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

Invalidity, Old-Age and Survivors' Benefits Convention, 1967 (No. 128) - Netherlands (Ratification: 1969)

The Committee notes the communication dated 25 August 2003 from the Netherlands’ Trade Union Confederation (FNV), which contains extensive comments on the application by the Netherlands of the various provisions of the Convention. This communication, which was transmitted to the Government by the Office on 29 September 2003, contains a copy of the letter addressed by the FNV to the Dutch Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment concerning the Government’s report on the Convention for the period from 1 June 2001 to 1 June 2003. In a letter dated 28 August 2003, the Government informed the Office that it has received FNV’s comments on this report and needs some time to look into the question and to adjust the corresponding parts of its report. The said report was received in the ILO on 20 October 2003. The report however contained no reference whatsoever to the FNV’s comments and up till now no reply to these comments has been received from the Government.

The FNV’s comments concern the application in law and practice of Parts III (Old-Age benefit) and IV (Survivors’ benefit) of the Convention. As far as the General Old-Age Pensions Act (AOW) is concerned, the FNV refers in particular to the advisory opinion solicited by the Parliament from the Dutch Social and Economic Council (SER), which suggested reconsidering the qualifying period for the full AOW benefit (50 years of residence) in view of the international commitments of the Netherlands. The Trade Union Confederation alleges also that some provisions of the General Survivors’ Benefit Act (ANW) do not comply with the requirements of the Convention and that this fact was long brought to evidence by several legal experts, as well as in several important court rulings regarding the ANW, which directly invoked Conventions Nos. 121 and 128, including the decision of the Central Court of Appeal (CRvB) of 4 April 2003. The FNV indicates that after this court’s decision it wrote to members of Parliament and to the Government with an urgent appeal to change the legislation in order to comply with Convention No. 128. As none of these developments has been reflected in the Government’s report, the FNV considers that it is now time for the supervisory bodies of the ILO to express their views.

Taking into account the extensive and complex nature of the problems raised by the FNV, the Committee trusts that the Government will not fail to respond to the allegations made and will provide detailed information on all the points raised, including the text of the relevant documents and court rulings, to enable the Committee to assess the situation at its next session in 2005. The Committee also welcomes the willingness of the FNV to supply additional information on the problems raised. The Committee also refers to the questions raised in its previous direct request, which it will consider together with the future report of the Government.

[The Government is asked to reply in detail to the present comments in 2005.]