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

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2022, published 111st ILC session (2023)

In order to provide a comprehensive view of the issues relating to the application of ratified Conventions on social security, the Committee considers it appropriate to examine Conventions Nos 121 (employment injury benefits), 128 (invalidity, old-age, and survivors’ benefits), 130 (medical care and sickness benefits), and 168 (employment promotion and protection against unemployment) together.

The Committee notes the observations of the Central Organization of Finnish Trade Unions (SAK), the Finnish Confederation of Professionals (STTK), and the Confederation of Unions for Professional and Managerial Staff in Finland (AKAVA), communicated with the Government’s reports on the above-mentioned Conventions.

Article 7(1) of Convention No. 121. Definition of industrial accident. The Committee takes note of the Government’s indication that the Occupational Accidents, Injuries and Diseases Act adopted in 2015 (Act No. 459/2015) has not changed the principle of causality between a disease and a work-related injury necessary for entitlement to employment injury benefits. The Government further indicates that the compensation praxis in cases of employment injuries has been unified to avoid any inconsistency in the application of the national legislation that existed before the adoption of Act No. 459/2015.

Article 8of Convention No. 121. Occupational diseases. (i)Procedure for the recognition of the occupational origin of diseases. The Committee takes note of the Government’s indication that the recognition of the occupational origin of diseases which are not on the national list of occupational diseases may require an additional examination by the Finnish Institute of Occupational Health. The Government further indicates that insurance companies bear all necessary medical expenses in this respect. The average duration of an additional examination is about 6-8 months. According to the statistical data for 2020, the occupational origin of diseases was recognized in 934 out of 2520 cases. The Committee takes due note of this information.

(ii) Diseases caused by occupational exposure to moisture and asbestos. The Committee notes the observations of the SAK, the AKAVA and the STTK pointing out the lack of income protection for workers suffering from symptoms caused by moisture damage in the workplace since many of these workers fail to qualify for social security benefits. The SAK, the AKAVA and the STTK indicate in this respect that the national legislation should be more precise regarding the obligations of insurance companies to provide compensation due to diseases caused by moisture damage. The SAK, the AKAVA and the STTK also indicate that insufficient measures have been taken to ensure screening, monitoring and appropriate treatment of workers exposed to asbestos at the workplace. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the measures taken to ensure the provision of employment injury benefits due to diseases caused by occupational exposure to moisture damage. With respect to the measures to be taken for the prevention and protection of workers against health hazards due to occupational exposure to asbestos, the Committee refers to its detailed comments under the Asbestos Convention, 1986 (No. 162).

Article 15(3) of Convention No. 128, in conjunction with Articles 17 and 18.Early retirement for workers in arduous and unhealthy occupations. The Committee notes that according to section 11 of the Employees Pensions Act (Act No. 395/2006), the retirement age for persons born between 1962 and 1964 has increased to 65 years old. The retirement age for persons born in 1965 and thereafter will be linked to life expectancy. The Committee further notes that according to sections 15 and 16 of Act No. 395/2006, a partial early retirement pension can be provided to persons born in 1964 at the age of 62 and to persons born in 1965 and thereafter at the age adjusted to life expectancy. In addition, as per section 53a of Act No. 395/2006, persons are entitled to a career pension at the age of 63 if they have been in hazardous work for at least 38 years and if their working capacity has been impaired because of an illness or disability.

The Committee recalls that according to Article 15(3) of the Convention, if the pensionable age is 65 years or higher, the age shall be lowered, under prescribed conditions, in respect of persons who have been engaged in occupations that are deemed by national legislation, for the purpose of old-age benefit, to be arduous or unhealthy. The Committee further recalls that the purpose of this provision is intended to ensure additional protection, through a more favourable system, to persons employed on arduous or unhealthy work, by allowing them to draw an anticipated old-age pension, of which the rate and qualifying period must conform to Articles 17 (old-age pension’s rate) and 18 (minimum qualifying period) of the Convention. In this respect, the Committee observes that the qualifying period of 38 years for the entitlement to the career pension under section 53a of Act No. 395/2006 exceeds a 30-year period of contributions or employment, which is the standard qualifying period for the entitlement to an old-age pension at the minimum level required by the Convention (Article 18). The Committee further observes that a partial early retirement pension is subject to a certain reduction which may result in the amount lower than old-age pension’s rate of 45 per cent of the reference wage required, according to Articles 17 and 26 of the Convention. The Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate other possibilities for workers in arduous and unhealthy occupations to draw a pension which meets the requirements of Articles 17 and 18 of the Convention at an age lower than 65.

