Demande directe (CEACR) - adoptée 2014, publiée 104ème session CIT (2015)

Convention (n° 98) sur le droit d'organisation et de négociation collective, 1949 - Kazakhstan (Ratification: 2001)

Article 2 of the Convention. Protection against acts of interference. The Committee had previously requested the Government to provide information on the application in practice of sections 150 and 151 of the Criminal Code, providing that cases of interference in the activities of social organizations and interference in the legitimate activities of workers’ representatives are punishable by a penalty equivalent to up to five times the monthly wage or imprisonment. The Committee notes that a new Criminal Code was adopted in July 2014 and that it will enter into force on 1 January 2015. Sections 145 and 154 of the new Code provide for even harsher penalties for acts of interference. It further notes that section 25 of the Law on Trade Unions of 2014 prohibits interference in trade union internal affairs. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the application of the abovementioned legislative provisions in practice, including copies of the relevant court decisions.

Article 4. Collective bargaining. The Committee notes that in its observations on the application of the Convention received on 3 September 2014, the Confederation of Free Trade Unions of Kazakhstan (CFTUK) considers that section 289 of the Labour Code, as amended in 2012, impedes the exercise by trade unions of their right to present demands to employers. The Committee notes that in terms of this provision, demands of workers concerning the establishment (or change) of labour conditions and wages, the conclusion, modification and implementation of collective agreements, are formulated and approved by a general meeting (or conference) of employees; the general meeting should be attended by more than half of workers of an undertaking; the conference should be attended by at least two-thirds of delegates elected by workers; decisions of the meeting (or conference) of employees should be accepted by the majority of those present; and if it is impossible to organize a meeting (or conference), the workers’ representative body has the right to adopt its decision by gathering signatures of more than half of employees in support of its demands. The Committee considers that the requirements of section 289 of the Labour Code may constitute an obstacle to the exercise of collective bargaining rights by trade unions. It further considers that a representative union should have the right to present its demands to the employer without prior approval by an enterprise workforce. The Committee therefore requests the Government to amend section 289 of the Labour Code accordingly and to indicate all measures taken to that end.