Controversy over number of employer organisations in tripartite council

From 1991 to 2004, employers in Slovakia were organised in one central organisation – the Federation of Employers Associations. However, in 2004, a number of employers left this organisation and established a new group – the National Union of Employers. Both organisations represent employers in the national tripartite concertation, where sometimes they express different viewpoints. The current chair of the tripartite council recently declared that it would be better if the employers were represented in this body by only one organisation, but this opinion has been rejected by most of the employer representatives. It is assumed that the problem of representation of the social partners will be resolved by the adoption of the new act on tripartism.

Context

From 1991 to 2004, employers in Slovakia were organised in one central organisation – the Federation of Employers Associations (Asociácia zamestnávatelských zväzov a združení Slovenskej republiky, AZZZ SR). They were also represented by this organisation at the national tripartite Economic and Social Concertation Council (Rada hospodárskej a sociálnej dohody Slovenskej republiky, RHSD SR). However, in April 2004, some employer organisations left AZZZ SR and established a new central employer organisation – the National Union of Employers (Republiková únia zamestnávatelov Slovenskej republiky, RUZ SR).

At the end of 2004, the Act on tripartism was repealed and the RHSD SR, which had operated for more than 12 years, was abolished. Tripartism was then implemented within the Economic and Social Partnership Council (Rada hospodárskeho a sociálneho partnerstva Slovenskej republiky, RHSP SR); at this forum, the employers were represented by AZZZ SR as well as RUZ SR. According to the rules for representation of the social partners in a tripartite body, each organisation was represented by three members.

During the functioning of the new national tripartite council, some rivalries between the two employers organisations emerged as each group sought dominance in the tripartite consultations. At the same time, the discussion about the representativeness of these organisations continued, In 2004, the employer organisation RUZ SR represented 270,000 employees, while AZZZ SR recorded 235,000 employees in their member organisations. With this level of coverage, each organisation was therefore entitled to the number of three representatives in the tripartite council.

Discussion on new rules for national tripartism

The new Slovakian government declared its support for the development of social dialogue in Slovakia (SK0609019I). Thus, discussions recently began about changes in the current framework of tripartite social dialogue, and a draft new act is under preparation. The issue of social partner representation in the social dialogue has also been discussed. In addition to AZZZ SR and RUZ SR, a civil association called Klub 500 exists, which represents the interests of several large companies with 500 or more employees; these companies used to be represented by AZZZ SR.

Furthermore, the recent discussion included the issue of who should be represented by the Association of Cities and Villages of Slovakia (Združenie miest a obcí Slovenska, ZMOS); in the current national tripartite consultations, ZMOS represents the government. However, in the opinion of some experts, this is not an appropriate position for this organisation, which should rather be a representative of employers. In fact, ZMOS signed the 2005 sectoral collective agreement for employers in the public service as the employer representative (SK0502101N).

Proposal for single employer representation

In October 2006, the Minister of Economy, Lubomír Jahnátek, who is also the chair of the tripartite RHSP, criticised the fragmentation of the employer representatives. He expressed a wish that the employers should be represented by one organisation, according to the article Zamestnávatelské zväzy sa majú zjednoti (in Slovak) in the daily newspaper SME on 27 October 2006. As the spokesperson of the Ministry of Economy, Branislav Zvara, explained, three large employer organisations exist, which are not able to reach agreement, and which do not recognise each other. In the ministry’s view, it would be more efficient if the employer representatives came to an agreement that only one organisation would represent them in the national tripartite forum.

This announcement provoked a negative reaction from the employer representatives. According to the Secretary of RUZ SR, Martin Hošták, it is not possible in a democratic country, in which freedom of association exists, to force organisations to unify. AZZZ SR Vice-president, Peter Masár, was outraged by the minister’s opinion in relation to representation of employers within tripartism and he pointed out that ‘even Mr Meciar respected tripartism’. (Vladimir Meciar was a rather authoritarian prime minister during the 1990s.) The President of AZZZ SR, Tomáš Malatinský, added that it is natural that the employer representatives have different opinions and the reason for establishing RUZ SR was that some employers ‘did not find a common language’ within the framework of AZZZ SR.

On the other hand, the representatives of Klub 500 would welcome a merger of employer organisations in Slovakia (SME, ‘Jahnátkové výroky zamestnávatelov pobúrili’, 30 October 2006). The Chair of the Slovakian Chamber of Commerce and Industry (Slovenská obchodná a priemyselná komora, SOPK), Peter Mihók, concedes that the employers could hold a stronger position if they represented a united front. Nevertheless, he believes that the integration should be initiated by the employer organisations themselves, and should not be imposed.

Commentary

Discussion about the representation of employer organisations in national tripartism is ongoing, with diverging opinions on their representativeness. However, the representatives of the majority of the employer organisations reject the notion of an imposed centralisation, which would be in conflict with the constitutional right for freedom of association and does not have a place in a democratic society.

Employers’ representation in national tripartism should be resolved in the new act on tripartism, which is being drafted by the Ministry of Labour, Social Affairs and Family (Ministerstvo práce, sociálnych vecí a rodiny Slovenskej republiky, MPSVR SR). Nonetheless, it will be left to the members of parliament to decide the final version of the new legislation regulating the national tripartite social dialogue in Slovakia.

Ludovít Cziria, Institute for Labour and Family Research