Since the early 1990s. Estonia has created a system for the resolution of individual and collective labour disputes, involving labour dispute commissions, local conciliators, a public conciliator and the courts. This article examines the institutional and legislative framework for dispute resolution and looks at the use actually made of these procedures.
In Estonia, the main institutions dealing with individual and collective labour disputes are labour dispute commissions, local conciliators and the public conciliator, as well as the courts.
The institutions dealing with individual and collective labour disputes in relating to conflicts of 'interest' (TN0301101S) are the labour dispute commissions and the local and public conciliators. In the case of conflicts of 'right', the main institutions are the labour dispute commissions and courts.
The main legal acts dealing with conflict resolution are the Individual Labour Dispute Resolution Act and Collective Labour Dispute Resolution Act. There are some other acts which are concerned with certain aspects of the resolution of labour disputes, such as the Employment Contracts Act and Public Service Act.
The only legally regulated method for conflict resolution in Estonia is conciliation. At enterprise level, a shop steward can be involved in a mediation process, but usually conflicts are resolved in labour dispute commissions. The activity of conciliators is based on the Collective Labour Dispute Resolution Act and Collective Labour Dispute Conciliation Statute.
The duty of a conciliator is to effect conciliation between the parties. A conciliator should identify the reasons for and circumstances of a labour dispute and propose resolutions. Conciliators have the right to invite the parties to participate in conciliation proceedings, and to engage qualified persons or experts and competent officials in their work. Conciliation is effected through the mediation of a conciliator or on the basis of a proposal made by a conciliator. The parties must reply to the proposal made by a conciliator within three days. Parties are required to participate in conciliation proceedings, send their fully authorised representatives to participate in the conciliation proceedings and submit documents necessary for the substantive resolution of the matter by the date specified by the conciliator. The conciliation process is documented by a report, which should be signed by the representatives of the parties and the conciliator. A conciliation outcome contained in a signed report is binding on the parties and enters into force upon signature, unless a different date is agreed on. The report should also be prepared in those cases where no agreement is reached.
Since 1996, when the labour dispute commissions were established, most individual labour disputes have been resolved in these commissions. The total number of court cases is much smaller than the total number of cases in labour dispute commissions: over 1998-2001, there were on average 607 court cases a year regarding employment contracts, while the average number of cases before labour dispute commissions was 3,200 a year over 2000-2. This is as intended, as the resolution of disputes in labour dispute commissions is meant to take precedence over their resolution in the court.
According to a study conducted by J Masso of the University of Tartu, 0.58 cases were submitted to commissions per 100 employees in 2001 and workers won quite a high percentage of cases - in 82% of cases their demands were satisfied. There are no statistics available regarding whether law suits have been decided in favour of the employee or employer. However, 62% of court cases were resolved in favour of the claimant, and it is assumed that the employees made the claims in most cases.
During the eight years since the establishment of the public conciliator, there have been more than 260 cases referred to the public conciliator. The applicants have mainly been representatives of employees and representatives of trade unions. In recent years, representatives of employers have been tending more often to refer cases to the public conciliator. Most disagreements are induced by employees' dissatisfaction with payment conditions (50% of the cases). In 30% of cases, the source of the labour dispute has been collective agreements, while labour legislation accounts for 8% of cases, working conditions for 7% and 'social guarantees' for 5%.
According to statistics from the public conciliator's office, 24 applications were presented to the public conciliator to resolve collective labour disputes in 2001. In total, these labour disputes covered around 18,000 people. In 18 cases, conciliation led to positive results, while in two cases the right to strike was awarded. In 2002, 17 collective labour disputes were registered, and according to estimates 31,000 employees were involved in these disputes. Positive solutions were found in 12 cases. In 2003, 12 labour disputes were registered. Most disputes over wages and collective agreements referred to the conciliator end with a positive result. According to the public conciliator's office, agreement is achieved in 80% of all cases. Only in some cases have representatives of employees been given the right to organise a strike. However, there were only rare cases of warning strikes and other protest actions in Estonia over the period 1992-2002. The first strike was held only at the end of 2003, when the Estonian Employees’ Unions’ Confederation (Eesti Teenistujate Ametiliitude Keskorganisatsioon, TALO) and the government did not reach agreement over public sector wage policy (EE0311103F and EE0312103F).
In Estonia, various laws concerning labour relations have been adopted and amended over the transition period and various institutions dealing with labour relations have been established. The main problem in labour dispute resolution appears to be that Estonia has special legal procedures and institutions only in the case of conflicts of 'interest'. There are no special arrangements for conflicts of right, as there are in many other countries in Europe (labour courts etc). Conflicts of interest are resolved by the regular court system in Estonia. This is a time-consuming and very bureaucratic process. In future, Estonia needs special legal arrangements in this area.
The main reason for the relatively peaceful labour relations in Estonia has been the fact that employees' position is still relatively weak. Union density and collective bargaining coverage rate are both very low. Due to this fact, trade unions do not have enough financial resources and therefore cannot afford to hold strikes. Furthermore, the administrative capacity of unions to organise strikes is low. (Kaia Philips and Raul Eamets, University of Tartu)