Union density, at around 11% of employees, is slightly higher in the Slovak Republic than in many other states of central and Eastern Europe. There is a single dominant union confederation, KOZ SR, although a new confederation has recently been founded.

There are probably around 275,000 trade unionists in the Slovak Republic. With 2.205 million employees, and taking account of the fact that not all union members are employees, this suggests that around 11% of employees are in unions. This is similar to the latest Eurofound estimate of union density, which was “around 12%” in 2018.[1] It is also close to the estimate from the independent ICTWSS database , which put union density in Slovakia at 10.7% in 2016.[2]

The dominant trade union confederation in the Slovak Republic is KOZ SR. The latest figures published by the country’s statistical office show that it had 244,823 members in 2017.[3] However, the latest Eurofund figure for 2018 puts KOZ SR’s membership at 215,850.

KOZ SR is the Slovak successor of the Czechoslovak union confederation, ČSKOS, which was founded in March 1990 after the “Velvet Revolution” of 1989. Most of the members of the former ROH organisation – the union confederation in the communist period, which was dissolved in 1990 – joined ČSKOS, although the new union confederation adopted different policies and organisation. When Czechoslovakia split into two separate states, the Czech Republic and the Slovak Republic in 1993, CSKOS split into a Slovak organisation, KOZ SR, and a Czech organisation, ČMKOS.

KOZ SR is made up of 25 separate unions. Although KOZ SR does not publish detailed figures, the largest are almost certainly the metalworkers’ union, OZ KOVO, and the union for education workers, OZPŠAV, which has 54,000 members.[4] Other unions with significant membership are the public administration and public services union SLOVES, the health and welfare workers’ union SOZZaSS (18,380 members) and the railway workers’ union OZŽ. Falling membership led to several union mergers between 2007 and 2009, but since then there have been few changes. The individual unions have considerable autonomy and the role of the confederation is essentially one of co-ordination, especially in discussions with the government.

For many years, the only union confederations outside KOZ SR were:

• the Christian union confederation, NKOS, whose largest affiliate is the teachers’ union ZPŠaV NKOS;
• VSOZ, a smaller union grouping, which was set up in 1997; and
• KUK a joint Czech and Slovak union body which includes some unions in the cultural sector.

The 2019 Eurofound report estimates that in 2018 NKOS had around 3,000 members and VSOZ around 500. There are no figures on KUK’s membership in Slovakia.[5]

However, in October 2018, five new trade unions came together to form a new union confederation, SOS.[6] Three of the five unions in SOS, the nurses’ and midwives union, OZSaPA, set up in 2012, a schools’ union, NŠO, and a police union, NOZP, set up in 2015, are in the public sector, and two, Moderné odbory AIOS and Moderné odbory Volkswagen, are in the private sector. All five unions have developed in opposition to the KOZ SR affiliates. In the public sector, particularly in education and health, as a recent ETUI study on collective bargaining notes, “these new unions emerged in response to dissatisfaction with the results of bargaining within existing union structures” and seek support through protests demonstrations and petitions.[7] The situation is similar in Moderné odbory AIOS, which was set up in 2014 and has membership in a number of manufacturing and logistics companies, including at the Jaguar Land Rover car plant, the components maker Schaeffler and an Amazon distribution centre. The origin of Moderné odbory Volkswagen is different. It emerged following a bitter dispute in 2016 between OZ KOVO’s national leadership and the union’s leadership in Volkswagen, which resulting in the bulk of OZ KOVO’s membership in Volkswagen leaving OZ KOVO and setting up a new union.

SOS has not published membership figures but the 2019 Eurofound report estimated total membership of its five affiliates to be 28,000 in 2018. Moderné odbory Volkswagen was reported to have 7,300 members in November 2016.[8] And a study of social dialogue in 2019 put the membership of the nurses and midwives’ union and the schools’ union at around 2,000 and under 1,000, respectively.[9]

The doctors’ union, LOZ, with 2,250 members is outside the confederations.

KOZ SR is politically independent but it has generally been close to the social democratic Smer-SD party, which was in government between 2006 and 2010 and again between 2012 and 2020. In March 2010, KOZ SR and Smer-SD signed a four-year cooperation agreement.[10] Since then relations have continued to be close. For example, Smer-SD backed KOZ SR in a clash with the labour minister over social dialogue in August 2020.[11] These links have been criticised by the unions in the SOS confederation and its statutes exclude unions which are not independent of political parties.

Union membership has declined since the creation of the Slovak Republic in 1993, when KOZ SR had 1,540,000 members. The confederation and individual unions have for some years taken a range of initiatives to improve the membership situation, but union numbers continue to fall. Figures in the statistical yearbook show that the membership of KOZ SR fell by 38% over 10 years, from 394,162 in 2007 to 244,823 in 2017, although the most rapid fall was in the first half of that period. Unions are stronger in the public sector and large-scale manufacturing but have almost no presence in the smaller companies in both manufacturing and services.