Article 35(1) of Convention No. 128. General responsibility of a State for the due provision of invalidity, old-age, and survivors’ benefits. The Committee notes the observations of the SAK, the AKAVA and the STTK raising concerns about the sustainability of the pension system financed through employers’ and employees’ contributions. In particular, the SAK, the AKAVA and the STTK indicate the increased use of various contractual arrangements instead of labour contracts while the individuals concerned may be de facto in subordinate and dependent relationships with their employers. The SAK, the AKAVA and the STTK further point out that employers do not have to pay social security contributions for persons not employed under labour contracts which may affect not only the financial sustainability of the pension system but also result in lower pension levels.

In this respect, the Committee notes the Government’s indication regarding the proposal of a working group of the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health to amend the Self-Employed Persons’ Pensions Act with a view to improve pension security of the self-employed. The Committee welcomes this development and requests the Government to keep it informed on the outcome of this process.The Committee also requests the Government to continue to provide information on the measures taken or envisaged to ensure the sustainability of the pension system, in application of Article 35(1) of the Convention,

Article 13(c) of Convention No. 130, in conjunction with Article 17. Cost-sharing for pharmaceutical supplies. Further to its previous request on the reimbursement of costs for pharmaceutical supplies, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that the changes in the reimbursement rules made in 2016 aimed to ensure access to pharmaceuticals for persons who heavily depend on them and persons with low income. In this respect, for example, the basic reimbursement of costs for pharmaceuticals increased from 35 to 40 per cent. In addition, there was a decrease in the annual ceiling and only after reaching this ceiling of €579.7 is a fixed co-payment of £2.5 per each medicine required. The Committee also notes the Government’s indication that the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health has launched a comprehensive reform of pharmacotherapy, which will also involve reviewing the medicine reimbursement rules.

The Committee notes from the 2021 publication of the World Health Organization “Can people afford to pay for health care? New evidence on financial protection in Finland” that medicines account for the largest share of “catastrophic spending”, particularly in the poorer quintiles, and that people with chronic conditions are more sensitive to co-payments. Furthermore, not all people in vulnerable situations have effective access in practice to social assistance benefits provided to cover out-of-pocket payments for outpatient prescribed medicines. The Committee recalls that according to Article 17 of the Convention, cost-sharing for medical care benefits, including the necessary pharmaceutical supplies, shall be so designed as to avoid hardship and not to prejudice the effectiveness of medical and social protection. The Committee therefore requests the Government to provide information on the measures taken or envisaged to ensure effective access topharmaceutical supplies for persons protected, particularly those with low income and those who suffer from diseases recognized as entailing prolonged care, without financial hardship. In this respect, the Committee encourages the Government to take advantage of the pharmacotherapy reform to ensure that the medicine reimbursement rules are so designed as to avoid hardship and not to prejudice the effectiveness of medical and social protection, in line with Article 17 of the Convention.

Article 30(1)of Convention No. 130. General responsibility of a State for the due provision of medical care benefits. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that according to the Health Care Act, medical treatment in non-urgent cases shall be provided within a reasonable time not exceeding three months for primary medical care and six months for specialized medical care, including oral health care, since the assessment of patients’ needs. The Government further indicates that in 2021, there were no cases in which waiting times went beyond a maximum of three months and approximately 60 per cent of patients received primary medical care within one week since the assessment of patients’ needs. Only 6.8 per cent of patients were waiting for treatment longer than the statutory six-month maximum period for specialized medical care at the end of December 2021.

