The Confederation of Employers and Industrialists in Bulgaria expresses the following opinion on the draft of the ZID of the Labor Code, No. 354-01-20, submitted by Milko Bagdasarov and a group of people's representatives; proposal by People's Representative Petar Kanev, regarding a second vote on a draft of the ZID of the Labor Code, 402-01-7, submitted by the Council of Ministers on 21.01.2014; a proposal by People's Representative Svetlana Angelova and a group of People's Representatives regarding a second vote on a draft of the ZID of the Labor Code, 402-01-7, submitted by the Council of Ministers on 21.01.2014; proposal by People's Representative Georgi Mrkov regarding a second vote on a draft of the ZID of the Labor Code, 402-01-7, submitted by the Council of Ministers on 21.01.2014,:
Draft of the ZID of the Labor Code, No. 354-01-20, submitted by Milko Bagdasarov and a group of people's representatives
The bill restores the partially repealed part of Article 328, paragraph 1, item 10 of the Labor Code from January 2012. Before the repeal, the provision provided for the employer's right to unilaterally terminate the employment contract with notice, when the worker or employee has acquired the right of pension for insurance service and age. The exercise of this right was at the employer's discretion. He could not exercise it, if he considers that the worker or employee who has acquired the right to a pension has enough strength and ability to continue performing the work assigned to him. With the change from January, this right of the employer no longer exists.
The bill introduced by n.p. Bagdasarov and a group of people's representatives provides for the restoration of the right of the employer under Article 328, Paragraph 1, Item 10 of the Civil Code from before the change of January 2012. itself for cases where the person who has acquired the right to a pension for insurance length of service and age is a worker or an employee is employed in the "public sector." "The public sector" includes employed workers and employees in Article 2, paragraph 1, items 1,5,6, 8, XNUMX and XNUMX of the Law on Financial Management and Control, namely: budgetary organizations, organizations disposing of funds guaranteed by The Republic of Bulgaria, with funds from the funds and programs of the EU and other organizations disposing of financial funds pursuant to a regulatory act.
The reasons for submitting the specific proposal are dictated by the deepening negative trend in recent years for the growing youth unemployment within the entire European Union.
We believe that this amendment will achieve the intended effect as a type of measure to overcome this problem, if the old legal version is restored, allowing the employer to unilaterally terminate the employment relationship upon acquiring the right to a pension for length of service and age, and not only in relation to persons employed in the public sector.
Mr. Bagdasyarov's proposal creates a privileged composition only for the state to terminate employment relationships with employees under employment law upon reaching the insurance length of service and retirement age, but not for legal entities in the private sector in relation to workers and employees who have reached retirement age. Such a distinction is discriminatory on the one hand, and on the other hand, it does not stimulate the release of people who have reached retirement age from the labor market in order to increase the opportunities for the growth of youth employment.
With this content, the submitted bill cannot be supported, as it introduces a distinction between workers and employees who have acquired the right to a pension for length of service and age, employed in the public sector and in the private sector.
In order to create a level playing field for all employers in the country and to create an opportunity for the employment of unemployed youth in all economic sectors in jobs currently occupied by workers and employees who have acquired the right to a pension for length of service and age, the proposal made should be supported in the event that the proposed measure extended not only to the termination of employment relationships with workers and employees in the public sector, but also in the private sector, i.e. to acquire the following revision:
"10. with acquiring the right to a pension for length of service and age, and for professors, associate professors and doctors of science - upon reaching the age of 65;
Proposal by People's Representative Petar Kanev, regarding a second vote on a draft of the Labor Code Labor Code, 402-01-7, submitted by the Council of Ministers on 21.01.2014.
In general, we support the idea and objectives of the introduced bill with the comments made below.
The changes in the bill are aimed at aligning the legal regulation of labor relations with the scale of the enterprise's activity and the provisions of the Law on Small and Medium Enterprises (SME). The main purpose of ZMSP is to create a favorable and stable institutional and economic environment for the development and establishment of competitive small and medium-sized enterprises, which are the backbone of the modern Bulgarian economy, whose activity is an indicator of the economic revival in the country.
About t.5 for the creation of §7b, which stipulates that the termination of the employment contract must be done "by the employer, by an official designated by him in the enterprise or by another body determined by law", we find the request unfounded. On the issue of who can lawfully terminate the employment relationship with a worker and an employee outside the employer and whether this can be an authorized person or body of the employer, the Supreme Court ruled with Interpretive Decision 6/2012. and finally cleared the disputed points.
In the proposal objectified in t.6, concerning §9, item 1, in which item 10 is created with letters a and b) - the text in item b) there is no evidence of the existence of an employment relationship" is meaningless, because if there is no evidence of an existing employment relationship, on what basis will the employer be obliged by a prescription from the Labor Inspectorate to register an employment contract?
The proposals in t.7 with the creation of §12, which provides for the distinction and applicability of specific provisions of the Labor Code, depending on the scale and size of the employer, in our opinion, an objective and independent assessment should be made as to how the proposed provisions, as well as other from CT, is expedient and could be applied differently and differentiated, solely depending on the size of the employer. At the same time, the proposed version is not clear in meaning and content.
