. Deductions from wages – Attachment of wages. The Committee notes the comments of the National Trade Union Confederation (CNS “CARTEL ALFA”) and Block of National Trade Unions (BNS) concerning the application of the Convention. The two workers’ organizations consider that recent austerity measures, such as the 25 per cent reduction in the salaries of public sector employees and the 15 per cent reduction in pension payments which were imposed from July to December 2010, are in violation of the Convention. The BNS indicates that this measure concerned more than 1.3 million employees and affected their standard of living as most of them earned less than 1000 Romanian new leu (RON) (approximately €230) per month.

In its reply, the Government explains that these austerity measures were taken in application of a loan agreement signed with the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank. It also indicates that the 25 per cent reduction was introduced by Act No. 118/2010 concerning measures to restore budgetary stability for a limited period of six months. The Government further states that the constitutionality of this law was challenged before the Constitutional Court which by decision No. 872/2010 pronounced itself in favour of the constitutionality of the law in question. The Court upheld the constitutionality of the law principally because of the temporary character of the measures, their non-discriminatory application and their consistency with article 53 of the Constitution that permits limitations to the exercise of rights and liberties in cases of extreme necessity.

The Committee notes the Government’s explanations. It observes that although wage cuts implemented in a context of harsh economic crisis may not be deemed to represent deductions from wages within the meaning of Article 8 of the Convention nor do they qualify as wage attachment within the meaning of Article 10, they may nonetheless effectively challenge the very object and purpose of this Convention depending on their extent and severity. The Committee recalls its Note on the “Relevance and application of ILO wage-related Conventions in the context of the global economic crisis” (paragraph 119 of the Committee’s 2010 Report, page 35) in which it emphasized that wage protection takes on particular importance in times of crisis and therefore relevant standards should not be undermined but rather put at the centre of crisis responses, as is underlined in the Global Jobs Pact, adopted by the International Labour Conference in 2009. It also considered that ILO wages-related standards and principles serve as a reminder of the special nature of wages as the workers’ principal, if not sole, means of subsistence, and hence of the need for targeted and priority action in this field, and expressed the hope that ILO Member States will act positively in the current economic downturn by carrying out the necessary reforms in wage legislation and wage policy consistent with those standards and principles. The Committee accordingly requests the Government to provide full particulars on any new anti-crisis measures and policies that impact on wages, including information on the necessary consultations with the employers’ and workers’ organizations concerned on these measures.

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

The Committee notes the comments made by the Federation of National Education (FEN) concerning the alleged failure of the Government to implement pay increases for teaching staff in the State education system. More concretely, FEN indicates that in October 2008 the Chamber of Deputies of the National Parliament adopted Act No. 221/2008 awarding a 50 per cent pay rise to all teaching staff but the Government has systematically refused to apply the new legislation. The FEN adds that the Government first took the matter to the Constitutional Court and, when its challenge was dismissed, it decided to block the implementation of Act No. 221/2008 by making abusive use of the Prime Minister’s power to issue emergency ordinances. The first such ordinance was Emergency Ordinance No. 136/2008, which repealed Act No. 221/2008, but was later struck down by the Constitutional Court. According to the FEN’s detailed account, the Government has deliberately created through political manoeuvring and delaying tactics a confusing situation for the sole purpose of not honouring the wage entitlements of the employees concerned.

The Committee recalls that in its previous observation – following similar comments received from the Confederation of Democratic Trade Unions of Romania (CSDR) and the Free Trade Union Federation in Education (FSLI) – it expressed concern about the ongoing controversy over pay conditions of education personnel. Noting that the Government’s reply has not yet been received, the Committee requests the Government to transmit any comments it may wish to submit in response to the allegations of the FEN.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2007, published 97th ILC session (2008)

The Committee notes the information contained in the Government’s report, in particular the adoption of the new Labour Code (Law No. 53/2003).

