Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98) - Latvia (Ratification: 1992)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

The Committee notes with satisfaction the amendments made to the Labour Code in 2017, 2018 and 2019, which aim, inter alia, to promote collective bargaining at the sectoral and territorial levels and to strengthen the role of collective agreements. The Committee also notes with interest the national collective agreements concluded or renewed in various sectors since 2019 (health and care, railway, construction, glass fibre industry, hospitality and catering). The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the number of collective agreements concluded and in force in the country, the sectors concerned and the number of workers covered by these agreements.

Replies received to the issues raised in a direct request which do not give rise to further comments (CEACR) - adopted 2017, published 107th ILC session (2018)

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government, which answers the points raised in its previous direct request, and has no further matters to raise in this regard.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2014, published 104th ILC session (2015)

The Committee notes the 2011 observations on the application of the Convention submitted by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC). It further notes the observations submitted by the ITUC and received on 1 September 2014 and those of Education International (EI) and the Latvian Education and Science Employees’ Trade Union (LIZDA) received on 17 September 2014, and the Government’s reply thereon. The Committee notes, in particular, the allegations of acts of anti-union discrimination and reluctance of multinational companies to sign collective agreements as well as cases of local governments still refusing to conclude collective agreements with trade unions. It further notes the allegation that a draft law on State Civil Service would have the effect of reducing the protection of the rights of employees in case of dismissal. The Committee requests the Government to provide detailed comments thereon.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2010, published 100th ILC session (2011)

The Committee notes the comments made by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) in a communication dated 24 August 2010, which primarily concern the matters already raised by the Committee and also refer to the reluctance of multinational companies to conclude collective agreements in their subsidiaries, as well as to the misuse of the Law on Remuneration of Officials and Employees of State and Local Government Authorities by undertakings to avoid the implementation of collective agreements. The Committee requests the Government to provide its observations thereon.

Articles 4 and 6 of the Convention. Right of public servants not engaged in the administration of the State to bargain collectively. The Committee takes due note of the information provided by the Government on a number of legislative changes and other measures aimed at promoting collective bargaining. The Committee notes that the Law of 1 December 2009 on Amendments of Labour Law provides that the Labour Law is not applicable to those employees of State and government institutions, for which remuneration and the other issues related thereto, are regulated by the Law on Remuneration of Officials and Employees of State and Local Government Authorities.

The Committee notes that, according to the ITUC, the Latvian Free Trade Union Federation (LBAS) and the Employers’ Confederation (ECL), the Law on Remuneration of Officials and Employees of State and Local Government Authorities imposes excessive restrictions on the right to collective bargaining. The Committee also notes that the Government’s indication that, pursuant to the social partners’ request to expand the scope of collective bargaining, the Government is currently working, in cooperation with the social partners, on the proposals to amend the Law.

The Committee recalls that while Article 6 of the Convention allows public servants engaged in the administration of the State to be excluded from its scope, other categories should enjoy the guarantees of the Convention and therefore be able to negotiate collectively their conditions of employment, including wages. The Committee also recalls that a distinction should be drawn between, on the one hand, public servants who by their functions are directly engaged in the administration of the State (for example, civil servants employed in government ministries and other comparable bodies, as well as ancillary staff), who may be excluded from the scope of the Convention and, on the other, all other persons employed by the Government, by public enterprises or by autonomous public institutions, who should benefit from the guarantees provided for in the Convention (see General Survey of 1994 on freedom of association and collective bargaining, paragraphs 200 and 262). The Committee recalls in this connection that the only exceptions that may be allowed to the guarantees laid down in the Convention concern the armed forces, the police and public servants engaged in the administration of the State (Articles 5 and 6). The Committee requests the Government to provide information in its next report on the results of negotiation with the social partners mentioned above, in particular as regards the introduction of legislative measures to ensure better application of the right to collective bargaining of the public servants not engaged in the administration of the State. The Committee hopes that the ongoing tripartite work will serve to find solutions in full conformity with Article 6 of the Convention.

