Union density is higher in Romania than in most Central and Eastern European countries, with between a fifth and a quarter of all employees in unions. The structures are fragmented, with five separate confederations, CNSLR-Frăţia, BNS CNS Cartel Alfa, CSDR and CSN Meridian. Each has broadly similar membership levels and a wide spread of affiliated federations.

There are around 1.3 million trade unionists in Romania. The figures are reasonably precise, as union confederations must provide details of their membership as part of the process of gaining national representative status, and these figures are published on the website of the Ministry of Labour and Social Protection.[1]

The total membership of the five main union confederations (four dating from late 2019 or early 2020 and one from 2016) is 1,332,400. This is equivalent to 26.8% of all Romanian employees at the end of 2019, using the figures from the Monthly statistical bulletin.[2] The 2019 Eurofound estimate for union density is slightly lower at 23%.[3] However, this lower percentage is the result of using a higher figure for the total number of employees. The independent ICTWSS database also uses a higher figure for the total number of employees. It puts union density in Romania at 20.0% in 2016.[4]

The five main union confederations are all of broadly similar size, and, given the requirement to have at least 5% of total employment in membership to be nationally representative (see below), they all need to have at least around 250,000 members in order to retain that status. Currently, the largest is CNSLR- Frăţia, with 304,842 members.[5] It developed from a merger of the former official trade union movement (CNSLR) with another confederation (Frăţia) in 1990. BNS, which had its founding congress in 1991, is in second place in membership terms, with 259,428 members in 2019.[6] CNS Cartel Alfa, which was set up in 1990, has 258,099 members.[7] CSDR, which emerged after a split in CNSLR-Frăţia in 1994, is very slightly smaller, with 255,757 members.[8] CSN Meridian, which was set up in 1994, is now the smallest of the five, although the gap between it and CSDR is very small. It had 254,280 members at the start of 2020.[9]

These five confederations all meet the conditions to be considered as representative at national level, giving them a place in the country’s tripartite consultative structure (see section on collective bargaining). As well as having at least 5% of Romania’s employees in membership, nationally representative unions must meet certain formal legal obligations and have local structures in more than half the country’s 41 counties plus the capital Bucharest.

A study on Romania unions published by the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung (FES) in 2016 found that there was no “significant difference [between the confederations] in terms of doctrine, affiliated sectors or composition”.[10] However, as the same study pointed out, there have been links between the confederations and political parties, despite a formal prohibition on trade unions carrying out political activities. The largest confederation, CNSLR-Frăţia has traditionally been close to the social democratic party PSD, and signed a new agreement with the party in November 2019, with both sides emphasising their close cooperation over 30 years.[11] BNS, which in 2004 signed an agreement with a right-wing party the PRM to gain representation in parliament, no longer has these links, although it has criticised the social democratic party for moving away from its traditional partners in the trade union movement.[12]

CSN Meridian and CSDR have no clear party-political position, and Cartel Alfa emphasises on its website that is “totally independent of government or political groups”.[13] In autumn 2019, when PSD was looking for union support for its “Pact for the welfare of Romanians” Cartel Alfa rejected the plan and criticised the party as hypocritical and populist.[14] Cartel Alfa has also criticised other confederations claiming that they have traded union support for political positions for senior union leaders.[15]

All the confederations have several industry federations affiliated to them, which are detailed in the documents submitted to the Ministry of Labour and Social Protection (see above). CNSLR-Frăţia has 14 affiliated industry federations, of which the largest by far is the health services union Federatia Sanitas, with 101,248 members, a third (33%) of the confederation’s total membership. BNS has 29 affiliated federations and its membership is more evenly split between them. The largest BNS affiliate is the construction and construction material union FGS Familia, with 32,318 members, although the manufacturing union, IndustriALL-BNS, with 31,769, has almost as many . Cartel Alfa has 39 affiliated federations, and its largest single affiliate, with 43,975 members is the police union, SNPCC. CSDR has 16 affiliated industry federations, and the largest is the teachers’ union FSLI with 173,000, two-thirds (68%) of its total membership.. Finally, CNS Meridian has 29 affiliated federations and the largest is SCMD which has 33,661 members and represents military staff. All five confederations also have local structures in most of Romania’s counties.

The federations themselves typically bring together large numbers of small unions, which often only cover a single employer. (Unions can be set up by a minimum of 15 people working at the same workplace.) One of the consequences of this is that unions are fragmented with competition for membership and local unions will sometimes move from one federation to another.

There have been attempts to bring the confederations together in the past. The most recent was at the end of 2011 when BNS announced that it wanted to create a new union structure. Talks were started with both CNRLR-Frăţia and Cartel Alfa, although CNRLR-Frăţia rapidly withdrew. In 2012, BNS and Cartel Alfa announced that they planned to merge in 2013 but these plans were abandoned before the end of the year.

