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

Unemployment Provision Convention, 1934 (No. 44) - Bulgaria (Ratification: 1949)

The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government in reply to its previous comments and, in particular, the adoption in 2001 of the Act on employment promotion, repealing the Act of 1999 on protection against unemployment.

The Committee also notes with interest the recent ratification by Bulgaria of the Social Security (Minimum Standards) Convention, 1952 (No. 102), and the acceptance of the parts relating to medical care, sickness benefit, old-age benefit, employment injury benefit, family benefit, maternity benefit and survivors’ benefit, namely seven out of the nine branches established by the Convention. This ratification has particular importance in that it enables integrated management and rationalization of all the legal obligations arising from the international social security Conventions ratified by Bulgaria, thereby contributing to lasting economic and social development through the reinforcement of the social security system. In this regard, the Committee also observes that the branch relating to unemployment benefit is not one of those which have been accepted under Convention No. 102 and invites the Government to report on any difficulties encountered in the acceptance of this branch. The Committee will therefore continue to examine issues relating to unemployment insurance in the context of the present Convention, particularly with regard to the following points.

Article 10, paragraph 1, of the Convention. Concept of suitable employment. The Committee notes that suitable employment is defined by the national legislation as employment corresponding to the training, qualifications and state of health of the insured person, and situated in the same locality or up to 30 kilometres from the insured person’s place of residence, on condition that there are adequate public transport facilities. In view of the fact that the Convention defines suitable employment essentially by reference to rates of pay (previous wages or typical wages for the occupation), the Committee requests the Government to explain the reasons for the absence of a criterion taking into account rates of pay in the definition of suitable employment.

Loss of unemployment benefit if an offer of suitable employment is refused. The Committee notes that, under section 20(4)(4) and (5) of the Act on employment promotion, an insured person who refuses an offer of suitable employment shall lose his right to unemployment benefit and shall only qualify again for unemployment benefit after a period of 12 months from the date on which he or she was disqualified. It also notes that the minimum period for the payment of unemployment benefit is four months for any person who has completed three years of service and the maximum period is 12 months for a person who has been insured for more than 25 years. The Committee draws the Government’s attention to the fact that the 12-month disqualification period appears disproportionate to the minimum period of unemployment benefit payments and may cause hardship for the persons concerned.