There are no official figures on the proportion of women in unions, but the most recent figures provided to the ETUC gender equality survey show that women made up 43.8% of the membership of KOZ SR in 2015.[12]

[1] Working life in Slovakia by Ludovit Cziria and Rastislav Bednarik, Eurofound November 2019 https://www.eurofound.europa.eu/country/slovakia#actors-and-institutions (Accessed 20.08.2020)

[2] Jelle Visser, ICTWSS Data base. Version 6.1. Amsterdam: Amsterdam Institute for Advanced Labour Studies AIAS. October 2019

[3] Statistical Yearbook of the Slovak Republic: 2019, Table 9-16

[4] Enhancing the effectiveness of social dialogue articulation in Europe (EESDA) National report: Slovakia by Marta Kahancová, Monika Martišková and Gábor Szüdi, CELSI, December 2019 https://celsi.sk/media/research_reports/RR29_V6XQ2Tv.pdf (Accessed 20.08.2020)

[5] Working life in Slovakia by Ludovit Cziria and Rastislav Bednarik, Eurofound November 2019

[6] Vzniká nová odborová konfederácia Spoločné odbory Slovenska, SME Ekonomika, 24 October 2018 https://ekonomika.sme.sk/c/20945150/vznika-nova-odborova-konfederacia-spolocne-odbory-slovenska.html (Accessed 20.08.2020)

[7] Slovakia: between coordination and fragmentation by Marta Kahancová, Monika Martišková and Mária Sedláková in Collective bargaining in Europe: towards an endgame, edited by Torsten Müller, Kurt Vandaele and Jeremy Waddington, ETUI, 2019

[8] Nedávno založené Moderné odbory Volkswagen už majú viac ako 7300, dzennikn.sk 03.11.2016 https://dennikn.sk/minuta/599546/ (Accessed 20.08.2020)

[9] Enhancing the effectiveness of social dialogue articulation in Europe (EESDA) National report: Slovakia by Marta Kahancová, Monika Martišková and Gábor Szüdi, CELSI, December 2019

[10] http://odbory.sk/page_sk/archiv/a_dohoda_smer.pdf (Accessed 20.08.2020)

[11] Opozícia: Odborárov nemožno vyhnať z rokovania tripartity, Pravda, 25.08.2020 https://ekonomika.pravda.sk/ludia/clanok/561014-nazivo-smer-o-krachu-socialneho-dialogu/ (Accessed 25.08.2020)

[12] ETUC Annual Gender Equality Survey 2019 – 12th edition, by Lionel Fulton and Cinzia Sechi, ETUC, April 2019 https://www.etuc.org/sites/default/files/circular/file/2019-05/ETUC_Annual_Equality_Survey%202019_FINAL_EN.pdf (Accessed 01.07.2020)

Collective bargaining takes place at both industry and company level and it is estimated that around 35% of employees are covered. Company level agreements are important in setting effective wages, leading to substantial variations between companies.

The framework

Collective bargaining in the Slovak Republic takes place at both industry and company level.[1]

Industry level collective agreements (known as higher-level agreements (KZVS) in Slovakia) must be registered with the Ministry of Labour, Social Affairs and Family, and the Ministry provides details each year of the number of these agreements in its annual report on the country’s social situation. In 2019, 20 higher-level agreements and 17 amendments to higher-level agreements were signed, a total of 37, split between 28 in the private sector and nine in the public sector.[2] This is a higher total than for the immediately preceding years: 30 in 2018 and 25 in 2017 and also higher than in the previous five years covering 2012 to 2016, when the annual average was 27.The Ministry states that this increase is the result of “the overall development of the economy and the financial results of the employers who belong to the employers’ associations”. Overall, based on the surveys conducted annually by the Ministry of Labour, Social Affairs and Family, 33 higher-level collective agreements applied to companies operating in the private sector in 2019 compared with 33 in 2018 and 32 in 2017.[3]

The Ministry provides information on the number of organisations covered by these higher-level agreements. In 2016, higher-level collective agreements covered 388 companies plus large parts of public administration.[4] All these companies belonged to the employers’ associations which signed the agreement, as, in 2016, it was not possible to extend agreements beyond the members of the signatory employers’ associations. However, since then the law has changed, and the number covered has almost certainly increased.

The issue of the extension of industry level agreements – making them binding on companies that operate in the same industry but do not belong to the signatory employers’ association and therefore would not otherwise be covered – has been politically controversial. Over the period 2002 to 2014 the rules changed almost every time the government changed, with right-wing governments giving employers a veto over extension and social democratic-led governments removing it . The issue was then taken to the Constitutional Court, which ruled in March 2016 that the policy of extensions as it operated at that time was unconstitutional.