Overall trade union membership in Romania has declined since the beginning of the 1990s as the economic role of the state has been cut back and union influence has been curtailed, particularly by the 2011 Social Dialogue Act.

As well as reducing their role in collective bargaining and the protection for workplace representatives (see sections on collective bargaining and workplace representation), the Social Dialogue Act has also made it more difficult for unions to organise in smaller companies. Following the Act, a union can only be set where 15 individuals in the same workplace agree to do so, but before the Act it was possible to set up a union with 15 individuals in the same industry but in different workplaces.

The unions are currently (June 2020) supporting draft new legislation on social dialogue that would reduce the threshold for setting up a union from 15 to 10 employees and also make it possible to set up a union if at least 20 employees from the same industry, but in more than one workplace, wished to do so.[16]

As in many other countries, union membership in Romania is now higher in the public sector than in the private sector, and the largest union federations are in education – FSLI with 173,000 members – and health – Sanitas, with 101,248 members. This is in contrast with the past. In 2002, a study by an employers’ association study found that trade union density was at 85% in extractive industries, 83% in the metalworking industry, and 76% in the chemicals industry, compared with only 30% in public administration.[17]

There is only limited data on the proportion of women in trade unions. The membership figures submitted to the Ministry of Labour and Social Protection do not include a breakdown by sex, and the information provided to the ETUC’s annual gender equality survey is not up to date. The latest available figures show that 47% of CNRLR-Frăţia’s membership was female in 2016, 40% of the membership of BNS in 2015 and 40% of the membership of Cartel Alfa in 2013.[18] CSDR has never provided this breakdown, and CNS Meridian is not affiliated to the ETUC.

[1] http://dialogsocial.gov.ro/organizatii-sindicale/

[2] Table 54 Monthly statistical bulletin, National Institute of Statistics December 2019. This states that the total number of employees in the economy was 4,973,000 on 31 December 2019. https://insse.ro/cms/sites/default/files/field/publicatii/buletin_statistic_lunar_nr12_2019.pdf (Accessed 03.08.2020) However, the press release for employment and unemployment for the fourth quarter of 2019, also from the National Institute of Statistics states the total number of employees was 6,686,000 https://insse.ro/cms/sites/default/files/com_presa/com_pdf/somaj_tr4e_19_0.pdf (Accessed 03.08.2020) One reason for the substantial difference between the two figures is that the higher figure includes military and security staff and individuals working in the informal and underground exconomy.

[3] Living and workin in Romania: actors and institutions by Victoria Stoiciu, November 2019 https://www.eurofound.europa.eu/country/romania#actors-and-institutions (Accessed 03.08.2020)

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

[5] Document presented to the Ministry of Labour and Social Protection (24.02.2020) http://dialogsocial.gov.ro/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/2020-CNSLR-Fratia-partea-I.pdf (Accessed 03.08.2020)

[6] Document presented to the Ministry of Labour and Social Protection (07.10.2019) http://dialogsocial.gov.ro/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/2019-Blocul-National-Sindical.pdf (Accessed 03.08.2020)

[7] Document presented to the Ministry of Labour and Social Protection (09.09.2019) http://dialogsocial.gov.ro/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/2019-Confederatia-Nationala-Sindicala-Cartel-ALFA-partea-I.pdf (Accessed 03.08.2020)

[8] Document presented to the Ministry of Labour and Social Protection (04.11.2016) http://dialogsocial.gov.ro/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/2016-sindicat-Confedera%C5%A3ia-Sindicatelor-Democratice-din-Rom%C3%A2nia.pdf (Accessed 03.08.2020)

[9] Document presented to the Ministry of Labour and Social Protection (10.01.2020) http://dialogsocial.gov.ro/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/2020-Confederatia-Sindicala-Nationala-Meridian-Partea-I.pdf (Accessed 03.08.2020)

[10] Romania’s Trade Unions at the Crossroads, by Victoria Stociu, Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung, November 2016 http://library.fes.de/pdf-files/id-moe/12924-20161123.pdf (Accessed 03.08.2020)

[11] Sindicatele din CNSLR Frăția se aliază oficial cu PSD, după ce PNL a preluat guvernarea, Newsweek Romania 06.11.2019 https://newsweek.ro/politica/sindicatele-din-cnslr-fratia-se-aliaza-oficial-cu-psd (Accessed 03.08.2020)

[12] BNS Press release 02.10.2019 https://bns.ro/info-bns/516-comunicat-de-presa-blocul-national-sindical-impreuna-cu-celelalte-confederatii-sindicale-reprezentative-a-participat-astazi-2-octombrie-2019-la-o-intalnire-cu-conducerea-partidului-social-democrat (Accessed 03.08.2020)