Article 4 of the Convention. Partial payment of wages in kind. The Committee notes the Government’s reference to section 161(3) of the new Labour Code which allows for the partial payment of wages in kind only if this is expressly provided for in the applicable collective agreement or the individual labour contract. The Committee also notes that under section 160 of the Labour Code, the monetary part of wages must not be lower than the statutory national minimum wage. The Committee recalls, in this regard, that Article 4 of the Convention makes exclusive reference to national laws or regulations, collective agreements or arbitration awards (and not to individual labour agreements) as being the only valid legal bases for authorizing the partial payment of wages in kind. The aim is clearly to exclude “private” arrangements which might involve unlawful or unsolicited payments in kind to the detriment of the worker’s earnings. The Committee accordingly requests the Government to take the necessary steps to ensure that the national legislation is brought into line with the Convention in this respect.

Article 11. Protection of wage claims in bankruptcy/insolvency. 

Article 14(b). Wage statements. While noting section 163(1) of the Labour Code which requires workers to sign the payroll as a means of proving the payment of wages, the Committee requests the Government to indicate whether there is a standard form for keeping payroll records, or issuing wage statements and, if so, whether this form contains information on wage particulars such as the gross amount earned, the net amount due, and the amount and reasons for any deductions effected.

Article 15(c). Enforcement measures. The Committee notes that while section 276(1)(a) of the Labour Code provides for a fine for non-compliance with the provisions concerning the national minimum wage, the Labour Code does not appear to contain specific provisions on sanctions for other wage-related offences.It therefore requests the Government to provide additional explanations on this point.

Further, the Committee requests the Government to indicate how effect is given in law and practice to the requirements of the Convention concerning the freedom of workers to dispose of their wages (Article 6); the operation of workers’ stores not for the purpose of securing profit but for the benefit of the workers concerned (Article 7), and the payment of wages on a working day and at or near the workplace (Article 13).

Part V of the report form. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the practical application of the Convention including, for instance, the number of workers covered by the relevant legislation, copies of collective agreements containing clauses on pay conditions, extracts from reports of the labour inspection services, detailed particulars on any difficulties experienced in the private or public sector concerning the timely payment of wages, etc.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2007, published 97th ILC session (2008)

The Committee recalls its previous observation in which it examined issues related to the regular payment of salaries to teachers and the financing of the education system following comments made by the Democratic Trade Union Confederation of Romania (CSDR) and the Free Trade Union Federation in Education (FSLI). The Committee has been in receipt of new comments made by the same organizations denouncing the Government’s continued failure to implement statutory provisions concerning the level of public expenditure for education and also a series of practices that allegedly violate various pay entitlements of teachers and related personnel. These comments were transmitted to the Government on 23 May 2007 and the Government’s reply was received on 4 October 2007.

More specifically, as regards the financing of the education system, the CSDR and the FSLI indicate that, contrary to section 170(1) of Act No. 84/1995 on national education which provides that the budgetary resources allocated to education should reach 6 per cent of the GDP in 2007, the state budget for 2007 allocates only 5.2 per cent of the GDP to public education. Moreover, by Emergency Ordinance No. 88/2006 the Government has suspended the application of section 170(1) of Act No. 84/1995 until 31 December 2007. In addition, a draft legislative amendment, which was massively supported by a FSLI-initiated petition, for the allocation of at least 7 per cent of the GDP to public education, primarily through VAT revenue, has been approved by Parliament but has remained in abeyance for the last two years at the Senate.

With respect to the actual wage policy, the CSDR and the FSLI enumerate several wage supplements and allowances that the Government refuses to pay to teachers and auxiliary staff, such as the allowance paid to the heirs of deceased teaching personnel provided for in section 106(2) of Act No. 128/1997, the 15 per cent supplement for library staff provided for in section 51(3) of Act
No. 334/2002, and the allowances provided for in the single collective agreement for the education branch (e.g. the birth allowance, the 15 per cent wage supplement for those working in units located in socially and economically disadvantaged areas, and the wage benefit for leaving the profession at the age of retirement). The two organizations also allege that other entitlements, such as holiday pay or the cash compensation for work performed during periods of weekly rest, are often miscalculated or simply ignored. According to the two organizations, some of the teachers’ claims have given rise to judicial proceedings and favourable court decisions have already been obtained. Moreover, the CSDR and the FSLI state that the Government has not as yet fulfilled its obligation under the agreement of 28 November 2005 to prepare draft legislation on the remuneration of public employees and therefore the question of wage differential between teachers and other categories of public employees remains unaddressed. It is further pointed out that the Government ignores the minimum wage rate established under section 40 of the national collective agreement for 2007–10 (440 lei, or approximately US$186, per month for full-time employment of 170 hours) by fixing lower pay rates through Government Decision No. 1825/2006.

