Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98) - Republic of Moldova (Ratification: 1996)

Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 2025, Publication: 113rd ILC session (2025)

Written information provided by the Government

The Government of the Republic of Moldova thanks the Committee on the Application of Standards and the Committee of Experts for their continued attention to the application of Convention No. 98. We also express our appreciation to the National Trade Union Confederation of Moldova (CNSM) for bringing the matter to the attention of the Committee. We are committed to a constructive process that strengthens social dialogue and upholds the rights enshrined in international labour standards.

With this in mind, the Government submits the following information for the Committee’s consideration, as part of our shared effort to reach a fair and positive outcome for all parties involved.

By ratifying International Labour Organization (ILO) Convention No. 98, the Republic of Moldova reaffirmed its commitment to guaranteeing trade union freedoms and a functioning system of social dialogue. This commitment is embedded in the Constitution, which guarantees the right of every employee to join a trade union and engage in collective bargaining, while recognizing the binding nature of collective agreements. These principles are operationalized through the Republic of Moldova’s Labour Code and complementary legislation governing trade unions, employers’ associations, and mechanisms of social dialogue.

A key instrument reinforcing these commitments is the Tripartite National Collective Agreement No. 20, adopted on 29 July 2022. Jointly developed with the social partners, this agreement outlines clear responsibilities for fostering social dialogue, establishing consultation and negotiation platforms at national, sectoral, and territorial levels, and building an institutional framework for effective collective bargaining and dispute resolution.

The Tripartite Agreement includes commitments to strengthen institutional capacity – particularly the role of the State Labour Inspectorate. Reflecting this commitment, in 2023 the Republic of Moldova adopted legal amendments to align the mandate and practices of the Labour Inspectorate with ILO Conventions Nos 81 and 129. These reforms introduced unannounced inspections in cases of undeclared work and labour exploitation. Additional amendments related to occupational safety and health are under review in 2025. The Government is further supported in this effort through a project funded by the European Union (EU) and implemented by the ILO.

Moreover, through Agreement No. 20, the Government reaffirmed its essential role in safeguarding the autonomy of trade unions and employers’ associations by removing administrative and financial barriers to their formation. To this end, in July 2023, the Parliament approved amendments abolishing state registration fees for trade union and employers’ organizations at all levels – ensuring that the fundamental right of both workers and employers to organize and associate is fully respected.

The main national platform for dialogue is the National Commission for Consultations and Collective Bargaining, which convenes regularly to discuss a broad range of social and economic policies proposed by each of the social partners. These include proposed amendments to the Labour Code, as well as consultations on key financial legislation such as the state budget, the state social insurance budget and the mandatory healthcare insurance funds. The tripartite dialogue also covers the annual revision of the minimum wage and the mechanism for determining its adequacy – a topic under review in every tripartite session, aligned with the principles of adequacy outlined in Directive 2022/2041. Further topics include the potential ratification of pending ILO conventions or the regulation of non-standard forms of work (for example, temporary agency work and platform work). Collective bargaining issues are addressed through this framework at all levels. As a result of collective bargaining efforts, the national minimum wage increased by 87 per cent between 2021 and 2025. Furthermore, as a result of tripartite efforts, the Republic of Moldova ratified the Violence and Harassment Convention, 2019 (No. 190) in 2024, which entered into force on 19 March 2025. Discussions are ongoing regarding the ratification of the Workers with Family Responsibilities Convention, 1981 (No. 156).

The social partners are fully engaged in the Republic of Moldova’s EU accession process, including the screening of relevant chapters and legal approximation. On 26 January 2024, we signed a joint Declaration in support of the Republic of Moldova’s EU integration path. The social partners have contributed to the Republic of Moldova’s Bilateral Screening process with the EU, participating in all internal screening simulations and attending the bilateral screening meetings with the European Commission. Moreover, both trade union and employers’ representatives are members of the Working Group No. 19 on Social Policy and Employment. In-depth consultations are under way for the transposition of several EU Directives, including Directive 2022/2041 on adequate minimum wages, due for transposition in 2025. This engagement contributes to strengthening social dialogue at all levels and supports the effective application of European labour standards and policies in the Republic of Moldova.

Despite progress, challenges remain. Among the main issues is the limited capacity among the social partners to negotiate and conclude collective agreements, especially due to the absence of active social dialogue structures at sectoral, territorial and enterprise levels. Moreover, awareness among key stakeholders remains limited in some sectors. Therefore, the coverage with collective bargaining remains low. As of 2024, the Republic of Moldova had 4,275 collective labour contracts in force, covering approximately 241,094 union members – equivalent to 38.5 per cent of the country’s total salaried workforce. The Government is actively scaling up efforts to expand social dialogue across all levels and build the institutional capacities necessary for effective implementation of international labour standards.

With the ILO’s support, the Republic of Moldova delivered a broad training programme in 2022–24 aimed at strengthening the capacity of social dialogue structures across all levels. Focus areas included wage-setting, non-discrimination, gender pay equity, dispute resolution, and local labour market analysis. Territorial commissions in all 20 districts and multiple branch-level platforms were trained.

The Government is also taking concrete steps to improve legislation and practice in the field of social dialogue and collective bargaining. In close cooperation with the social partners and with support from the ILO, it has developed a comprehensive road map covering over 15 proposals to strengthen collective bargaining frameworks in the Republic of Moldova.

The implementation of the Decent Work Country Programme 2025–27, in partnership with the ILO, is a key priority for the Republic of Moldova. The programme was developed jointly by the Government and the social partners. Strengthening social dialogue is the programme’s first strategic priority. Its immediate objectives include: (i) better alignment of labour legislation with international labour standards and relevant EU acquis; (ii) stronger social partners with expertise in policy and social dialogue; and (iii) a more robust system of social dialogue and effective collective bargaining. One of the key performance indicators for this priority is the adoption of a National Action Plan to promote social dialogue and collective bargaining, along with the implementation of at least 50 per cent of the planned activities with ILO support – including technical assistance, training and logistical support.

Safeguards to protect workers’ organizations

Trade unions benefit from constitutional and judicial protection against any discriminatory actions aimed at limiting their freedom of association or the lawful exercise of their activities. The Constitution of the Republic of Moldova, the Law on Trade Unions, the Labour Code and the Contraventions Code lay out the protections and the remedy mechanisms in case of violations:

Protections against potential acts of interference by the public authorities

Article 6 of Law No. 1129/2000 on Trade Unions establishes that trade union membership shall not entail any restriction of human rights and freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution, national legislation or international treaties to which the Republic of Moldova is a party. It prohibits any form of discrimination in employment, including hiring, promotion, or dismissal, based on a person’s affiliation with a particular trade union or their decision to join or leave a union. Furthermore, the article forbids influencing individuals – through threats, bribes, or promises of improved work, service, or study conditions – with the aim of forcing them to leave a union, join another or dissolve their union.

Article 9 states that public authorities are prohibited from any form of interference that would limit or interrupt the exercise of trade union rights, as defined by law and union statutes.

The law penalizes any obstruction of employees’ rights to form or join trade unions as a means to defend their professional, economic and social interests. Such actions are considered a contravention under section 61 of the Contraventions Code and are subject to fines.

Article 38 of Law No. 1129/2000 lays out the procedure for handling complaints concerning violations of the trade union law, related normative acts or union statutes. Courts are the designated authority to examine such complaints, which may be submitted by relevant trade union bodies. Court decisions (rulings, conclusions or sentences) can be appealed in accordance with applicable legislation.

Additionally, based on article 73 of the Civil Procedure Code and article 21 of Law No. 1129/2000, trade unions may initiate civil actions to defend the rights and interests of their members or other persons.

Steps taken in the concrete case

Concerns have been raised regarding the application of Convention No. 98 in a sector-specific case concerning trade union rights in the health sector, particularly in the public medical institution, the National Center for Pre-hospital Emergency Medical Assistance. In response to the case, the Government has taken a series of targeted institutional and procedural steps aimed at promoting dialogue, clarifying facts and supporting the resolution of the situation in question.

On 13 August 2024, the Ministry of Labour and Social Protection convened a high-level meeting with the participation of senior representatives of the Ministry of Health, the CNSM and the ILO. During this meeting, the Government reaffirmed its willingness to provide a platform for structured dialogue, including access to the employer concerned, and proposed the creation of a joint fact-finding mechanism to impartially examine the allegations and contribute to rebuilding mutual trust among the parties.

As part of its institutional follow-up, the State Chancellery issued a formal request on 17 October 2024 to all competent institutions to submit explanatory notes concerning the reported events, with the objective of establishing an accurate and comprehensive understanding of the circumstances and responsibilities involved. In parallel, the Ministry of Labour and Social Protection has continued to monitor developments closely and to maintain open channels of communication with all relevant stakeholders, including trade unions and employer representatives.

As mentioned earlier, the Government – together with the social partners and with ILO support – is working on a comprehensive road map containing over 15 proposals to strengthen social dialogue and collective bargaining mechanisms.

Further steps are under examination. The Government of the Republic of Moldova reaffirms its full commitment to upholding the principles enshrined in Convention No. 98 and to working transparently, in good faith and in close cooperation with the ILO and national social partners. We view this process as an opportunity to deepen our democratic and institutional maturity in line with international labour standards.

Discussion by the Committee

Chairperson – I am pleased to invite the Honourable representative of the Government of the Republic of Moldova, Ambassador, Permanent Representative of the Republic of Moldova to the United Nations Office in Geneva, to take the floor.

Government representative – On behalf of the Government of the Republic of Moldova, I would like to express our appreciation to the Committee of Experts and to this Committee for their continued attention to the application of the Convention. We also acknowledge the efforts by the CNSM for bringing this matter to the attention of the Committee.

Let me start by saying that we see this discussion as a shared opportunity to strengthen the fundamental rights enshrined in the international labour standards and to reinforce our national commitment to meaningful social dialogue. With this spirit, we submitted to the Committee an update on recent developments and reaffirm our willingness to work constructively towards a fair and positive outcome for all parties involved.

Since ratifying the Convention, the Republic of Moldova has made sustained efforts to guarantee trade union freedoms and build a functioning system of social dialogue. These principles are anchored in our Constitution, which guarantees the right of every employee to join a trade union and engage in collective bargaining and recognizes the binding nature of collective agreements. These constitutional guarantees are operationalized through the Labour Code and complementary legislation governing trade unions, employers’ associations and bipartite and tripartite mechanisms.

