Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2002, published 91st ILC session (2003)

Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1958 (No. 111) - Hungary (Ratification: 1961)

1. The Committee notes with interest the adoption of Act No. XVI of 2001, which amends the Labour Code by introducing the concept of indirect discrimination and prohibiting discrimination on the grounds stipulated in the Convention and the additional grounds of marital and disability status in all matters connected to the employment relationship, including practices preceding the employment relationship. Also, the Labour Code now expressly spells out the principle of equal pay for work of equal value. Noting that section 5(2) exempts from the definition of indirect discrimination any measure that is appropriate and necessary or can be justified by objective circumstances, the Committee hopes this exception will be applied in accordance with the Convention and limited to matters related to the inherent requirements of the job. It invites the Government to provide information on the practical implementation of these new provisions, including information on judicial cases and labour inspection processes.

2. The Committee notes that, except for information regarding the parliamentary investigation into the dismissal of several female employees of higher education institutions, the Government’s report contains no reply to its previous comments. It must therefore repeat, in part, its previous observation on the following points:

1. The Committee notes that, at its 275th Session (June 1999), the Governing Body approved the report of the committee designated to examine the representation submitted by the National Federation of Workers’ Councils (NFWC) pursuant to article 24 of the ILO Constitution, alleging the Government’s non-observance of the present Convention, and of the Employment Policy Convention, 1964 (No. 122). The Governing Body determined that there was insufficient information to permit it to reach any conclusions regarding the issues raised in the representation, including the NFWC’s allegations that the Government’s enactment of legislation reducing the personnel and social security-related budgets of institutes of higher education had resulted in the dismissal of a disproportionate number of female lecturers and researchers, and it requested the Government to provide additional information on the issues raised in the representation, so that the Committee of Experts could continue to examine the matter.

2. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in this respect. [...] The Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate whether any measures have been taken or are contemplated to ensure that the exercise of the educational institutions’ right of self-governance is carried out in conformity with the principle of non-discrimination.

3. With regard to the impact of the budgetary restrictions on the employment of civil servants employed in institutions of higher education, the Government indicates in its report that, during the period in question, 2,287 teaching staff and 4,311 non-teaching staff were dismissed. Of the total number of persons dismissed, 3,114 were men and 3,443 were women. The Government indicates that 35.6 per cent of the full-time teaching staff in the 1994/95 academic year were female, but that the larger part of those dismissed did not belong to the teaching staff. The Committee recalls that the Governing Body also concluded that "the imposition of a different retirement age on women, particularly where this distinction is used to force women into retirement earlier than the compulsory legal retirement age for their profession, would, if such a practice were verified, constitute discriminatory conduct that has a negative impact on women’s access to employment and denies them equality of opportunity and treatment in employment and occupation" (GB.275/7/3, paragraph 43) (275th Session, June 1999). The Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate the number of female teaching staff dismissed during the relevant period, as well as the number of female non-teaching staff dismissed.

4. The Governing Body also requested the Government to provide information on any measures taken or contemplated to ensure that the civil servants dismissed have access to redress through the judicial process, the status of any claims filed and the outcome of those claims. The Government has indicated that the employees who were dismissed have the right to legal redress, but that it does not have details of litigated cases. The Committee expresses its hope that this information will be supplied with the next report.

In addition, a request regarding certain points, including the status of the abovementioned investigation, is being addressed directly to the Government.