In its reply, the Government indicates, firstly, that the legislative amendment seeking to allocate 7 per cent of the GDP to public education was finally rejected by the Senate and the Government has no power to influence or otherwise intervene in decisions of the legislature. Secondly, as regards the payment of various wage supplements, the Government maintains that most of the claims are unfounded. For instance, teaching personnel are not civil servants, but contractual workers, and therefore they are not entitled to receive holiday pay. Similarly, library staff are considered auxiliary teaching personnel and, as such, enjoy a wage increase under Government Decision No. 281/1993 and Order No. 1350/2007, but they are not entitled to receive the 15 per cent supplement provided for under Act No. 334/2002. Thirdly, concerning the minimum wage, the Government states that the rate of 440 lei applies only to private sector employees and therefore employees of the budgetary sector are not directly concerned.

While noting the Government’s explanations, the Committee expresses its concern about the persistence of the controversy over pay conditions of education personnel. It would appreciate receiving full particulars on any progress made in implementing the 2005 agreement and settling the accumulate wage debt within the agreed time framework. It also asks the Government to indicate the measures taken in execution of recent court decisions ordering the recalculation or retroactive payment of certain benefits and indemnities to teachers.

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

The Committee takes note of the observations made by the Democratic Trade Union Confederation of Romania (CSDR) and the Free Trade Union Federation in Education (FSLI) concerning the application of the Convention, and the Government’s reply.

According to the CSDR and the FSLI, since the adoption of Law No. 128/1997 regarding the status of teachers, the salaries of teachers have never been paid on time and in whole. The two organizations also allege that the benefits and allowances to which teachers are entitled, under section 48(1) of the Law of 1997, have been systematically miscalculated leading to illegal retentions from salaries and consequently unfair loss of income, even though the Law provides that the remuneration of the teachers should be ensured in accordance with the principle that education is a national priority. Reference is made, in this respect, to recent court decisions that have upheld teachers’ claims for recalculation of benefits and indemnities and retroactive payment of salary differences.

In its reply, the Government refers to an agreement which was reached on 28 November 2005 between the Government and representatives of trade union federations in education, including the FSLI, concerning the administrative settlement of the wage debt for the period from October 2001 to September 2004. According to the terms of this agreement, the amounts owed to teachers would be reimbursed in instalments starting from February 2006 over a maximum period of 35 months. The Government also refers to Emergency Ordinance No. 17/2006, which was drafted in consultation with trade union representatives fixing the amounts which will be needed for the repayment of the wage arrears. The Government adds that the necessary budgetary arrangements have been made for 2006. The Committee welcomes these positive developments and asks the Government to keep it informed of all further developments concerning the implementation of the 2005 agreement, and the final settlement of the accumulated wage debt to teaching staff.

In addition, the CSDR and the FSLI state that the Government continues to fail to allocate 4 per cent of the GDP to public education, thus violating section 170(1) of Law No. 84/1995 on education, which provides that the public education system is financed through public funds at an amount equivalent to 4 per cent of the GDP, to be increased to 6 per cent by 2007. In its reply, the Government explains that, in an agreement concluded with the trade unions in education, it has committed itself to allocating supplementary budgetary resources at the level of 1.1 per cent of the GDP, so that public expenditure for education in 2006 would be raised to 5 per cent of the GDP. The Government adds that by August 2006, an additional 3076.37 millions Lei, or 0.95 per cent of the GDP, had been allocated to the education budget. The Committee understands that the financing of education has been the source of deep controversy over the past few years and hopes that the Government will continue to seek solutions in this most sensitive area through social dialogue.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2001, published 90th ILC session (2002)

The Committee notes the Government’s report and the information provided in response to the previous direct request. In this connection, it wishes to draw attention to the following points.