New legislation, aiming to overcome this hurdle was drawn up and it came into force in September 2017. It states that only “representative” higher-level collective agreements can be extended. To be representative the agreement must be signed on the employers’ side by an employers’ association which employees more people in that industry than any other employers’ association, and on the union side by a union which operates in more than 30% of the employers belonging to the employers’ association, and which signed the previous year’s agreement (or asked to sign it, if it is a new agreement). There may only be one representative agreement in the industry concerned, which is defined precisely in line with the official NACE industry classification, and the final assessment of the representativeness of the agreement is made jointly by the unions and employers in the industry concerned and the government.

These new rules seem to have made relatively little difference to the number of agreements being extended. After a hiatus in 2016, when, because of the court case, no agreements were extended and a fall to just two extensions in 2017, the number of agreements extended since then has returned to the level before the court case. There were five extensions in both 2014 and 2015 and five in 2018 and six in 2019.[5] The industries covered are also largely the same: construction, the manufacture of glass and related products, some metalworking, the manufacture of cement and steel, the manufacture of wiring products and bus transport. As before, the extension does not apply to companies employing fewer than 20 people or those that have been in business for less than two years.

As well as bargaining at industry level, negotiations also take place at company level. By law, company agreements (PKZ) can only improve on what has been negotiated at industry level, and company-level bargaining is often crucial in setting pay, with wide variations between companies.

Figures collected for the Ministry of Labour, Social Affairs and Family show that 1,512 organisations had a company-level collective agreement in 2016, equivalent to 32% of all organisations surveyed. These agreements were much more common in the public sector, where more than two-thirds (70.9%) of organisations had such an agreement than in the private sector, where only a fifth of organisations (20.7%) had an agreement at company level. The largest single group of agreements were those signed by the education workers’ union OZPŠAV.[6] Figures for 2017 show slightly lower percentages for both sectors – down to 65.8% in the public sector and 18.4% in the private sector.[7]

There are important variations between industries in the relative importance of industry-level and company-level bargaining, and in some cases there is important interplay between the two levels as a 2019 study on social dialogue indicated.[8] It noted, for example, that in construction there is an industry-level agreement, which is important in fixing terms and conditions and is extended with employer support. In retail, there are two higher-level agreements with two separate employers’ associations, but they do not cover most employees in retail and barely go beyond basic legal provisions. They are also not extended because of employer opposition. As a result, the key area for bargaining in retail is at company level. Finally, in schools, although one of the higher-level agreements for the public sector covers pay, the amount actually paid is “composed of fixed levels, set by the sector collective agreements and a flexible component decided on by the school-level collective agreement”. This makes the organisation-level agreement a key factor in determining employees’ earnings and an important area for bargaining.

It is difficult to judge the proportion of employees covered by collective bargaining. Figures from the annual survey of the Ministry of Labour, Social Affairs and Family show coverage at 47.0% of employees in the private sector and 79.2% in the public sector in 2017, which suggest that more than half of all employees were covered by collective agreements.[9] However, this figure is likely to be too high as the survey is primarily based on organisations with more than 20 employees and smaller organisations are less likely to be covered by collective agreements. Eurofound’s 2019 report quoted estimates from Slovakia’s social partners that up to 35% of all employees were covered by collective bargaining, and this seems a more likely number.[10]

Whatever the correct figure for bargaining coverage is, the statistics from the annual survey that coverage is slowly falling, with the proportion of private sector employees covered by collective bargaining dropping from 50.1% in 2013 to 47.0% in 2017, while the proportion of public sector employees covered fell from 88.0% to 79.2% in the same period. For the ETUI study, however, the main changes is that “both unions and employers increasingly concentrate their efforts on adopting legislative solutions to employment and working conditions issues instead of collective bargaining”. [11]

As well as industry and company-level collective bargaining, there are also tripartite meetings between unions, employers and the government, in what is now known as the Economic and Social Council (HSR). The government, the main employers’ associations and the unions each have seven seats on the 21-member body. A union organisation must have at least 100,000 members and operate in at least five of Slovakia’s eight regions to be nationally representative and have seats on the HSR. Only the KOZ SR union confederation meets these conditions, and it holds all seven seats.

The HSR discusses government policies and proposed legislation in economic and social areas. One of these areas is the minimum wage. However, new legislation, which came into effect in 2020, provides that, if unions and employers cannot reach agreement on the level of the minimum wage, it will be set automatically at 60% of average pay in the previous year. This is an effective reduction in the influence of the HSR.

In the early 1990s, national level meetings between unions and employers played an important role in setting bargaining guidelines for industry and company-level bargaining. However, the last pact of this kind was signed in 2000.

Who negotiates and when?

Negotiations at industry level take place between the industry unions and the appropriate employers’ associations. At local level, the two sides are the employer and a union representative (normally from the workplace union group). Other bodies such as the works council have no right to negotiate collective agreements. (Legislation introduced by a right-wing government in 2012, which allowed works councils to sign collective agreements where no unions were present, was subsequently repealed.)

