Minimum Wage Fixing Convention, 1970 (No. 131) - Latvia (Ratification: 1993)

Replies received to the issues raised in a direct request which do not give rise to further comments (CEACR) - adopted 2019, published 109th ILC session (2021)

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government, which answers the points raised in its previous direct request and has no further matters to raise in this regard.

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

Article 3 of the Convention. Socio-economic criteria for adjusting the minimum wage. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the objective of Cabinet Regulation No. 413 of 22 July 2003, which aimed at progressively raising the level of the minimum monthly wage to 50 per cent of the monthly average gross remuneration by 2010, has finally not been reached owing principally to the limitations of the State budget and also the fact that the originally planned minimum wage increases were not implemented for several years. Subsequently, Cabinet Regulation No. 390 of 17 May 2011 was adopted, which establishes new principles for the determination and review of the minimum wage. Under the terms of the Regulation, the Ministry of Welfare, the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Economics draw up every year proposals regarding the amount of the minimum monthly wage based on the macroeconomic forecasts, the planned changes in the tax system, the evolution of the minimum wage in other Baltic states and the average annual value of the basket of subsistence minimum calculated by the Central Statistical Bureau.

The Committee notes that, by virtue of Cabinet Regulation No. 1096 of 30 November 2010, the minimum monthly wage was increased to 200 Latvian lats (LVL) (approximately US$370) as from 1 January 2011 and that due to economic instability, the risk of structural unemployment and the need for fiscal consolidation, it has been decided, in consultation with the National Tripartite Cooperation Council (NTCC), not to readjust the level of the minimum wage in 2012. The Government further indicates that according to a draft Cabinet decision, which should be discussed by the NTCC shortly, the amount of the minimum wage should remain unchanged in 2013. While noting the Government's explanations concerning the decision to no longer link the minimum wage to specific indicators and to review it annually based on an evaluation of the economic situation, the Committee requests the Government to provide further clarifications as regards the manner in which social considerations, such as the needs of workers and their families, the cost of living, and social security benefits, are taken into account in the annual revision of the minimum wage level. The Committee considers that the need to consider social together with economic criteria, as prescribed by this Article of the Convention, is all the more important in view of the considerable proportion of the workforce, i.e. 25.9 per cent in 2011, whose earnings are equal to the amount of the minimum wage.

Moreover, the Committee notes that according to the NTCC decision of February 2011, by which the Government's new methodology for fixing and reviewing the minimum wage was endorsed, the amount of the minimum wage should gradually reach the average annual value of the basket of subsistence minimum calculated by the Central Statistical Bureau. The Committee understands, however, that the subsistence minimum per inhabitant and per month stood at LVL173 (approximately $323) in 2011 whereas the minimum wage already amounts to LVL200 (approximately $370). The Committee requests the Government to provide additional explanations concerning the relationship between the minimum wage and the basket of subsistence minimum.

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

The Committee notes the detailed information provided in the Government’s report, in particular the adoption of Cabinet Regulation No. 413 of 22 July 2003 concerning the procedure for determining and revising the minimum monthly wage which aims at raising the level of the minimum monthly wage to 50 per cent of the monthly average gross remuneration by the end of a seven-year transitional period in 2010.

Article 3 of the Convention. Socio-economic criteria for adjusting the minimum wage. The Committee notes that by virtue of Cabinet Regulation No. 858 of 17 October 2006, the minimum monthly and hourly rates were set at LVL120 (approximately US$237) and LVL0.713 (approximately US$1.40), respectively. It also notes the Government’s explanations that the latest adjustment was necessary due to the increase of the consumer price index and also taking into account that in 2005–06 it was not made possible to reach the target levels which had been agreed in 2003. The Committee requests the Government to continue to supply all relevant information on the implementation of the transition plan (2004–10) for the progressive raising of the minimum wage to 50 per cent of the average wage, in particular as regards the manner in which social considerations, such as the needs of workers and their families, the cost of living, or social security benefits, are taken into account in the annual revision of the minimum wage level.