Furthermore, the Committee notes with interest that the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health submitted a draft law amending the Health Care Act to the Parliament on 12 May 2022 which ensures the provision of medical care within seven days from the assessment of patients’ needs for outpatient medical care and within three months for oral health care. The Government also indicates the allocation of more than €200 million to regional development projects seeking to improve access to medical care. The Committee requests the Government to continue providing information on the measures taken to ensure the due provision of medical care benefits to persons protected, in line with Article 30(1) of the Convention.

Articles 7 and 8 of Convention No. 168. Promotion of productive employment. With respect to the measures taken or envisaged topromote full, productive and freely chosen employment, including among disadvantaged persons, the Committee refers to its detailed comments under the Employment Policy Convention, 1964 (No. 122).

Article 21of Convention No. 168. Suitable employment. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that a jobseeker’s employment plan is elaborated after a jobseeker’s initial interview with the Employment and Economic Development Office (TE office). The jobseeker’s employment plan takes into account the jobseeker’s competence and professional skills, work ability, duration of unemployment as well as labour market situation. The Government also indicates that a jobseeker shall usually apply for four jobs each month in line with his/her employment plan to continue receiving unemployment benefits. The Committee also takes note of the Government’s indication that a jobseeker is bound to accept a job offer if the job search has lasted for more than six months since the initial interview.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2019, published 109th ILC session (2021)

In order to provide a comprehensive view of the issues relating to the application of ratified Conventions on social security, the Committee considers it appropriate to examine Conventions Nos 121 (employment injury benefits), 130 (medical care and sickness benefits), and 168 (employment promotion and protection against unemployment) together.

The Committee notes the observations of the Central Organisation of Finnish Trade Unions (SAK), the Finnish Confederation of Professionals (STTK), and the Confederation of Unions for Professional and Managerial Staff in Finland (AKAVA), communicated with the Government’s reports on the above-mentioned Conventions.

Article 7(1) of Convention No. 121. Definition of industrial accident. Reform of national legislation on employment injuries. Referring to its previous comments on the reform of accident insurance and occupational diseases, the Committee takes note of the Occupational Accidents, Injuries and Diseases Act (459/2015), which entered into force on 1 January 2016. The Committee notes the indications provided by the Government in its report that the new Act does not significantly change the content of the system of employment injury insurance, nor the types and amounts of benefits. The Committee also notes the observations of the SAK, STTK and AKAVA that insurance companies no longer pay compensation in respect of incapacity for work due to complications arising from the medical treatment of an employment injury due to the new interpretation of the principle of causality which is being applied to such cases. The Committee requests the Government to provide information in this respect.

Article 8. Occupational diseases. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in reply to its previous request to provide information regarding the new list of occupational diseases and, notably, the adoption of the Occupational Accidents, Injuries and Diseases Act (459/2015) and the Occupational Diseases Decree (769/2015). The Committee also notes the Government’s explanations that, in accordance with Article 8(c) of the Convention, Finland follows a mixed approach for the identification and definition of occupational diseases, which includes both a list of occupational diseases and a general definition of occupational disease set out in the legislation. With respect to the procedure for the recognition of the occupational origin of diseases that are not included in the list, the Government indicates that such a procedure requires “a higher level of proof in individual cases of the causal link between exposure and illness, because the illness is not generally recognised as being a typical occupational disease”. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the average duration of such a procedure, the allocation of the burden of proof, the number of requests submitted and the number of cases of occupational diseases recognized under this mechanism, particularly with regard to the substances covered by Article 8 and Schedule I of Convention No. 121.

Article 13(c) of Convention No. 130, in conjunction with Article 17. Cost-sharing – pharmaceutical supplies. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the expenditure allocated to the reimbursement of insured persons for the costs of pharmaceutical supplies has grown in recent years, and that means for curbing this growth had to be sought. In this regard, the Committee notes the Government’s indication of the introduction in 2016 of an initial co-payment of €50 per calendar year for pharmaceutical reimbursements for all persons aged 18 or over and an increase of the co-payment for each reimbursed pharmaceutical from €1.50 to €4.50. The Committee also notes that the maximum total co-payment per year for reimbursed pharmaceuticals (annual cap) decreased from €700.92 to €610.37. The Committee further notes that, according to SAK, STTK and AKAVA, the increase in co-payments for medicines forces many low-income persons to “compromise on the purchase of medicines and abandon treatment because they are not able to afford it”. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures taken to ensure that the participation of protected persons in the costs of pharmaceutical supplies does not entail financial hardship nor prejudice the effectiveness of medical and social protection.