One of the most important recent milestones was the adoption of the Tripartite National Collective Agreement No. 20 in July 2022. This agreement was jointly developed with the social partners and outlines clear responsibilities for fostering social dialogue at national, sectoral and territorial levels. It lays the foundation for structured consultation, negotiation platforms and mechanisms for dispute resolution.

As part of our ongoing commitment, the Government adopted legal amendments in 2023 to align the mandate and practices of the Labour Inspectorate with the Labour Inspection Convention, 1947 (No. 81) and the Labour Inspection (Agriculture) Convention, 1969 (No. 129). These amendments introduced such procedures as unannounced inspections in case of undeclared work and labour exploitation. Additional legal updates are under review in 2025 to enhance occupational safety and health. These efforts are further supported by an EU-funded project implemented by the ILO.

In 2023, the Republic of Moldova also removed administrative and financial barriers to the creation of trade unions and employers’ organizations. The Parliament abolished State registration fees at all levels, demonstrating our commitment to facilitating the right to organize without unnecessary hurdles. The National Commission for Consultations and Collective Bargaining remains the main national tripartite platform for dialogue. It meets regularly and discusses a wide range of topics, from amendments to the Labour Code to consultations on national budgetary laws, including the State Social Insurance and Healthcare Insurance Budgets. Only in the current year, the above Commission has already held five meetings. Critically, the Commission plays a central role in reviewing and revising the national minimum wage, with each discussion guided by the adequacy principle, as set out in the EU Directive 2022/2041.

Between 2021 and 2025, as a direct result of tripartite dialogue and collective bargaining, the national minimum wage increased by 87 per cent. Beyond wage-setting, the Commission addresses collective bargaining issues, sectoral social dialogue and the potential ratification of pending ILO Conventions.

We are proud to share that, as a result of this collaborative effort, the Republic of Moldova ratified Convention No. 190 in 2024, which entered into force in March 2025. Discussions are also under way concerning Convention No. 156. Social dialogue is not separate from the Republic of Moldova’s involvement. It is at the heart of our European integration path.

On 26 January 2024, the Government and the social partners signed a joint declaration supporting the Republic of Moldova’s EU accession. Trade unions and employers’ organizations have been actively involved in the Bilateral Screening process, and both are members of the Working Group No. 19 on Social Policy and Employment.

We are now conducting in-depth consultations on the transposition of several EU directives, including the Adequate Minimum Wage directive due in 2025. This work contributes to aligning the Republic of Moldova’s labour policies with European standards while ensuring that they remain inclusive and grounded in national dialogue.

We are referring in such detail to all of these ongoing processes to demonstrate that all three parties to the social dialogue are working closely on major national priorities advancing the Republic of Moldova towards objectives of economic prosperity, social justice and decent work. However, we acknowledge that challenges remain.

The capacity of the social partners to negotiate and conclude collective agreements is still limited, especially at the sectoral, territorial and enterprise levels. Some dialogue structures are still dormant. Awareness of collective bargaining rights remains low in specific sectors. As a result, coverage with collective agreements remains at an estimated 39 per cent as of 2025. The Government is actively scaling up efforts to address these issues.

With support from the ILO, we implemented a national training programme between 2022 and 2024 which covered 20 districts, multiple sectoral platforms and focused on wagesetting, gender pay equity, dispute resolution and local labour market analysis.

Just last week here in Geneva, the Government, the national configurations of trade unions and of employers, together with the ILO, signed a Decent Work Country Programme 2025–27. We are looking forward to the implementation of this Programme, which is a national priority. Its first strategic objective is to strengthen social dialogue and collective bargaining.

Key objectives include better alignment with international labour standards in the EU acquis, building the expertise and capacity of the social partners, and promoting a robust and inclusive system of social dialogue. A central deliverable of this programme is the adoption of the National Action Plan to promote social dialogue and collective bargaining, with at least 50 per cent of its activities to be implemented with ILO technical support including training, assistance and logistical support.

The Republic of Moldova provides robust legal safeguards for the autonomy of trade unions. The Constitution, Labour Code, Trade Union Law and Contravention Code prohibit any form of discrimination against trade union members, coercion to leave or change a union and interference by public authorities in union affairs. Violations of these rights are subject to fines under the law. Trade unions have the legal standing to appear in court and may initiate civil actions to defend their members.

Turning to the specific situation raised before this Committee, let me first underline that the case concerns one institution in the health sector, in particular the public medical institution, the National Center for Pre-hospital Emergency Medical Assistance.

Let me say, however, that we take this situation seriously. At the national level, we are fully committed to working towards a solution mediated by the Government.

In response to concerns regarding the application of the Convention, the Government has already taken targeted steps to promote dialogue and clarify the facts. On 13 August 2024, the Ministry of Labour and Social Protection convened a high-level consultative meeting, with the participation from the Ministry of Health, the CNSM and the ILO. At this meeting, the Ministry of Health proposed the creation of a joint fact-finding mechanism to examine the allegations in an impartial manner and rebuild mutual trust. I must say this proposal remains on the table and we are committed to it. Following this, the State Chancellery issued a formal request to all relevant institutions for explanatory notes on the case.

The Ministry of Labour and Social Protection has continued to monitor developments and maintain open communication with all stakeholders.

As mentioned earlier, the Government, in collaboration with the social partners and with the support of the ILO, is in the process of finalizing a comprehensive road map comprising a range of proposals aimed at strengthening social dialogue and collective bargaining mechanisms. This document is currently under consultation with the social partners and the next round is taking place this Friday.

What we want to achieve with this road map is proposals for legislative, institutional and policy measures which will strengthen the social partnership, provide better guarantees, address violations and further increase the rate of coverage of collective agreements.

In this context, the Government aims to take into account the conclusions of the Committee of Experts, together with the proposals advanced by the social partners, with a view to achieving a genuinely tripartite outcome.

We welcome constructive proposals from all parties and remain committed to reflecting them in the final version of this road map. Once finalized, the Government will keep the Organization informed on progress made in its implementation. There are also ways to address the situation through court proceedings, which remains available and further institutional and legislative steps are currently under examination.

The Government of the Republic of Moldova reaffirms its full commitment to the principles enshrined in the Convention. We remain engaged in this process transparently, in good faith and in close cooperation with the ILO and our national social partners. We recognize the challenges but we also see here an opportunity, a chance to deepen our democratic and institutional maturity, strengthen the social contract and advance on our path towards EU integration. In this sense, all points in Committee of Experts’ comments are currently given thorough consideration.

We are also grateful to the ILO for its long-standing partnership and respectfully request continued technical assistance to strengthen collective bargaining capacity, increase awareness of social dialogue in specific sectors, including the health sector, support legislative alignment with the EU standards and help build a more inclusive and effective system of social dialogue in the Republic of Moldova. We thank the Committee once again for its guidance and engagement.

Together we can ensure that the Republic of Moldova lives up to the spirit of the ILO Convention by promoting dignity, fairness and dialogue in the world of work.

Worker members – In its report, the Committee of Experts highlighted three aspects. The first was the lack of effective measures to protect against acts of anti-union discrimination and interference. While the Moldovan legislation provides for sanctions when workers are prevented from joining or forming trade unions, it is silent when it comes to acts of interference in the activities of trade unions.

We can provide a very serious example of the impact of this legislative oversight. The administration of the National Center for Pre-hospital Emergency Medical Assistance threatened workers with reprisals if they refused to change their membership from the union of their own choosing to the Government-supported union which was not of their choosing. This led to the forced resignation from the union of just under 4,000 employees and the dismantling of the independent union. In addition, a union leader was demoted to force him to resign. Furthermore, even when the legislation exists to protect workers’ rights, in practice, the penalties provided for are not at all dissuasive. Indeed, a fine of US$120 feels more suitable for a speeding ticket than it does for abuse of fundamental rights, and is clearly inadequate.

As long ago as 2004, the Committee on Freedom of Association took the opportunity to make recommendations to the Moldovan Government in this regard and called for the introduction of effective and sufficiently dissuasive sanctions to prevent acts of anti-union discrimination.

The CNSM has also made proposals to Parliament and the Government to give effect to the recommendations of the Committee on Freedom of Association. However, these proposals were not followed up. The same is true of the bill that aims to amend section 61 of the Contravention Code in order to introduce stronger sanctions. The change was requested by unions but so far section 61 remains unamended.

For too long, any progress on this issue has foundered in an endless discussion of draft regulations that somehow never progresses to reality.

As much as negotiation and consultation are at the very heart of what we do here, it is expected to develop into law and practice at one point. Otherwise, eventually, like a US$120 fine, talk is cheap. The persistence of the status quo in these issues constitutes a serious threat to freedom of association. It is now necessary for the Government to finally put these proposals into practice with the greatest urgency.

It also appears from the Committee of Experts’ report that a provision of the Labour Code protecting union officials from dismissal for two years after leaving their positions was repealed and replaced with a requirement for an advisory opinion, rather than, as formally, prior consent from the superior union body. This further weakened the existing legal protection against anti-union discrimination.

Our own advisory opinion is that this is unacceptable. We join the Committee of Experts in expecting that the Government will adopt provisions that will significantly strengthen the legal protection against anti-union discrimination.

The second problem that the Committee of Experts pointed out in its report concerned the lack of information on the number of workers covered by collective agreements. This information is needed to assess the dynamics of collective bargaining in the country. Strong and well-functioning collective bargaining, which is often characterized by high collective bargaining coverage, has many benefits for workers and society in general. We note that it is impossible to deliver on the obligation to promote collective bargaining if you do not know whether collective bargaining in your country is flourishing or failing. It is, therefore, of the utmost importance for the Government to collect those statistics so that it can develop appropriate policies to increase collective bargaining coverage and, for us in the ILO supervisory system, to be able to independently assess the functioning of collective bargaining in the country.

Third and lastly, the Committee of Experts recalled a long-standing concern relating to compulsory arbitration. In this respect, we note that referring a collective labour dispute to the courts is incompatible with the Convention except, as the Committee of Experts recalled, where such a referral is at the request of both parties to the conflict. An appeal may also be allowed when the question concerns public servants employed in the essential services of the State, in the strict sense of the term, or a situation of serious national crisis. These form a very narrow set of exceptions: section 360(1) of the Labour Code is not in line with the Convention in that regard. The Government indicates that a new draft law is on the way to address this issue.