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

The Committee notes the Government’s report. It further notes the comments submitted by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) in a communication dated 29 August 2008, referring to the issues concerning employers’ interference in the internal trade union affairs and anti-union discrimination and the Government’s reply thereon. The Committee requests the Government to send its comments in reply to these observations.

The Committee recalls that its previous comments concerned the right to collective bargaining of prison service workers. In particular, the Committee requested the Government to provide a copy of the Prisons Administration Law and to describe the dispute settlement mechanism prison service workers could avail themselves of and to introduce in the legislation clear provisions granting them the right to collective bargaining. The Committee notes that the Constitution provides for the right of workers to conclude collective agreements. The Committee also notes the Prisons Administration Law and the Government’s explanation to the effect that the rights and interests linked to or arising from collective labour agreements are settled by the conciliation commission, pursuant to section 25(1) of the Labour Code. If the conciliation commission does not reach an agreement in the legal dispute, the dispute may be settled by the court or arbitration, pursuant to the procedure provided for by the Law on Civil Proceedings or, in the case of arbitration, pursuant to the regulation concerning the court of arbitration. In cases of collective disputes of interest, it is also possible to settle the dispute through mediation.

In its previous observation, the Committee noted the Government’s intention to update some regulatory acts concerning certain public institutions with regard to the issues relating to collective bargaining and requested the Government to provide information on developments in this regard. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that no new regulations have been adopted. The Committee requests the Government to indicate any new legislation affecting collective bargaining rights.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2006, published 96th ILC session (2007)

The Committee notes the comments of the Free Trade Union Confederation of Latvia (LBAS) on the problems faced in the collective bargaining process when the parties do not reach agreement, as well as the Government’s observation thereon. Noting that the LBAS comments are too general, the Committee will not pursue their examination unless new concrete evidence is submitted.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2006, published 96th ILC session (2007)

The Committee notes the Government’s report.

1. Article 4 of the Convention. Right to collective bargaining of prison service workers. The Committee notes that, according to the Government, in compliance with section 4 of the Prisons Administration Law, the prison administration staff shall be comprised of: (1) the specialized state civil service servants (individuals with the appropriate vocational education, qualifications, rank and who have taken the oath of a civil servant and serve in the prison administration) whose legal status, rights, duties and social guarantees are determined by the Prison Administration Law; (2) civil servants in general (regulated by the State Civil Service Law); and (3) employees who work on the basis of a contract of employment (regulated by the Labour Law). According to the Government, the Prison Administration Law does not prohibit servants to organize but prohibits them to take part in a strike. The Committee recalls that, in accordance with the Convention, workers of the prison services should enjoy full collective bargaining rights. The Committee requests the Government to describe the dispute settlement mechanism this category of workers can use in a case of a dispute and to introduce in the legislation clear provisions granting them the right to collective bargaining.

2. State police, state border guard, state fire and rescue service. The Committee notes the Government’s statement that, on 15 June 2006, the Law on the service of officials with special service ranks of the institutions of the system of the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Prison Administration was adopted. The Government adds that the institutions subordinated to the Ministry of Internal Affairs are included in the system of the Ministry of Internal Affairs – state police, state border guard, state fire and rescue service. The Government states that, in the nearest future, it is planned to adopt corresponding updates of the other regulatory acts, including issues relating to negotiating. The Committee requests the Government to send a copy of the recently adopted Law. The Committee welcomes the future updates concerning collective bargaining of the regulatory acts regarding state police, state border guard, state fire and rescue service and asks to be kept informed of the developments.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2005, published 95th ILC session (2006)

The Committee notes the comments made by the Free Trade Union Confederation of Latvia (LBAS) on the application of the Convention in its communication of 30 September 2004. The Committee notes that the LBAS expressed its concern over the ineffectiveness of mediation procedures instituted by the national legislation. In this respect, the Committee takes note of the Government’s statement that the mediation procedure is provided for in the Labour Disputes Law of 26 September 2002 and that it is up to the social partners to make use of the mediation procedure in resolving collective labour disputes. The Government points out that the mediation is not obligatory and could be used at the free will of the parties involved in the dispute.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2005, published 95th ILC session (2006)

