​Parliament adopted today the new Law on Social Dialogue after years of discussions and with a milestone in the PNRR, which obliges Romania to take this step by the end of the year. We have great reservations that this law will promote more real social dialogue, as we all say we want, says Radu Burnete, representative of the Confederation of Concordia.

Although it purports to develop mechanisms for greater dialogue with unions, Bernete adds, it opens the door wide enough to more collective conflicts over reasons of little relevance, solidarity strikes or national strikes against public policy. “Instead of creating a structure based on trust and building, we risk ending up in a landscape marked by conflict and in which the two sides, workers and employers, do not understand each other’s needs or constraints, with the risk of serious blockages in the economy. Bilateral social dialogue at all levels cannot be restored by putting the conflict first and reducing the responsibility of those who initiated it. We will all pay the costs of the strikes, which have nothing to do with the affected companies,” Burnete told Radu.

We tick off this milestone and breathe a sigh of relief that we have a new law after years of negotiations with all parties involved, unions, parliament and government, but I remain skeptical about its results, says a Concordia representative. “Unfortunately, two fundamental topics were missing from all these discussions. First, how do we encourage the roll-out of real, representative employers and unions who have the clout and administrative capacity whose deliberations have positive consequences. Unfortunately, some of the organizations that today want to negotiate and be taken into account have puffed up hot air. Second, it is social peace, the fundamental goal of dialogue, which means that partners know how to listen and take each other into account, which leads to agreements in this spirit. It remains to be seen whether we will make progress or in a few years we will be stuck in fruitless discussions between irrelevant partners,” Bernete concludes.

We will remind, at the plenary session of the Chamber of Deputies on Wednesday, the legislative proposal on social dialogue was adopted by 198 votes “for”, 13 “against” and 46 abstentions.

The object of regulation of the legislative proposal is the establishment of new provisions in the field of social dialogue and the repeal of Law No. 62/2011. According to the motivation, it is envisaged, among other things, to eliminate the identified dysfunctions regarding the organization and functioning of trade union and employer organizations, as well as regarding the implementation of institutionalized tripartite social dialogue, strengthening the role of trade unions, rethinking the institution of employee representatives, as well as establishing a clear procedure for initiation, settlement and monitoring collective labor conflicts and strikes, writes Agerpres.

The draft stipulates that “social dialogue is all forms of negotiation, consultation or exchange of information between representatives of the Government, employers and employees/employees on matters of common interest regarding economic and social policy”, and information is “transfer of data”. by representatives of the Government, employer/employer organizations, trade unions/union organizations or, as the case may be, elected employee/employee representatives, as well as the transfer of data by the trade union/union of trade union organizations to the employer/employers’ organizations so that they can familiarize themselves with the matter discussed and consider it with knowledge of the matter”.

In this legislative proposal, a trade union is defined as a form of voluntary association of workers/employees for the purpose of protecting, supporting the rights and promoting their professional, economic, cultural, artistic, sports or social interests in relations with the employer.

Sectors of collective bargaining are branches of the national economy in which social partners agree to conduct collective bargaining, which are created by the Tripartite National Council and approved by the Government’s decision.

The bill also provides that “the unemployed have the right to join or remain members of a trade union.” Non-working members of the trade union are not taken into account when determining the number of trade union members for which the representativeness of the trade union is determined.

“To establish a trade union, a number of at least 10 employees/employees of one unit or at least 20 employees/employees from different units of the same sector of collective bargaining is required. Trade union organizations cannot be dissolved or terminated on the basis of some normative and administrative acts of state administration bodies or decisions the employer/employer’s organizations,” the project also states.

The legislative initiative was rejected by the Senate, and the Chamber of Deputies is the deciding body in this case.