If there are several trade unions in the company or organisation, they are required to act in absolute agreement if they are negotiating for the whole workforce, unless some other arrangement has been agreed. If they cannot agree, the employer has the right to negotiate with the union with the largest number of members at the workplace, or with a group of unions, if together they have more members than the union with the highest number of members. The collective agreement reached covers the whole workforce.

The legislation on collective bargaining assumes that agreements last for one year, unless otherwise stated. However, many company-level collective agreements run for longer than a year. At industry level the length of collective agreements also varies, with many lasting two or three years.

The subject of the negotiations

The key issue for negotiations, particularly at company level, is pay. However, negotiations also cover other issues such as, hours and holidays, special leave, working conditions, health and safety, training arrangements, trade union rights and facilities, severance pay and, at company level, the use of the social fund, which is paid for by contributions from the employer.

The Slovak Republic has a minimum wage. This is set each year following discussions in the tripartite HSR between the unions, employers and the government, represented by the Ministry of Labour, Social Affairs and Family. However, under legislation which came into effect in 2020, the rate is now set automatically at 60% of average wages in the previous year if the unions and employers cannot agree a common figure.

[1] For a detailed examination of collective bargaining in Slovakia see Slovakia: between coordination and fragmentation by Marta Kahancová, Monika Martišková and Mária Sedláková in Collective bargaining in Europe: towards an endgame, edited by Torsten Müller, Kurt Vandaele and Jeremy Waddington, ETUI, 2019

[2] Správa o sociálnej situácii obyvateľstva Slovenskej republiky za rok 2019 (and previous years) Ministerstvo Práce, Sociálnych Vecí a Rodiny https://www.employment.gov.sk/isp/ (Accessed 20.08.2020)

[3] Ročný výkaz o pracovných podmienkach a nákladoch na podnikovú sociálnu politiku, Ministerstvo Práce, Sociálnych Vecí a Rodiny https://www.employment.gov.sk/sk/ministerstvo/vyskum-oblasti-prace-socialnych-veci-institut-socialnej-politiky/v6/ (Accessed 20.08.2020)

[4] Kolektívne zmluvy na Slovensku by Marta Hašková, ePRÁCA, September 2017, http://kozsr.sk/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/2017_01_ePR%C3%81CA.pdf (Accessed 20.08.2020)

[5] Správa o sociálnej situácii obyvateľstva Slovenskej republiky za rok 2019 (and previous years) Ministerstvo Práce, Sociálnych Vecí a Rodiny https://www.employment.gov.sk/isp/ (Accessed 20.08.2020)

[6] Kolektívne zmluvy na Slovensku by Marta Hašková, ePRÁCA, September 2017, http://kozsr.sk/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/2017_01_ePR%C3%81CA.pdf (Accessed 20.08.2020)

[7] Annual Review of Labour Relations and Social Dialogue: Slovakia 2018, by Trexima, Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung, 2019 http://library.fes.de/pdf-files/bueros/bratislava/15365.pdf (Accessed 20.08.2020)

[8] Enhancing the effectiveness of social dialogue articulation in Europe (EESDA) National report: Slovakia by Marta Kahancová, Monika Martišková and Gábor Szüdi, CELSI, December 2019 https://celsi.sk/media/research_reports/RR29_V6XQ2Tv.pdf (Accessed 20.08.2020)

[9] Annual Review of Labour Relations and Social Dialogue: Slovakia 2018, by Trexima, Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung, 2019 http://library.fes.de/pdf-files/bueros/bratislava/15365.pdf (Accessed 20.08.2020)

[10] Working life in Slovakia by Ludovit Cziria and Rastislav Bednarik, Eurofound November 2019 https://www.eurofound.europa.eu/country/slovakia#collective-bargaining (Accessed 20.08.2020)

[11] Slovakia: between coordination and fragmentation by Marta Kahancová, Monika Martišková and Mária Sedláková in Collective bargaining in Europe: towards an endgame, edited by Torsten Müller, Kurt Vandaele and Jeremy Waddington, ETUI, 2019

A workplace can have both a workplace union organisation and a works council, and both have specific powers. However, it is much more usual to have a union than a works council, and works councils in unionised workplaces are very rare.

Until 2002 local trade union bodies were the only organisations legally entitled to represent employees at the workplace. However, legislation introduced in April 2002 allowed for the introduction of works councils, initially, only in companies without trade union representatives, and, a year later in July 2003, in all workplaces, including those with unions.

Since then, the balance of powers and responsibilities between the local union organisation and the works council has varied in line with changes of government, although it has been stable in recent years. In broad terms, under the current Labour Code (Articles 229-240) both the local union organisation and the works council have rights to information, monitoring the employer’s compliance with legal obligations, negotiations, and joint decision-making in certain areas. However, only union organisations can conduct collective bargaining, and, if a works council and a local union body exist in the same organisation, negotiating and joint decision-making rights are in the hands of the union body. Trade unions do not just act on behalf of their members but also for employees who are not in a trade union.