Article 30(1). General responsibility of a Member for the due provision of the benefits. The Committee notes the indication provided by the SAK, STTK and AKAVA on the introduction of a National Health Care Guarantee which includes the establishment of a maximum time limit for the provision of medical treatment, within the framework of the Act on Specialized Health Care of 2005. The Committee also notes the indication of SAK, STTK and AKAVA that, although the introduction of the National Health Care Guarantee has reduced the period before persons in need of healthcare receive treatment, there are still cases in which the prescribed deadlines are not met. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on progress made in the implementation of the National Health Care Guarantee with a view to ensuring the due provision of medical care benefits to protected persons, in line with Article 30(1) of the Convention.

Articles 7 and 8 of Convention No. 168. Promotion of productive employment. The Committee takes due note of the information provided by the Government on Finland’s employment policy, in reply to its previous comments. The Committee also notes the indications provided by SAK, STTK and AKAVA that measures to promote employment, particularly with respect to providing employment opportunities and vocational education and training programmes, are still needed. In this regard, the Committee refers to its detailed comments under the Employment Policy Convention, 1964 (No. 122).

Article 21. Suitable employment. The Committee notes the Government’s indications that the active labour market policies in place in Finland put an increased emphasis on the responsibility of unemployed persons to seek work actively and to accept jobs offers, as a prerequisite for receiving unemployment benefits. The Government indicates more specifically that jobseekers are obliged to accept employment from outside their travel-to-work area if the daily commute by public transport, car or bicycle does not exceed an average of three hours. The Government further indicates that jobseekers no longer have a valid reason for refusing to accept a full-time job where the total wages together with any adjusted unemployment benefit, with deductions of commuting costs and other costs incurred through accepting the job, are less than the unemployment benefit that they would be entitled to otherwise. In this regard, SAK, STTK and AKAVA point out that the tightening of the eligibility requirements for entitlement to unemployment benefits, the extension of the sanction system and the obligation for unemployed persons to participate in all services offered to them, even if such services were not agreed upon in the employment plan, raise issues of compatibility with the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to explain how the criteria specified in Article 21(2) of the Convention, namely the age of unemployed persons, their length of service in their former occupation, their acquired experience, the length of their period of unemployment, the labour market situation, and their personal and family situation, are taken into account by the administrative authorities in assessing the suitability of the employment or service offered.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1999, published 88th ILC session (2000)

The Committee takes note of the information provided by the Government in its report and, in particular, that concerning the application of Articles 3, 10, paragraph 1, and 11, paragraphs 1 and 2, of the Convention, which were the subject of its previous comments. It also notes the comments, included in the report, made by the Central Organization of Finnish Trade Unions (SAK) and the Finnish Confederation of Salaried Employees (STTK).

Articles 7, 8 and 9 of the Convention (Promotion of employment). In its comments the SAK indicates that unemployment security has been reformed at the beginning of 1997, with a number of qualifying conditions for receiving unemployment benefit being tightened. As a result, the relative number of unemployed persons outside the actual unemployment security system has been on the rise and about half of all unemployed are already on labour market support. The impact of the reform should therefore be closely monitored so that it does not cause exclusion in any group. In this respect the SAK welcomes the fact that measures of assistance to long-term unemployed people on labour market support (for example, guidance into unpaid trainee work and employment using combination subsidy) have begun to be differentiated from the measures offered to other unemployed. However, it considers that particular attention should be paid to the situation of ageing long-term unemployed, who find it difficult to get work despite the increase in employment due to favourable economic trends.