Article 5 and Part V of the report form. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government on the number of workers remunerated at the minimum wage rate, the meetings of the National Tripartite Cooperation Council concerning the increase of the minimum wage, and the activities of the State Labour Inspectorate in relation to enforcement of the legislation on minimum wage. It would be grateful if the Government would continue to provide up to date information on the practical application of the Convention.

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

The Committee notes the Government’s report and the attached documentation furnished in response to its previous comments.

Article 3 of the Convention. The Committee notes with satisfaction that the new Labour Code of 2001 no longer provides for lower minimum wage rates in case of non-fulfilment of production quotas or non-compliance with quality standards. It also notes that under section 80(1) of the new Labour Code, even in the case of permissible wage deductions for improper performance or losses caused to an employer, the minimum monthly salary must be maintained for the employee. As the Committee has pointed out on several occasions, factors such as the quantity and the quality of the work performed by the individual worker, while appropriate elements in the determination of his/her actual remuneration, should not affect the right to payment of a minimum wage, which should be a guarantee of a just remuneration in return for work duly performed during a stated period.

In addition, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that in accordance with Regulation No. 580 of the Cabinet of Ministers of 27 December 2002 the minimum monthly and hourly wage rates are currently fixed at 70 and 0.419 lats, respectively, but that these rates do not correspond to the level necessary for ensuring minimum living conditions. The Government adds that in 2001 the national minimum wage amounted to 63.3 per cent of the subsistence level calculated by the Central Statistical Bureau and that 93,800 workers, or 16 per cent of the total working population, are estimated to receive a gross monthly salary at the level of the minimum wage. In this connection, the Committee is obliged to recall that the principal objective of a minimum wage system is to contribute to the eradication of poverty by ensuring a decent standard of living for all working people and their families and that consequently a minimum wage which manifestly fails to cover such basic needs as housing, food, education, health or social security, scarcely serves as an adequate tool of social protection. The Committee trusts that the Government, in consultation with its social partners, will make every effort to ensure that minimum wage increases adequately reflect the needs of workers and their families, for instance by maintaining their purchasing power in relation to a basic basket of essential consumer goods and requests the Government to continue to provide up-to-date information on the evolution of minimum wage rates as compared to the evolution of other indicators such as the average subsistence level or the inflation rate.

Article 4. Further to its previous request on this point, the Committee takes due note of the Regulation of 30 October 1998 on the National Tripartite Cooperation Council, section 6 of which provides for the equal representation of employers and workers. The Committee would appreciate receiving additional information on the operation of the Council, for instance copies of its annual reports or any recent studies on issues relating to fixing or adjusting minimum wages.

Article 5 and Part V of the report form. The Committee notes the adoption of the State Labour Inspection Act of 13 December 2001 and Regulation No. 158 of the Cabinet of Ministers dated 16 April 2002 on state labour inspection. It also notes the statistical information regarding the number of cases investigated and wage-related infringements observed in 2001. The Committee requests the Government to transmit a copy of the above regulations and to continue to provide all available information concerning the application of the Convention in practice, including, for instance, information on the number and coverage of collective agreements setting minimum wage levels, the number and different categories of workers subject to minimum wage legislation, labour inspection results and any other particulars bearing on the operation of the minimum wage fixing machinery.

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

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:

Article 2, paragraph 1, of the Convention. In its previous comments the Committee has noted that, according to sections 97 and 98 of the Labour Code, when the responsibility of the employee for the non-fulfilment of the work quotas or the non-compliance of production to quality standards is not involved, the monthly remuneration should not be lower than the minimum remuneration. However, the Committee has also noted that under section 98 the employee shall not be paid if the production for which he or she is responsible does not meet the quality standards completely and that in case of partial responsibility of the employee, he or she shall be paid in accordance with lower tariffs. The Committee therefore has requested the Government to provide information on the application of the abovementioned provisions of sections 97 and 98 and to communicate information on the procedural mechanisms that enable the employee involved in the latter case to recover sums due in respect of the minimum wage. The Committee regrets that the report of the Government does not contain any response on these matters. The Committee hopes once more that the Government will provide the requested information with its next report.

