.gif){kind=small}
BACK TO HOME
PAGE BACK TO HOME
PAGE EUROPEAN REVIEW
With trade union membership in the new EU Member States in steep decline the workplace inspection authorities and labour courts become even more important in protecting workers from unscrupulous employers. In Poland a report from the State Labour Inspection has revealed the extent of abuse.
The State Labour Inspection (PIP) is a body set up by law to report to the Polish parliament, the Sejm, on violations of labour law. It is seen as a crucial mechanism for upholding reasonable employment practices in Poland where there have been increasing instances of late payment of wages, non-payment of overtime and infringement of the minimum wage laws. Some idea of the extent of this malpractice can be gained from the figure of 58% of the 1,088 employers inspected in 2004 who had violated the law on remuneration of workers. This was actually a reduction from the previous report but non-payment of overtime and dishonest recording of working time was increased. The public sector was proportionately more likely to indulge in these abuses whereas private employers tended to be worse at compulsory medical checks and training.
The PIP is also responsible for following up decisions of the Labour Court to see if they have been complied with. For 2004 they checked 2,960 settlements, of which 57% had not been put into practice. The Polish government has reacted to these damning figures by proposing raising the Labour Court maximum fine from approximately €1,250 to €5,000, the inspector's on-the-spot fine from €250 to €500 and the punishment for failing to abide by a Labour Court decision involving pay to a maximum of 3 years in prison. Following the recent general election it is not clear if the new government will take up these proposals but it seems that Poland needs much greater co-operation between unions, employers, courts and government to improve its labour relations.
Promotion by seniority is the latest work benefit that must not be denied women who go on maternity leave. A Ms.Sass began work for a film school in 1982 in Potsdam, then in East Germany. In 1987 she went on maternity leave for 20 weeks as she was entitled to under East German law. By 1998 Potsdam was part of a unified Germany and the film school was subject to a collective agreement which stated that workers with 15 years continuous service would be promoted. Although maternity leave was to be counted, German law now only allowed 8 weeks. The employer therefore delayed Ms.Sass's promotion by the 12 weeks extra which she had taken. The ECJ, ruling that the difference in pay during the disputed 12 weeks should be awarded to Ms.Sass, held that the length of maternity leave did not affect the basic principle of equal treatment. This case may allow women in the UK to claim rights, such as holiday pay, continue to accrue during the extra, unpaid, 26 weeks of Additional Maternity Leave.
Recognition of professional qualifications has been dealt with by the EU in several directives. A case from Greece illustrates that a Member State cannot prevent foreign-qualified workers from practising because it has not implemented the legislation. When Ms.Aslanidou applied for permission to be an occupational therapist she relied on her German qualification. However she was rejected on the grounds that the relevant EU directive on recogniton of professional training had not been transposed into Greek law, even though the deadline for doing so had expired. The ECJ decided that the directive still applied and that its list of acceptable qualifications took precedence over recognition by the national body.
|
Back to |
Forward to |
Up to |
Back to |
