Forty-Hour Week Convention, 1935 (No. 47) - Lithuania (Ratification: 1994)

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2022, published 111st ILC session (2023)

In order to provide a comprehensive view of the issues relating to the application of ratified Conventions on working time, the Committee considers it appropriate to examine Conventions No. 1 and 47 (hours of work) together.

Legislative developments. The Committee notes the adoption of a new Labour Code (Law No. XII-2603) on 14 September 2016, which entered into force on 1 July 2017 and repealed the previous Labour Code (Law No. IX-926), with all amendments and additions.

Hours of work

Articles 2(b), 2(c), 4, and 5 of Convention No. 1 and Article 1 of Convention No. 47. Variable distribution of working hours. Circumstances. The principle of a 40-hour week. The Committee notes that sections 113 to 116 of the Labour Code regulate working time arrangements which include the averaging of working hours. Specifically, it notes that section 113(1) provides that the reference periods for these arrangements may not exceed three consecutive months; while section 114(2) sets as maximum limits for these arrangements 12 working hours per day and 60 per week, which is to include overtime and work done according to an agreement on additional work. In this respect, the Committee observes that none of these provisions sets any precise circumstances under which resort to averaging of working hours is allowed. The Committee recalls that the averaging of hours of work in general is authorized in the Convention only over a reference period of one week, and provided that a daily limit of nine hours is required (Article 2(b)); and that in all the other cases in which the averaging of working hours is allowed over reference periods longer than a week, the circumstances are clearly specified, as follows:

• (i)in case of shift work, it shall be permissible to employ persons in excess of 8 hours in any one day and 48 hours in any one week, if the average number of hours over a period of three weeks or less does not exceed 8 per day and 48 per week (Article 2(c));
• (ii)in those processes which are required by reason of the nature of the process to be carried on continuously by a succession of shifts, the daily and weekly limit of hours of work may be exceeded subject to the condition that the working hours shall not exceed 56 in the week on the average (Article 4); and
• (iii)in exceptional cases where it is recognised that the limits of 8 hours a day and 48 hours a week cannot be applied, agreements between workers' and employers' organizations may fix a longer daily limit of works, provided that the average number of hours worked per week, over the number of weeks covered by any such agreement, shall not exceed 48 (Article 5).

Therefore, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to bring the above provisions of the Labour Code in conformity with the requirements of Convention No. 1.

Regarding the principle of the 40-hour week, the Committee notes that, in response to its previous comments, the Government indicates that section 112(3) of the Labour Code provides that an employee’s standard working hours shall be 40 per week. The Committee observes however that by virtue of section 121 of the Labour Code, Government Resolution No. 534 of 28 June 2017 determines the peculiarities of working time and rest time in transport, electronic communications, postal, agricultural, peat excavation, agricultural processing, energy companies, medical and social care, educational institutions, fishing vessels and other economic activities, and provides for a list of jobs for which working hours of up to 24 hours a day may be applied. The Committee also observes that section 114(2) of the Labour Code prescribes, in cases of averaging in working time arrangements, maximum limits of 12 and 60 daily and weekly working hours respectively, in a context of undefined circumstances for resorting to averaging and over reference periods that extend up to three months. Recalling that these provisions authorize practices that would possibly lead to unreasonably long hours of work, in direct contradiction to the principle of progressive reduction of hours of work, the Committee requests the Government to take the measures necessary to ensure that the principle of a 40-hour week provided for by Convention No. 47 is fully applied both in law and in practice.

Article 6 of Convention No. 1. Temporary exceptions. Circumstances. The Committee notes that section 119(2) of the Labour Code stipulates that the employer may only instruct an employee to perform overtime work with the employee's consent, except in cases where:

• (i)unplanned work critical to society must be performed or action must be taken to prevent calamities, dangers, accidents or natural disasters or to eliminate the consequences thereof that require prompt eradication;
• (ii)it is necessary to complete a job or eliminate a failure due to which a large number of employees would have to cease work or materials, products or equipment would be damaged; and
• (iii)this is stipulated in the collective agreement.

In this respect, the Committee observes that section 119 only prescribes the circumstances under which an employer may request an employee to work overtime without his or her consent, while remaining silent on the circumstances under which resort to overtime can be made with the employee’s consent and by collective agreement. The Committee recalls that temporary exceptions to normal hours of work are authorized in the Convention in very limited and well-circumscribed cases. Recalling the impact that long hours of work can have on workers’ health and work–private life balance, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to define the exceptional circumstances under which normal hours of work may be temporarily increased in industrial establishments, in accordance with this Article of the Convention.

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

Article 1 of the Convention. The principle of the 40-hour week. Further to its previous comment, the Committee notes the Government’s statement that it plans to revise the Labour Code, and in that context, Government Resolution No. 587 of 2003 on the list of activities where working time duration up to 24 hours may be applied will be modified, and another provision limiting the period of being on duty up to 16 hours will be introduced. In this regard, the Committee wishes to draw the Government’s attention to the fact that the new draft Labour Code should not authorize practices that would possibly lead to unreasonably long hours of work and would thus directly contradict the principle of progressive reduction of hours of work. The Committee recalls, in this respect, Paragraph 12 of the Reduction of Hours of Work Recommendation, 1962 (No. 116), which indicates that averaging should be permitted only when special conditions in certain branches of activity or technical needs justify it. It also recalls paragraph 79 of its General Survey of 1984 on working time in which it pointed out that undue facilitation of overtime, for example, by not limiting the circumstances in which it may be permitted or by allowing relatively high maximums, could in the most egregious cases tend to defeat the Recommendation’s objective of a social standard of a 40-hour week and make irrelevant the provisions as to normal working hours. The Committee therefore requests the Government to keep the Office informed of any further developments in the process of revision of the Labour Code, and to transmit a copy of the new legislation once it has been adopted.

