Observation (CEACR) - adoptée 2009, publiée 99ème session CIT (2010)

Convention (n° 98) sur le droit d'organisation et de négociation collective, 1949 - Azerbaïdjan (Ratification: 1992)

Articles 1 and 4 of the Convention. The Committee had previously noted the comments made by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) in 2007, which alleged in particular that despite the law, an effective system of collective bargaining between unions and enterprise managements had not yet been established: employers often delayed negotiations, and unions rarely participated in determining wage levels and were often bypassed in the conclusion of bilateral agreements between the Government and multinational enterprises. The ITUC further alleged cases of anti-union discrimination and interference that took place in multinational enterprises.

The Committee, recalling that it was the responsibility of the Government to ensure the application of the Convention, requested the Government to take the necessary measures in order to ensure that multinational enterprises operating on its territory respect freedom of association norms and principles and to inform it of the measures taken in this respect. It further requested the Government to provide its observations on the ITUC’s previous allegation of cases of anti-union discrimination and interference that took place in multinational enterprises.

In its previous comments, the Committee had noted that the legislation made a distinction between a “collective agreement”, concluded at the enterprise level following bipartite negotiations between workers and employers, and a “collective accord”, concluded at industry, territorial or national levels following tripartite negotiations between trade unions of the appropriate level, the National Confederation of Entrepreneurs’ (Employers’) Organization and the authorities. The Committee recalled that while tripartism was particularly appropriate for the regulation of questions of a larger scope (drafting of legislation, formulating labour policies), the principle of tripartism should not replace the principle of autonomy of workers’ organizations and employers (or their organizations) in collective bargaining on conditions of employment. The Committee also recalled that, according to Article 4 of the Convention, free and voluntary bargaining with a view to the regulation of terms and conditions of employment should be conducted between workers’ organizations and an employer or employers’ organization and therefore requested the Government to take measures to amend its legislation so as to bring it into conformity with the Convention.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication that steps are being taken to set up national and local collaborative committees comprising representatives of unions, employers’ associations, relevant executive bodies and public associations representing the interests of those especially in need of social protection, with a view to promoting employment.

The Committee reiterates its previous requests to the Government, as set out above, and reminds the Government that ILO technical assistance remains at its disposal on the abovementioned issues.