We also note that the Government has been requested by the social partners to work with them and the Labour Inspectorate to establish a mechanism for out-of-court dispute settlement which was expected to be fully developed by the end of 2024 but on which we have heard no more. We ask the Government to resume the tripartite process related to the development of an out-of-court mechanism for labour disputes.

All these issues should lead to effective and time-bound measures on the part of the Government. We therefore call on the Government to take up the matter and in particular to take measures to ensure effective protection against acts of anti-union discrimination.

Employer members – We thank the Government of the Republic of Moldova for the recently provided written information on this case, of which we have fully taken note. The Employer members address the importance of states’ compliance relating to the application of the Convention, which was ratified by the Republic of Moldova in 1996. Since 2001, the Committee of Experts has issued seven observations and this case had never been discussed in this Committee.

It should be noted that in March 2022, the Republic of Moldova applied for the EU membership and that the social partners are engaged in the accession process.

This case includes four elements. Firstly, about the allegations of interference in trade union activities, the Committee of Experts noted allegations that workers were threatened with retaliation if they refused to change their affiliation to the Government-supported union. Furthermore, it noted with regret that a trade union leader was demoted to induce resignation and that the issue had not been resolved.

According to Article 1 of the Convention, workers shall enjoy adequate protection against acts of anti-union discrimination in respect of their employment. Such protection applies, in particular, in respect of acts calculated to make the employment of the worker subject to the condition that the person shall not join a union or shall relinquish trade union membership.

The legal situation is as follows: Article 6 of Law No. 1129/2000 on trade unions establishes that trade union membership shall not entail any restrictions of human rights and freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution, national legislation or international treaties to which the Republic of Moldova is a party. It prohibits any form of discrimination in employment, including hiring, promotion or dismissal based on a person’s affiliation with a particular trade union or their decision to join or leave a union. Furthermore, the same Article forbids influencing individuals with the aim of forcing them to leave a union, join another or dissolve a union.

The Government mentioned today that it had taken a series of targeted actions: (i) on 13 August 2024, the Ministry of Labour and Social Protection convened a high-level meeting with the participation of the Ministry of Health, the CNSM and the ILO; (ii) the State Chancellery issued a formal request on 17 October 2024, to all competent institutions to submit explanatory notes concerning the reported events; (iii) in parallel, the Ministry of Labour and Social Protection has continued to monitor developments; and (iv) the Government, together with the social partners and the ILO, is working on a comprehensive road map containing over 15 proposals to strengthen social dialogue and collective bargaining mechanisms. The Employer members have taken note and welcome these developments. However, we encourage the Government to continue on this path with the aim to comply with the obligations of the Convention and to report back on measures achieved.

The second point concerns the legal reform to amend section 61 of the Contravention Code. In this regard, the national law penalizes any obstruction of employees’ rights to form or join trade unions as a means to defend their professional, economic and social interests. Such actions are considered a contravention under section 61 of the Contravention Code and are subject to fines. A draft law to amend section 61 of the Contravention Code and the application of tougher sanctions is being discussed. The Employer members ask the Government to provide further detailed information on this process to amend the law and the provisions that cover the sanctions to acts of anti-union discrimination and interference. Furthermore, in line with the request of the Committee of Experts, we ask the Government to submit a copy of the adopted Act.

Third, on steps taken by the Government in relation to referring a collective bargaining dispute to the courts, the Committee of Experts requested the Government to amend section 360(1) of the Labour Code to ensure that referral of a collective bargaining dispute to courts is possible only upon request by both parties of the dispute or in relation to public servants engaged in the administration of state essential services and in situations of national crises. The Government indicated that new draft legislation, the Mediation Act and Statute of the Mediator, is at the endorsement stage. The Employer members would like to recall that according to Article 4 of the Convention, measures appropriate to the national conditions shall be taken where necessary to encourage and promote the full development of voluntary negotiation between employers’ and workers’ organizations. Article 4 of the Convention provides some flexibility in order to let governments, the social partners and Member States find ways of implementation that are in line with the circumstances and needs. Therefore, the Employer members encourage the Government to engage in a meaningful consultation with the most representative employers’ and workers’ organizations on the revision process of section 360(1) of the Labour Code and to provide information on any developments in this respect.

The fourth point relates to statistics on the number of collective agreements concluded and in force. The Government provided information on collective agreements stipulated at the national level. The Committee of Experts noted this information and requested the Government to provide additional statistical information on the number of collective agreements concluded and enforced in the country, including the sectors concerned and the number of workers covered. The Employer members note that the Government provided additional written information on collective bargaining coverage. According to the information provided, as of 2024 the Republic of Moldova had 4,275 collective labour contracts enforced. Collective agreements covered approximately 241,094 union members, equivalent to 38.5 per cent of the country’s total workforce.

To conclude, The Employer members ask the Government: (i) to continue the path of solving the issue regarding interference in union activities in the healthcare sector and to report back on measures achieved; (ii) to provide detailed information on the process to amend the law and the provisions that cover the sanctions to acts of anti-union discrimination and interference and to provide a copy of the adopted act; to engage in meaningful consultation with the most representative employers’ and workers’ organizations on the revision process of section 360(1) of the Labour Code and to provide information on any developments in this respect.

Interpretation from Russian: Worker member, Republic of Moldova – The Committee of Experts has duly considered the information provided by the CNSM and has given due consideration to the information illustrating anti-trade union interference in the country. Having ratified the fundamental Conventions of the ILO, including the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87) and Convention No. 98, the Republic of Moldova has committed to observing the provisions contained therein relating to labour standards and a range of rights and guarantees for trade union activities, including adequate protection against any act of interference from employers or the Government.

I note here that appropriate protection against anti-trade union discrimination requires sufficient sanctions and, in the Republic of Moldova, there are currently only sanctions for obstructing the exercise by employees of the right to establish and join trade unions. When it comes to the violation of trade union rights and interference by employers aimed at dissolving trade unions, there are no effective sanctions provided, which could be considered an incentive for non-observance of trade union laws.

The initiative of the Government and Parliament in the form of a bill reflecting a proposal from the CNSM to provide penalties against trade union interference has not been met with success, and the current legislation has not been amended to provide for sufficiently dissuasive sanctions in the case of trade union rights violations.

Consequently, specific cases of violation of trade union rights have been recorded in the Republic of Moldova. One of them is the gross violation of these rights by the interference of the administration of the National Center for Pre-hospital Emergency Medical Assistance which has led to the de facto dissolution of a trade union and the creation of a new trade union under the direct control of the employer. The founders of this new trade union organization are 16 managers of the Centre, including two vice-directors, involving the structures subordinate to them. This fact has been confirmed by the certificate of registration of the trade union.

Further, the statutes of the trade union dictate that it is the administration that determines when the next general meeting of the trade union will take place. We see this as a classic case of company-run or yellow trade union that is created and controlled by employers, and this has taken place in an institution directly under the control of the Ministry of Health. So the Government is not only failing to guarantee the rights of trade unions but is also supporting the violation taking place by the employers, something that is reflected in the reports of the CNSM.

We turned to the competent authorities responsible for upholding trade union rights. We contacted the respective bodies. Unfortunately, none of them came back to us with a decent response. The Ministry of Labour and Social Protection simply provided a passive response referring to the absence of authority they had. The Ministry of Health welcomed the creation of the employer-controlled trade union, and the Labour Inspectorate did not react to our official complaint. So, without a response worthy of the name, the CNSM decided to turn to the ILO and make a complaint to the Committee on Freedom of Association.

Particularly alarming is the passive attitude of the Ministry of Labour and Social Protection which, as the body responsible for ensuring social dialogue and social policy, should stand up for international labour standards.

Bearing in mind that the Republic of Moldova is a candidate for EU membership, I would like to note that our complaint in no way seeks to derail the country’s process of European integration. The association agreement between the EU and the Republic of Moldova provides that the Republic of Moldova has the duty to respect, promote and enshrine in law internationally accepted labour standards as provided for by the fundamental Conventions of the ILO, in particular on freedom of association.

We believe therefore that our representations to the ILO supervisory bodies should not only serve as a wake-up call to government officials who have grossly interfered in trade union matters, but should also lead to specific legislative and practical steps removing any forms of interference, and in that way support the process of European integration.

In conclusion, I would like to express gratitude to the representatives of the ILO, the Committee of Experts and for the prompt consideration of our representations and the support to the Government to move forward to promote and protect the rights of trade unions and trade unionists. We very much hope that the Government of the Republic of Moldova will take into account the conclusions of the ILO supervisory bodies and immediately take the necessary measures for the application of international labour standards relating to the activities of trade unions and not allow, in the future, such cases of anti-union interference, while supporting national legislation and providing for specific sanctions against interference in trade union activities.

Government member, Switzerland – Switzerland has noted with interest the comments of the Committee of Experts and the written information provided by the Government of Moldova. The report of the Committee of Experts refers to several acts of anti-union discrimination and interference, one of which led to the dissolution of an independent trade union in the hospitality sector and the forced resignation of its members.

Switzerland reminds the Government that, pursuant to Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention, workers must be able to join unions of their choice and carry out their union activities free from any threat, harm or interference. Ensuring adequate protection of workers’ trade union rights, including the right to organize and to bargain collectively, demands a comprehensive and robust legislative and judicial framework that includes sufficiently dissuasive penalties against acts of anti-union discrimination and interference.

In this regard, Switzerland notes with satisfaction the information on a bill being prepared to establish tougher penalties than those currently in force, and invites the Moldovan authorities to proactively report on this matter to the Committee of Experts.

Through its bilateral relations with the Republic of Moldova, Switzerland promotes social dialogue and the exchange of views between Swiss and Moldovan social partners. In doing so, Switzerland offers a platform for the full participation of the social partners, thus enabling them to express their concerns and views. The Swiss Government stands ready to support the Moldovan authorities and social partners, within the framework of a tripartite dialogue on labour and employment, institutionalized since 2023 between Switzerland and Moldova, to facilitate the implementation of legislative and institutional reforms.