[13] Cartel Alfa website: https://www.cartel-alfa.ro/ro/valori-si-prioritati-64/ and Financial Intelligence 27.11.2019 https://financialintelligence.ro/cartel-alfa-reprezentarea-corecta-a-membrilor-de-sindicat-este-incompatibila-cu-aranjamentele-politice-pentru-obtinerea-unor-functii/

[14] Sindicalistii nu sunt de acord cu pactul lui Dancila. Cartel ALFA: Un document ipocrit, populist. Si BNS il vrea modificat, ziare.com 18 Sepetmber 2019 https://ziare.com/vasilica-viorica-dancila/premier/sindicalistii-nu-sunt-de-acord-cu-pactul-lui-dancila-un-document-ipocrit-populist-1577875 (Accessed 03.08.2020)

[15] Cartel Alfa: Reprezentarea corectă a membrilor de sindicat este incompatibilă cu aranjamentele politice pentru obținerea unor funcții, Financial Intelligence, 27.11.2019 https://financialintelligence.ro/cartel-alfa-reprezentarea-corecta-a-membrilor-de-sindicat-este-incompatibila-cu-aranjamentele-politice-pentru-obtinerea-unor-functii/ (Accessed 03.08.2020)

[16] De ce se tem patronii: Propunere de lege prin care angajații vor putea să-și facă mai ușor sindicate reprezentative, startupcafe, 22.06.2020 https://www.startupcafe.ro/taxe/propunere-lege-sindicat-firma.htm (Accessed 03.08.2020)

[17] Patronate si Sindicate in Romania, UGIR-1903, 2005

[18] 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 03.08.2020)

The system has been fundamentally changed by legislation passed in 2011 and collective bargaining at national level, which previously set minimum pay and conditions for the whole economy, has been abolished. There are also new rules for bargaining at industry and company level, which have weakened the position of unions.

The framework

The present situation is that collective agreements can be negotiated at industry level, at company/organisation level and for groups of companies. In the past, legislation also used to provide for negotiations to take place at national, level. However, the ability to negotiate a national level agreement, which set minimum terms and conditions and covered all Romanian employees, was abolished in the Social Dialogue Act (Legea dialogului social 62/2011) passed in 2011.[1]

Large parts of the economy also used to be covered by industry agreements, and, at this level too, the Social Dialogue Act made major changes. First, under its terms, industry agreements are only binding on the whole industry if the employers’ associations that sign them employ more than half the employees in the industry concerned and the extension has been requested by the signatories and approved by the national tripartite council. If this is not the case, they are treated as agreements for a group of companies and only cover companies belonging to the organisations that have signed them.

Second, the way industries are defined was changed, with the new arrangements failing to match with existing structures of bargaining. Both union federations and employers’ associations must show that they are representative before they can sign agreements at industry level. Unions must demonstrate that they represent at least 7% of the employees in that industry to be representative, and employers’ associations must show that they represent employers employing at least 10% of the industry’s workforce to gain this status.

As a recent ETUI report on collective bargaining on Romania points out, while most union federations regained their representative status this was not the case for the employers’ associations. And many individual employers left their employers’ associations at this point.

The result has been a fall in the number of industry agreements signed, from eight in 2010, before the change, to two in 2019.[2] And while the industry-level agreements signed in 2010 were spread across agriculture, manufacturing and private services, the two signed in 2019 were both in the public sector – in health and in pre-university education.

At the level of groups of companies, where the Social Dialogue Act made less difference, the number of agreements reached both before and after 2011 has been broadly similar. For example there were nine in 2019 and five in 2018 compared with four in 2010 and 10 in 2009.[3] However, as a recent study has indicated, the majority of the agreements for groups of companies are now in the public sector.[4] One important exception is the agreement for finance and insurance companies signed in 2018. As the study points out, this agreement could not be made binding on the whole finance and insurance industry because the employers’ association concerned did not represent companies employing more than 50% of the workforce.

At company level, there is a legal obligation to negotiate – although not to reach agreement – where the company has 21 or more employees. (This obligation predates the Social Dialogue Act.) Companies with fewer than 21 employees – a substantial proportion in Romania – are not obliged to negotiate and generally do not do so.

Although the Social Dialogue Act eliminated the national level agreement and has reduced the number and coverage of industry-level agreements, the number of company level agreements has not increased to compensate for this. Figures from the regular bulletins of the Ministry of Labour and Social Protection show that, in the years since 2011, the number of company level agreements has been slightly lower than in the years before the Social Dialogue Act was introduced, although the economic crisis from 2008 onwards will also have had an impact.

The first year when the number of agreements returned to the level regularly seen before the crisis and the Social Dialogue Act, was 2018, when 10,708 collective agreements and additional agreements were signed.[5] The most recent figure, for 2019, shows the numbers falling back again to 8,233.