In its previous observation, the Committee had requested that the Government indicate whether the prison wardens and employees of the Fire-fighting Department, Lifesaving Service and Penitentiary Department had the right to bargain collectively and have access to the dispute settlement mechanisms covered by sections 15-17 of the Collective Labour Agreement Act, sections 7-13 of the Strike Act and section 19 of the Trade Union Act, or to other independent and impartial procedures, in case of disagreement on work conditions.

The Committee notes that according to the information provided by the Government, by virtue of the Fire Safety and Fire-fighting Law of 24 October 2002, employees of the state fire-fighting and rescue services can form and join trade unions. Trade unions of firemen have a right to submit to the Cabinet of Ministers their proposals of amendments of the legislation. As concerns the dispute settlement, the Government indicates that this depends on the status of firemen: firemen who are civil servants do not have a right to use the settlement procedure provided for in the Labour Disputes Law, as section 35(5) of the Fire Safety and Fire-fighting Law states that, rules regulating employment relations shall not apply to civil servants; however, firemen employed as employees have a right to settle disputes according to the Labour Disputes Law. With regard to the firemen employed as civil servants, the Government indicates that in case of violation of their rights or illegal or unjust attitude from a supervisor, the civil servant has a right to submit a complaint; the civil servant has a further right to appeal against the decree of his retirement by submitting a complaint to the supervisor or court.

The Committee recalls that: (1) only public employees engaged in the administration of the State can be excluded from the scope of application of the Convention; (2) other categories of employees, such as lifesaving service employees and fire-fighting employees, considered by the national legislation to be civil servants, should enjoy the guarantees of the Convention and should be able to negotiate collectively their conditions of employment; (3) the authorities may of course establish a special mechanism for collective disputes for these categories of employees. The Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures in order to ensure the application of this principle in the legislation.

As concerns the prison service, the Committee reiterates its previous request and asks the Government to indicate whether prison service workers enjoy the right to collective bargaining and to describe the dispute settlement mechanism this category of workers can use in a case of a dispute, which relates to the conclusion of a collective labour agreement.

The Committee is also addressing a request on another point directly to the Government.

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

The Committee takes note of the Government’s report.

1. Article 5 of the Convention. In its previous comments concerning Article 5 of the Convention, the Committee had requested that the Government indicate in its next report whether the prison wardens and employees of the Fire-Fighting Department, Lifesaving Service and Penitentiary Department have the right to bargain collectively and have access to the dispute settlement mechanisms covered by sections 15-17 of the Collective Labour Agreement Act, sections 7-13 of the Strike Act and section 19 of the Trade Union Act, or to other independent and impartial procedures, in case of disagreement on work conditions.

The Committee notes that neither information nor precision has been provided in the Government’s report. Therefore, the Committee repeats the request made in its last comment, and asks the Government to clarify this situation in its next report.

2. Article 5. Concerning representatives authorized for collective bargaining purposes, the Committee refers to its direct request under Convention No. 135.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2001, published 90th ILC session (2002)

The Committee takes note of the Government’s report.

1. In its previous comments concerning Article 4 of the Convention, the Committee requested the Government to provide information on the nature of the arbitration process under section 16 of the Collective Labour Agreement Act and to indicate how that process could be initiated. The Committee also requested information on the types of disputes covered by the procedures set out in sections 15 to 17 of the Collective Labour Agreement Act, sections 7 to 13 of the Strike Act and section 19 of the Trade Union Act.