Lastly, we welcome the adoption of the Decent Work Country Programme 2025–27, signed last week between the Republic of Moldova and the ILO, as well as the adoption, at the national level, of a road map containing 15 measures to strengthen collective bargaining. We encourage the Moldovan authorities to pursue their close cooperation with the Office and the social partners in these processes.

Interpretation from German: Worker member, Switzerland – I am speaking on behalf of the Swiss Federation of Trade Unions (SGB). The present case is of particular importance as it has systemic implications for many countries and regions with regard to the application of a fundamental ILO Convention.

There are two main problems that we have just been hearing about. Firstly, the lack of adequate legal protection and dissuasive sanctions against anti-union discrimination and interference. Secondly, specific cases of intervention by the administration in the health sector, in particular by the competent ministry.

On the first topic, the lack of dissuasive sanctions and sufficient legal protection, this is a problem that we are also familiar with in Switzerland. We refer in particular to the case that was submitted in 2024 dealing with anti-union interference in the Republic of Moldova. The Republic of Moldova ratified Conventions Nos 87 and 98. As a result, national laws were enacted to guarantee freedom of association. These laws formally recognize trade union rights but do not provide effective protection against their violation.

In particular, we have heard about the Contravention Code which only provides for an extremely small fine, amounting to US$120, for preventing the establishment or membership of trade unions. For interventions by employers aimed at breaking down or replacing trade unions, as far as I can see, no sanctions are foreseen. Repeated recommendations from the ILO have called upon the Moldovan Government to revise legislation and introduce dissuasive sanctions. This has not yet been done.

The CNSM has submitted a draft law amending section 61 of the Contravention Code, which provides for sanctions in the case of anti-trade union interference. However, these proposals have been ignored by the Government and Parliament.

This legal vacuum has created an environment conducive to such serious interference.

The administration of the National Center for Pre-hospital Emergency Medical Assistance has dismantled the independent trade union with over 3,800 members and in practice has installed a new trade union, controlled by the employer.

The authorities were informed, both through the National Commission for Consultations and Collective Bargaining and through formal submissions but, to date, the Government has not taken effective action.

The Government’s own statements are limited to internal discussions which, in the view of the CNSM and the SGB, do not constitute effective measures against this interference.

The CNSM considers this as an expression of a passive stance of the Ministry of Labour and Social Protection, which is the competent authority for labour market policy, social dialogue and enforcement of international labour standards and which should therefore protect freedom of association.

We would like to reiterate that while national law provides for sanctions to prevent the establishment or membership of trade unions, it does not provide for protection against interference with existing trade unions. Once again, the CNSM’s proposals have not yet been implemented.

Finally, I would like to refer to the experience of Switzerland which may prove useful. The SGB has been fighting for over 20 years to improve protection against the dismissal of trade union members in companies. After intensive tripartite high-level negotiations and dialogue, we were finally able to reach an agreement in Switzerland, which will soon be submitted to Parliament. This shows that with consistent social dialogue, progress is possible. We hope to see similar developments in the Republic of Moldova but hopefully much faster than in Switzerland. In addition, Switzerland, as part of a Memorandum of Understanding, is involved in discussions with the Moldovan Government in tripartite structures. The social partners from the Republic of Moldova, including the CNSM, are also involved in this process. We hope that the Moldovan Government and the social partners can benefit from the experience of Switzerland which we would like to make available to them under this Memorandum of Understanding.

Worker member, France – The Republic of Moldova has been on the European integration path for several years. This process accelerated in March 2022 when the Republic of Moldova submitted its application to join the EU, then when the negotiation process was given the green light by the Council of the EU in December 2023. The country also benefits from the Growth Plan 2025–27, with a package worth €1.8 million, adopted in early October 2024 by the European Commission.

This strong commitment of the Moldovan authorities to accede to the EU, which should come to fruition by 2023, is an excellent opportunity to improve the right to organize and to bargain collectively in the country, particularly given that a joint ILO–EU mission took place in April 2024. Under these particular circumstances, we request that the Moldovan Government does not take merely symbolic measures but that it acts with determination at the legislative level.

We note, with our colleagues of the CNSM, that the transposition of the provisions of the Convention into national legislation, specifically Law No. 1129 of 7 July 2000 on trade unions and the 2003 Labour Code, has not ensured their effective application.

It is imperative to establish an offence of obstruction of activities with penalties for employers when they interfere in trade union activities. As it stands, this scenario is absent in national legislation, which only provides for penalties for obstructing the establishment of trade unions, as already stated.

The specific example of the dissolution of the independent trade union in a workplace of the public health sector illustrates this need. The measures taken by the Government remain tentative and have not prevented interference in trade union matters.

We therefore call on the Moldovan Government, as a matter of urgency and in consultation with the social partners, to supplement national legislation relating to the provisions in Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention, in order to introduce truly dissuasive measures and penalties in case of violation of trade union rights. We expect much better from a country aspiring to become a member of the EU.

Interpretation from German: Worker member, Austria – I am speaking on behalf of the Austrian Trade Union Federation (ÖGB) representing Austrian workers. For many years, we have worked closely with the CNSM. This cooperation has been supported inter alia by the Austrian Ministry of Social Affairs, most recently with projects to strengthen social security in the Republic of Moldova.

But one thing is clear, these initiatives can only be successful if Moldovan trade unions are fully involved. Their involvement is not an option, it is a necessity. What we are currently observing, however, is a matter of great concern to us. The CNSM has repeatedly pointed to anti-trade union interference by employers, especially in the public sector.

The response of the authorities to these complaints has been more than insufficient. Convening a working session without concrete decisions or simply asking for clarifications are not effective measures against the repression of trade union rights. On the contrary, they confirm the passive attitude of the competent authorities.

The Republic of Moldova ratified ILO Convention Nos 87 and 98 in 1995, making a clear commitment to freedom of association and collective bargaining. However, national legislation is lagging behind this ambition. While sanctions have been imposed when employees are prevented from joining a trade union, employers who actively intervene or dismantle trade union work remain largely unpunished. This has led to serious incidents such as, as we have heard on a number of occasions now, the National Center for Pre-hospital Emergency Medical Assistance, where an existing trade union with over 3,800 members being dismantled under pressure only to create a new organization led by the employer. This is quite simply a yellow union.

The CNSM’s proposals to introduce dissuasive sanctions against anti-union interference have so far been ignored both by the Government and Parliament. This undermines not only trust in social dialogue but also the implementation of international labour standards.

For these reasons, we expressly urge the Moldovan authorities to take decisive and effective steps to guarantee freedom of association and to consistently sanction anti-union acts. Workers’ rights must not only exist on paper. They must also be defended in reality. The ÖGB stands in solidarity with our colleagues in the Republic of Moldova. For us, it is quite clear: there must be no compromise on the protection of trade union rights, neither in the Republic of Moldova, elsewhere in Europe or anywhere around the world.

Observer, Public Services International (PSI) – We have heard that despite existing legislation that recognizes the right to freedom of association and collective bargaining, the legal protections in place are neither adequate nor effectively enforced.

Sanctions against violations of trade union rights, if and when they exist, are simply symbolic and insufficient to prevent anti-union practices.

I am obliged to repeat something that has been said before, regarding the situation in the National Center for Pre-hospital Emergency Medical Assistance, where the administration interfered directly and aggressively in the functioning of the trade union of health protection workers, SANATATEA, a legitimate trade union affiliated with both the CNSM and the PSI.

Under pressure from the hospital administration, over 3,800 workers were required to sign the standardized resignation letters. These are pre-printed forms. Those who resisted this pressure, including union leaders and active members, faced retaliation.

Union president Anatol Fortuna was transferred and reassigned to a different role and others, such as Vitalie Scerbenco and Luminila Malco, were demoted or faced penalties and intimidation for refusing to leave the union. Other employees from the hospital reported salary cuts, threats and harassment.

As mentioned in a previous intervention, this campaign of intimidation culminated in the forced dismantling of SANATATEA and the creation of this new organization under the hospital control, named Ambulanța din Moldova, whose founding members are 16 hospital directors or staff with managerial positions.

It is worth noting that the wage penalties and salary cuts imposed on these trade union leaders and employees are higher than the fines provided for in the law in cases of interference, which says a lot about the core issue being discussed in this case.

We would like to emphasize also that these facts, these acts of the Government, are not isolated and are not addressed effectively by national authorities. I heard the Government representative mention that they have taken steps to address these issues. However, we have information that, despite multiple formal complaints and requests for intervention, the State Labour Inspectorate remained passive, and the Ministry of Health denied any knowledge or responsibility. Such inaction by public authorities, combined with the lack of effective remedies, has increased the climate of impunity in the country with regard to the principles of freedom association and the right to organize.

As was mentioned before, it is worth noting that the supervisory bodies have been requesting amendments of the legislation for a long time (for instance, in Case No. 2317 of 2004 of the Committee on Freedom of Association, and in Committee of Experts’ requests since at least 2008).

In view of these facts, we call on this Committee to urge the Moldovan Government to take immediate action, including the amendment of the law to ensure effective deterrence against anti-union interference, and to take all measures to maintain independence and integrity of the social partners.

Government representative – I would like to express sincere gratitude to all previous speakers for sharing their views and comments on the implementation by the Republic of Moldova of the Convention and on the specific case. We have listened attentively to the interventions of the workers’ representatives, as well as to concerns and suggestions raised by employers and the Government. We recognize the importance of open and constructive dialogue and remain fully committed to addressing all these issues in a transparent and cooperative manner.

The Government reaffirms its dedication to upholding the principles of the Convention and to ensuring that all workers in the Republic of Moldova can freely exercise their rights through collective bargaining. We acknowledge the challenges highlighted today and view them as opportunities to further progress and reform.

Following the positions expressed, I would like to highlight several key messages that have been pointed out with the need for further action.

First, the need for legislative reforms: there is a clear understanding of the Government that legislative amendments are needed to strengthen the framework in which the social partners operate, to provide stronger legal guarantees and address possible violations. The work on the road map, to which I referred, is the right avenue to discuss and address all these issues.

Second, addressing specific allegations: the Government takes seriously the specific case under consideration and is open to continuing discussion with the social partners on a dedicated platform, and I have referred to the open position of the Ministry of Health in this regard.