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

Article 1 of the Convention. Forty-hour week. The Committee notes that section 149 of the Labour Code permits the averaging (or “summary recording”) of working hours over a reference period not exceeding four months provided that the average maximum working time does not exceed 48 hours in a week and 12 hours in a day while Government Resolution No. 587 of 2003 provides for a reference period of up to one year for those employed, among other sectors, in transport and energy production. The Committee considers that these provisions, even though they may reflect a general tendency for more flexible working-time arrangements, they call into question the object and purpose of the Convention inasmuch as unreasonably long reference periods for the averaging of hours cannot guarantee full application of the principle of the 40-hour week.

In addition, the Committee notes that section 144(4) of the Labour Code and Government Resolution No. 587 of 2003 provide for specific occupations and works (including on-duty works in health care, education, social care, telecommunications, public utility services, seaport navigation, air traffic control, railway transport, oil and gas production) in which the duration of working time may be up to 24 hours per day provided that the average working hours do not exceed 48 in a week and that the rest period between working days is not shorter than 24 hours. The Committee observes that such provisions directly contradict the letter and the spirit of ILO Conventions on hours of work which seek to establish reasonable legal standards of hours of work in order to provide adequate protection against undue fatigue and to ensure meaningful leisure and opportunities for recreation and social life for all workers. The Committee considers it important to recall that the same concerns have been raised by the European Committee of Social Rights which in its 2007 conclusions found that the situation in Lithuania is not in conformity with article 2(1) of the European Social Charter since for some categories of workers a working day of up to 24 hours may be allowed and under flexible working-time regimes the working week may be more than 60 hours. The Committee therefore requests the Government to provide additional explanations on the rationale of the provisions mentioned above and indicate how these provisions may be construed to be consonant with the requirements of the Convention, read in conjunction of the Reduction of Hours of Work Recommendation, 1962 (No. 116). The Committee also requests the Government to refer to the comments made under Articles 2 and 5 of the Hours of Work (Industry) Convention, 1919 (No. 1).

Part V of the report form. Application in practice. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide together with its next report up to date information on the practical application of the Convention, including, for instance, extracts from labour inspection reports showing the number and nature of contraventions reported with regard to hours worked in excess of the 40-hour week; statistics concerning the categories and number of workers to whom the principle of the 40-hour week has been applied and the number of hours worked in excess of the 40-hour week; the categories and number of workers to whom the principle of the 40-hour week has not as yet been applied and the normal hours of work applicable to these workers; official studies or reports on working time issues and especially the question of the reduction of hours of work in relation to factors such as the effect of new technologies and employment policy objectives; trends on working time arrangements as reflected in recent collective agreements, etc.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2004, published 93rd ILC session (2005)

The Committee notes the observations made by the Lithuanian Trade Union of Constables and Police Employees (LPTU). The Government has not, as yet, commented on these observations.

The LPTU alleges that the working-time provisions contained in the new Internal Services Act No. IX 1538 of 29 April 2003, which came into effect on 1 May 1993, is contrary to the principle of a 40-hour working week provided for in the Convention. The LPTU observes that under the new Act, whilst certain sections of the Act express that the norm for police officers cannot be longer than 40 hours per week (seven-day period), the section concerning overtime provides that, in certain circumstances, overtime work is compulsory. The LPTU states that the Act allows the Internal Affairs Office executive to require certain officers to work longer than the ILO norm. The LPTU observes that, under the new Act, the normal hours of work for certain workers will be 48 hours per week, as they will no longer receive overtime rate of pay for work carried out above 40 hours.

The Committee, in its direct request in 2003, requested the Government to indicate to what extent hours may be worked in excess of a 40-hour week as section 144(3) of the new Labour Code merely stipulates that the maximum working time, including overtime, must not exceed 48 hours per seven working days. The Committee noted that this provision could be used to arrange for a regular working time of up to 48 hours, which would run counter to the principle of the 40-hour week.

The Committee requests the Government to respond to these issues and generally on how the working-time provisions contained in the new Internal Services Act comply with the provisions contained in the present Convention both in law and in practice. It also requests the Government to provide information requested in its last direct request in the next report.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2003, published 92nd ILC session (2004)

Article 1 of the Convention. The Committee notes that the new Labour Code of the Republic of Lithuania, which came into force on 1 January 2003, extends the possibilities to deviate from the 40-hour week, as laid down in section 144, paragraph 1, of the new Labour Code. The old Law on Labour Protection of 1993, in section 44, paragraph 4, allowed exemptions from the general principle of the 40-hour week only in exceptional and categorized cases, which needed to be approved by the Government. Now, the new Labour Code merely stipulates in section 144, paragraph 3, that maximum working time, including overtime, must not exceed 48 hours per seven working days. The Committee notes that this provision may be used to arrange for a regular weekly working time of up to 48 hours, which would not be in line with the 40-hour principle of the Convention.

The Committee requests the Government to indicate the extent to which hours may be worked in excess of the 40-hour week, either (i) on a regular basis for all workers, (ii) on a regular basis by certain categories of workers or for certain types of work, or (iii) as overtime, with particulars of the rate of pay for overtime.