The STTK concentrates its comments on the public labour market policy reform which took effect at the beginning of 1998, drawing attention to the fact that new employment opportunities should not be created at the expense of reducing expenditure on and the level of unemployment security. Undermining the livelihood of unemployed people has not been shown to create new jobs or to noticeably reduce the need for public income transfers. The STTK stresses that unemployed people who are in fact no longer available to the labour market should be provided with additional arrangements to meet their needs and emphasizes in this respect the importance of strengthening cooperation between the labour administration, the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health, local social services and health care services, and pension authorities.

The Government indicates in its report that the labour market policy reform of 1998 contains effective measures designed for people who have been unemployed for a particularly long time and have received their unemployment benefit for 500 days, and cites, in particular, the provision of "combination subsidy". Employment appropriations also focus on young people under 25 who are registered with an employment office, and the long-term unemployed who have been seeking work for more than 12 months, and cover such measures as subsidized employment, trainee work, adult labour market training, rehabilitation and training. As a new special group, the Government mentions ageing jobseekers whose employment on the open market has been promoted through, for instance, the National Programme on Ageing Workers and the National Workplace Development Programme.

The Committee notes this information as well as the statistics contained in the report on the number of employed, the number of recipients of unemployment benefits and the amount of expenditure on unemployment security for 1994-97. It notes, in particular, that while the number of employed people in all sectors has increased by 116,000, the number of recipients of unemployment benefits for the same period has decreased by 347,803. This substantial decrease has been accompanied by the 27 per cent reduction in expenditure on earnings-related unemployment benefit and by the over five times reduction in expenditure on basic benefit. At the same time the expenditure on labour market support has increased four times, proving that a number of people who had been previously receiving earnings-related or basic unemployment benefits have passed on to labour market support. According to the statistics, the total amount of labour market support in 1997 amounted to over 41 per cent of the combined expenses on earnings-related and basic unemployment benefits, while the SAK considers that about half of all unemployed are already on labour market support, partly because of long-term unemployment and partly because they are unable to fulfil more strict qualifying conditions for receiving the daily unemployment allowance. The Committee would like the Government to provide updated statistics in its next report, indicating in particular the total number of unemployed people receiving labour market support, as well as the number of those who have moved on to labour market support having used the full 500 days' duration of their daily unemployment benefits. It would further like the Government to detail, with appropriate statistics, the measures taken or contemplated with a view to preventing marginalization of unemployed and in favour of long-term and very long-term unemployed, including older jobseekers. In the light of the comments made in this connection by the trade union organizations, the Committee would like to stress that the use of social security, including its financial resources, as a means to promote employment, foreseen in Article 7 of the Convention, should be made in such a manner as to maintain in any circumstances the level of unemployment benefit at least at the minimum level prescribed in Article 15(1) of the Convention. Furthermore, the Committee would be glad if, as suggested by the STTK, the Government would consider in its next report the need to strengthen cooperation in providing additional assistance to the most disadvantaged categories of unemployed persons between the labour administration, the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health, local social services and health care services, and pension authorities. Finally, the Committee draws the Government's attention to its 1998 comments under the Employment Policy Convention, 1964 (No. 122).

Articles 15, paragraph 1(b), and 16. According to STTK, recent reforms have resulted in a situation where the standard of unemployment security, including earnings-related benefits, is already below the general income support for many unemployed people. In this respect, the Government indicates in its report that income support payable under the Act on Income Support No. 1412/97 is part of the social security system and is regarded as a last-resort type of financial support to be used purely to safeguard a person's livelihood in conditions of human dignity. The tax-free full basic amount of income support for a single person constituted FIM2,021 a month in the first category of municipalities and FIM1,934 a month in the second category of municipalities. At the same time, basic daily unemployment allowance amounted to FIM2,129 per month after tax and the minimum wage under the collective agreements currently in force attained FIM3,900-4,000 a month after tax at average rates. According to the Government, basic daily allowance can thus be considered to cover 50 per cent of the standard required under Article 15, paragraph 1(b), of the Convention. As regards the labour market support, its full amount is the same as the basic daily unemployment allowance. It is means-tested for unemployed persons who do not fulfil the previous employment requirement for the daily unemployment allowance, as well as for those who have received labour market support for 180 days after the maximum 500 days' period of receiving the daily allowance. As regards earnings-related daily unemployment allowance, it consists of the basic part equal to the full basic daily allowance plus an earnings-related part constituting 42 per cent of the difference between the daily wage and the basic part. In 1998, earnings-related daily allowance was about 58 per cent of the wage with average income levels.