In many ways the more significant impact of the Social Dialogue Act at the level of company agreements has been a change in who is able to negotiate. Before 2011, unions at company level were able to negotiate agreements provided they were affiliated to a federation that was representative for that industry – had more than 7% of that industry’s workforce in membership. The Social Dialogue Act initially changed that to require that the union in the company must have a majority of the company’s workforce in membership to be able to sign agreements.

However, these new rules were changed by legislation which came into effect in January 2016. This allowed a representative industry federation to negotiate company-level agreements, where a union belonging to that federation was present in the company but did not have representative status at company level. In all other cases, negotiations must be undertaken by elected employee representatives, and even where the industry federation is negotiating it must work with these representatives. The result is that the vast majority of company-level agreements are negotiated by employee representatives rather than unions. In 2017, 85.5% of company level agreements were signed by employee representatives (92.4% in the private sector), and figures for earlier years are similar.[6] It is not clear how much difference, the change in 2016 has made.

Agreements at a lower level cannot contain clauses providing for worse conditions than those negotiated at a higher level, and the Social Dialogue Act did not alter this, although it abolished the national agreement, which provided a basis for local negotiations in the past.

Collective agreements, by law, must be in writing and should be registered with the appropriate authorities – at county level in the case of company agreements and at national level for industry agreements. There can only be one collective agreement for each bargaining group – in other words there cannot be competing agreements at industry level nor can there be separate agreements for different groups of employees in the same company.

As well as collective bargaining between employers and unions, there are also structures at national level, in which unions are represented. The 2011 Social Dialogue Act changed the composition of the economic and social council, the CES, which previously was a tripartite body including the unions, employers and government. It now includes representatives of civil society rather than government and it must be consulted on financial, economic, social and health legislation. The new tripartite body is the National Tripartite Council, for Social Dialogue, the CNTDS, whose role includes consulting about the minimum wage and feeding in to the development of government programmes and strategies. There are also social dialogue committees in many national ministries and at the level of Romania’s counties.

The changes introduced through the 2011 Social Dialogue Act have severely affected collective bargaining, leading to a dramatic fall in bargaining coverage, which was almost 100% when the (now abolished) national agreement covered all employees. There are no official figures but the 2019 ETUI study, quoting OECD date, puts coverage at 35% in 2013 [7]. This view is shared by an ILO report on the impact of legislative changes in Romania, which concluded that collective bargaining covered “less than a third of Romanian workers”.[8] The 2019 Eurofound report quotes figures from the Labour Inspectorate, which indicates than in 2017 only 952,911 employees (15% of the total) were covered by company-level collective agreements.[9]

There have been a number of attempts to reverse more of the changes introduced by the Social Dialogue Act and a legislative proposal to this effect has been under discussion in the Romania parliament since June 2018.[10] Among other things this would reduce the threshold for a union to be representative (and able to negotiate an agreement) at company level from the current 50% plus one to 35% plus one. It would also again give union members the right to negotiate at company level if their federation was representative at industry level. However, there is opposition to these plans, and they have not yet been approved.

Who negotiates and when?

At industry level, unions must represent at least 7% of the employees in the industry, and employers’ associations must represent 10% to be able to negotiate at this level.

At company level unions must represent at least 50% plus one of the employees of the company, in order to be representative and entitled to negotiate.

Where there is no representative union, because the union present does not have enough members, company level negotiations can be undertaken by the union federation with members there, provided it itself is representative within that industry, although it must work with elected employee representatives. If this is not the case, either because there is no union or the union federation is not representative, negotiations are undertaken by elected employee representatives.

Similarly, in negotiations involving groups of companies, unions are entitled to negotiate provided they have a majority of employees in membership. As in individual companies, union federations can take on the negotiating role, if they are representative at industry level (have more than 7% of the industry’s employees in membership).

The legal minimum period that a collective agreement can last is 12 months and the legal maximum is two years, although this can be extended by a further 12 months by mutual agreement. Employers at company level should begin negotiations at least 45 days before the existing agreement expires and they should not last longer than 60 days, except where agreed. Negotiations typically take place at the end of one calendar year and the start of the next.

The subject of the negotiations

Rules setting out what a collective agreement should cover and requiring employers to negotiate on issues such as job classification were abolished by the Social Dialogue Act. However, a survey of union negotiators carried out in February to April 2018 found that the pay-linked issues most commonly included in collective agreements covered vouchers, overtime payments, social benefits, end-of-year bonuses, reimbursement of training costs, reimbursement of travel costs and holiday pay. The non-pay issues most frequently included in agreements were working conditions, the length of individual employment contracts, work schedules, dismissal compensation and occupational training.[11] Where an employer wishes to introduce working time arrangements which go beyond the standard limits set out in the Labour Code, this must be done through a collective agreement.