There are different thresholds for local union bodies and works councils and, in practice, very few workplaces have both a local union body and a works council.

Unions at the workplace can represent employees provided they have least three members. This is the minimum number required to set up a workplace union organisation, and a list of all union members must be provided to the employer. The threshold for setting up a works council, is at least 50 employees, although in smaller workplaces a “works trustee” can be elected, provided there are at least three employees. The election of a works council or works trustee is not automatic. It must be requested in writing by at least 10% of the employees.

In practice, a survey from 2013 indicates that workplace union structures exist in around twice as many companies and organisations as works councils/works trustees. The 2013 survey of working conditions, undertaken by the Trexima consultancy for the Ministry of Labour, Social Affairs and the Family found that almost a third of the companies and organisations surveyed (32.9%) had a local union organisation, compared with just a sixth (16.8%) with a works council or a works trustee.[1]

However, the figures also reveal that works councils or works trustees are extremely rare where there is a union presence. In 2013, out of 5,063 organisations surveyed, there were 853 companies and organisations with a works council or a works trustee (16.8%). However, 843 of these were in companies and organisations “without union membership”. Only 10 workplaces (0.2% of the total) had a union and a works council/works trustee.

The variations between industries in the extent to which employees are represented by local union organisations or by works councils/works trustees are, therefore, a reflection of union strength. In areas like public administration, water and sewerage and education, local union bodies outnumber works councils/works trustees by either 10 or eight to one. However, in information and communication, there are three times as many works councils/works trustees as workplace union organisations. Manufacturing is somewhere in the middle with slightly more works councils/works trustees – 373 (28.2% of the total) – than workplace union organisations – 312 (23.5%).

An indication of the overall extent of employee representation at the workplace is provided by the results of Eurofound’s 2013 European Company Survey. These show that, in 2013, 38% of establishments in Slovakia with at least 10 employees had some form of official employee representation, either a workplace union organisation, a works council or a works trustee. This is slightly higher than the EU28 average of 32%. As elsewhere in Europe, larger organisations were more likely to have such a structure than smaller ones. The survey shows that 73% of establishments with more than 250 employees had representation, but even among smaller ones, those with between 50 and 249 employees, the percentage of workplaces with representation was relatively high at 57%. In smaller workplaces in Slovakia, those with between 10 and 49 employees, the survey indicates that more than a third (35%) had employee representation.[2]

Numbers and structure

Apart from the requirement that a local union organisation must have at least three members, there are no legal regulations on the numbers and structure of the local union organisations. These are for the union to decide.

Works councils must be set up in organisations with at least 50 employees provided that 10% of the workforce requests this in writing. The Labour Code does not make a distinction between full-time or part-time employees, although the general definition in the Labour Code as someone, “who performs dependent work for the employer”, seems to exclude agency workers. If there are fewer than 50 employees but more than three, and 10% of the workforce has called for it, a single “works trustee” must be elected, who has the same rights and duties as a works council.

The size of the works council is as follows:

The law does not say anything about the frequency or organisation of meetings, although it states that, if there is both a union and a works council in a workplace, a representative of the union body can attend meetings of the works council if an absolute majority of the works council’s members are in favour. (In practice it is very rare for both bodies to exist in the same organisation.)

Tasks and rights

Employees, either through a union or a works council (works trustee in smaller organisations), are to participate in the “creation of just and satisfactory working conditions” through

• joint decision making,
• negotiations,
• the right to information, and
• monitoring the employer’s compliance with the law and collective agreements.

Joint decision-making rights cover a series of specific issues set out at various points in the Labour Code. They include:

• health and safety rules, although a decision by the Labour Inspectorate can replace agreement with the employee representatives (Article 39);
• work rules, which are invalid without the prior consent of the employee representatives (Article 84);
• the uneven distribution of working hours beyond a period of four months, although a collective agreement can replace an agreement with employee representatives (Article 87);
• the introduction of flexible working, where again a collective agreement is an alternative to an agreement with employee representatives (Article 88);
• issues around the organisation of working time, including start and finish times and breaks (Articles 90, 91 and 93);
• overtime arrangements (Article 97);
• arduous and stressful work at night (Article 98);
• holiday arrangements (Article 111);
• changes in workloads, unless this is fixed by a collective agreement, although a decision by the Labour Inspectorate can replace agreement with the employee representatives (Article 133); and
• situations where an employee cannot work because of external reasons (Article 142).

The requirement to negotiate “with the goal of achieving an agreement” covers the more general issues set out in Article 237. These are:

• planned and future levels of employment, especially where it is under threat;
• the employer’s social policy, and actions to improve health and the work environment;
• decisions which may lead to changes in work organisation or employees’ contractual terms;
• other changes such as the ending of some activities or the taking on of new ones, mergers, acquisitions and divestments and changes in the organisation’s legal structure; and
• measures to prevent accidents and occupational diseases and protect employees’ health.