Article 4 of the Convention. In reply to the Committee’s comments, the Government indicates that under article 37 of the national collective agreement for 1999-2000, agricultural workers may receive a part not exceeding 30 per cent of their wage in the form of allowances in kind. It also states that the new draft Labour Code which was officially communicated to social partners for discussion in November 1999, provides that up to 25 per cent of the wage due may be paid in kind. The Government further indicates that the employees of commercial undertakings, cooperatives and autonomous enterprises of the public sector as well as other persons employed by virtue of an individual labour contract, may receive a subsistence allowance in the form of meal coupons the cost of which is borne by the employer in accordance with Act No. 142/1998. The Committee, nevertheless, requests the Government to indicate the legislative provisions that prohibit the payment of wages in the form of alcohol or narcotic substances. Recalling that according to the Government’s report a new Labour Code is under preparation, the Committee hopes that the Government will not fail to take the necessary measures to ensure that payment in the form of allowances in kind is limited to industries or occupations where it is customary or desirable, that, where authorized, such allowances are appropriate for the personal use and benefit of the worker and his/her family, and that the value of such allowances is fair and reasonable. The Committee asks the Government to supply the text of the abovementioned collective agreement, the Act relative to meal coupons and the relevant provisions of the new Labour Code as soon as it is adopted.

Article 6. The Committee requests the Government to indicate measures taken or contemplated to ensure that employers are prohibited from limiting in any manner the freedom of the worker to dispose of his/her wage.

Article 7. In the absence of any information on this point in the report, the Committee again requests the Government to provide concrete information as to the extent to which company stores for the sale of commodities to the workers are established or services are operated in connection with an undertaking, and further to specify the measures taken or envisaged to guarantee that these stores are set up for the sole object of serving the interests of the workers.

Articles 8 and 10. The Committee notes that the Government refers to article 409 of the Code on Civil Procedure which lays down the conditions and limits for the attachment of and deductions from wages. It would appreciate the Government’s supplying a copy of the relevant provisions of the Code. Moreover, the Committee notes that, under article 10(1), (2) of the Emergency Ordinance No. 117/2000 to amend and supplement the Emergency Ordinance No. 58/2000 regarding measures to redress the financial situation of certain state-controlled enterprises, high ranking officials of those establishments may only receive the basic salary and other wage entitlements in their entirety on a monthly basis on condition that the approved deficit reduction targets have been successfully met while the salary reduction may not exceed 30 per cent. The Committee asks the Government to provide further clarifications in this regard, bearing especially in mind the requirement for regular payment of wages and the need to protect wages from unfair or excessive deductions in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Convention.

Article 13(1). The Committee notes that the Government’s report does not contain any information regarding the payment of wages on working days only and at or near the workplace, as provided for in the Convention. The Committee would be grateful if the Government could specify the legislative or regulatory provision, if any, which expressly gives effect to this requirement.

Article 14(b). While noting the information supplied on this point in the report, the Committee requests the Government to indicate the legislative provision that requires wage statements to be issued setting out the particulars of wages at each payment.

Part V of the report form. The Committee asks the Government to supply detailed information on the practical application of the Convention, including any difficulties encountered in the enforcement of national legislation.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1995, published 82nd ILC session (1995)

The Committee notes the Government's report, the Constitution of Romania of 1991 and the Wages Act No. 14 of 8 February 1991.

The Committee notes that the Wages Act concerns the methods for determining wages and the elements to be taken into account in so doing. Only section 7 refers to protection of the payment of wages. It asks the Government to indicate whether Part II, Chapter II (Remuneration), of the Labour Code (Act No. 10 of 23 November 1977) is still in force. With reference to section 7(3) of Act No. 14 of 1991, the Committee also asks the Government to indicate the cases and conditions for the attachment of and deductions from wages provided for by law.

The Committee notes the Government's statement that there are no regulations on Article 2 of the Convention (exclusion from its scope), Article 4 (partial payment in kind), Article 7 (works stores) and Article 14 (information for workers). It hopes that the next report will contain detailed information, for each Article of the Convention, on legislative and regulatory provisions giving effect to them.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1991, published 78th ILC session (1991)

The Committee notes with interest the adoption of the various legislative texts for the protection of workers who, for technical reasons, are prevented from working. It also notes that other texts have been repealed.

The Committee also notes that the Ministry of Labour and Social Protection has prepared a Bill respecting wage systems. The Committee hopes that the Government will supply a copy of this Act as soon as it is adopted by Parliament. It also suggests that the Government could consult the Office before preparing the final draft in order to ensure that it is in conformity with the Convention.