There is a national minimum wage set by the government following discussions with unions and employers in the National Tripartite Council, for Social Dialogue, the CNTDS. With relatively low levels of bargaining coverage the national minimum wage is particularly important in setting pay rates in Romania. In November 2019, the government told a meeting of the CNTDS that 24% of Romania’s employees (1.4 million people) were paid at the level of the minimum wage.[12]

[1] For a detailed analysis of collective bargaining in Romania see Romania: from legal support to frontal assault by Aurora Trif and Valentina Paolucci in Collective bargaining in Europe: towards an endgame, edited by Torsten Müller, Kurt Vandaele and Jeremy Waddington, ETUI, 2019

[2] Ministry of Labour and Social Protection, CCM http://dialogsocial.gov.ro/sector-de-activitate/ (Accessed 03.08.2020)

[3] Ministry of Labour and Social Protection,CCM http://dialogsocial.gov.ro/grup-de-unitati/ (Accessed 03.08.2020)

[4] Situația salariaților din România: 2018-19 by Ștefan Guga, Syndex 2019 https://www.syndex.ro/sites/default/files/files/pdf/2019-06/Situa%C8%9Bia%20salaria%C8%9Bilor%20din%20Rom%C3%A2nia%20%282019%29_0.pdf (Accessed 03.08.2020)

[5] Buletin statistic în domeniul muncii şi protecţiei sociale Ministry of Labour and Social Protection http://www.mmuncii.ro/j33/index.php/ro/transparenta/statistici/buletin-statistic (Accessed 03.08.2020)

[6] Situația salariaților din România: 2018 by Ștefan Guga, Syndex 2019 https://www.syndex.ro/sites/default/files/files/pdf/2019-06/Situa%C8%9Bia%20salaria%C8%9Bilor%20din%20Rom%C3%A2nia%20%282018%29.pdf (Accessed 03.08.2020)

[7] Romania: from legal support to frontal assault by Aurora Trif and Valentina Paolucci in Collective bargaining in Europe: towards an endgame, edited by Torsten Müller, Kurt Vandaele and Jeremy Waddington, ETUI, 2019

[8] The Impact of Legislative Reforms on Industrial Relations in Romania by Luminita Chivu, Constantin Ciutacu, Raluca Dimitriu and Tiberiu Ticlea ILO 2013 http://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---europe/---ro-geneva/---sro-budapest/documents/publication/wcms_219711.pdf (Accessed 07.04.2015)

[9] Living and workin in Romania: actors and institutions by Victoria Stoiciu, November 2019 https://www.eurofound.europa.eu/country/romania#actors-and-institutions (Accessed 03.08.2020)

[10] Propunere legislativă privind dialogul social L567/2018 https://www.senat.ro/legis/lista.aspx?nr_cls=L567&an_cls=2018 (Accessed 03.08.2020)

[11] Situația salariaților din România: 2018-19 by Ștefan Guga, Syndex 2019 https://www.syndex.ro/sites/default/files/files/pdf/2019-06/Situa%C8%9Bia%20salaria%C8%9Bilor%20din%20Rom%C3%A2nia%20%282019%29_0.pdf (Accessed 03.08.2020)

[12] Press statement Minister of Labour and Social Protection, 26 November 2019 http://www.mmuncii.ro/j33/index.php/ro/comunicare/comunicate-de-presa/5679-20191126-dp-ministrul-mmps-cancelarie-pm?highlight=WyJtaW5pbSJd (Accessed 03.08.2020)

Employee representation at the workplace is provided either through a “representative union organisation” or through elected employee representatives. Both have similar rights, and both are involved in collective bargaining. However, they are alternatives, and the union has precedence. Employee representatives can only be elected if there is no representative union organisation..

Union organisations are the prime body for employee representation. Only if there is no “representative trade union organisation” at the workplace may the employees – provided there are more than 20 – elect employee representatives (reprezentantii salariatilor).[1]

However, following the 2011 Social Dialogue Act, a union needs to have a majority of employees (50% plus one) at a workplace as members in order to be “representative”, and in most workplaces they do not reach this threshold.

Employers are, however, under no obligation to ensure that employee representatives are elected.

There are no official figures on the proportion of employee represented by either unions or employee representatives at workplace level. However, the figures on workplace level collective agreements, which can only be signed by employee representatives if there is no representative union present, give an indication of the split. In 2017, almost seven out of eight (85.5%) agreements at this level were signed by employee representatives rather than unions, and, in the private sector, the proportion signed by employee representatives was even higher at 92.4%.The situation is reversed in the public sector, where three-quarters of agreements (73.4%) were signed by unions.[2]

Despite this the number of trade union organisations registered with the authorities has steadily increased in recent years, rising from 9,398 in 2012 to 9,944 in 2016. However, it has been suggested that this may be the result of new organisations being created but defunct organisations not being removed from the register.[3]

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, just over half (52%) of establishments in Romania with at least 10 employees had some form of official employee representation, either a trade union or elected employee representatives. This is well above the EU28 average of 32%.

