Termination of Employment Convention, 1982 (No. 158) - Latvia (Ratification: 1994)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2020, published 109th ILC session (2021)

The Committee takes note of the supplementary information provided by the Government in light of the decision adopted by the Governing Body at its 338th Session (June 2020). The Committee proceeded with the examination of the application of the Convention on the basis of the supplementary information received from the Government and the Free Trade Union Confederation of Latvia (FTUCL) this year, as well as on the basis of the information at its disposal in 2019.

Application in practice and measures adopted to mitigate the impact of the COVID 19 pandemic. The Committee notes the detailed information, including statistics as well as copies of judicial decisions concerning the implementation of the Convention. The Committee further notes the information concerning the statistics on claims for reinstatement and on claims for recovery of remuneration and other rights before district and regional courts. The Government also provides statistical information on the applications and decisions from the State Labour Inspectorate concerning termination of employment pursuant to section 101(1) of the Labour Act. The Committee also notes the additional information submitted by the Government concerning temporary amendments to different laws and regulations such as the Law on Unemployment Insurance or other measures in support for unemployed persons in the framework of the measures taken to mitigate the negative socio-economic effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on employment. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide updated available information on the manner in which the provisions of the Convention are applied in practice, including relevant judicial decisions involving questions relating to the application of the Convention, available statistics on the activities of the bodies of appeal (such as the number of appeals against unjustified termination, the outcome of such appeals, the nature of the remedy awarded and the average time taken for an appeal to be decided) and on the number of terminations for economic or similar reasons in the country. The Government is also requested to continue to provide information on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and the measures adopted to mitigate it on the application of the Convention.

Article 2(2) and (3) of the Convention. Adequate safeguards in case of abusive recourse to contracts of employment for a specified period. The Committee had noted that pursuant to section 44(6) of the Labour Act, the same provisions that apply to workers engaged under a contract for an unspecified period also apply to those engaged under contracts for a specified period, for example, in regard to notice periods. The Government indicates that while there have been no judicial decisions interpreting this provision, the protection against abusive recourse to contracts of employment for a specified period of time is provided by the State Labour Inspectorate which, in case of violation of the law imposes a fine on the employer. The Committee takes note of this information and requests the Government to continue to provide information on relevant judicial decisions involving questions relating to the application of the Convention.

Articles 5(c) and 9(3). Invalid reason for termination. Procedure of appeal. In reply to the Committee’s request for judicial decisions interpreting section 9 of the Labour Act concerning the imposition of sanctions to an employee for the exercise of his or her rights, the Committee notes that the Government provides a summary of case-law in matters regarding termination of employment on the initiative of the employer, and prohibition to cause adverse consequences to an employee for the exercise of his or her statutory or contractual rights. The Committee notes that various decisions in this summary examine diverse aspects of section 9. As regards the possibility provided in section 109(2) of the Labour Act to dismiss a person with disabilities on the ground that she or he lacks adequate occupational competence for performance of the contracted work, the Committee had requested the Government to indicate how it was ensured that the termination was indeed based on valid reasons. The Government indicates that the State Labour Inspectorate is competent to examine the valid reason for termination and in case of violation of the law it imposes a fine on the employer. The Government also provides copies of judicial decisions concerning dismissal of workers with disabilities where the legal grounds for dismissal are examined in detail. The Committee takes note of this information.

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

Article 2(2) and (3) of the Convention. Adequate safeguards in case of recourse to contracts of employment for a specified period. The Committee notes the Government’s comprehensive report, including detailed statistical information indicating that there has been a significant decline during the reporting period in the number of reinstatement cases received by first and second instance courts. The Committee recalls the information provided by the Government in its last report indicating that, pursuant to section 44(6) of the Labour Act, the same provisions that apply to workers engaged under a contract for an unspecified period also apply to those engaged under contracts for a specified period, for example, in regard to notice periods. Referring to its previous comments, the Committee notes that the Government has not provided information on judicial decisions interpreting section 44(6) of the Labour Act. The Committee reiterates its request that the Government provide information regarding judicial decisions interpreting section 44(6) of the Labour Act. It also requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to ensure adequate safeguards against recourse to contracts of employment for a specified period of time (Article 2(2) and (3) of the Convention).

