Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2012, published 102nd ILC session (2013)

Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98) - Hungary (Ratification: 1957)

The Committee notes the Government’s report, including the information provided concerning Act No. LXXIII of 2009 on the National Council for the Reconciliation of Interests and Act No. LXXIV of 2009 on the Sectoral Dialogue Committees and certain issues of medium-level social dialogue, as well as the statistical data concerning the number and coverage of recently concluded collective agreements. It also notes the Government’s observations on the comments of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) dated 4 August 2011.

The Committee notes the comments of the ITUC dated 31 July 2012 on the application of the Convention. It requests the Government to provide its observations thereon.

The Committee also notes the adoption on 13 December 2011 of Act I of 2012 enacting the Labour Code.

Article 1 of the Convention. Anti-union discrimination. The Committee previously noted the Office’s comments on the draft labour law, in particular on the need to provide for rapid appeal procedures and dissuasive sanctions in case of acts of anti-union discrimination. With respect to trade union officials, the Committee notes that: (i) section 273 of the new Labour Code provides for the protection of a limited number of union officials against acts of anti-union discrimination in the form of termination or transfer by requiring the prior consent of the higher trade union body; (ii) section 83 grants reinstatement in case of dismissals violating the requirement for prior consent of the union’s higher body before terminating a trade union official; (iii) section 82 provides compensation not exceeding the worker’s 12-month absence pay in case of unlawful dismissals of trade union officials; (iv) it is unclear whether the new Labour Code stipulates penalties for acts of anti-union discrimination against trade union officials; and (v) the 1996 Labour Inspection Act was amended to cover compliance with rules related to employment protection of employees in an elected trade union position, and levying a fine is mandatory if an employer has failed to grant the protection envisaged in the Labour Code to such employees. As regards trade union affiliates, the Committee notes that: (i) section 271 of the new Labour Code generally prohibits termination or discrimination of employees on the grounds of their trade union affiliation or activity, both at the time of taking up employment and in the course of employment; (ii) in case of unlawful dismissals of trade union members, section 82 provides compensation not exceeding the worker’s 12-month absence pay; (iii) it is unclear whether the new Labour Code stipulates sanctions for acts of anti-union discrimination against trade union affiliates; and (iv) the Labour Inspection Act establishes particularly severe sanctions for repeated offences violating the rights of several employees. The Committee requests the Government to provide information concerning the amount of fines and information or other penalties that can be imposed by labour inspection in cases of acts of anti-union discrimination against trade union officials or trade union affiliates.

Moreover, concerning the effective protection in practice against anti-union dismissals and other acts of anti-union discrimination, the Committee notes that: (i) the Government provides information concerning the proceedings instituted by the Equal Treatment Authority; (ii) the ITUC referred in 2011 to a number of alleged specific acts of anti-union discrimination; and (iii) in the framework of Case No. 2775, the Committee on Freedom of Association has examined numerous allegations of this nature as well as alleged delays in the related proceedings. The Committee invites the Government to initiate a forum of dialogue with the most representative workers’ and employers’ organizations with regard to the functioning and length of the existing proceedings related to anti-union discrimination.

Article 2. Acts of interference. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to indicate the measures taken or contemplated so as to adopt specific legislative provisions prohibiting acts of anti-union interference. The Committee notes that the Government once again indicates in its report that it considers that the Constitution, the Labour Code, the Act on the Right to Association along with section 15 of the Public Finance Act and the severe sanctions envisaged in the Labour Inspection Act for repeated offences violating the rights of several employees are sufficient to prevent acts of interference. The Committee also notes that, according to section 271(4) of the new Labour Code, any entitlement or benefit may not be rendered contingent upon affiliation or lack of affiliation to a trade union. In this respect, the Committee recalls that the specific forms of acts of interference likely to impair the guarantees established by the Convention are very varied in nature. The Committee observes that the provisions in force do not seem to cover all forms of anti-union interference. It highlights the necessity to adopt protective provisions against all acts of interference, in particular those designed to promote the establishment of workers’ organizations under the domination of employers or employers’ organizations, or to place workers’ organizations under the control of employers or employers’ organizations through financial or other means. The Committee is also of the view that legislation should make express provision for rapid appeal procedures, coupled with effective and sufficiently dissuasive sanctions against acts of interference in order to guarantee the application in practice of Article 2 of the Convention (see 1994 General Survey on freedom of association and collective bargaining, paragraphs 231–232). The Committee requests the Government to adopt specific legislative provisions prohibiting all acts of anti-union interference on the part of the employer. It further requests the Government to provide information on the sanctions imposed in law and in practice in case of acts of anti-union interference.

Article 4. Representativeness for the conclusion of collective agreements. The Committee previously requested the Government to indicate in its next report any measures taken or contemplated so as to lower the 65 per cent requirement set out in the Labour Code, as well as to ensure that, where no union represents 65 per cent of the employees in a bargaining unit, collective bargaining rights are granted to all unions in the unit, at least on behalf of their own members. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that trade unions will no longer need to represent 65 per cent of the workforce in order to be able to engage in collective bargaining. The Committee notes with satisfaction that, according to section 276(2) of the newly adopted Labour Code, trade unions shall be entitled to conclude collective agreements if the number of their members reaches 10 per cent: (i) of all workers employed by the employers; or (ii) of the number of workers covered by the collective agreement concluded by the employers’ interest group; and that two or more trade unions may join to reach the required percentage. Noting also the statistical data provided by the Government regarding collective bargaining, the Committee invites the Government to provide further details with respect to the sectors and the total number of workers covered by collective agreements.