As elsewhere in Europe, larger organisations were much more likely to have such a structure than smaller ones. The survey shows that 92% of establishments with more than 250 employees had representation, but even among those with between 50 and 249 employees, 90% had either a union or elected employee representatives. In smaller workplaces in Romania, those with between 10 and 49 employees, the survey indicates that just over 44% had employee representation.[4]

Numbers and structure

The numbers and structure of trade union representation at the workplace depend on the rules of the union. However, under the 2011 Social Dialogue Act a union can only be set up by at least 15 individuals in the same company. In the past, it was 15 individuals in the same industry or occupation.

However, if there is no representative union organisation at the workplace and it has more than 20 employees, the employees are entitled to elect representatives at a general meeting. The legislation does not stipulate how many should be elected, stating only that the number should be mutually agreed with the employer, in relation to the number of employees.

Tasks and rights

The representative workplace union and the elected employee representatives both have rights in relation to collective bargaining (see section on collective bargaining) and information and consultation, although if there is a representative union organisation, no employee representatives can be elected.

In most specific areas, there is no difference in the rights enjoyed either by the representative union organisation or by the employee representatives. However, the Labour Code does describe the tasks and rights of the employee representatives separately (Labour Code Article 223). These are to:

• to ensure that employees’ rights are complied with;
• to participate in drawing up the company’s internal rules;
• to promote the interests of employees in relation to pay, working conditions, working time and rest time, employment stability and other professional, economic and social interests;
• to notify the Labour Inspectorate of any breaches of regulations; and
• to negotiate collective agreements.

However, the Labour Code also makes clear (Article 224) that it is the employees as a whole, in the general assembly, who decide how the employee representatives should exercise these rights.

In the area of information and consultation, there is a general obligation on the employer to consult with the union or the employee representatives on decisions “likely to affect substantially their rights and interests” (Article 40). There are also a number of specific issues where the representative union organisation or the employee representatives must be consulted. These include:

• short-time working because of a temporary reduction in activity (Article 52);
• collective redundancies, where the union or the employee representatives have the right to make alternative proposals, to which the employer must respond (Articles 69 and 71);
• work schedules (Article 129);
• holiday arrangements (Article 148);
• business transfers, where both the company transferring the business and the one receiving it should consult the union or the employee representatives (Article 174);
• the development of health and safety measures (Article 178);
• the annual training plan (Article 195) and
• internal company rules, which cover a range of topics, from disciplinary procedure to the specific rights and obligations of the employer and employees (Article 241).

Information and consultation rights have been strengthened by legislation implementing the 2002 EU directive on a general framework for information and consultation at national level, which came into force on 1 January 2007(Legea nr. 467/2006). It states that the employer should inform and consult about the recent and probable future development of the business, the current situation and likely changes in employment, and issues likely to lead to substantial changes to work organisation or contractual relations. As with the Labour Code, this legislation makes clear that these rights are exercised in the first instance by the trade union. It is only when it is not present that they pass to the employee representatives

As well as collective bargaining and information and consultation rights, the workplace union is specifically entitled to support union members in dispute with the employer in court.

Election and term of office

The choice and term of office of workplace union representatives depend on the rules of the union.

Employee representatives in workplaces where there are more than 20 employees and where there is no representative union organisation are elected by the employees’ general meeting – provided that at least half of the employees vote. All employees aged over 18 can stand as candidates and senior staff are not excluded, as they are in some countries.

The legislation does not set out any specific election or nomination procedures for employee representatives. Their period of office is two years.

Protection against dismissal

The elected leaders of the workplace union cannot be dismissed during their period of office for reasons related to their activities as union leaders. They are also legally protected against any coercion or limitation of their functions. However, this protection represents a reduction in the level of protection they enjoyed before a change in the Labour Code, introduced in 2011. Before 2011 union leaders were also protected for two years following their period of office. They have also lost protection against being dismissed for other reasons, which was the case before 2011.

Elected employee representatives are also only protected during their term of office against dismissal for reasons linked to the fulfilment of their duties as employee representatives.

Time off and other resources

The rights of the elected leaders of the representative union organisation at the workplace to time off now depend on a collective agreement at company level, and this time off is not paid (Social Dialogue Act, Article 35). Before the Act these local representatives had the right to three to five days paid time off.

The time off for elected employee representatives must similarly be fixed in a collective agreement or through direct agreement with the employer (Labour Code Article, 225). There is no general right for paid time off for employee representatives.

Training rights

Neither the leaders of the representative union organisation at the workplace nor elected employee representatives have any statutory rights to time off or payment for training for their role.

Representation at group level

The legislation does not provide for any form of employee representation above company level.