Articles 5(c) and 9(3). Invalid reason for termination. Procedure of appeal. In reply to the Committee’s request for judicial decisions interpreting section 9 of the Labour Act, which enables an employee to apply to the State Labour Inspectorate or to the court in order to invalidate termination of employment, the Government provides examples of Supreme Court decisions that examine, inter alia: the obligations of trade unions in the context of termination procedures, in that they are not required to state the reason that they oppose the termination; the reversal of the burden of proof, placing the burden on the employer; cases examining the reasons for termination; and the requirement that an employer obtains the consent of the trade union to give notice of termination to a union member. The Committee also notes the Government’s indication that section 109, paragraph 2 of the Labour Act has been amended to permit the termination of an employee with a disability when the employee does not have sufficient professional skills to perform the work. The Committee notes that there is no information on the manner in which it is established that the termination is indeed based on a valid reason connected with the capacity of the worker, as contemplated in Article 4 of the Convention, to ensure that the termination is not pretextual. The Committee once again requests the Government to provide copies of judicial decisions interpreting section 9 of the Labour Act. It further requests the Government to provide information on any measures taken or envisaged to ensure that a worker with a disability is protected from termination on invalid grounds in light of the amendment to section 109, paragraph 2 of the Labour Act.

Application in practice. The Committee requests the Government to provide updated available information on the manner in which the provisions of the Convention are applied in practice, including relevant judicial decisions involving questions relating to the application of the Convention, available statistics on the activities of the bodies of appeal (such as the number of appeals against unjustified termination, the outcome of such appeals, the nature of the remedy awarded and the average time taken for an appeal to be decided) and on the number of terminations for economic or similar reasons in the country.

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

The Committee notes the Government’s report received in September 2011 containing detailed information in reply to the points raised in the 2007 observation and a list of legislative amendments introduced during the reporting period June 2007–11. The Government also provides data tables concerning reinstatement in civil cases in all first instance and appeal courts of Latvia for the time period June 2007–11. The data tables indicate a sharp increase in the number of reinstatement cases received by the courts in 2009–10 – increasing from 133 in 2008 to 510 in 2009 and 445 in 2010. The Committee notes the compilation of jurisprudence and findings of the Senate on the issues of: (1) legal grounds for termination of employment; (2) procedures for termination of employment contracts; (3) reinstatement; and (4) notice of termination of an employment contract during a probationary period. The Committee invites the Government to continue providing updated available information on the manner in which the provisions of the Convention are applied in practice, including any relevant judicial decision involving questions relating to the application of the Convention, available statistics on the activities of the bodies of appeal (such as the number of appeals against unjustified termination, the outcome of such appeals, the nature of the remedy awarded and the average time taken for an appeal to be decided) and on the number of terminations for economic or similar reasons in the country (Parts IV and V of the report form).

Article 2(2) and (3). Adequate safeguards in case of recourse to contracts of employment for a specified period. The Government reports that pursuant to section 44(6) of the Labour Act, the same provisions governing workers entering into contracts for an unspecified period apply to those entering into contracts for a specified period. As a result of this, an employer must give adequate notice of termination to the employee under an employment contract for a specified period. In addition, pursuant to section 44(7) of the Labour Act, an employer shall inform such employees of any job vacancies in the undertaking in which the employee may be employed for an unspecified period. Moreover, under section 44(7) of the Labour Act, if no party requests a termination upon the expiry of the term of the employment contract, it will automatically be renewed for an unspecified period. The Government indicates that no statistics of recording of employment contracts are being carried out at present. The Committee invites the Government to include in its next report copies of judicial decisions of labour courts, if any, interpreting section 44 of the Labour Act.

Article 5(c). Invalid reason for termination. The Government reports that section 9(1) of the Labour Act allows an employee to apply to the State Labour Inspectorate or a Court for protection against invalid termination of employment. It further reports that pursuant to section 9(2) of the Labour Act, the burden of proof rests on the employer to demonstrate that the employee has not been penalized or subjected to adverse consequences as a result of the exercise of his/her rights in a permissible manner. The Committee invites the Government to include in its next report copies of judicial decisions of labour courts, if any, interpreting section 9 of the Labour Act.

