Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2018, published 108th ILC session (2019)

Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98) - Russian Federation (Ratification: 1956)

The Committee notes the Government’s reply to the previous observations of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) and the Confederation of Labour of the Russian Federation (KTR) on the application of the Convention. It welcomes the Government’s indication that these observations will be further examined together with the social partners in the framework of activities aimed at giving effect to the Convention. Noting the Government’s undertaking to report on the progress made in its next report, the Committee trusts that the Committee’s comments below will be given effect, in consultation with the social partners.

Articles 1, 2 and 3 of the Convention. Adequate protection against acts of anti-union discrimination and interference. In its previous comments the Committee had deeply regretted the lack of progress in the implementation of a proposal prepared by the KTR and the Federation of Independent Trade Unions of Russia (FNPR), following an ILO technical mission in the framework of the Committee on Freedom of Association (CFA) Case No. 2758 in 2011, which the Government and employers’ representatives had agreed to examine in the framework of the Russian Tripartite Commission for the Regulation of Social and Labour Relations (RTK). The Committee recalls that this proposal refers to the need to draft specific legislative provisions with a view to make protection against violations of trade union rights, in general, and anti-union discrimination, in particular, more effective, and suggests to create a body with a specific mandate to examine cases of violations of trade union rights, including anti-union discrimination (such a mandate can also be undertaken by an existing body). The proposal also calls for training of relevant bodies and courts on freedom of association.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication that a tripartite working group of the RTK met in August 2018 and will continue to meet on a regular basis to discuss the issue of protection against acts of anti-union discrimination. At the same time, the Government points out that the Ministry of Labour had examined, on several occasions, the proposals for legislative amendments aimed at bringing the national legislation into conformity with the international labour standards submitted by the KTR. The Ministry pointed out to the KTR that the majority of its proposals for amendment had previously formed part of two legislative drafts to amend the Labour Code, which were subsequently not supported by the Government and were dismissed by the Duma; therefore, it could not support the resubmission of the same proposals. The Government further indicates that the existing levels of protection of trade union rights and its members is sufficient and once again refers in this respect to the legislative provisions of the Law on Trade Unions, Code of Administrative Offenses and the Criminal Code. While the statistical data on criminal and civil cases related to anti-union discrimination is not collected by the courts, according to the Government, this does not mean that such cases are not being considered. The Government indicates that as from 1 January 2019, the Federal Service for Labour and Employment (Rostrud) will begin collecting the relevant statistics for submission, on a semi-annual basis, to the Ministry of Labour. The latter indicates its readiness to work together with the KTR to identify and analyse cases of anti-union discrimination, including in the framework of the RTK, as well as with the ILO with a view to possible development of new instruments in the field of protection against trade union discrimination. The Committee notes the Government’s request for technical assistance in this regard. In addition, the Government informs that the issue of protection of trade union rights is part of the regular training for labour inspectors and that it intends to hold a seminar on the relevant standards for the judiciary in the last quarter of 2018.

The Committee notes the observations of the KTR and the FNPR submitted with the Government report. The FNPR considers that the level of protection of trade unions and their members is not sufficient and is thus not in full conformity with the Convention and refers to several examples of anti-union discrimination affecting its members. It further points out that the Rostrud (labour inspection) does not deal with the issue of anti-union discrimination and that rather, this was under the competence of the prosecutors and courts. The FNPR considers that the collection of statistics in relation to the alleged cases of anti-union discrimination can be further discussed with the relevant authorities (Rostrud, Office of the Prosecutor and the judicial department of the Supreme Court). Furthermore, and with reference to the 2011 agreement, should it be decided that the RTK is to deal with the alleged cases of anti-union discrimination the necessary regulatory measures should be taken to that effect. The observations of the KTR are to the same effect.

Noting with interest the Government’s stated intention to address, including with the technical assistance of the Office, the issues it has been raising for a number of years, the Committee expects that consultations with the social partners towards the implementation of proposals to which it had previously agreed will continue and would lead to giving full effect to the Convention. It requests the Government to provide information on the developments in this regard.

Article 4. Parties to collective bargaining. In its previous comments, the Committee had noted that, pursuant to section 31 of the Labour Code, when an enterprise trade union represents less than half of the workers in that enterprise, other non-unionized representatives could represent workers’ interests. Considering that, in these circumstances, direct negotiation between the undertaking and its employees, bypassing sufficiently representative organizations where these existed, might be detrimental to the principle that negotiation between employers and organizations of workers should be encouraged and promoted, the Committee expected the Government to take immediate and decisive action to amend section 31 of the Labour Code. The Committee notes that the Government reiterates its previous explanation that the election of a representative body other than the primary trade union is an extreme measure and occurs only when there is no full representation (more than 50 per cent) of workers’ interests by a trade union organization. The Government thus considers that this standard allows for the most optimal representation of the interest of workers within an organization or undertaking. However, it is ready to use all available opportunities to improve social dialogue using the best international practices and in this respect, would appreciate receiving technical assistance of the Office. The Committee notes that the FNPR is also of the view that this provision needs to be amended so as to ensure that other representatives can be elected only in the absence of another trade union. The Committee welcomes the Government’s request for the technical assistance of the Office and trusts that this assistance will be provided in the near future with a view to ensuring that the national legislation is amended so as to give full effect to the Convention. It requests the Government to inform it of the progress made in this regard.