On guts and compromise
Why have employers and trade unions been unable to come to terms for 10 years?
MPs were scheduled to hold the second reading of the draft Labour Code on November 17. However, this “labor constitution” was once again relegated to shelves in MPs’ offices, as the Verkhovna Rada Chairman Volodymyr Lytvyn told the coordination council of heads of the factions at the start of the week that the Party of Regions proposed to withdraw the bill or postpone consideration of this matter. Simultaneously, about 70 people who represented NGOs and trade unions voiced their opposition to the second reading of the current bill in front of the parliamentary committees building. They stood there and held posters reading, “Independent trade unions against slave labor” and “The new Labour Code is a step into slavery.” According to the protesters, the code makes it easier to fire employees, prolongs working hours, legalizes surveillance in the workplace, and gives employers the right to make decisions that could change the collective labor contracts, as well as restricts the rights and capabilities of trade unions.
The positions of both parties are quite understandable, as no one wants to give up and make do with fewer rights and powers. However, they will still have to find the consensus on the matter that has been sought for the last 10 years.
What are the controversial points that currently prevent the parties from approving a compromise version of the code? And where is the limit of the “labor compromise”? The Day asked these questions of experts and participants of the discussion.
COMMENTARIES
INFRINGING ANY PARTY’S RIGHTS WILL INEVITABLY BE MET WITH RESISTANCE
Oleksandr PASKHAVER, President of the Center for Economic Development:
“The country can not live according to the current labor law. It must be changed. But we should remember that the content of a labor code is closely linked with the traditions of a particular people. Should we compare the situation of employees in France and the US, we would find them quite different. A labor code is a compromise between the interests of employers and employees, based on the mentality of the nation in question. Obviously, if it will be skewed to one side, we will get a negative outcome. Infringing rights of a party will inevitably be met with resistance. The development of an effective labour code is strongly influenced by employees’ stance on its formation. Emergence of the high-quality code as a compromise with employers depends on how quickly employees will learn to unite and defend their rights. It is the question of compromise that is very important here. The labor code that was made by well-meaning strangers will always be defective.”
“OPPOSITION IS DEVELOPING ITS OWN VERSION AND IS READY TO SUBMIT IT”
Natalia KOROLEVSKA, Chairperson of the parliamentary Committee on Industrial and Regulatory Policy and Entrepreneurship:
“The version of the Labor Code that has been submitted to the parliament means the return to the slave system. This year, Ukraine celebrates 150th anniversary of the abolition of serfdom, and you know what? Should MPs support this version of the code, employees will be made into serfs again. These rules enable employers to introduce long and irregular working hours and to force people to take unpaid leaves of absence of arbitrary length; they also restrict the rights of Ukrainian trade unions, weak as they are, and allow the administration of the enterprise to establish on its own full working schedule, social standards and wage rates. All in all, it is a clear case of infringement of workers’ rights. Therefore, in my opinion, this draft law that all took turns writing for several years, as in the Three from Buttermilk Village cartoon, may not be considered, because it infringes the rights of the working population when we still are under threat of recurrence of economic crisis, with our economy still not having completely recovered after the crisis of 2008. I stand for writing a new code. The opposition is developing its own version and is ready to submit it as soon as the currently debated bill will be withdrawn from the parliament.”