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

1. The Committee notes the detailed information provided by the Government in reply to its 2006 direct request and its report received for the period ending June 2007. It notes the legislative amendments introduced in September 2006 to the Labour Law. It notes with interest the data provided on cases reviewed by its courts in 2006–07 and the summary of jurisprudence of the Supreme Court of 2004 concerning reinstatement (Article 10 of the Convention). It particularly notes with interest the Supreme Court decision in case No. SKC‑229 of 19 May 2004, which refers directly to Article 8, paragraph 3, of the Convention. In addition, the Committee notes that a maximum period of temporary incapacity of an employee has not been specified by the national legislation (Article 6, paragraph 2, of the Convention). The Committee welcomes the information provided and would appreciate continuing to receive updated information on the manner in which effect is given in practice to each provision of the Convention (Parts IV and V of the report form). Please also provide information on the following points.

2. Article 2, paragraphs 2 and 3. Adequate safeguards in case of recourse to contracts of employment for a specified period. The Committee notes that Part One of section 45 of the Labour Law has been amended providing that the term for an employment contract entered into for a specified period may not exceed three years (previously the maximum period was two years). It requests the Government to provide information on the manner in which the protection provided by the Convention is ensured to workers who have concluded an employment contract for a specified period, indicating the number of workers affected by these measures.

3. Article 5(c). Invalid reason for termination. In reply to previous comments, the Government indicates that, in addition to section 94 of the Labour Law, protection of the employee when informing competent authorities of suspected offences and violations in the workplace is provided by Part One of section 9 of the Labour Law, as amended in September 2006. The Committee would appreciate receiving further information on the manner in which Part One of section 9 of the Labour Law is applied in practice.

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

1. The Committee notes the Government’s report for the period ending June 2006, including indications on the legislative amendments introduced in April 2004 and October 2005 to the Labour Act. It further notes with interest the data on the cases reviewed by the courts in 2003-05. The Committee refers to its 2004 direct request and would appreciate receiving extracts of decisions of courts or other tribunals relating to termination of employment (Part IV of the report form). It refers to its comments of 2004 and asks the Government to report on the following points.

2. Article 5(c). Invalid reasons for termination.  The Committee notes that the Government referred to section 94 of the Labour Act as the provision giving effect to this Article. Section 94, however, protects workers who initiate internal proceedings only. The section does not appear to protect workers who have recourse to competent administrative authorities. The Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate how workers who have recourse to competent administrative authorities alleging violation of laws or regulations are protected against dismissal.

3. Article 6, paragraph 2. Please indicate whether a maximum duration is fixed for the period of temporary incapacity for work during which the employment of a worker may not be terminated under section 109(3) of the Labour Act.

4. Article 10. Please indicate whether the courts or other tribunals are empowered to order the payment of adequate compensation or any other appropriate relief if they consider it impracticable to declare the termination invalid or order the reinstatement of the worker.

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

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

Referring to its observation, the Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide in its next report detailed information on the following points.

Article 2, paragraphs 4-6, of the Convention. Exclusions. Please indicate whether certain categories of workers are excluded from the application of the Convention or from some of its provisions. If so, please indicate whether the organizations of employers and workers concerned have been consulted with regard to this exclusion. Please indicate the position of law and practice regarding the excluded categories. If these categories have been excluded under paragraph 4, please describe the special arrangements which, as a whole, provide protection at least equivalent to that afforded under the Convention.

Article 5(c). Valid reasons for termination. The Committee notes that the Government refers, with respect to the effect given to this provision, to section 94 of the Labour Act, which provides for protection of a worker who initiates internal proceedings in the enterprise with a view to protecting his rights and interests. It requests the Government to indicate also the manner in which it is ensured that the filing of a complaint or the participation in proceedings by a worker against an employer involving alleged violation of laws or regulations or recourse to competent administrative authorities shall not constitute valid reasons for termination, in accordance with this provision of the Convention.

Article 6, paragraph 2. Please indicate whether a maximum duration is fixed for the period of temporary incapacity for work during which the employment of a worker may not be terminated under section 109(3) of the Labour Act.