There are also specific issues where the employer must discuss or consult with employee representatives. These are:

• business transfers (Article 29);
• collective redundancies (Article 73);
• dismissals (Article 74);
• the even distribution of working hours (Article 86);
• working on non-working days (Article 94);
• nightwork (article 98);
• varying arrangements for the provision of meals outside normal working hours (Article 152);
• training (Article 153);
• the arrangements for employees with disabilities (Article 159); and
• the employer’s liabilities in the case of injuries at work or occupational disease. (Article 198).

Information rights cover the more general issues on which there should be negotiations, such as planned an future levels of employment, and employee representatives are also entitled to information on the economic and financial situation and future prospects of their employer.

The rights relating to the carrying out of inspections and monitoring activities are intended to ensure that that the obligations resulting from labour law and from any collective agreement covering the workplace are fulfilled. This gives employee representatives the right to enter premises at an agreed time, to ask for documents, to make proposals to remedy faults and to report failings to the appropriate authorities.

In health and safety, only the union has a specific right to carry out safety inspections and make proposals for improvements, reporting deficiencies to the labour inspectorate.

If only one employee representative body, either a union or a works council (works trustee), exists at the workplace, it carries out all of these duties, although a works council cannot undertake collective bargaining on terms and conditions and it does not have the health and safety inspection rights.

If there is both a union organisation and a works council at a workplace – in practice this is rare – then the powers of the two bodies are divided. The union body is involved in joint decision making, collective bargaining, inspections and the receipt of information; the works council is only involved in negotiation (although not collective bargaining) and in receiving information.

The Labour Code requires employee representatives, whether unions or works council members, to cooperate closely.

Election and term of office

The election and term of office of union representatives in the organisation are matters for the union concerned. Typically, they are elected for two to five years.

Works council members and works trustees can be set up, provided at least 10% of employees request this. They are elected by secret ballot of the whole workforce with all employees with at least three months’ service entitled to vote. All employees aged over 18 who are “of good character” can stand, provided they have at least three months’ service and are not closely connected to the employer. The elections are on the basis of lists, which must be proposed by at least 10% of the employees or a trade union present at the workplace. The candidates with the largest number of votes are elected, although at least 30% of the potential electors must participate in the vote for it to be valid.

Members of the works council or works trustees serve for four years.

Protection against dismissal

Employee representatives, whether they are part of a local union organisation, members of a works council works council or a works trustee, must not be disadvantaged or penalised by the employer for the performance of their duties.

During their term of office and for six months afterwards, their dismissal is illegal without the prior consent of the employee representatives concerned – local union or works council – or a decision of the court.

Time off and other resources

Employee representatives have rights to paid time off – union representatives to perform trade union activities and works council members (or the works trustee) to undertake their works council duties. The amount can be agreed between the employer and the representatives, but if there is no agreement, the representatives are entitled to a total of 15 minutes per month per employee. This total is then divided between all the employee representatives, both those from the union and the works council, if they are both present. If the employee representatives cannot agree on the distribution of the time off, they can call on an arbitrator to decide. The union decides how the time off should be distributed between the union representatives, and the works council decides how it should be distributed between works council members. It is possible for time off not used to be taken as monetary compensation by the union or works council if there is an agreement to this effect.

The employer has the right to check whether the time off is being used for the purpose for which it was provided.

Employers should also provide employee representatives with “an adequate range of rooms with the necessary equipment” free of charge. The employer pays for the equipment’s maintenance and its operation. The 2013 survey of working conditions, found that, in companies and organisations where a union was present, the trade union organisation was overwhelmingly based on the premises of the employer (86.2%), and in more than a third of cases (36.6%) the rent was paid by the employer. These percentages have been rising in recent years, leading the survey to conclude that “cooperation between employers and workers’ representatives has become increasingly close in the past three years”.[3]

Training rights

Employee representatives have no specific rights to training to carry out their duties. This applies both to trade union members and to members of the works council and the works trustee.

Representation at group level

This is only provided through union structures for union representatives. There is no group structure for works councils.

[1] Informačný system o pracovných podmienkach v roku 2013: Pravidelné ročné výberové zisťovanie, Table Z2, MPSVR SR 2013

[2] Eurofound (2015), Third European Company Survey – Overview report: Workplace practices – Patterns, performance and well-being, Figures for Table 44

[3] Informačný system o pracovných podmienkach v roku 2013: Pravidelné ročné výberové zisťovanie, Table Z3, MPSVR SR 2013

Employees have a right to a third of the seats on the supervisory board of public limited companies in the private sector with more than 50 employees, provided some other conditions are met. In state-owned companies they have the right to half the seats.

Slovak legislation provides for the representation of employees at supervisory board level in both private and state-owned companies, although in the private sector, the right for employees to be represented on the board depends on the size of the company and its legal status.