Article 3. The Committee notes that the Government recognizes in its report that "the minimum wage falls considerably behind the cost of living calculated by the Central Board of Statistics", and that "in the period of time from 1990 to 1998 the rise of consumer prices (inflation) has been almost twice as rapid as the rise of work payment". The Committee takes note of the indication of the Government that the labour legislation has not given full effect to this provision of the Convention due to the limited possibilities of the national budget. The Committee recalls that according to the Convention: "The elements to be taken into consideration in determining the level of minimum wages shall, so far as possible and appropriate in relation to national practice and conditions, include: (a) the needs of workers and their families, taking into account the general level of wages in the country, the cost of living, social security benefits, and the relative living standards of other social groups; (b) economic factors, including the requirements of economic development, levels of productivity, and the desirability of attaining and maintaining a high level of employment". The Committee firmly hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the very near future to give full effect to the Convention on these points.

Article 4. The Committee notes that the report does not contain any response to its previous request on the composition of the Tripartite Consultation Board or on how the direct and equal participation of employers’ and workers’ organizations or employers’ and workers’ representatives is ensured in the operation of the minimum wage fixing machinery. The Committee therefore hopes once more that the Government will communicate the information requested with its next report.

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

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It must therefore repeat its previous observation, which read as follows:

Further to its previous comments the Committee notes with interest the information supplied by the Government in its report according to which:

-  the Latvian Free Trade Union Federation (LBAS) concluded two general agreements with the Latvian Employers’ Confederation on minimum remuneration for work on 27 April 1998 and on 5 May 1999;

-  22 agreements covering 30 per cent of wage-earners have been concluded between sectorial trade unions and sectorial associations of employers which fix guarantees of minimum remuneration for work of a much higher level than the national minimum monthly wage.

The Committee takes note of the Government’s information that, in the period of time from 1990 to 1998, the rise of consumer prices (inflation) has been almost twice as rapid as the rise of workers’ remuneration. The Committee therefore hopes that the Government will continue providing information on the fixing and adjustment of minimum wages and on the measures adopted or envisaged to ensure the direct participation of representatives of organizations of employers and workers concerned, on an equal basis, in the machinery for fixing or adjusting minimum wages.

The Committee raises other points in a direct request to the Government.

The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the very near future.

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

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its report.

Article 2, paragraph 1, of the Convention. In its previous comments the Committee has noted that, according to sections 97 and 98 of the Labour Code, when the responsibility of the employee for the non-fulfilment of the work quotas or the non-compliance of production to quality standards is not involved, the monthly remuneration should not be lower than the minimum remuneration. However, the Committee has also noted that under section 98 the employee shall not be paid if the production for which he or she is responsible does not meet the quality standards completely and that in case of partial responsibility of the employee, he or she shall be paid in accordance with lower tariffs. The Committee therefore has requested the Government to provide information on the application of the abovementioned provisions of sections 97 and 98 and to communicate information on the procedural mechanisms that enable the employee involved in the latter case to recover sums due in respect of the minimum wage. The Committee regrets that the report of the Government does not contain any response on these matters. The Committee hopes once more that the Government will provide the requested information with its next report.

Article 3. The Committee notes that the Government recognizes in its report that "the minimum wage falls considerably behind the cost of living calculated by the Central Board of Statistics", and that "in the period of time from 1990 to 1998 the rise of consumer prices (inflation) has been almost twice as rapid as the rise of work payment". The Committee takes note of the indication of the Government that the labour legislation has not given full effect to this provision of the Convention due to the limited possibilities of the national budget. The Committee recalls that according to the Convention: "The elements to be taken into consideration in determining the level of minimum wages shall, so far as possible and appropriate in relation to national practice and conditions, include: (a) the needs of workers and their families, taking into account the general level of wages in the country, the cost of living, social security benefits, and the relative living standards of other social groups; (b) economic factors, including the requirements of economic development, levels of productivity, and the desirability of attaining and maintaining a high level of employment". The Committee firmly hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the very near future to give full effect to the Convention on these points.

Article 4. The Committee notes that the report does not contain any response to its previous request on the composition of the Tripartite Consultation Board or on how the direct and equal participation of employers' and workers' organizations or employers' and workers' representatives is ensured in the operation of the minimum wage-fixing machinery. The Committee therefore hopes once more that the Government will communicate the information requested with its next report.