The Government indicates that the disputes covered by sections 15 to 17 of the Collective Labour Agreement Act and sections 7 to 13 of the Strike Act are "collective labour disputes", which include disputes concerning the conclusion, amendment or implementation of collective labour agreements, as well as disagreements between trade unions and employers. Section 19 of the Trade Union Act applies to disagreements over the determination or modification of work conditions. Under section 15 of the Act, labour disputes are settled by a conciliation commission, composed of representatives of the parties. Under section 16 of the Act, if the conciliation commission is unable to settle a dispute, the parties may submit it to the court, or to an arbitration board by written agreement, which makes the final decision. The Committee takes note of this information.

2. As regards Article 5 of the Convention, the Committee had emphasized that the staff of the Fire-Fighting Department, Lifesaving Service and Penitentiary Department should enjoy the right of collective bargaining and requested the Government to indicate to what extent the guarantees provided in the Convention apply to these employees.

The Government indicates that prison wardens and employees of the Fire-Fighting Department and Lifesaving Service are not included in the ranks of the armed forces or police, and therefore not prohibited from organizing or joining trade unions.

The Committee notes this information and requests the Government to indicate in its next report whether these employees have the right to bargain collectively and have access to the dispute settlement mechanisms described above, or to other independent and impartial procedures, in case of disagreement on work conditions.

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

The Committee takes note of the Government's report.

Article 4 of the Convention. The Committee notes that the Government's report does not provide any information on the nature of the arbitration process provided in section 16 of the Collective Labour Agreement Act or the manner in which it can be invoked, either at the request of one or of both parties or of the authorities. The Committee therefore requests the Government once again to specify how the arbitration process provided in section 16 of the Collective Labour Agreement Act can be initiated.

The Committee also wishes to receive information on the respective areas of application of the procedures for settling disputes set out in sections 15 to 17 of the Collective Labour Agreement Act, sections 7 to 13 of the Strike Act and section 19 of the Trade Union Act. In particular it wishes to know what type of dispute is covered by each of these procedures for settling disputes.

Article 5. The Committee notes that the Government's report gives no details on the comments made by the Federation of Free Trade Unions of Latvia (LBAS). In this communication, the LBAS noted that employees of the Fire-Fighting Department and Lifesaving Service, which have never been State Defence Forces, are excluded from the right of association and of collective bargaining. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would indicate to what extent the guarantees provided in the Convention apply to employees of the Fire-Fighting Department and Lifesaving Service, indicating whether these employees are considered to be included in the ranks of the armed forces or the police, and attaching the relevant legislative provisions. The Committee emphasizes that, otherwise, these categories of public servant should be able to enjoy the right to collective bargaining. The same considerations apply to employees of the Penitentiary Department.

The Committee requests the Government to inform it on these matters in its next report.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1998, published 87th ILC session (1999)

The Committee takes note of the information provided by the Government in its report.

Article 1 of the Convention. Recalling that its previous comments addressed the necessity to provide adequate protection against acts of anti-union discrimination at the time of recruitment, the Committee notes the Government's statement that the protection against acts of anti-union discrimination at the time of recruitment is provided by the provisions of the Constitution (articles 30-31), the Labour Code (sections 1 and 15) and by those of the Law on Trade Unions of the Republic of Latvia, which prohibit discrimination upon recruitment on grounds of trade union membership; moreover, an employer, when recruiting a new employee, has no right to ask whether the latter is a member of a given trade union and the employee is entitled not to disclose his/her trade union membership. These various acts of discrimination entitle the member of a trade union to file the case before a court.

Article 4. The Committee notes that the Government's report does not provide any information on the nature of the arbitration process provided in section 16 of the Collective Labour Agreement Act and the manner according to which it could be initiated. In this regard, the Committee wishes to recall that it usually considers arbitration imposed by the authorities at the request of one party to be contrary to the principle of the voluntary negotiation of collective agreements established in the Convention and thus the autonomy of a bargaining partner. An exception might however be made in the case of the conclusion of a first collective agreement or when it is obvious, after protracted and fruitless negotiations, that the deadlock in bargaining will not be broken without direct initiative on the part of the authorities (see 1994 General Survey on Freedom of association and collective bargaining, paragraphs 257-258). The Committee therefore requests once again the Government to specify how the arbitration process provided in section 16 of the Collective Labour Agreement Act can be initiated and whether such arbitration requires, for instance, the consent of both parties.