Third, strengthening the social dialogue in general: we continue to promote social dialogue at all levels. In recent years, we have increased the number of collective agreements – and I refer to the statistics at this stage – and, of course, expanded dialogue platforms, particularly in sectors such as health and education. We are working to improve the collection and reporting of data on collective bargaining coverage, as requested by the Committee.

Fourth, cooperation with the ILO: as previously mentioned, we are giving careful and comprehensive consideration to all observations and recommendations that have been made, and are determined to work closely with the ILO, our national social partners and all stakeholders. Reflecting our firm commitment to achieving tangible progress, we would like to formally request, as I did in my previous statement, the provision of technical assistance from the ILO. We view this assistance as essential for strengthening collective bargaining capacity, increasing awareness of social dialogue in specific sectors, supporting legislative alignment with EU standards. and helping to build a more inclusive and effective system of social dialogue in the Republic of Moldova.

We recognize that achieving full compliance and effective implementation will take time. We are committed to regular dialogue with all stakeholders, including workers’ and employers’ organizations, and to reporting transparently on our progress. We also see this process as an opportunity to deepen our democratic institutional maturity and to advance on our path towards EU integration. Once again, we thank the Committee and all participants for their guidance and engagement, and remain open to concluding a positive outcome following these contributions.

Employer members – The Employer members reiterate that the Convention is a fundamental Convention and strongly condemn non-compliance relating to its application. We are pleased that the Government in its past statements and today reaffirmed its willingness and commitment to further national social dialogue, strengthen fundamental rights and achieve a positive outcome in this case.

Considering today’s discussion, the Employer members would like to recommend to the Government the following: (i) to solve the issue regarding interference in union activities in the health sector with the aim of complying with the obligations of the Convention and to report back on measures implemented; (ii) to provide detailed information on the process to amend the law and the provisions covering the sanctions of acts of anti-union discrimination and interference, and to provide a copy of the adopted Act; and (iii) to engage in meaningful consultation with the most representative employers’ and workers’ organizations on the revision of section 360(1) of the Labour Code and to provide information on any developments in this respect.

To conclude, we count on the constructive collaboration of the Government and ask it to implement these recommendations.

Worker members – I said in my introductory remarks that given the persistence of certain issues we expect more than mere commitments and endless discussion. The Worker members are particularly concerned about the lack of effective measures to combat acts of anti-union discrimination and interference. Among the interference in trade union activities that we discussed, it is particularly worrying to see that the State was the direct author of the violations of the principles contained in the Convention, as in the case of the National Center for Pre-hospital Emergency Medical Assistance.

We also noted the need to assess the dynamics of collective bargaining in the country to ensure the collective bargaining machinery is functioning well. We also expressed our firm belief that regulations relating to compulsory arbitration are not in line with the Convention.

Therefore, we invite the Government in consultation with the most representative social partners to take effective and time-bound measures to address those issues.

When it comes to acts of anti-union discrimination and interference, we call on the Government to amend any relevant regulation in order to clearly criminalize interference in trade union activities, including discriminating acts against them, and to ensure that any sanctions applied in the event of such interference are truly dissuasive, in accordance with the seriousness with which such breaches should be taken. We ask the Government to take proper measures to remedy situations where such interference occurs, particularly in the case of interference in trade union activities by the Administration of the National Center for Pre-hospital Emergency Medical Assistance.

Turning to compulsory arbitration, we expect the Government to amend section 360(1) of the Labour Code to ensure that referral of a collective bargaining dispute to the courts is possible only upon request by both parties to the dispute or in relation to public servants engaged in the administration of the State, that is, essential services in the strict sense of the term, or in acute national crisis.

Finally, we encourage the Government to develop and promote a strong and wellfunctioning collective bargaining machinery, including ensuring that the independence and integrity of the social partners are respected and supported, and to provide all the requested information to the Committee of Experts in this regard.

We see that the Government of the Republic of Moldova, represented by the Minister of Labour and the social partners, partnered last week with the ILO to launch a new Decent Work Country Programme. One of the priorities of this programme is to strengthen social dialogue between the Government and the social partners. The implementation of the recommendations made by the Committee of Experts and by this Committee will certainly contribute to the realization of that priority. We had hoped that the Minister of Labour could have stayed a little longer or returned to participate in the discussion of our Committee, as our colleague on the Worker benches has done, to take note of our recommendations.

We welcome the Government’s suggestion of receiving technical assistance and urge it to swiftly follow this up. However, considering the long-standing and persistent nature of the issues in this case, we also invite the Government to accept an ILO direct contacts mission before the next Conference so as to better implement these recommendations with the urgency they deserve.

Conclusions of the Committee

The Committee took note of the written and oral information provided by the Government and the discussion that followed.

The Committee welcomed the measures taken to resolve interference in union activities in the healthcare sector.

Taking the discussion into account, the Committee recommended that the Government take measures to: initiate a consultation process with the most representative employers’ and workers’ organizations to guarantee the full compliance of the relevant provisions of national law and practice with the Convention, including ensuring that workers’ and employers’ organizations enjoy adequate protection against any acts of interference in their establishment, functioning or administration and to remedy situations where such interference occurs.

Taking into account the Government’s request for technical assistance, the Committee invited the Government to follow up on this request with the Office in order to address these recommendations.

The Committee requested the Government to report any progress to the Committee of Experts on the measures taken to implement the above recommendations by 1 September 2025.

Chairperson – I now invite the Honourable representative of the Government of the Republic of Moldova, Ambassador, Permanent Representative of the Republic of Moldova to the United Nations Office in Geneva, to take the floor.

Government representative – We acknowledge the recommendations just adopted by the Committee. As stated yesterday, these recommendations will be duly taken into account by the Government in developing measures aimed at promoting social dialogue, expanding collective bargaining and strengthening legal frameworks, including in cases of potential violation.

The dialogue with the social partners is ongoing and will be further advanced in the framework of the implementation of the Decent Work Country Programme 2025–27, which we signed last week in Geneva, and the road map aimed at promoting collective bargaining in the Republic of Moldova. The Programme will also serve as the main basis for discussing and receiving ILO technical assistance relevant for the case under examination, and for further improvement of labour standards. We thank the Committee and all parties involved for their constructive engagement.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2025, published 114th ILC session (2026)

The Committee notes the observations of the International Organisation of Employers (IOE) received on 1 September 2025, relating to the discussions held in the Committee on the Application of Standards of the International Labour Conference (the Conference Committee) on the application of the Convention by the Republic of Moldova and the Government’s reply thereto. The Committee also notes the observations of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) and the National Confederation of Trade Unions of Moldova (CNSM), received on 2 and 9 September 2025, respectively, referring to matters examined by the Committee below, as well as the Government’s reply to the ITUC observations.

Follow-up to the conclusions of the Committee on the Application of Standards (International Labour Conference, 113th Session, June 2025)

The Committee notes the discussion that took place in the Conference Committee in June 2025 concerning the application of the Convention by the Republic of Moldova, during which the Conference Committee welcomed the measures taken to resolve interference in union activities in the healthcare sector and, taking into account the discussion, recommended that the Government take measures to initiate a consultation process with the most representative employers’ and workers’ organizations to guarantee the full compliance of the relevant provisions of national law and practice with the Convention, including ensuring that workers’ and employers’ organizations enjoy adequate protection against any acts of interference in their establishment, functioning or administration and to remedy situations where such interference occurs. The Conference Committee invited the Government to follow up on its request for technical assistance of the Office in order to address these recommendations and to report any progress on the measures taken to implement the above recommendations in line with the Convention to this Committee by 1 September 2025.

Articles 1 to 2 of the Convention. Adequate protection against acts of anti-union discrimination and interference. Healthcare sector. The Committee recalls that it previously requested the Government to provide its comments on the 2024 CNSM observations alleging serious acts of interference in trade union activities by the administration of the National Centre for pre-Hospital Emergency Medical Assistance. The Committee notes that these matters were discussed at the Conference Committee in June 2025 and also examined by the Committee on Freedom of Association at its November 2025 meeting (see 412th Report, Case No. 3483, paras 642–644) and observes that the Government provided its detailed reply to the allegations raised on both occasions. The Committee observes that the Conference Committee welcomed the measures taken to resolve interference in union activities in the healthcare sector and the Committee on Freedom of Association expressed its expectation that the initiatives reported by the Government (its readiness to continue to provide a platform for discussion and mediation between the parties and the proposal to create a joint fact-finding mechanism) would enable the Government to shed full light on the reported incidents of anti-union discrimination and interference in trade union affairs and to take the necessary measures to address them. In light of the above, the Committee trusts that the Government will act upon these initiatives and will take the necessary action to ensure the full application of Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention with respect to the alleged acts. The Committee requests the Government to provide information in this regard.

Sufficiently dissuasive sanctions. Contravention Code. The Committee notes the Government’s reiteration that section 61 of the Contravention Code provides penalties for hindering the exercise of the right of employees to establish and join trade unions. It further notes the Government’s indication that a draft law amending the Contravention Code, including section 61 to expressly provide for sanctions against interference in trade union activities, endorsed by the competent authorities, was subject to public consultations and should be submitted to parliament after its investiture following the parliamentary elections at the end of September 2025. The Government adds that, during consultations, trade unions emphasized the need for the adoption of effective sanctions against acts of interference while employers supported legal clarity and stability and welcomed the inclusion of protection against interference in freedom of association of employers’ organizations; both social partners endorsed the initial draft as an essential step towards establishing an effective framework for the protection of trade union freedom. The Committee welcomes the Government’s indication that the draft will also cover interference in freedom of association of employers’ organizations and that it introduces two new categories of contraventions relating to acts of interference in union activities – one concerns violations of trade union legislation or any coercion aimed at hindering trade union members from exercising their trade union rights; the second refers to conditioning, coercion or interference aimed at limiting the exercise of duties by elected union officials. It also notes that the draft increases the level of fines, which will range from 30 to 150 conventional units (this equals to Moldovan leu 1,500 (US$89) to 7,500 (US$443)). The Committee further notes the observations of the CNSM and the ITUC in this regard, expressing concern that despite partial inclusion of unions’ proposal in the draft Contravention Code, the national legal framework still lacks appropriate sanctions and mechanisms to address cases of anti-union interference. The Committee further observes that the Committee on Freedom of Association examined allegations of insufficient protection against acts of anti-union discrimination and interference in Case No. 3483 (see 412th Report, November 2025), expressed its expectation that the Contravention Code would be finalized without delay to ensure that the sanctions for anti-union interference cover a wide range of anti-union acts and are sufficiently dissuasive and referred the legislative aspects of the case to this Committee. In light of the above, the Committee trusts that the amendments to the Contravention Code will be adopted without delay and will strengthen the sanctions regime to cover all acts of interference in the internal affairs of trade unions and employers’ organizations, in line with the Convention. Further observing that despite the proposed notable increase in the amount of fines for acts of interference, these may still not be sufficiently dissuasive (the maximum fine is proposed to be raised from US$125 to US$443), the Committee encourages the Government to pursue a dialogue with the social partners to consider further increasing these sanctions. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any developments in this regard.