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

Further to its previous comments the Committee notes with interest the information supplied by the Government in its report according to which:

-- the Latvian Free Trade Union Federation (LBAS) concluded two general agreements with the Latvian Employers' Confederation on minimum remuneration for work on 27 April 1998 and on 5 May 1999;

-- 22 agreements covering 30 per cent of wage-earners have been concluded between sectorial trade unions and sectorial associations of employers which fix guarantees of minimum remuneration for work of a much higher level than the national minimum monthly wage.

The Committee takes note of the Government's information that, in the period of time from 1990 to 1998, the rise of consumer prices (inflation) has been almost twice as rapid as the rise of workers' remuneration. The Committee therefore hopes that the Government will continue providing information on the fixing and adjustment of minimum wages and on the measures adopted or envisaged to ensure the direct participation of representatives of organizations of employers and workers concerned, on an equal basis, in the machinery for fixing or adjusting minimum wages.

The Committee raises other points in a direct request to the Government.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1998, published 87th ILC session (1999)

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 following matters raised in its previous direct request:

Article 2 of the Convention. 1. The Committee notes that, according to sections 97 and 98 of the Labour Code, when the responsibility of the employee for the non-fulfilment of the work quotas or the non-compliance of production to quality standards is not involved, the monthly remuneration should not be lower than the minimum remuneration. However, the Committee also notes that under section 98 the employee shall not be paid if the production for which he or she is responsible does not meet the quality standards completely. In case of partial responsibility of the employee, he or she shall be paid in accordance with lower tariffs depending on the usefulness of the production.

The Committee requests the Government to communicate information on the application of the said provisions of sections 97 and 98, to indicate the procedural mechanisms that enable the employee involved in the latter case to recover sums due in respect of the minimum wage and to supply any relevant decisions by courts of law or other tribunals.

2. The Committee notes that section 250 of the Labour Code provides for the responsibility of employers, officials of the State, institutions and organizations for, inter alia, the violations of the labour laws and regulations on labour protection. It requests the Government to provide information on sanctions applicable to a failure to apply the minimum wages.

Article 3. The Committee notes that, according to the Government, the basis for the review of the minimum wage is calculated expenses of people in accordance with the consumer goods basket (minimum living wage standards or crisis living wage) determined by the Government, and the possibility of covering these costs from this wage/salary. It requests the Government to provide further information as concerns the various components which are taken into account when calculating the minimum living wage standards and the crisis living wage.

Article 4. The Committee notes that the Tripartite Consultation Board is involved in the minimum wage revision processes. It requests the Government to provide further information on the composition of the Tripartite Consultation Board and to indicate how the direct and equal participation of employers' and workers' organizations or employers' and workers' representatives is ensured in the operation of the minimum wage-fixing machinery.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1998, published 87th ILC session (1999)

The Committee notes with regret that the Government's report has not been received. It must therefore repeat its previous observation concerning the following points:

The Committee notes the information supplied in the first report of the Government and the observations made by the Free Trade Union Federation of Latvia (LBAS). The Committee notes from the observations made by the LBAS that, according to trade union experts, the state-determined minimum wage is 1.7 times less than the state-determined crisis living wage and three times less than the living wage necessary for one working person. The Committee notes that the Government has not communicated its comments on these observations and requests it to do so. It asks the Government to provide comprehensive information on the results of the application of the minimum wage fixing machinery in accordance with Article 5 of the Convention.

The Committee trusts that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the very near future.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1997, published 86th ILC session (1998)

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 following matters raised in its previous direct request:

Article 2 of the Convention. 1. The Committee notes that, according to sections 97 and 98 of the Labour Code, when the responsibility of the employee for the non-fulfilment of the work quotas or the non-compliance of production to quality standards is not involved, the monthly remuneration should not be lower than the minimum remuneration. However, the Committee also notes that under section 98 the employee shall not be paid if the production for which he or she is responsible does not meet the quality standards completely. In case of partial responsibility of the employee, he or she shall be paid in accordance with lower tariffs depending on the usefulness of the production.