The Committee notes this information and, in particular, the Government's statement that, in application of Article 15, paragraph 1(b), of the Convention, the level of the basic unemployment benefit covers 50 per cent of the statutory minimum wage. It recalls that this provision of the Convention links calculation of the level of unemployment benefit which is not based on contributions or previous earnings, also to the level attaining 50 per cent of the wage of an ordinary labourer, or to a level which provides the minimum essential for basic living expenses, whichever is the highest. The Committee notes in this respect that, according to the data provided by the Government, the amount of the basic daily unemployment allowance is only slightly higher than the amount of the income support which provides the minimum essential for basic living expenses. In order to be able to monitor the situation, the Committee asks the Government to continue to supply detailed updated statistical information on the amounts of the basic daily unemployment allowance, income support, minimum wage and the wage of an ordinary labourer, before and after tax.

Article 18, paragraph 1. The Government indicates that by virtue of the legislative amendments which came into force at the beginning of 1997, payment of daily unemployment allowance begin when a person has been an unemployed jobseeker registered with an employment office for seven working days during a maximum of eight consecutive weeks. This waiting period is counted once for the maximum payment period of 500 days. It further specifies that, for the purpose of the payment of the daily allowance, each calendar week may not comprise more than five payment days.

The SAK points out in this respect that, since daily unemployment allowance can be paid for a maximum of five days a week, this means that a person who becomes unemployed cannot, because of this waiting period, receive the allowance for the first nine to 11 calendar days he is unemployed. Moreover, the monitoring period during which the waiting days must be accumulated was not extended beyond eight calendar weeks. These changes cause losses, especially for people in part-time employment. However, the holiday remuneration at the end of an employment relationship was made payable in parts over the waiting period for the daily unemployment allowance.

The Committee notes this information. It would like the Government to provide a copy of the legislative amendments in question and to explain, in the light of the above comments made by the SAK, the practical consequences of the introduction of the new waiting period of seven working days for the unemployed, taking into account that, according to Article 18(1) of the Convention, any such period shall not exceed seven days.

Article 20(b). In reply to the Committee's previous comments, the Government indicates that in cases where employment has been refused or terminated without an acceptable reason, the opinion on whether the preconditions for receiving unemployment security are met, is given by a labour commission, which consists of representatives of employers and employees, with a representative of the employment office as chairperson. Each case of refusing or terminating employment is solved individually, in accordance with the principles set down in Act No. 602 of 1984, which respects the protection of the livelihood of unemployed persons. The Government further indicates that, as of the beginning of 1997, the duration of the suspension of the unemployment benefit in case of self-inflicted unemployment has been extended. Thus a person who has resigned from his job without justifiable reason or who has himself caused the employment relationship to terminate is not entitled to daily allowance for three months. If a person has, through his own conduct, caused an employment contract not to be made, he is not entitled to daily allowance for six weeks.

The SAK states that it does not accept the extension of the penalty periods of suspension of benefit, as these periods were already long enough before the extension, and points to many problems involved in fixing these periods in terms of the legal protection of the unemployed. It is very problematic, for instance, to investigate a job interview situation or to prove that an employee's own conduct was reprehensible.

The Committee notes this information, as well as the fact that because of the extension of the duration of the suspension of the unemployment benefit in cases of self-inflicted unemployment, the question of determining the employee's own responsibility has acquired importance. It further notes that, while the decisions in such cases are taken by the tripartite labour commission, this in itself does not exclude difficulties in assessing the degree of an employee's own fault and problems in ensuring his legal protection. The Committee recalls that the guiding principle for such situations established by this provision of the Convention consists in determination by the competent authority that the person concerned had deliberately contributed to his or her own dismissal. It would therefore ask the Government to indicate how this principle is being applied in the decisions of the labour commissions and the appeal bodies, and to provide examples of the relevant administrative or judicial decisions.

