Decisions adopted by the European Committee of Social Rights at its 321st session


The European Committee of Social Rights adopted at its 321st session (28 June-2 July 2021):

The complaint was registered on April 27, 2020. The ERRC specifies that as part of the police operations carried out on April 4 and 5, 2020 targeting two Voyageurs sites in the Couillet and Jumet districts of the municipality of Charleroi, families, including children, sick people and a pregnant woman saw their caravans and their property seized. The ERRC claims that this situation must be seen in the broader context of the police operations carried out against Travelers communities across Belgium since 2019 and which were the subject of a previous collective complaint lodged in 2019 ( ERRC v. Belgium, complaint n ° 185/2019, decision on admissibility and immediate measures of 14 May 2020). In the present case, the ERRC alleges that the police operations of April 4 and 5, 2020 in Charleroi were carried out without taking into account considerations of proportionality and without offering an alternative solution for the families concerned, such as the provision of ” alternative housing, access to water, sanitation, electricity, food and medical services, and exposed affected families to hardships and health risks, including those associated with COVID-19, in violation of Articles 1§2 (right to work), 11§1 and 3 (the right to health protection), 12§1 (the right to social security), 13§1 (the right to social and medical assistance), 16 (the right of the family to social, legal and economic protection), 17 (the right of children and adolescents to social, legal and economic protection), 30 (the right to protection against poverty and social exclusion), 31 (the right to housing) and E (non-discrimination) of the Ch arte.

The ERRC further requested the committee to indicate to the government immediate measures in accordance with section 36 of its regulations.

The Committee unanimously declared the complaint admissible on June 29, 2021 and decided that there was no need to indicate to the Government any immediate measures.

  • The decision on the merits in Unione Nazionale Dirigenti dello Stato (UNADIS) c. Italy, Complaint No. 147/2017

The complaint was registered on March 20, 2017. UNADIS alleged that Italy violated Articles 1 (right to work), 4 (right to fair remuneration), 5 (right to organize) (6 (right to work) collective bargaining) 24 (right to protection in the event of dismissal) and E (non-discrimination) in conjunction with each of the relevant provisions of the Charter with regard to the situation of some 800 public officials of tax administrations who, after having exercised under fixed-term contracts, functions higher than those when they were initially recruited, lost these functions due to changes in legislation and case law, without having the right to regularize their position on management positions they have held for years.a worker is entitled to an indefinite contract after having worked on a fixed-term contract for more than 36 successive months, the same protection does not apply to public sector employees ic, including those appointed as managers (directors) of tax agencies under fixed-term mandates, sometimes renewed for more than ten years. In addition, UNADIS alleges that employees of tax administrations appointed as executives within the framework of fixed-term mandates are treated differently from permanent executives with regard to end-of-service allowances, pension rights and sickness benefits. Finally, UNADIS complained that the experience acquired by working as directors of tax agencies under fixed-term mandates could not be taken into account for future competitions.

In accordance with Article 8§2 of the Protocol providing for a system of collective complaints, this decision will only be made public after the adoption of a resolution by the Committee of Ministers, or at the latest four months after its transmission to the Committee. of Ministers.

Source link

Leave A Reply

Your email address will not be published.