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

Employment Promotion and Protection against Unemployment Convention, 1988 (No. 168) - Finland (Ratification: 1990)

With reference to its previous comments, the Committee took note of the information provided by the Government in its report and, in particular, that concerning the application of Articles 24 and 27, paragraph 1, of the Convention. It has also noted the comments, included in the report, made by the Confederation of Finnish Industry and Employers (TT), the Employers' Confederation of Service Industries (LTK), the Central Organization of Finnish Trade Unions (SAK) and the Confederation of Unions for Academic Professionals in Finland (AKAVA).

Article 3 of the Convention. In its comments the SAK draws attention to the inadequacies in tripartite collaboration. According to this organization, such inadequacies result from the fact that the legislation has been amended with undue haste and that the Government has continued to present draft legislation to curb spending, holding discussions with organizations only after the matter has already been decided. The SAK considers that such behaviour, which has twice brought the country almost to a general strike in defence of unemployment security, contravenes Article 3 of the Convention. The Committee recalls that the SAK's previous comments supplied by the Government with its report of 1992, already referred to the difficulties encountered in the application of Article 3 of the Convention, pointing out, in particular, that, while negotiations have been held and decisions have been taken jointly in matters concerning unemployment security, the procedure applied in the preparation of the new employment security legislation has not observed the modes normally used in applying the tripartite principle. At the same time the Local Authority Employers' Commission (KT) also complained at the fact that, while local authority employers were financing unemployment security, the KT was not represented in the tripartite unemployment bodies and had not been consulted in any policy decisions.

The Committee notes, with respect to all of the above comments, that the Government's report does not contain any reply to the criticisms expressed. In this situation, the Committee is bound to recall that Article 3 requires the Government to implement the provisions of the Convention in consultation and cooperation with the organizations of employers and workers. It therefore hopes that, in its next report, the Government will not fail to explain in the light of the comments made by the above-mentioned organizations, how such consultation and cooperation take place in practice, in particular with respect to the elaboration of draft legislation pertaining to the application of the Convention. The Committee also draws the Government's attention to its latest comments made under Article 3 of the Employment Policy Convention, 1964 (No. 122).

Articles 7, 8 and 9 (Promotion of employment). The Government's reports on Conventions Nos. 168 and 122 contain additional comments made by the SAK and AKAVA. The SAK indicates in particular that, although finding a solution to the poor employment situation would require active labour market measures, the deletion from the Employment Act of the obligation to create work for the long-term unemployed as well as young persons has contributed to an increase in the number of long-term unemployed, with more and more people thus having to resort to welfare maintenance.

The Government confirms, in its reply, that the obligation established under the Employment Act of 1987, requiring the State and the municipalities to provide work for the long-term unemployed and for young persons under the age of 20, in case it is not possible to find them jobs through manpower services, has been abolished on the grounds that the cost of this work-creation requirement was found to be excessive. However, under the new Employment Services Act No. 1005/93, manpower services must activate labour policy and improve the functioning of the labour market with special emphasis on long-term and youth unemployment. In the meantime, the Ministry of Labour is using wage-related appropriations for employing the long-term and young unemployed with the aid of wage support in the event jobs have not been found through manpower services. Also, a special training and employment programme "An alternative to unemployment" has been drawn up for 1994-96 to alleviate unemployment among young people. Finally, the Act on labour market subsidies No. 1542/93 which came into force at the beginning of 1994, aims at providing the labour market subsidies to two special groups: those entering the job market for the first time and unemployed people who have exceeded the maximum period entitling them to the earnings-related unemployment allowance.

The Committee notes the comments made by the SAK and AKAVA as well as the Government's reply. In view of the fact that Finland has ratified Convention No. 122 (Employment Policy, 1964) and Convention No. 142 (Human Resources Development, 1975), the Committee hopes that the Government will continue to supply information in its reports on the application of these instruments. It also draws the Government's attention to its comments of 1995 (February-March session) and 1996 under Convention No. 122.

Article 10, paragraph 1. The Committee notes that the Government's report does not reply to its previous comments under this provision of the Convention. It notes, however, that, according to the observation made by the AKAVA, unemployment allowance paid during training to maintain professional skills depends on whether the training is regarded as labour market training, with the result that people's own active efforts to study at an educational institution bring payment of this allowance to an end. The Committee would therefore once again ask the Government to indicate whether the training provided under the Act on labour market training, No. 763 of 1990, corresponds in all cases to the one referred to in sections 4 and 9 of the Act respecting the protection of the livelihood of unemployed persons, No. 602 of 1984, and, if not, what other provisions of the legislation regulate such training and ensure in particular that persons referred for training receive allowances, of which the conditions and the amount correspond to the unemployment benefit under Act No. 602.

Article 11, paragraphs 1 and 2. With reference to its previous comments, the Committee notes from the Government's report that about 1,800,000 wage- earners, or 80 per cent of the total number of wage-earners in the country, are insured under earnings-related schemes. It recalls in this respect that, according to paragraph 1 of this Article of the Convention, the persons protected shall comprise not less than 85 per cent of all employees, including public employees and apprentices; the Government may, however, under paragraph 2 of this provision, exclude from protection public employees whose employment up to the normal retiring age is guaranteed by national laws and regulations. In order to be able to appraise whether the coverage under the earnings-related scheme attains the level prescribed by the Convention, the Committee would once again ask the Government to provide in its next report detailed statistical information, as required in the report form on the Convention adopted by the Governing Body, indicating in particular for the same time-period the number of employees protected under the earnings-related scheme, the total number of employees in Finland, including apprentices, and the number of public employees in guaranteed employment.

Article 15, paragraph 1(b), and Article 16. According to the report, the full basic daily unemployment allowance currently amounts to FIM116 a day. Please indicate, with reference to the necessary statistical data, whether this amount attains any one of the following reference levels mentioned in the Convention, as appropriate under the national conditions: (1) 50 per cent of the statutory minimum wage; or (2) 50 per cent of the wage of an ordinary labourer; or (3) a level which provides the minimum essential for basic living expenses.

Article 20(b). With reference to its previous comments concerning section 11 of Act No. 602 of 1984, the Committee notes that the amendments mentioned in the Government's report, effective from 1 September 1993, have not met the substance of its comments concerning suspension of the unemployment benefit in cases where the person concerned has himself been the cause of his employment relationship being terminated or has through his own behaviour been the cause of such a contract not being made. The Committee would therefore once again ask the Government to indicate whether in practice the application of this provision is limited, in accordance with the Convention, only to cases where it has been determined by the competent authority that the person concerned had deliberately contributed to his or her own dismissal, and to provide examples of the relevant judicial or administrative decisions.

Article 25. The Committee notes from the Government's reply that there are no statistics on the number of part-time workers who, by working less than 18 hours per week, are excluded from the entitlement to the earnings-related unemployment benefit. It recalls that this provision of the Convention calls for the adjustment of the statutory social security schemes, including unemployment security, to the occupational circumstances of part-time workers, unless their hours of work or earnings can be considered, under prescribed conditions, as negligible. The Committee therefore would be glad if the Government would explain in its next report the criteria used in setting the said 18 hours/week threshold, below which the work done by part-time workers is apparently considered as negligible.