Article 25. With reference to its previous comments, the Committee 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. As the legislation in Finland excludes from the entitlement to daily unemployment benefits part-time workers who work less than 18 hours per week, the Committee asked the Government to explain 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.

In reply, the Government indicates that unemployment security is an insurance-type benefit based on a previous employment requirement which calls for the amount of work considered to provide a person with an adequate income, i.e. 18 hours a week. At the beginning of 1997, the previous employment requirement was extended from 26 weeks to 43 weeks during the preceding 24 months in a job where the weekly working time was at least 18 hours. The Government recalls that before 1 January 1994 basic daily allowance was paid to people in need of financial support even if the previous employment requirement was not met. Afterwards, unemployed persons who do not fulfil this requirement can be granted labour market support subject to needs assessment without a set maximum period. The Social Insurance Institution is also in charge of paying labour market support.

In its comments, the SAK considers that the reform of unemployment security undertaken in 1997 has had a number of negative consequences particularly for people in part-time employment. Besides the extension of the previous employment requirement and of the waiting period, it finds that another feature introduced by the reform -- redefinition of the wages used as a basis for daily unemployment allowance after each new period of employment -- has caused problems specifically for people in part-time jobs and resulted in a downward spiral in the income of many of them.

The Committee notes from the Government's reply that the criteria used in setting the 18 hours/week threshold for coverage of part-time workers by unemployment security consisted in covering by social insurance only work which provided a person with an adequate income. It observes that, while in traditional spheres of employment gaining an adequate income would normally require working not less than 18 hours per week, in modern sectors of the economy with a high value-added potential it is now not rare to find part-time employment with less than 18 hours per week which would still permit to obtain an adequate living income. In Finland, however, under the present legislation such part-time employment would appear to be excluded from unemployment security. The Committee considers that the fact that the new forms of part-time employment which ensure an adequate income for work of less than 18 hours per week, do not carry with them the right to unemployment security is not in accordance with the priority objective of employment promotion and using social security as a means for achieving this objective, enunciated in Article 7 of the Convention. Such types of work gain a growing social importance and in no case could be considered as negligible in terms of Article 25(1) of the Convention. The Committee recalls however that, being particularly flexible, this Article permits to take into account for the determination of the non-negligible part-time work not only the hours of work, but also the earnings which are obtained from this work. It also recalls that the previous employment condition, under section 16 of Act No. 602 of 1984, which respects the protection of the livelihood of unemployed persons, also requires having a wage paid in accordance with the collective agreement or at the customary level, and that in branches of employment where the arrangements made for the hours of work depart from the normal, an exception to the requirement relating to the weekly hours of work may be made, subject to such conditions as may be prescribed by ordinance, if the person concerned can be regarded, on the basis of his earned income, as deriving his livelihood from such work. The Committee therefore asks the Government to indicate how these provisions are being applied in practice and whether any minimum amount of earned income from part-time employment has been established for the purpose of coverage by the unemployment security. If not, the Government might wish to consider the possibility of introducing an earnings criteria, on par with the 18 hours/week threshold, as an alternative means of satisfying the previous employment requirement for the entitlement to the daily unemployment benefit.

As to the actual situation of part-time workers, the Committee notes, from the Government's report and the comments made by the SAK, that modifications of unemployment security introduced in the reporting period with respect to the previous employment requirement have resulted in the exclusion of part-time workers working less than 18 hours per week, in addition to the earnings-related allowance, from the basic daily unemployment allowance as well, thus leaving labour market support the only kind of assistance on which they can still count in case of unemployment, subject to needs assessment. As regards the situation of part-time workers who, in principle, work more than 18 hours per week, it further notes that, according to the SAK, the extension of the previous employment requirement for the entitlement to daily unemployment benefit from 26 to 43 weeks has made it more difficult for them to get included in the unemployment security system and, to some extent, to renew their right to unemployment security. In this situation, the Committee asks the Government to provide in its next report detailed information on the conditions attached to granting labour market support in case of part-time workers who are not able to fulfil the previous employment requirement. Finally, taking into account that the application of Article 25 of the Convention requires governments to constantly keep in mind, particularly when reforming their social security schemes, the occupational circumstances of part-time workers, the Committee would like the Government to indicate in its next report the legislative and administrative measures taken or contemplated, including any statistical studies and reviews, to adjust the national unemployment security scheme to the specific needs of growing part-time employment.