If the provisions of Art. 136a of the Criminal Code won't apply to small and micro-enterprises what does it really mean? Does it mean that small and micro businesses will not be able to extend the working hours of their employees or that they can do so without having to comply with the procedure of Art. 136a of the Criminal Code.
Similarly for the provision of Art. 138a of the Criminal Code upon the introduction of part-time work. It will not be able to introduce part-time work at all or will be able to introduce part-time work for its employees for whatever period it decides and will not be bound by the provisions of Art. 138a of the CT?
Likewise, regarding the provision of Art. 181 of the Criminal Code - why should the legal status of the obligations to have a Regulation for the internal labor order be different for a micro enterprise compared to a large employer. Does this mean that the small and micro-employer does not have an internal work order and does not observe a certain labor discipline, which is also due to a large or medium-sized employer?
The same applies to the provision of Art. 173, paragraph 1 of the Criminal Code. This provision provides for a timetable to be drawn up to enable all workers to take their paid annual leave until the end of the calendar year to which it applies. The non-implementation of this provision, which regulates the use of paid annual leave, raises the question of how paid leave will be used in micro-, small- and medium-sized enterprises?
Proposal by People's Representative Svetlana Angelova and a group of People's Representatives regarding a second vote on a draft of the ZID of the Labor Code, 402-01-7, submitted by the Council of Ministers on 21.01.2014.
The proposed amendments concern a more precise editing of the envisaged new texts of Art. 230 and related art. 233b and Art. 344 of the CT, regulating the internship contract as a special type of employment contract.
The proposals made for amendments to this part of the CT reflect the position of KRIB related to the possibility that the parties to the internship contract may not have a time limit for concluding the contract /i.e. can be concluded for a period of less than 6 months/; to be free to negotiate the gratuitous nature of the contract for a certain period; the scope of internship contracts should also include persons who are in the process of training to acquire secondary or higher education, as they are among the measures to support youth employment.
In general, we support the idea and objectives of the introduced bill with the comments made below:
The proposal under Art. 230, paragraph 2 CT cannot be supported because it displaces the content of the training contract under Art. 230 CT. The content of this contract is to conduct training for the acquisition of a profession by a worker or employee who wants to be trained in a certain profession or specialty, when he has no profession at all. If he has a profession and wants to be trained in another profession, he has at his disposal the contract for retraining and acquisition of a new profession according to Art. 234, paragraph 1, proposal 2 CT.
The proposal Art. 233b, paragraph 2 to drop cannot be supported as this paragraph introduces the requirement that the worker or employee be appointed to a position corresponding to the qualification he has acquired.
On Art. 233b CT, offered new paragraph 4 is redundant. In the internship contract, as a new type of employment contract, the remuneration must be agreed between the parties on a general basis according to the type and degree of education - secondary general, secondary professional, higher-bachelor or higher-master and should be included in its content according to Art. 66, paragraph 1 CT.
Proposal by People's Representative Georgi Mrkov regarding a second vote on a draft of the ZID of the Labor Code, 402-01-7, submitted by the Council of Ministers on 21.01.2014.
The proposal of n.p. Georgi Murkov could not be shared. The systematic place of this issue is not in the Labor Code, but in the Rules for the Organization and Activities of the National Assembly (PODNS), as a normative act of the National Assembly, issued on the basis of Article 73 of the Constitution.
Since 1991, in all assemblies of the National Assembly, the question raised in the proposal of the national representative has been settled in the same way. According to this adopted and maintained regulation, the people's representatives retain the position they hold itself in state and municipal institutions and enterprises, commercial companies with more than 50 percent state or municipal participation in the capital of the company or budget organizations, using unpaid leave until the end of their powers. This also applies to contractors under contracts for the management of commercial companies of commercial companies with more than 50 percent state or municipal participation in the capital, but for no longer than the end of the contract term. In the National Assembly of the 42nd National Assembly, this authorization is contained in Art. 124, paragraph 1 of the National Assembly. It literally repeats the permission adopted in the regulations of the past National Assemblies (36th, 37th, 38th, 39th, 40th and 41st).
Adopted since 1991 and permanently repeated and maintained since then in the regulations for the organization and activities of the National Assembly, a normative permission to retain the positions held by the people's representatives only in state and municipal enterprises and institutions and under management contracts in commercial companies, with majority participation of the state or the municipality, i.e. - of public (budgetary, etc.) funds. This authorization is based on principled considerations and proceeds from the understanding that the National Tax Act as a normative act of the National Assembly can create such an obligation only for public (state and municipal enterprises, institutions and commercial companies) that carry out their activities on the basis of state or municipal property, and not for private enterprises, organizations and commercial companies, not for private enterprises and commercial companies that carry out their activities on private property and free economic initiative. Private property and private economic initiative are protected by the Constitution (art. 17, paragraphs 1 and 3 and art. 19, paragraphs 1 and 2) and the state cannot dispose of them.
We see no reason to change the legal basis adopted and maintained since 1991.
http://www.turbulence.tech