Article 9, paragraph 3. Verification of justifying reasons. The Committee notes that, under section 104(1) of the Labour Act, termination for reasons which are not connected with the conduct or aptitude of the worker must be sufficiently justified by the adoption of economic, technological, structural or similar measures in the enterprise. Please indicate whether courts of law or other tribunals are empowered, in the event of an appeal against such termination, to ensure that the reasons stated are sufficient to justify the termination.

Article 10. Please indicate whether the courts or other tribunals are empowered to order the payment of adequate compensation or any other appropriate relief if they consider it impracticable to declare the termination invalid or order the reinstatement of the worker.

Parts IV and V of the report form. Please supply examples of decisions of courts or other tribunals relating to termination. Please provide all available statistics on appeals against termination decisions, the outcome of such appeals, the nature of the remedy awarded and the time needed for an appeal to be decided.

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

The Committee notes with interest the Government’s report and the information it contains on the effect given to the Convention by the provisions of the Labour Act of 20 June 2001. It welcomes in particular the provisions adopted to ensure consultations with workers’ representatives and notification of the competent authority when terminations of employment are contemplated for economic, technological, structural or similar reasons, in accordance with Articles 13 and 14 of the Convention.

A request regarding certain other points is being addressed directly to the Government.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2002, published 91st ILC session (2003)

The Committee notes with regret that the Government’s report has not been received. It hopes that a report will be supplied for examination by the Committee at its next session and that it will contain full information on the matters raised in its direct request of 1999, which read as follows.

1. The Committee notes the first report on the application of the Convention, received in January 1999.

2. Article 2, paragraph 2, of the Convention. The Committee notes that section 235 of the Labour Code states that there may be specific labour regulations for those employed on a seasonal basis and some categories of employees, such as employees in the forestry or timber industry and persons employed under a labour contract as domestic workers and in other cases. The Government states that the legislation of the Republic of Latvia may stipulate specific labour regulations for these employees under the exception permitted by Article 2(2) of the Convention. The Committee requests further information on the scope of the exception and whether it applies solely to people employed as domestic workers or to those employed in the forestry or timber industry on a casual basis for a short period, or also to permanent workers. Please also indicate which "other cases" are included within section 235 of the Labour Code, as well as whether any special regulations have been adopted which would exclude these workers from the coverage of the Convention.

3. Article 7. The Committee notes that section 142 of the Labour Code states that the employer must ask for an explanation from the employee before applying any punishment. Please indicate how effect is given to this provision of the Labour Code in practice.

4. Article 10. The Committee notes that under section 219 of the Labour Code, the court or the Labour Dispute Commission can reinstate the employee if the dismissal was unjustified or in contradiction of dismissal procedures, and can order remuneration for the intervening period until reinstatement. The Committee also notes that under section 222 of the Labour Code, resolutions by bodies dealing with labour disputes shall be implemented immediately. The Committee requests information on the consequences of failure to reinstate the worker following a decision by the court or Labour Dispute Commission, as required by the report form.

5. Article 13, paragraph 1(a). The Committee notes that under section 11 of the Law of the Republic of Latvia on trade unions of 13 December 1990, the employer must consult the elected institutions of the trade unions in making decisions on employment, social and economic issues. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would indicate whether the workers’ representatives concerned must be provided with information on the reasons for the terminations contemplated, the number and categories of workers likely to be affected and the period over which the terminations are intended to be carried out, as well as how far in advance of the contemplated terminations the workers’ representatives concerned must be consulted, as requested in the report form for this Convention.

6. Article 13, paragraph 1(b). The Committee also requests information on whether workers’ representatives are consulted on measures to be taken to avert or minimize the terminations and measures to mitigate the adverse effects of terminations. In particular, please indicate the manner in which provision is made for an opportunity for consultation, how far before the contemplated terminations such opportunity must occur and the object of such consultation, as requested in the report form.