Article 4. Compulsory arbitration. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to amend section 360(1) of the Labour Code to ensure that referral of a collective bargaining dispute to the courts is possible only in limited situations that are compatible with the Convention. The Committee also noted that a new draft law, the Mediation Act and the Statute of the Mediator, as well as a mechanism for out-of-court dispute settlement were being developed. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that, at a tripartite meeting in August 2025, the Government sought the opinions of the social partners on the revision of section 360(1) of the Labour Code and that the CNSM considered that such amendments could lead to deadlocks, especially in cases where the employers did not wish to take a dispute to court and therefore did not support such amendments. The Committee further notes the lack of information from the Government on the previously reported draft law on mediation or on initiatives to develop an out-of-court dispute settlement mechanism and observes the views of the ITUC that the social partners wish to be involved in the development of such a mechanism. In light of the above, the Committee encourages the Government to engage in consultations with the social partners with a view to establishing an out-of-court dispute settlement mechanism and requests the Government to provide information on any developments made in this regard. The Committee requests the Government once again to take the necessary measures to amend section 360(1) of the Labour Codeto bring it in line with the Convention to ensure that referral of a collective bargaining dispute to the courts is possible only upon request by both parties to the dispute or in the limited situations compatible with the Convention, that is in essential services in the strict sense of the term; in disputes involving public servants engaged in the administration of the State; in situations when, after protracted and fruitless negotiations, it becomes obvious that the deadlock will not be broken without some initiative by the authorities; or in the event of an acute crisis.

Collective bargaining in practice. The Committee previously requested the Government to continue to provide statistical information on the number of collective agreements concluded and in force in the country, indicating the sectors concerned and the number of workers covered. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that: (i) the total collective bargaining coverage is at about 38.5 per cent, representing 241,094 workers; (ii) the highest collective bargaining coverage is in the cultural sector (99.5 per cent), followed by the education sector (87.35 per cent), the healthcare sector (56.896 per cent), agriculture (47.9 per cent), the transport sector (26.15 per cent) and the construction sector (13.09 per cent); (iii) to increase the overall level of coverage, a National Plan for the Growth of Collective Bargaining for the years 2025-2030 is being developed and will include a revision of the legislation on collective bargaining and the applicability of collective bargaining agreement clauses; (iv) in August 2025, the Government convened a tripartite working meeting to identify existing obstacles and determine necessary measures to ensure that national legislation and practice are fully aligned with the Convention, the outcome of which was agreement to focus on the preparation, consultation and adoption of normative measures to address issues raised above; and (v) at the meeting of the Supervisory Committee of the Decent Work Country Programme 2025–27, the Government highlighted the need for capacity-building and enhanced expertise to effectively implement and monitor labour standards and requested technical assistance from the Office to address these needs, including on the proposed revision of section 61 of the Contravention Code. Welcoming these initiatives, the Committee trusts that, with the technical assistance of the Office, the Government will be able to report progress in this regard and requests the Government to continue to provide statistical information on the number of collective agreements concluded and in force in the country, indicating the sectors concerned and the number of workers covered.

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

The Committee notes that in its observations received on 21 August 2024 with respect to the Convention and the Workers’ Representatives Convention, 1971 (No. 135), the National Trade Union Confederation of Moldova (CNSM) alleges serious acts of interference in union activities by the administration of the National Centre for pre-hospital Emergency Medical Assistance (IMSP CNAMUP). The Committee notes that the CNSM alleges in particular that: (i) workers were threatened with retaliation if they refused to change their affiliation to the union supported by the Government, resulting in the forced resignation of 3,826 employees and the dismantling of the independent union; (ii) a union leader was demoted to induce resignation and (iii) the issue has still not been resolved after the CNSM having informed the relevant authorities in July 2024. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments on the CNSM observation and to take the necessary action to ensure the full application of articles 1 and 2 of the Convention with respect to the alleged acts.

Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention. Adequate protection against acts of anti-union discrimination and interference. In its previous comments, the Committee repeatedly requested the Government to take measures aimed at strengthening the existing sanctions so as to ensure effective protection against acts of anti-union discrimination and interference. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that there is currently a draft law to amend article 61 of the Contravention Code and apply tougher sanctions. The Committee also notes the CNSM’s observations according to which: (i) current national legislation continues to lacks an effective mechanism to protect trade union rights; (ii) the CNSM proposed amendments to article 61 of the Contravention Code to sanction anti-union interference have not been taken into account; and (iii) Act No. 114 of 9 July 2020, which repealed a Labour Code provision protecting union officials from dismissal for two years after their term, replacing it with a requirement for an advisory opinion rather than prior consent from the superior union body further has further weakened the existing legal protection against anti-union discrimination. Taking due note of the Government’s indication that a legal reform is under way, the Committee expects that the Government will be soon in a position to inform about the adoption of provisions that will significantly strengthen the applicable sanctions to acts of anti-union discrimination and interference. The Committee requests the Government to provide a copy thereof.

Article 4. Compulsory arbitration. In its previous comment, the Committee reiterated its previous request to amend section 360(1) of the Labour Code to ensure that referral of a collective bargaining dispute to the courts is possible only upon request by both parties to the dispute, or in relation to public servants engaged in the administration of the State essential services in the strict sense of the term and acute national crisis. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that a new draft law, the Mediation Act and the Statute of the Mediator, is currently at the endorsement stage. The Committee also notes the Government’s indication that the Ministry of Labour and Social Protection, together with the State Labour Inspectorate and the social partners, are working on the establishment of a mechanism for out-of-court dispute settlement, which is expected to be fully developed by the end of 2024. The Committee reiterates its request to the Government to amend, in consultation with the social partners, section 360(1) of the Labour Code and to provide information on any developments in this respect.

Collective bargaining in practice. The Committee takes note of the Government’s indication that: (i) 21 collective agreements have been concluded at the national level; (ii) 18 collective agreements have been concluded at the sectoral level; At the unit level, 1,189 collective agreements have been submitted to the State Labour Inspectorate in 2021, 640 in 2022, 629 in 2023and 212 since the beginning of 2024. While taking due note of this information, the Committee notes the absence of indication regarding the number of workers covered by those agreements. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide statistical information on the number of collective agreements concluded and in force in the country, indicating the sectors concerned and the number of workers covered.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

The Committee notes the observations of the National Trade Union Confederation of Moldova (CNSM) received on 21 December 2017 referring to the issues dealt with by the Committee below.

Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention. Sanctions against acts of anti-union discrimination and interference. For a number of years, the Committee had been requesting the Government to take measures aimed at strengthening the existing sanctions so as to ensure effective protection against acts of anti-union discrimination and interference. In its previous comment, the Committee noted the Government’s indication that the Contravention Code was amended in 2016 so as to increase the value of the conventional unit used to calculate the amount of fines from 20 to 50 Moldovan Leu (MDL) (section 34(1) of the Code). The Committee further noted that: section 54(2) of the Code, dealing with various forms of discrimination in employment and occupation, provides for fines ranging from 60 to 240 conventional units (US$170–685); section 55(1) dealing with violation of labour legislation, provided for fines ranging between 60 and 270 conventional units (up to US$770); and section 61 dealing with obstruction of workers’ right to establish and join trade unions, provided for fines ranging from 24 to 42 conventional units (up to US$120). While welcoming the increase of the value of the conventional unit, the Committee noted that the CNSM considered that the fines provided for obstruction of workers’ right to establish and join trade unions were not sufficiently deterrent. The Committee therefore requested the Government to review the above fines and other types of sanctions in consultation with the social partners, in order to ensure effective protection against acts of anti-union discrimination and interference. Regretting that the Government’s report does not address this issue, the Committee reiterates its previous request and asks the Government to indicate all progress made in this regard.

Article 4. Compulsory arbitration. The Committee had previously requested the Government to take the necessary measures to amend section 360(1) of the Labour Code so as to ensure that referral of a collective bargaining dispute to the courts is possible only upon request by both parties to the dispute, or in relation to public servants engaged in the administration of the State (Article 6 of the Convention), essential services in the strict sense of the term and acute national crisis. The Committee recalls in this respect that it had noted the Government’s indication that a tripartite working group was working on a draft law for amicable settlement of collective labour disputes, which would address this issue. While noting the CNSM indication that the tripartite working group has not yet achieved any results and that the draft has not been finalized, the Committee noted the Government’s indication that the process of adoption of the draft law was stopped altogether with the adoption, in July 2015, of the Law on Mediation. The Committee noted, however, that the Law on Mediation did not deal with the issue at hand. In the absence of any new information, the Committee reiterates its previous request to amend section 360(1) of the Labour Code, in consultation with the social partners, so as to bring it into conformity with the Convention and promote free and voluntary collective bargaining. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the progress made in this regard.

Collective bargaining in practice. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the number of collective agreements signed and in force in the country and to indicate the sectors and levels concerned, as well as the number of workers covered.

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

The Committee notes the observations of the National Trade Union Confederation of Moldova (CNSM) received on 21 August 2017 referring to the issues dealt with by the Committee below. The Committee notes the Government’s reply to the previous observations on the application of the Convention submitted by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC).

Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention. Sanctions against acts of anti-union discrimination and interference. The Committee had previously requested the Government to take measures aimed at strengthening the existing sanctions so as to ensure effective protection against acts of anti-union discrimination and interference. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the Contravention Code was amended in 2016 so as to increase the value of the conventional unit from 20 to 50 Moldovan Leu (MDL) (section 34(1) of the Code). The Committee further notes that: section 54(2) of the Code, dealing with various forms of discrimination in employment and occupation, provides for fines ranging from 60 to 240 conventional units (US$170–685); section 55(1) dealing with violation of labour legislation, provides for fines ranging between 60 and 270 conventional units (up to US$770); and section 61 dealing with obstruction of workers’ right to establish and join trade unions, provides for fines ranging from 24 to 42 conventional units (up to US$120). While welcoming the increase of the value of the conventional unit and observing the CNSM indication that the current minimum wage in the country is, depending on the sector, between MDL1,000 and 2,380 (US$57–135), the Committee notes that the CNSM considers that the fines provided for obstruction of workers’ right to establish and join trade unions are not sufficiently deterrent. The Committee therefore requests the Government, in consultation with the social partners, to review the above fines and other types of sanctions so as to ensure effective protection against acts of anti-union discrimination and interference and to provide information on all progress made in this respect.

Article 4. Compulsory arbitration. The Committee had previously requested the Government to amend section 360(1) of the Labour Code so as to bring it into conformity with the Convention and promote free and voluntary collective bargaining. The Committee recalls in this respect that it had noted the Government’s indication that a tripartite working group was working on a draft law for amicable settlement of collective labour disputes, which would address this issue. While noting the CNSM indication that the tripartite working group has not yet achieved any results and that the draft has not been finalized, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that the process of adoption of the draft law was stopped altogether with the adoption, in July 2015, of the Law on Mediation. The Committee notes, however, that the Law on Mediation does not deal with the issue at hand. The Committee therefore once again requests the Government to take the necessary measures to amend section 360(1) of the Labour Code so as to ensure that referral of a collective bargaining dispute to the courts is possible only upon request by both parties to the dispute, or in relation to public servants engaged in the administration of the State (Article 6 of the Convention), essential services in the strict sense of the term and acute national crises. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the progress made in this regard.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2014, published 104th ILC session (2015)

The Committee notes the 2011 observations on the application of the Convention submitted by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), as well as those received on 1 September 2014. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments thereon.

Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention. Sanctions against acts of anti-union discrimination and interference. The Committee had previously requested the Government to ensure the adequate protection of workers’ and employers’ organizations against acts of anti-union discrimination by providing for sufficiently dissuasive sanctions in the legislative texts. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that, pursuant to Law No. 169 of 11 July 2012 which amended article 55 of the Contravention Code, fines for violations of labour legislation were increased from a maximum of 50 to a maximum of 140 conventional units (US$180) for natural persons, from a maximum of 75 to a maximum of 350 conventional units US$470) for persons with responsible functions and from a maximum of 120 to a maximum of 450 conventional units (US$604) for legal persons. The Committee also notes the Government’s indication that article 61 of the Contravention Code has been amended by Law No. 233 of 1 October 2013 to add sanctions against responsible persons for obstruction of workers’ right to establish and join trade unions (50 to 70 conventional units). The Committee observes that the fines imposed by article 61 of the Contravention Code remain low and as such, may not constitute an effective deterrent. Considering that the fines established by the legislation are not dissuasive, the Committee requests the Government to take measures aimed at strengthening these sanctions so as to ensure effective protection against acts of anti-union discrimination and interference. It requests the Government to provide information on all measures taken in this regard.

Article 4. Compulsory arbitration. The Committee had previously requested the Government to amend section 360(1) of the Labour Code so as to ensure that referral of the dispute to the judicial tribunals is possible only upon request by both parties to the dispute, or for essential services in the strict sense of the term or for public servants exercising authority in the name of the State. The Committee appreciates the Government’s indication that a tripartite working group consisting of representatives of government, trade unions and employers is currently working on a draft law for amiable settlement of collective labour disputes which is expected to establish in detail the procedure for solving collective disputes, including the possibility to appeal to a court of arbitration at the request of all parties. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the progress made in this regard.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2010, published 100th ILC session (2011)

The Committee notes the comments submitted by the Confederation of Trade Unions of the Republic of Moldova (CRSM) in a communication dated 4 September 2009 and the comments submitted by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) in a communication dated 6 September 2010 concerning the issues raised by the Committee below. The Committee also notes the Government’s reply to the 2008 ITUC comments.

Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention. Sanctions against acts of anti-union discrimination and of interference. In its previous observation, the Committee had noted that section 61 of the new Code on Contraventions adopted in 2008 provided for the application of fines in the amount of 40 to 50 conventional units (one unit equals 20 MDL) for the obstruction of the right of workers to establish and join trade unions. The Committee had further noted the Government’s indication that the working group, constituted of representatives of the Ministry of Economy and Trade, the National Confederation of Trade Unions and the Ministry of Justice, examined the possibility of setting administrative sanctions against acts of interference in trade union activities, not covered by section 61. The Committee had requested the Government to provide information on any new developments in this respect and to ensure that these sanctions are applied through effective and expeditious procedures. The Committee notes that the ITUC and CRSM indicate that the scope of section 61 of the Code on Contraventions is very limited since it sanctions solely the obstruction of workers’ right to establish and join trade unions and not all acts of anti-union discrimination and interference as prohibited by section 37(1) of the Law on Trade Unions. The Committee further notes that the Government indicates in its report that the possibility of amendment of section 61 of the Code on Contraventions will be reviewed in the near future. The Committee also notes the Government’s statement in its reply to the 2008 ITUC comments that up until the adoption of the new Code on Contraventions, violations of trade union rights were covered by section 41 of the Code of Administrative Contraventions, which sanctioned violations of labour legislation and provided for the application of fines amounting to up to 250 conventional units. The Committee notes that section 55 of the new Code on Contraventions is a similar provision to section 41 of the repealed Code of Administrative Contraventions, which sanctions violations of labour legislation but provides for the application of lower fines (amounting up to 50 conventional units for individuals, 75 conventional units for responsible persons and up to 120 conventional units for legal entities). It further notes that, according to the ITUC, law enforcement remains weak. The Committee recalls the conclusions and recommendations of the Committee on Freedom of Association in Case No. 2317 where it had requested the Government to actively consider, in full and frank consultations with social partners, legislative provisions expressly sanctioning violations of trade union rights and providing for sufficiently dissuasive sanctions against acts of interference in trade union internal affairs (see 350th Report). The Committee considers that neither section 61, nor section 55 the Code on Contraventions provide for sufficiently dissuasive sanctions against acts of anti-union discrimination and acts of interference. The Committee expresses the firm hope that the necessary legislative amendments ensuring the adequate protection of workers’ and employers’ organizations against acts of anti-union discrimination and interference will soon be adopted. In this respect, the Committee requests the Government to ensure that the legislative texts adopted in the future provide for sufficiently dissuasive sanctions in cases of violation and for effective and expeditious procedures to guarantee their application in practice.

Article 4. Compulsory arbitration. In its previous observations, the Committee had requested the Government to amend section 360(1) of the Labour Code, which allowed the imposition of arbitration by the authorities at the request of one party so as to ensure that recourse to compulsory arbitration is possible only in the context of essential services in the strict sense of the term (i.e. services, the interruption of which would endanger the life, safety or health of the whole or part of the population) or for public servants engaged in the administration of the State. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the question of amendment of section 360(1) of the Labour Code will be examined after discussions with the social partners on the issue concerning determination of minimum services in the case of strike. The Committee also notes the Government’s intention to amend section 359(2) of the Labour Code, pursuant to which in order to settle a collective dispute the parties may, within three calendar days from the beginning of the dispute, establish a conciliation commission formed of an equal number of representatives of the parties to the dispute, so as to repeal the time frame within which a conciliation commission should be established. The Committee expresses the hope that the necessary amendments to section 360(1) of the Labour Code will be adopted in the near future so as to ensure that the referral to compulsory arbitration is possible only upon request by both parties to the dispute, or for essential services in the strict sense of the term or for public servants engaged in the administration of the State. The Committee requests the Government to indicate measures taken or envisaged in this regard.

The Committee reminds the Government that it may avail itself of the technical assistance of the Office if it so wishes.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2008, published 98th ILC session (2009)

Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention. Sanctions against acts of anti-union discrimination and acts of interference. The Committee notes the comments submitted by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) in a communication dated 29 August 2008 alleging insufficient protection against acts of anti-union discrimination and interference in trade union affairs, the issues previously raised by the Committee. It further notes Case No. 2317 pending before the Committee on Freedom of Association, which requested the Government to actively consider, in full and frank consultations with social partners, legislative provisions expressly sanctioning violations of trade union rights and providing for sufficiently dissuasive sanctions against acts of interference in trade union internal affairs (see 350th Report, paragraph 1422(b)).

The Committee recalls in this respect that it had previously noted the Government’s indication that the Parliament was discussing the draft of the new Code on Contraventions which sought the introduction of a fine for obstruction of lawful activities of trade unions and their bodies by high-level civil servants. The Committee notes with interest the Government’s indication that the new Code on Contraventions was adopted on 24 October 2008. Section 61 of the Code provides for the application of fines in the amount of 40 to 50 conventional units (one unit equals 20 MDL) for the obstruction of the workers’ right to establish and join trade unions. It further notes the Government’s indication that a working group, constituted of representatives of the Ministry of Economy and Trade, the National Confederation of Trade Unions and the Ministry of Justice, examined the possibility of setting administrative sanctions against acts of interference in trade union activities, which is currently not provided for in section 61. The Committee requests the Government to indicate any new developments in this respect and to ensure that these sanctions are applied through effective and expeditious procedures. The Committee further requests the Government to provide a copy of the relevant provisions of the Code on Contraventions.

Article 4. Compulsory arbitration. The Committee recalls that it had requested the Government to amend section 360(1) of the Labour Code according to which, if the parties to the collective labour dispute have not reached an agreement or disagree with the decision of the reconciliation commission, either party has the right to submit an application to settle the conflict in the judicial tribunals. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that section 360(1) is not applicable at the stage of elaboration of the initial draft collective agreement, in which case, section 32 applies. According to the latter, if within three months from the beginning of negotiations, consent has not been achieved on some of the agreement’s provisions, the parties are obliged to sign a collective agreement containing the clauses on which agreement has been reached. The disagreements that have not been settled are subject to further collective negotiations or are resolved according to the provisions of the Labour Code. As to the referral of the dispute to the judiciary, the Government indicates that this occurs when a party to the conflict feels that its rights have been violated. The Government also indicates that arbitration is a good solution for the collective conflicts which arise from the arbitrary interests under negotiation. While noting this information, the Committee refers to the clear wording of section 360(1) and once again recalls that arbitration imposed by the authorities at the request of one party is generally contrary to the principle of the voluntary negotiation of collective agreements established in the Convention and thus the autonomy of the bargaining partners. Recourse to compulsory arbitration in cases where the parties do not reach an agreement through collective bargaining should be permissible only in the context of essential services in the strict sense of the term (i.e. services, the interruption of which would endanger the life, safety or health of the whole or part of the population) or for public servants engaged in the administration of the State. The Committee therefore once again requests the Government to take the necessary measures to amend the legislation so as to ensure that referral of the dispute to the judicial tribunals is possible only upon request by both parties to the dispute, or for essential services in the strict sense of the term or for public servants engaged in the administration of the State. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the progress made in this respect.