A company set up as a normal limited liability company (an s.r.o.) has directors but is not required to have a supervisory board, a body that oversees the management board, which runs the company on a day-to-day basis. These are generally smaller companies and they are not required to have employee representation at board level.

However, a joint stock company (a.s.), which must have a minimum capital of €25,000, is obliged to have a supervisory board, with a minimum of three members, as well as a board of directors. If it has more than 50 full-time employees, employees have a right to elect one third of the members of the supervisory board.[1] The remaining members are elected by the shareholders at the annual meeting. Employee representatives have the same rights and duties as other supervisory board members. The law also allows companies with fewer than 50 employees to provide for one-third employee representation on a voluntary basis and, if they wish, to increase the proportion of employee representatives elected from a third to up to a half.

The employee representatives are elected by all employees and are nominated either by the union or by 10% of employees. The election is organised by the management board in cooperation with the trade union, where a union is present, and can either be direct or through authorised representatives, who are themselves elected. The election requires that at least half of the eligible voter should participate for it to be valid.

The period of office of all supervisory board members is set in the company’s articles of association. However, by law, it may not be more than five years.

State-owned enterprises operating as businesses, must also have a supervisory board. (This is not the case for companies which meet a direct public need like education or health, where there is only a director.) The supervisory board supervises the management and administration of the company by the director. (There is no board, just a single director).

The supervisory board in these state-owned companies must always have an odd number of members, with a maximum of nine. The chair is appointed by government on the basis of a selection procedure and cannot be an employee of the company. Half of the remaining members of the supervisory board are elected by the employees of the company from among the employees in a secret ballot, either directly or indirectly through delegates.[2] Where there is a trade union in the company, it has the right to appoint one of its members as one of the employee board-level representatives. The remaining members of the supervisory board are appointed by the government. Employee representatives have the same rights and duties as other supervisory board members.

The term of office of supervisory board members is five years.

[1] Commercial Code – Obchodný zákonník (Article 200)

[2] State enterprise Act – Zákon č. 111/1990 Zb. Zákon o štátnom podniku (Article 20)

Slovak members on bodies relating to European Works Councils and the European Company are generally appointed by existing employee representatives where they are present, who can be either trade union representatives and/or works council members. The one exception is Slovak representatives at board level. They are elected by all employees.

European Works Council

Slovak members of the special negotiating body (SNB) for the EWC are appointed at a joint meeting of employee representatives. Employee representatives can be both trade union representatives and/or elected works council members. Voting is on a proportional basis to the number of employees represented. Only in cases where there are no employee representatives in the company, are the Slovak members of the SNB directly elected by all employees. Slovak members of the SNB must be employees.

The arrangements are the same for Slovak members of an EWC set up under the fallback procedure in the annex to the directive.

European Company

Slovak members of the special negotiating body (SNB) for the European Company are appointed at a joint meeting of employee representatives. Employee representatives can be both trade union representatives and/or elected works council members. Voting is on a proportional basis to the number of employees represented. Only in cases where there are no employee representatives in the company, are the Slovak members of the SNB directly elected by all employees. Slovak members of the SNB can be external trade union representatives and are not required to be employees.

The arrangements are the same for an SE representative body set up under the fallback procedure in the annex to the directive. However, in this case those elected must be employees of the company.

The arrangements are different for Slovak employee representatives on boards, where these are set up in line with the fall-back procedure. As is the case with employee representatives on national boards, they must be elected by all employees and they must themselves be employees.

Specially chosen employee safety representatives, who in the first instance are chosen by the union or the works council rather than being elected, represent the interests of employees in the area of health and safety. Joint health and safety committees must be set up in larger employers (above 100 employees) but they are only required to meet once a year.

Basic approach at workplace level

It is the employer’s responsibility to ensure the health and safety of his or her employees.

Employee health and safety bodies

Employee safety representatives (zástupca zamestnancov pre bezpečnosť) are the main channel for representing the interests of employees in the area of health and safety. In larger organisations (more than 100 employees) a joint health and safety committee, literally committee for safety and health protection at work (komisia bezpečnosti a ochrany zdravia pri práci), should be set up, in which the employees must always be in the majority.

Numbers and structure

There is no lower threshold, in terms of the number of employees, for the appointment of employee safety representatives and, in more hazardous industries, the maximum which each representative can represent is 50. In other words, in these industries, which include manufacturing, construction as well as the health service, an employer with up to 50 employees would have to have one employee safety representative; one with 51 to 100 would have to have two; one with 101 to 150 three; and so on. In other less hazardous industries each employee safety representative can represent up to 100 employees.

An employer with more than 100 employees, irrespective of the industry, must set up a joint health and safety committee. The employer’s representatives on the committee are the organisation’s health and safety professionals (see below), while the employee safety representatives represent the employees. The employee safety representatives must always be in a majority.