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

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.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1994, published 81st ILC session (1994)

1. The Committee has examined the first report of the Government as well as the legislation supplied with it. It would be grateful if the next report would contain additional information on the following points:

Articles 7, 8 and 9 of the Convention (promotion of employment). Since Finland has ratified the Employment Policy Convention, 1964 (No. 122) and the Human Resources Development Convention, 1975 (No. 142), the Committee would draw the attention of the Government to its comments regarding these instruments.

Article 10, paragraph 1. Under section 4 of the Act respecting the protection of the livelihood of unemployed persons No. 602 of 1984, the entitlement to unemployment benefit is conditional, among others, on the fact that the unemployed person has not been able to be referred to training, and the payment of benefit is further subjected, under section 9, to an obligation to take part in training. Please indicate whether the training referred to in the above provisions corresponds in all cases to the one provided under the Act on labour market training No. 763 of 1990 and, if not, what other provisions of the legislation regulate such training and ensure in particular that persons referred to training receive allowances, of which the conditions and the amount correspond to the unemployment benefit under Act No. 602 of 1984.

Article 11, paragraph 1. The Committee would like the Government to supply the statistical information required under this Article in the report form on the Convention adopted by the Governing Body, indicating the number of employees protected by the earnings-related benefit provisions as compared to the total number of employees. In this connection the Committee draws the Government's attention to the possibility of excluding from protection public employees whose employment up to normal retiring age is guaranteed by national laws or regulations, in accordance with paragraph 2 of this Article.

Article 15, paragraph 1(b), and Article 16. Please explain more fully the criteria used in determining the amount of the basic daily unemployment benefit provided under Act No. 602 of 1984, and indicate whether and how it attains the level required by the Convention.

Article 20(b). The Committee notes that under section 11 of the Act No. 602 the entitlement to unemployment benefit is suspended in the case of a person "whose behaviour has been such that a contract of employment is not concluded with him or who has himself been the reason for the termination of his employment relationship" until he has been at work or has been registered as a jobseeker for six weeks. Please 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 provide examples of the relevant judicial or administrative decisions.

Article 24. The Committee notes that, according to the report, receipt of the earnings-related daily unemployment allowance augments the person's pension right and the pension right of his dependants. Please indicate the relevant provisions of the national legislation.

Article 25. (a) The Committee notes, from the Government's report, that if the part-time worker's weekly working hours stand at least at 18, he can join an unemployment fund and become entitled to earnings-related unemployment benefit. It further notes that, under section 16 of Act No. 602 of 1984, his entitlement to earnings-related benefit is subject to the condition of completing a period of employment, that is, he has been engaged for at least 18 hours a week for 26 weeks in the course of the immediately preceding 24 months. The Committee would like the Government to indicate the number of part-time workers who, by working less than 18 hours per week, are thus excluded from the earnings-related benefit provisions, as well as their proportion to the total number of part-time workers.

(b) The Committee would like to point out that the adoption of the adjustment measures contemplated by this Article of the Convention is not restricted solely to the unemployment protection branch, but concerns all branches of statutory social security schemes which are based on occupational activity. It would therefore ask the Government to indicate in its next report how these schemes are adjusted to the occupational circumstances of part-time workers, for example, as is suggested in paragraph 22 of the Employment Promotion and Protection against Unemployment Recommendation, 1988 (No. 176).

Article 27, paragraph 1. Please indicate whether and under what legal provisions the claimant shall be informed in writing of the procedures available for complaint and appeal, as required by this Article of the Convention.

2. Finally, the Committee takes note of the comments on the application of this Convention made by the Central Organization of Finnish Trade Unions (SAK), the Finnish Employers' Confederation (STK), the Employers' Confederation of Service Industries (LTK) and the Local Authority Employers' Commission (KT), which the Government included in its report. The Committee would be grateful if the next report of the Government would contain any observations on the comments in question which it might consider useful.