[1] Labour Code Article 221 and following

[2] Situația salariaților din România: 2018 by Ștefan Guga, Syndex 2019 https://www.syndex.ro/sites/default/files/files/pdf/2019-06/Situa%C8%9Bia%20salaria%C8%9Bilor%20din%20Rom%C3%A2nia%20%282018%29.pdf (Accessed 03.08.2020)

[3] Romania Statistical Yearbook 2017 and Romania 2018: Annual Review of Labour Relations and Social Dialogue, by Victoria Stociu Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung, 2019 http://library.fes.de/pdf-files/bueros/bratislava/15363.pdf (Accessed 03.08.2020)

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

Employee representatives have no right to be board members in Romania, although they can be invited to attend board meetings for some items.

Joint stock companies in Romania (SAs) can choose between a single-tier and a two-tier company structure, with a management and an executive board. In neither variant have employees a right to be board members.

However, an employer may invite the representative trade union at workplace level to the board of directors to discuss “issues of professional, economic and social interest” (Social Dialogue Act, Article 30). The union should be told of the board’s decisions on the issues discussed within two working days.

Romanian members of European bodies linked with European Works Councils and the European Company are chosen by the existing employee representatives, who, in the vast majority of cases, will be the trade union representatives at company level.

European Works Councils

Romanian members of the special negotiating body (SNB) for an EWC are appointed by the existing employees’ representatives. These are defined in the legislation as the trade union representatives, unless there is no union, in which case employees have a right to elect individuals to represent their interests. If there are no existing employees’ representatives – either trade unionists or others – Romanian employees can elect the Romanian members of the SNB directly.

The same procedures apply for the Romanian members of an EWC set up under the fallback procedures in the annex to the directive.

European Company

Romanian members of the special negotiating body (SNB) for a European Company are appointed by the existing employees’ representatives. These are defined in the legislation as the trade union representatives, unless there is no union, in which case employees have a right to elect individuals to represent their interests. If there are no existing employees’ representatives – either trade unionists or others – Romanian employees can elect the Romanian members of the SNB directly.

The same procedures apply for the Romanian members of the SE representative body set up under the fallback procedures in the annex to the directive. The legislation does not deal with how Romanian representatives at board level under the fallback procedures to the directive are to be chosen.

Romania has a system of specially elected health and safety representatives, who should be present in all organisations with at least 10 employees. In larger organisations (50 or more employees) a joint health and safety committee should be established. This has a wide range of duties, although the employer is not obliged to accept its decisions.

Basic approach at workplace level

The employer is obliged to ensure the safety and health of workers in all aspects of their employment and any obligations imposed on workers do not affect the basic principle.

Employee health and safety bodies

Employee representation in the area of health and safety is provided by specially elected health and safety representatives – literally workers’ representatives with specific responsibility for safety and health at work (reprezentantii lucratorilor cu raspunderi specifice in domeniul securitatii si sanatatii in munca). In organisations with 50 or more employees, these representatives are members of a joint employee/employer health and safety committee (Comitetul de securitate si sanatate in munca), which has a wide range of duties.

Numbers and structure

Health and safety representatives should be elected in all organisations employing at least 10 people, and the number increases with the size of the workforce (see table).

These are minimum figures, set out in the government decision implementing the main legislation. Collective agreements can provide for higher numbers.

In organisations with 50 or more employees a joint health and safety committee should also be established. It may also be necessary to set up a health and safety committee in smaller organisations, if the labour inspector thinks that this is justified, given the nature of the risks involved. The employee members of the health and safety committee are the elected health and safety representatives, although where a health and safety committee is set up in organisations with fewer than 50 employees, there are two employee representatives. The other members of the committee are the employer or a representative of the employer, management representatives with specific health and safety responsibilities and the occupational physician, where present (see below).

There should be an equal number of employee and employer members, but the committee should be chaired by the employer or the employer’s representative. If the organisation uses an external health and safety service (see below) its representatives will be invited to attend, and the labour inspector can also be present. Notification is sent out in advance and the minutes of the meeting are sent to the labour inspectorate as well being displayed at the workplace. Decisions are taken on the basis of a two thirds majority.

Research by the European Agency for Safety and Health at Work in 2014 found that 78% of workplaces in Romania had health and safety representatives and 30% had a health and safety committee. These figures are both well 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

There is a general obligation on employers to inform and consult with workers and/or their representatives on health and safety issues.

In addition, health and safety representatives have specific responsibilities to:

• work with the employers to improve health and safety conditions at work;
• accompany the individual or individuals carrying out risk assessment;
• help workers become aware of the need to implement health and safety measures at work;
• notify the employer or health and safety committee about any proposals to improve working conditions;
• monitor the implementation of the plan to prevent and protect against risks;
• inform the competent authorities if legal health and safety provisions are not complied with.

