Demande directe (CEACR) - adoptée 2011, publiée 101ème session CIT (2012)

Convention (n° 156) sur les travailleurs ayant des responsabilités familiales, 1981 - Pays-Bas (Ratification: 1988)

Article 3 of the Convention. National policy. The Committee recalls the Government’s previous indication that the criteria for the “objective reason exception” in the Equal Treatment (Working Hours) Act of 1996 were formulated strictly in order to ensure that workers with family responsibilities receive adequate protection against discrimination. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the Equal Treatment Commission (ETC) conducted the second evaluation of the Equal Treatment (Working Hours) Act for the period from 1 November 2001 to 1 November 2006, and that the ETC concluded that the Act is very workable in practice. The Government also indicates that the application of the Equal Treatment (Working Hours) Act contributes to achieving a more flexible working-hour pattern and enhancing the possibilities of combining work and care. The Committee asks the Government to continue to provide information on the practical application and enforcement of the Equal Treatment (Working Hours) Act, including any judicial and administrative decisions concerning cases where family responsibilities have been considered an objective reason to discriminate against employees on the basis of their working hours.

Article 4. Working-time arrangements. The Committee recalls the Working Hours (Adjustment) Act of 2000, giving the right to employees and civil servants to increase or reduce their working hours. It notes the Government’s indication that it has no statistical information on the number of employees requesting reduced working hours in order to better combine work with family responsibilities; an evaluation carried out in 2008 shows that over the previous two years, nine out of ten employers received such requests, and in the majority of cases, agreement was reached between employers and employees; however, the evaluation gives no indication that employees in small or medium-sized businesses face special difficulties in realizing their preferred working time. It also notes the Government’s indication that, instead of promoting parental leave, the Government is developing a programme “Modern Employership” to encourage employers to offer their employees a broad range of human resource management instruments for combining work and family life, including flexible working-time arrangements. The Committee asks the Government to provide information on the flexible working-time arrangements, including statistical information disaggregated by sex, on the number of beneficiaries of such arrangements. It also asks the Government to provide information on any research or studies specifically examining enterprises with fewer than ten employees, on their own arrangements regarding the adjustment of the hours of work, as well as any measures taken, together with the social partners, to encourage these enterprises to allow flexible working-time arrangements for workers with family responsibilities.

Article 8. Protection against dismissal on the grounds of family responsibilities. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that, according to section 670(7) of the Civil Code, the employer cannot terminate the labour contract on the ground that the employee has exercised his or her right to leave entitlements (leave in case of adoption or leave for inclusion of a foster child, short-term or long-term care leave or parental leave, as provided for in the Work and Care Act). The Committee asks the Government to provide information on the practical application of section 670(7) of the Civil Code, including any judicial or administrative decisions.