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

The Committee notes the Government’s report as well as the Government’s reply to the comments made by the Confederation of Trade Unions of the Republic of Moldova (CRSM).

Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention. Sanctions against acts of anti-union discrimination and acts of interference. The Committee notes that the Government points to article 20 of the Constitution and to article 38 of the Law on Trade Unions according to which a trade union organization claiming violations of its legal rights can submit an application to the juridical instance which will express itself on the causes of the dispute by a motivated decision. The violation of trade union rights is sanctioned under article 41 of the Code on Administrative Contraventions (CAC) which provides for application of fines in the amount up to 250 units, which equals 5,000 MDL (section 26 of the CAC).

The Committee notes that the Government refers to the comments of the CRSM according to which section 41 of the CAC does not describe in sufficiently specific terms the illegal actions that constitute obstructions of trade union activities. The Government points out that the Ministry of the Economy and Trade elaborated a draft law which sought the introduction of a new contravention into the CAC providing for the application of a fine in the amount from 75 to 200 conventional units for obstruction of lawful activities of trade unions and their bodies by high-level civil servants. The Government reports that it was, ultimately, decided to stop promoting the draft law in question, and suggested to Parliament to incorporate its content into the draft of the new Code on Contraventions which is currently being discussed in Parliament.

The Committee hopes that specific legislative provisions providing for effective and sufficiently dissuasive sanctions (civil, administrative or penal) in cases of anti-union discrimination and acts of interference will be adopted in the near future and requests the Government to keep it informed of new developments in this respect and to ensure that these sanctions are applied through effective and expeditious procedures.

Article 4. Compulsory arbitration. The Committee recalls that its previous comments concerned section 360(1) of the Labour Code according to which, if the parties to the collective labour dispute have not reached an agreement or disagree with the decision of the reconciliation commission, either party has the right to submit an application to settle the conflict in the judicial tribunals.

The Committee notes that the Government refers to an amendment under consideration which would exclude the obligation to examine collective labour conflicts within the conciliation commission before addressing the judicial instance. The Committee considers, however, that this amendment maintains the possibility of one of the parties submitting the dispute to the judicial instances.

The Committee recalls that arbitration imposed by the authorities at the request of one party is generally contrary to the principle of the voluntary negotiation of collective agreements established in the Convention and thus the autonomy of the bargaining partners. Recourse to compulsory arbitration in cases where the parties do not reach an agreement through collective bargaining should be permissible only in the context of essential services in the strict sense of the term (i.e. services, the interruption of which, would endanger the life, safety or health of the whole or part of the population) or for public servants engaged in the administration of the State. The Committee again requests the Government to take the necessary measures to amend the legislation so as to ensure that referral of the dispute to the judicial tribunals is possible only upon request by both parties to the dispute, in the context of essential services in the strict sense of the term and for public servants engaged in the administration of the State.

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

The Committee notes the Government’s report.

Comments made by the Confederation of Trade Unions of the Republic of Moldova (CSRM) and the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) on the application of the Convention. The Committee notes the comments made by the CSRM and the ICFTU in communications of 2005 and 2006, respectively, concerning the application of the Convention. The observations of both organizations concern legislative issues raised in the previous comments of the Committee, and more particularly to the absence of specific sanctions to be imposed for violation of trade union rights, as well as the violation of trade union rights in practice, as alleged in Case No. 2317 examined by the Committee on Freedom of Association in its 335th Report. According to the allegations, the Government has adopted a new Penal Code but it does not include sanctions regarding violations against trade unions. The allegations also concern acts of interference of the authorities in the organization of trade unions in the health sector, in the culture sector and in the education sector. The Committee regrets that the Government has not replied to these comments and requests the Government to send its reply without delay.

In its previous comments, the Committee had pointed out some discrepancies between the legislation and the Convention. The Committee regrets that the Government has not replied specifically to these comments. It must therefore repeat its previous observations.

Article 1 of the Convention. Protection against acts of anti-union discrimination. The Committee had noted that neither the Labour Code nor the new Penal Code adopted in April 2002, provided for specific sanctions to be imposed on employers found guilty of anti-union discrimination. The Committee had recalled that the effectiveness of legal provisions depends, to a large extent, on the way in which they are applied in practice and on the forms of compensation and sanctions provided. Legal standards are inadequate if they are not coupled with effective and expeditious procedures and with sufficiently dissuasive sanctions to ensure their application (see General Survey on freedom of association and collective bargaining, 1994, paragraph 224). The Committee again requests the Government to adopt specific provisions providing for sanctions to be imposed on employers found guilty of anti-union discrimination.

Article 2. Protection against acts of interference. The Committee had noted that the new Penal Code does not provide for sanctions against acts of interference. The Committee was of the view that legislation should make express provisions for rapid appeal procedures, coupled with effective and dissuasive sanctions against acts of interference in order to ensure the application in practice of Article 2 of the Convention. Moreover, to ensure that these measures receive the necessary publicity and are effective in practice, the relevant legislation should explicitly lay down appeals and sanctions in order to guarantee the application of provisions prohibiting acts of interference (see 1994 General Survey, op. cit., paragraph 232). The Committee again requests the Government to adopt legislative provisions providing for effective and sufficiently dissuasive sanctions (civil administrative or penal) against acts of interference.

Article 4. Compulsory arbitration. The Committee had noted that, pursuant to section 360(1) of the Labour Code, if the parties to the collective labour dispute have not reached an agreement or disagree with the decision of the reconciliation commission, each of the parties to the dispute has the right to submit an application to settle the conflict in the judicial tribunals. As regards arbitration imposed by the authorities at the request of one party, the Committee had considered that it is generally contrary to the principle of the voluntary negotiation of collective agreements established in the Convention and thus the autonomy of the bargaining partners. Recourse to compulsory arbitration in cases where the parties do not reach an agreement through collective bargaining would be permissible only in the context of essential services in the strict sense of the term (i.e. services, the interruption of which, would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population) and for public servants engaged in the administration of the State. The Committee requests again the Government to take measures to amend the legislation so as to ensure that referral of the dispute to the judicial tribunals is possible only upon request by both parties to the dispute.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2005, published 95th ILC session (2006)

The Committee notes the comments made by the Confederation of Trade Unions of the Republic of Moldova (CSRM) and the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) in communications dated 13 January and 31 August 2005, respectively, concerning the application of the Convention. The comments of both unions concern legislative issues raised in the previous direct request of the Committee, and more particularly to the absence of specific sanctions to be imposed for violation of trade union rights, as well as the violation of trade union rights in practice, as alleged in Case No. 2317 examined by the Committee on Freedom of Association in its 335th Report. The Committee requests the Government to provide its observations thereon.

The Committee will examine other matters raised in its previous comments (see 2004 direct request, 75th Session) in respect of the application of the Convention during the regular reporting cycle of 2006.

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

The Committee notes the Government’s report. The Committee notes the adoption of the Labour Code (Law No. 154-XV of 28 March 2003).

Article 1 of the Convention. Protection against acts of anti-union discrimination. The Committee notes that neither the Labour Code nor the new Criminal Code adopted in April 2002, provide for specific sanctions to be imposed on employers found guilty of anti-union discrimination. The Committee recalls that the effectiveness of legal provisions depends to a large extent on the way in which they are applied in practice and on the forms of compensation and sanctions provided. Legal standards are inadequate if they are not coupled with effective and expeditious procedures and with sufficiently dissuasive sanctions to ensure their application (see General Survey on freedom of association and collective bargaining, 1994, paragraph 224). The Committee requests the Government to adopt specific provisions providing for sanctions to be imposed on employers found guilty of anti-union discrimination.

Article 2. Protection against acts of interference. The Committee notes that the new Criminal Code does not provide for sanctions against acts of interference. The Committee is of the view that legislation should make express provisions for rapid appeal procedures, coupled with effective and dissuasive sanctions against acts of interference in order to ensure the application in practice of Article 2 of the Convention. Moreover, to ensure that these measures receive the necessary publicity and are effective in practice, the relevant legislation should explicitly lay down appeals and sanctions in order to guarantee the application of provisions prohibiting acts of interference (see 1994 General Survey, op. cit., paragraph 232). The Committee therefore requests the Government to adopt legislative provisions providing for effective and sufficiently dissuasive sanctions (civil, administrative or penal) against acts of interference.

Article 4. The Committee notes that pursuant to section 360(1), if the parties to the collective labour dispute have not reached an agreement or disagree with the decision of the reconciliatory commission, each of the parties to the dispute has the right to submit an application to settle the conflict in the judicial instances. As regards arbitration imposed by the authorities at the request of one party, the Committee considers that it is generally contrary to the principle of the voluntary negotiation of collective agreements established in the Convention and thus the autonomy of the bargaining partners. Recourse to compulsory arbitration in cases where the parties do not reach an agreement through collective bargaining would be permissible only in the context of essential services in the strict sense of the term (i.e. services the interruption of which would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population) and in the public service. The Committee requests the Government to amend its legislation so as to ensure that referral of the dispute to the judicial instances is possible only upon request by both parties to the dispute.

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

The Committee notes the first report of the Government.

The Committee takes note with satisfaction of the law on trade unions dated 7 July 2000, which complies with the requirements of the Convention.

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

The Committee notes the Government's first report.

The Committee proposes to examine the conformity of the legislation in the Republic of Moldova with the provisions of the Convention as soon as it has at its disposal a translation of the Act respecting the collective labour agreement No. 1303-XII, of 25 February 1993, and of other relevant laws in one of the working languages of the ILO.