Research by the European Agency for Safety and Health at Work in 2014 found that 64% of workplaces in Slovakia had health and safety representatives and 24% had a health and safety committee. These figures are both above the EU-28 averages, which are 58% for health and safety representatives and 21% for health and safety committees. (The results relate to workplaces with five or more employees.)[1]

Tasks and rights

Employee safety representatives or employees themselves should be able to discuss important health and safety issues with the employer. The employer should provide employees or employee safety representatives with the relevant documentation and give them a reasonable time to express their views on:

• health and safety policy, including its implementation and evaluation;
• the proposed selection of equipment, the technologies used, work organisation and working environment;
• the appointment of health and safety professionals;
• the use of external providers of health and safety services;
• risk assessment and implementation of protective measures, including the provision of protective equipment, both personal and collective;
• accidents, dangerous occurrences, occupational diseases, including the results of investigations into their causes;
• the provision of health and safety information; and
• the training of employee safety representatives.

The main rights of the employee safety representatives are to:

• monitor the workplace and ensure that measures to protect health and safety at work are implemented;
• request information from the employer on the factors influencing health and safety, and to discuss these with the workplace trade union organisation or works council and, provided the employer agrees, with experts, although without disclosing confidential information;
• cooperate with the employer and submit proposals for measures to improve health and safety;
• request that the employer remove identified shortcomings and, where the employer fails to do this, to initiate action with the competent authorities,
• participate in discussions with the employer about health and safety protection, and to participate in discussions and ask for information about:
  • investigations into accidents, dangerous occurrences and occupational diseases,
  • measurements of the working environment, and
  • inspections by the appropriate authorities and the recommendations arising from them;
• make comments and proposals to the competent inspectorate or other authority during inspections.

The rights of the health and safety committee are to:

• evaluate regularly the situation in the area of health and safety at work, the frequency of working injuries, occupational diseases and similar events, and to evaluate other issues concerning health and safety at work, including the working environment and working conditions;
• propose measures in the management, control and improvement of the situation in the field of health and safety at work;
• provide statements on all issues connected to health and safety at work; and
• request information from the employer as required for the execution of its activities.

However, the legislation makes clear that setting up a health and safety committee protection does not affect the powers of the employee safety representatives.

Frequency of meetings

The health and safety committee must meet at least once a year.

Election and term of office

Employee safety representatives are appointed on the recommendation of the local trade union body or the works council. Only if these do not exist are they elected by the workforce. The term of office is not specified.

Resources and time off

The legislation states that the employer is obliged to provide “adequate” paid time off to allow employee safety representatives to carry out their duties but it does not specify how long this should be. The employer should also provide sufficient training, as well as the other resources the employee safety representatives need to perform their functions.

Protection against dismissal

Employee safety representatives should not be disadvantaged for carrying out their role.

Other elements of workplace health and safety

The employer must provide a safety technical service (bezpečnostnotechnická služba), which can be provided either internally (by appropriately trained employees) or externally (by health and safety experts authorised by the National Labour Inspectorate – see below). The number and qualifications of the health and safety experts required, either internally or externally depends on the number of employees and the nature of the risks involved, and the legislation sets this out. In workplaces operating in less risky industries there should be one safety technician for the first 600 employees, two for 601 to 1,200 and one additional safety technician for every 1,000 employees after that. In more risky industries, which include manufacturing as well as construction, energy and water supply and health care, there must be one safety engineer (someone with higher qualifications than a safety technician) for the first 400 employees, two safety engineers for 401 to 800 employees, and three (or two safety engineers and a safety technician) for 8,00 to 1,200. Above this number there must be one extra for every additional 1,000 employees.

However, where there are fewer than 19 employees (five in riskier industries) the employer can undertake the duties of the safety technician, provided that he or she has been adequately trained (at least 16 hours of training).

The employer must also provide an occupational health service, almost always provided externally, for workers in particularly hazardous occupations.

National context

The ministry responsible for health and safety at work is the Ministry of Labour, Social Affairs and Family of the Slovak Republic (Ministerstvo práce, sociálnych vecí a rodiny Slovenskej Republiky – MPSVR SR). Compliance with health and safety laws and regulations is ensured through the National Labour Inspectorate (Národný inšpektorát práce – NIP), which also enforces labour and social security legislation.

Trade unions and employers are able to influence health and safety policy through their membership of the tripartite Economic and Social Council of the Slovak Republic (Hospodárska a sociálna rada SR).[2]

Key legislation

Occupational Safety and Health Protection Act 2006, as amended

Zákon c. 124/2006 Z. z. o bezpecnosti a ochrane zdravia pri práci

[1] Second European Survey of Enterprises on New and Emerging Risks, European Agency for Safety and Health at Work, 2016

[2] For more information on the national context see OSH system at national level – Slovakia by Ferenc Kudász and Jana Gibódová, OSH Wiki https://oshwiki.eu/wiki/OSH_system_at_national_level_-_Slovakia