Observation (CEACR) - adoptée 2010, publiée 100ème session CIT (2011)

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

Article 1 of the Convention. Protection against acts of anti-union discrimination. In its previous comments, the Committee had noted the comments submitted by the Association of Free Trade Unions of Slovenia (AFTUS) referring to certain acts of anti-union discrimination against trade union representatives in the private sector which, in practice, according to AFTUS, are difficult to prove. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the Slovenian Labour Inspectorate has indicated that, in the period between 1 January 2008 and 1 June 2010, no infringements on the provisions of section 6 of the Employment Relationship Act that would be associated with the workers’ membership in a trade union were recorded.

Act implementing the Principle of Equal Treatment (No. 93/2007, UBP (ZUNEO)). The Committee takes note of the adoption of the Act implementing the principle of equal treatment explicitly applicable to cases of anti-union discrimination. The Committee further notes the Government’s indication that, in the period between 1 January 2008 and 1 June 2010, there was one case in which discrimination of the workers representative was established. In this case, the Committee notes that the inspector determined that an employer had infringed the provisions of section 4 of ZUNEO while terminating the employment contract allegedly for business reasons but for only three workers who belonged to the trade union, among whom was a trade union representative.

Act Amending the Employment Relationships Act (ERA-A) (OGRS, 103/2007). The Committee notes that the Act Amending the Employment Relationships Act has introduced the principle of reversed burden of proof in its section 6, paragraph 6. Therefore, if, in the event of a dispute, an applicant or a worker cites the fact giving ground for the suspicion that the prohibition of discrimination has been violated, the employer must demonstrate that in the case in question, the principle of equal treatment and the prohibition of discrimination was not violated. The Committee further notes that section 6, paragraph 8, states that persons who have been discriminated against and persons who help the victims of discrimination may not be exposed to unfavourable consequences owing to actions aimed at fulfilling the prohibition and discrimination. The Committee notes with interest this information.

Article 2. Protection against acts of interference. In its previous direct request, the Committee concluded that the protection against acts of interference afforded by sections 42 (right to associate) and 76 (free establishment, and functioning of, and membership in trade unions) of the Constitution, as well as section 6 of the Representativeness of Workers’ Unions Act (providing that independence from employers is one of the characteristics of a representative trade union), was not sufficient and that sufficiently dissuasive sanctions were necessary. The Committee had noted the Government’s indication that it would study the possibility of introducing additional legislative provisions that would address the Committee’s concerns. The Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report, that concrete sanctions for employers or their associations in case of interference in the activities of trade unions are currently not provided for by law and that legislative amendments have not yet been adopted in this regard. The Committee hopes that the Government will take the necessary measures in order to adopt specific provisions ensuring adequate protection to workers’ organizations against acts of interference in their establishment, functioning and administration by employers or their organizations, and providing for effective and sufficiently dissuasive sanctions. It once again requests the Government to indicate any developments in this respect.