Article 6. Finally, concerning the comments made by the Federation of Free Trade Unions of Latvia (LBAS) in its communication of 31 August 1995, the Committee requests the Government to specify the extent to which the guarantees provided for in the Convention apply to the employees of the Department of Fire and Rescue Service, and whether they are considered as being part of the armed forces.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1997, published 86th ILC session (1998)

The Committee notes that the Government's report has not been received. It hopes that a report will be supplied for examination by the Committee at its next session and that it will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous direct request, which read as follows:

The Committee notes that section 15 of the Trade Unions Law of 13 December 1990 grants protection to workers in general against acts of anti-union discrimination by not permitting the termination of a trade union member's employment contract on the initiative of the employer and without prior consent of the trade union except when labour discipline or conditions of the contract have been infringed. The Committee also observes that section 16 of the same legislation is aimed at protecting workers representatives. The Committee wishes to recall the importance it attaches to the necessity to provide adequate protection against acts of anti-union discrimination at the time of recruitment as well as in the course of employment to all workers. Such protection should cover all measures of anti-union discrimination and should be coupled with effective and expeditious procedures and with sufficiently dissuasive sanctions to ensure their application. The Committee therefore requests the Government to amend its legislation in order to put it more in line with the provisions of the Convention.

The Committee requests the Government to provide it with its comments with regard to the communication of the LBAS of 31 August 1995.

In addition, the Committee requests the Government to specify whether one party can initiate the recourse to arbitration provided for in section 16 of the Collective Labour Agreement Act or whether both parties need to apply jointly.

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

The Committee notes that the Government's report has not been received. It hopes that a report will be supplied for examination by the Committee at its next session and that it will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous direct request, which read as follows:

The Committee notes that section 15 of the Trade Unions Law of 13 December 1990 grants protection to workers in general against acts of anti-union discrimination by not permitting the termination of a trade union member's employment contract on the initiative of the employer and without prior consent of the trade union except when labour discipline or conditions of the contract have been infringed. The Committee also observes that section 16 of the same legislation is aimed at protecting workers' representatives. The Committee wishes to recall the importance it attaches to the necessity to provide adequate protection against acts of anti-union discrimination at the time of recruitment as well as in the course of employment to all workers. Such protection should cover all measures of anti-union discrimination and should be coupled with effective and expeditious procedures and with sufficiently dissuasive sanctions to ensure their application. The Committee therefore requests the Government to amend its legislation in order to put it more in line with the provisions of the Convention.

The Committee requests the Government to provide it with its comments with regard to the communication of the LBAS of 31 August 1995.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1995, published 83rd ILC session (1996)

The Committee takes note of the first report of the Government and of the communication of the Free Trade Union Federation of Latvia (LBAS) dated 31 August 1995.

The Committee notes that section 15 of the Trade Unions Law of 13 December 1990 grants protection to workers in general against acts of anti-union discrimination by not permitting the termination of a trade union member's employment contract on the initiative of the employer and without prior consent of the trade union except when labour discipline or conditions of the contract have been infringed. The Committee also observes that section 16 of the same legislation is aimed at protecting workers' representatives. The Committee wishes to recall the importance it attaches to the necessity to provide adequate protection against acts of anti-union discrimination at the time of recruitment as well as in the course of employment to all workers. Such protection should cover all measures of anti-union discrimination and should be coupled with effective and expeditious procedures and with sufficiently dissuasive sanctions to ensure their application. The Committee therefore requests the Government to amend its legislation in order to put it more in line with the provisions of the Convention.

Finally, the Committee requests the Government to provide it with its comments with regard to the communication of the LBAS of 31 August 1995.

[The Government is asked to report in detail in 1996.]