Improving the Legal Framework for Social Partnership in the Eurasian Economic Union States under International Labor Standards

2020

Full text Open access: Hybrid Metadata (CSL-JSON)
DOI 10.17803/1729-5920.2020.158.1.160-174
Data confidence 70 medium
How this score is calculated

It is built from checkable properties of the record itself: whether the article has a DOI, how many independent sources confirmed its data, whether the required fields are filled in, and how recent the latest confirmation is. Disagreement between sources and a missing identifier lower it. A value of 80 or above means the record was published without further checking; 60 to 79 means it is published at reduced confidence, with a manual check advisable. A record verified by an editor by hand is never pushed below 90 by a recalculation. This scores our data about the article, not the article itself.

Abstract

In the paper, the author examines the legal mechanism of social partnership in the States of the Eurasian Economic Union for compliance with international labor standards. The status of ratification of the ILO conventions in the field of social partnership in the EAEU Member States is defined, and a brief description of international standards in the exercise of the right to freedom of association, the institution of employee representation, and the implementation of forms of social partnership is given. The author concludes that some approaches to the legislative regulation of collective labor relations differ from international standards, and in some cases contradict them. Based on the analysis of labor legislation, gaps and conflicts in the regulation of collective bargaining procedures, mutual consultations and exchange of information, as well as ensuring the right to freedom of association and representation of employees in social partnership are identified. There is no uniformity in the definition and regulation of forms of social partnership in the EAEU States. The legislation of the EAEU States is characterized by heterogeneous conditions for conducting consultations: in some countries, this form of social partnership is implemented through the mechanism of coordination of important decisions and acts of the employer (Belarus, Kyrgyzstan) with employees’ representatives, in others through the mechanism of taking into account the opinion of the representative body of employees (Kazakhstan, Russia). In Armenia, the labor legislation does not provide for a counselling mechanism. The national legislation of a number of States contains rules that violate the right to freedom of association. The Committee of experts on the application of ILO conventions and recommendations has repeatedly noted this in its reports and recommendations. The author formulates recommendations for improving the legal framework of social partnership in the EAEU States in order to implement international obligations. In particular, it is recommended that the legislation of the EAEU States provide for a more systematic and clear mechanism for regular exchange of information between employees and the employer and their representatives as an independent form of social partnership.