7. Article 14, paragraphs 1 and 2. The Committee notes that section 5(2) of the Law on employment places a duty on the employer to inform the State Employment Service and the relevant municipality at least two months in advance if an undertaking, establishment or organization is to be liquidated or employees are to be dismissed. The Committee also notes the Government’s statement that this issue will be included in the new draft Labour Code and requests information on the development of this legislation. In particular, the Committee recalls that Article 14(1) of the Convention requires the employer to give the competent authority relevant information including written information of the reasons for the terminations, the number and categories of workers likely to be affected and the period over which the terminations are to be carried out.

8. The Committee notes with interest the relevant decisions of the Civil Court Department of the Senate of the Supreme Court, and would be grateful for an extract of the relevant parts of the decision of the Presidium of the Supreme Council of the Republic of Latvia "On Approval of the Regulations for the Labour Dispute Commission" of 2 April 1992.

9. Please also provide general information on the manner in which the Convention is applied in practice as requested in Part V of the report form, including for example, available statistics on the activities of the appeal bodies (such as the number of appeals against unjustified termination, the outcome of such appeals, the nature of the remedy awarded and the average time taken for an appeal to be decided) and on the number of terminations for economic and similar reasons.

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

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It hopes that a report will be supplied for examination by the Committee at its next session and that it will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous direct request, which read as follows:

        1. The Committee notes the first report on the application of the Convention, received in January 1999.

        2. Article 2, paragraph 2, of the Convention. The Committee notes that section 235 of the Labour Code states that there may be specific labour regulations for those employed on a seasonal basis and some categories of employees, such as employees in the forestry or timber industry and persons employed under a labour contract as domestic workers and in other cases. The Government states that the legislation of the Republic of Latvia may stipulate specific labour regulations for these employees under the exception permitted by Article 2(2) of the Convention. The Committee requests further information on the scope of the exception and whether it applies solely to people employed as domestic workers or to those employed in the forestry or timber industry on a casual basis for a short period, or also to permanent workers. Please also indicate which "other cases" are included within section 235 of the Labour Code, as well as whether any special regulations have been adopted which would exclude these workers from the coverage of the Convention.

        3. Article 7. The Committee notes that section 142 of the Labour Code states that the employer must ask for an explanation from the employee before applying any punishment. Please indicate how effect is given to this provision of the Labour Code in practice.

        4. Article 10. The Committee notes that under section 219 of the Labour Code, the court or the Labour Dispute Commission can reinstate the employee if the dismissal was unjustified or in contradiction of dismissal procedures, and can order remuneration for the intervening period until reinstatement. The Committee also notes that under section 222 of the Labour Code, resolutions by bodies dealing with labour disputes shall be implemented immediately. The Committee requests information on the consequences of failure to reinstate the worker following a decision by the court or Labour Dispute Commission, as required by the report form.

        5. Article 13, paragraph 1(a). The Committee notes that under section 11 of the Law of the Republic of Latvia on trade unions of 13 December 1990, the employer must consult the elected institutions of the trade unions in making decisions on employment, social and economic issues. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would indicate whether the workers’ representatives concerned must be provided with information on the reasons for the terminations contemplated, the number and categories of workers likely to be affected and the period over which the terminations are intended to be carried out, as well as how far in advance of the contemplated terminations the workers’ representatives concerned must be consulted, as requested in the report form for this Convention.

        6. Article 13, paragraph 1(b). The Committee also requests information on whether workers’ representatives are consulted on measures to be taken to avert or minimize the terminations and measures to mitigate the adverse effects of terminations. In particular, please indicate the manner in which provision is made for an opportunity for consultation, how far before the contemplated terminations such opportunity must occur and the object of such consultation, as requested in the report form.

        7. Article 14, paragraphs 1 and 2. The Committee notes that section 5(2) of the Law on employment places a duty on the employer to inform the State Employment Service and the relevant municipality at least two months in advance if an undertaking, establishment or organization is to be liquidated or employees are to be dismissed. The Committee also notes the Government’s statement that this issue will be included in the new draft Labour Code and requests information on the development of this legislation. In particular, the Committee recalls that Article 14(1) of the Convention requires the employer to give the competent authority relevant information including written information of the reasons for the terminations, the number and categories of workers likely to be affected and the period over which the terminations are to be carried out.

