Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2024, published 113rd ILC session (2025)

Hours of Work (Industry) Convention, 1919 (No. 1) - Slovakia (Ratification: 1993)

Article 2(b) and (c), and Articles 4 and 5 of the Convention. Averaging schemes. Following its previous comments, the Committee notes that: (i) section 87(1) of the Labour Code allows employers and workers, or their representatives, to agree on schemes to distribute working time unevenly over periods of up to four months; (ii) under sections 87(2) and (4) of the Labour Code averaging schemes can be concluded by collective agreement or by agreement between the employers’ and workers’ representatives, for periods of up to 12 months and daily working hours under such schemes cannot be longer than 12 hours; (iii) under section 87a of the Labour Code, working time accounts can be established, which, in effect, allow for the averaging of working hours with an average of 48 hours per week over a period of 12 months; and (iv) section 88 of the Labour Code allows for flexible hours arrangements under which a daily work shift can last 12 hours. 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 recognized 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).

The Committee also recalls that calculating hours of work as an average over a reference period of up to one year allows for too many exceptions to normal hours of work and can result in highly variable working hours over long periods, long working days and the absence of compensation (2018 General Survey on working-time instruments, paragraph 68). Accordingly, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to bring the above-mentioned provisions of the Labour Code into conformity with the requirements of the Convention for the categories of workers under its scope of application. The Committee also requests the Government to provide information on the manner in which those provisions of the Labour Code are applied in practice, including the categories of workers concerned and the number of daily and weekly hours effectively worked.

Articles 3 and 6. Temporary exceptions. 1. Limits to overtime. Following its previous comments on section 97(5) of the Labour Code, which allows overtime to be imposed for reasons of public interest, the Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that “public interest” is not used in the private sector as a justification to impose overtime and that the term is interpreted very narrowly.

In response to the Committee’s previous comments on section 97(10) of the Labour Code, which authorizes a maximum of 400 hours of overtime per calendar year, the Government indicates that only 150 hours of those overtime hours can be imposed by employers, pursuant to section 97(7) of the Labour Code and the remaining number of hours of overtime permitted per year would be at the initiative of the worker themselves. In this regard, the Committee recalls the impact that long hours of work can have on workers’ health and work–private life balance, and emphasize the fundamental importance of keeping the number of additional hours allowed within reasonable limits that take into account both the health and well-being of workers, and the employers’ productivity needs. The Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to bring section 97(10) of the Labour Code into conformity with the Convention for the categories of workers under its scope of application, in consultation with social partners. It also requests the Government to provide further information on the application in practice of the provisions on overtime to workers in the country.

2. Compensation for overtime. Following its previous comments on section 121(3) of the Labour Code, pursuant to which an employee may choose to receive time off in compensation for overtime hours, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that this provision has not caused any issues in practice in the country, and that, on the contrary, compensatory leave ensures the regeneration of the workforce, which contributes to the safety and health protection of employees. The Committee nevertheless recalls that, as it has underlined in its 2018 General Survey concerning working-time instruments, paragraph 158, it is important for additional hours to be in all cases remunerated and paid at a higher rate than normal hours, even in the cases where compensatory time off is granted. Accordingly, the Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to bring section 121(3) of the Labour Code into conformity with Article 6(2) of the Convention.

The Committee is raising other matters in a request addressed directly to the Government.