The Committee requests the Government to communicate information on the application of the said provisions of sections 97 and 98, to indicate the procedural mechanisms that enable the employee involved in the latter case to recover sums due in respect of the minimum wage and to supply any relevant decisions by courts of law or other tribunals.

2. The Committee notes that section 250 of the Labour Code provides for the responsibility of employers, officials of the State, institutions and organizations for, inter alia, the violations of the labour laws and regulations on labour protection. It requests the Government to provide information on sanctions applicable to a failure to apply the minimum wages.

Article 3. The Committee notes that, according to the Government, the basis for the review of the minimum wage is calculated expenses of people in accordance with the consumer goods basket (minimum living wage standards or crisis living wage) determined by the Government, and the possibility of covering these costs from this wage/salary. It requests the Government to provide further information as concerns the various components which are taken into account when calculating the minimum living wage standards and the crisis living wage.

Article 4. The Committee notes that the Tripartite Consultation Board is involved in the minimum wage revision processes. It requests the Government to provide further information on the composition of the Tripartite Consultation Board and to indicate how the direct and equal participation of employers' and workers' organizations or employers' and workers' representatives is ensured in the operation of the minimum wage fixing machinery.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1997, published 86th ILC session (1998)

The Committee notes that the Government's report has not been received. It must therefore repeat its previous observation concerning the following points:

The Committee notes the information supplied in the first report of the Government and the observations made by the Free Trade Union Federation of Latvia (LBAS). The Committee notes from the observations made by the LBAS that, according to trade union experts, the state-determined minimum wage is 1.7 times less than the state-determined crisis living wage and three times less than the living wage necessary for one working person. The Committee notes that the Government has not communicated its comments on these observations and requests it to do so. It asks the Government to provide comprehensive information on the results of the application of the minimum wage fixing machinery in accordance with Article 5 of the Convention.

The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the very near future.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1996, published 85th ILC session (1997)

Article 2 of the Convention. 1. The Committee notes that, according to sections 97 and 98 of the Labour Code, when the responsibility of the employee for the non-fulfilment of the work quotas or the non-compliance of production to quality standards is not involved, the monthly remuneration should not be lower than the minimum remuneration. However, the Committee also notes that under section 98 the employee shall not be paid if the production for which he or she is responsible does not meet the quality standards completely. In case of partial responsibility of the employee, he or she shall be paid in accordance with lower tariffs depending on the usefulness of the production.

The Committee requests the Government to communicate information on the application of the said provisions of sections 97 and 98, to indicate the procedural mechanisms that enable the employee involved in the latter case to recover sums due in respect of the minimum wage and to supply any relevant decisions by courts of law or other tribunals.

2. The Committee notes that section 250 of the Labour Code provides for the responsibility of employers, officials of the State, institutions and organizations for, inter alia, the violations of the labour laws and regulations on labour protection. It requests the Government to provide information on sanctions applicable to a failure to apply the minimum wages.

Article 3. The Committee notes that, according to the Government, the basis for the review of the minimum wage is calculated expenses of people in accordance with the consumer goods basket (minimum living wage standards or crisis living wage) determined by the Government, and the possibility of covering these costs from this wage/salary. It requests the Government to provide further information as concerns the various components which are taken into account when calculating the minimum living wage standards and the crisis living wage.

Article 4. The Committee notes that the Tripartite Consultation Board is involved in the minimum wage revision processes. It requests the Government to provide further information on the composition of the Tripartite Consultation Board and to indicate how the direct and equal participation of employers' and workers' organizations or employers' and workers' representatives is ensured in the operation of the minimum wage fixing machinery.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1996, published 85th ILC session (1997)

The Committee notes the information supplied in the first report of the Government and the observations made by the Free Trade Union Federation of Latvia (LBAS).

The Committee notes from the observations made by the LBAS that, according to trade union experts, the state-determined minimum wage is 1.7 times less than the state-determined crisis living wage and three times less than the living wage necessary for one working person.

The Committee notes that the Government has not communicated its comments on these observations and requests it to do so. It asks the Government to provide comprehensive information on the results of the application of the minimum wage fixing machinery in accordance with Article 5 of the Convention.