        8. The Committee notes with interest the relevant decisions of the Civil Court Department of the Senate of the Supreme Court, and would be grateful for an extract of the relevant parts of the decision of the Presidium of the Supreme Council of the Republic of Latvia "On Approval of the Regulations for the Labour Dispute Commission" of 2 April 1992.

        9. Please also provide general information on the manner in which the Convention is applied in practice as requested in Part V of the report form, including for example, available statistics on the activities of the appeal bodies (such as the number of appeals against unjustified termination, the outcome of such appeals, the nature of the remedy awarded and the average time taken for an appeal to be decided) and on the number of terminations for economic and similar reasons.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1999, published 88th ILC session (2000)

1. The Committee notes the first report on the application of the Convention, received in January 1999.

2. Article 2, paragraph 2, of the Convention. The Committee notes that section 235 of the Labour Code states that there may be specific labour regulations for those employed on a seasonal basis and some categories of employees, such as employees in the forestry or timber industry and persons employed under a labour contract as domestic workers and in other cases. The Government states that the legislation of the Republic of Latvia may stipulate specific labour regulations for these employees under the exception permitted by Article 2(2) of the Convention. The Committee requests further information on the scope of the exception and whether it applies solely to people employed as domestic workers or to those employed in the forestry or timber industry on a casual basis for a short period, or also to permanent workers. Please also indicate which "other cases" are included within section 235 of the Labour Code, as well as whether any special regulations have been adopted which would exclude these workers from the coverage of the Convention.

3. Article 7. The Committee notes that section 142 of the Labour Code states that the employer must ask for an explanation from the employee before applying any punishment. Please indicate how effect is given to this provision of the Labour Code in practice.

4. Article 10. The Committee notes that under section 219 of the Labour Code, the court or the Labour Dispute Commission can reinstate the employee if the dismissal was unjustified or in contradiction of dismissal procedures, and can order remuneration for the intervening period until reinstatement. The Committee also notes that under section 222 of the Labour Code, resolutions by bodies dealing with labour disputes shall be implemented immediately. The Committee requests information on the consequences of failure to reinstate the worker following a decision by the court or Labour Dispute Commission, as required by the report form.

5. Article 13, paragraph 1(a). The Committee notes that under section 11 of the Law of the Republic of Latvia on trade unions of 13 December 1990, the employer must consult the elected institutions of the trade unions in making decisions on employment, social and economic issues. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would indicate whether the workers' representatives concerned must be provided with information on the reasons for the terminations contemplated, the number and categories of workers likely to be affected and the period over which the terminations are intended to be carried out, as well as how far in advance of the contemplated terminations the workers' representatives concerned must be consulted, as requested in the report form for this Convention.

6. Article 13, paragraph 1(b). The Committee also requests information on whether workers' representatives are consulted on measures to be taken to avert or minimize the terminations and measures to mitigate the adverse effects of terminations. In particular, please indicate the manner in which provision is made for an opportunity for consultation, how far before the contemplated terminations such opportunity must occur and the object of such consultation, as requested in the report form.

7. Article 14, paragraphs 1 and 2. The Committee notes that section 5(2) of the Law on employment places a duty on the employer to inform the State Employment Service and the relevant municipality at least two months in advance if an undertaking, establishment or organization is to be liquidated or employees are to be dismissed. The Committee also notes the Government's statement that this issue will be included in the new draft Labour Code and requests information on the development of this legislation. In particular, the Committee recalls that Article 14(1) of the Convention requires the employer to give the competent authority relevant information including written information of the reasons for the terminations, the number and categories of workers likely to be affected and the period over which the terminations are to be carried out.

8. The Committee notes with interest the relevant decisions of the Civil Court Department of the Senate of the Supreme Court, and would be grateful for an extract of the relevant parts of the decision of the Presidium of the Supreme Council of the Republic of Latvia "On Approval of the Regulations for the Labour Dispute Commission" of 2 April 1992.

9. Please also provide general information on the manner in which the Convention is applied in practice as requested in Part V of the report form, including for example, available statistics on the activities of the appeal bodies (such as the number of appeals against unjustified termination, the outcome of such appeals, the nature of the remedy awarded and the average time taken for an appeal to be decided) and on the number of terminations for economic and similar reasons.