Health and safety representatives also have the right to ask the employer to take appropriate measures to reduce risks and eliminate hazards and they can appeal to appropriate authorities if they feel that the employer has not done enough to ensure safe and healthy working conditions. They can also make representations to the labour inspectorate during inspections.

The tasks to be undertaken by the health and safety committee are more detailed. It should:

• analyse and make proposals on health and safety policy, and the organisation’s plan for the prevention of and the protection against risks;
• monitor compliance with this plan, and ensure that sufficient resources are available to carry it out;
• assess the health and safety implications of the introduction of new technology and make proposals on how any resulting problems should be resolved;
• assess the choice, maintenance and use of equipment, and of collective and personal protective equipment;
• evaluate the work of any external agency providing health and safety services and advise whether the services should be retained or dispensed with;
• make proposals on work organisation, taking account of the position of particularly vulnerable groups;
• assess complaints received from employees on their working conditions, and the provision of health and safety services, whether provided externally or internally;
• monitor whether health and safety law and instructions from the labour inspectors are being complied with;
• examine employees’ proposals for improving health and safety;
• investigate accidents at work and occupational diseases, and propose measures to deal with them;
• ensure that its own instructions are being complied with, and make a written report on this;
• discuss the written report on health and safety which the employer should provide at least once a year (see below).

As indicated above, the employer must present an annual report to the health and safety committee setting out the overall health and safety situation, as well as a plan for prevention and protection in the following year. As well as going to the health and safety committee, this should also be sent to the labour inspectorate. The employer must also inform the committee about measures relating to first aid, fire fighting and evacuation.

Where the employer chooses not to accept the proposals of the health and safety committee, he or she must justify this refusal and the justification must be noted in the minutes of the meeting.

Frequency of meetings

The health and safety committee should meet at least once every three months, and more frequently if necessary.

Election and term of office

Health and safety representatives are elected by the employees according to procedures laid down by collective agreement. The term of office is normally two years.

Resources, time off and training

Members of the health and safety committee are entitled to paid time off. For health and safety committee members the amount is laid down by law and rises with the size of the workforce (see table). These figures are for each health and safety representative.

The employer must also provide them with the resources to carry out their work.

In addition, each health and safety representative is entitled to 40 hours’ training when first elected.

Protection against dismissal

Health and safety representatives have protection against dismissal.

Other elements of workplace health and safety

Depending on the size of the organisation and the nature of its activities employers can comply with their health and safety obligations in one of four ways: they can take on the work themselves; they can designate one of more employees to deal with the health and safety tasks; they can set up an internal health and safety service; or they can use an external health and safety service.

In small organisations, those with fewer than 10 employees, which do not operate in highly risky industries, such as the manufacture of explosives or work with radioactive substances, the employer can take on the health and safety tasks, provided that he or she has had at least 40 hours training. This also applies in larger organisations – with 10 to 49 employees – provided that these are in industries where there is no risk of accidents or disease causing death or disability. For these smaller companies, it is also possible for health and safety tasks to be outsourced to an external provider.

In the case of organisations with 50 to 249 employees, the employer can either designate one or more employees to carry out the health and safety tasks or set up an internal health and safety service. In the case of organisations with 250 or more employees, as well as all organisations operating in activities of high risk, the employer must set up an internal health and safety service. Designated health and safety workers must have had at least 80 hours of training, as must those working in the internal health and safety service (more for the person in charge).

In all cases the employer must use an external health and safety service if internal employees do not have the skills or capacity to carry out the necessary health and safety tasks.

National context

The ministry responsible for health and safety at work is the Ministry of Labour and Social Justice (Ministerul Muncii și Justiției Sociale). Compliance with Romania’s health and safety laws and regulations is ensured by the Labour Inspectorate (Inspecția muncii), an administrative body subordinate to the Ministry of Labour and Social Justice. The Labour Inspectorate also enforces laws relating to general labour rights and access to the labour market.

Trade unions and employers are able to influence health and safety policy through their membership of the National Tripartite Council for Social Dialogue (Consiliul Național Tripartit pentru Dialog Social), which has a wide economic and social remit but can discuss health and safety issues. The presidents of the five national representative trade union confederations are members of the National Tripartite Council, which is chaired by the prime minister.[2]

Key legislation

Law No. 319, 14 July 2006 – Law on Safety and Health at Work

Government decision 1425/2006

Government decision 955/2010

Legea nr. 319 din 14 iulie 2006 - Legea securităţii şi sănătăţii în muncă

Hotararea de Guvern 1425 din 2006

Hotararea de Guvern 955 din 2010

[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 – Romania by Ioana - Georgiana Nicolescu and, Alina Trifu, OSH Wiki

https://oshwiki.eu/wiki/OSH_systems_at_national_level_-_Romania