Trade Union Federation of Belarus defends interests of authorities rather than workers

We continue exploring what the FPB is about. Let us look at how it defends the interests of its members.

Although the Labour Code expressly prohibits discrimination and politically motivated dismissals, the Federation’s structures have not opposed workers’ lay-offs for taking part in rallies and strike actions or for expressing their views. In a number of cases, workplace union offices would sign the union consent form required for dismissals of activists, thus, violating workers’ rights rather than defending them.

For instance, in August 2020, workers of the Belarusian Metallurgical Plant in the town of Zhlobin went on strike, protesting against the presidential elections outcome. As a result, several protesters were fired and three of them were sentenced to up to 3 years in prison under Article 342 of the Criminal Code for “organizing group actions resulting in a grave breach of the peace”.

Attempts to set up an independent workplace union at the plant also led to dismissals. The FPB never tried to protect those workers.

Similar situations were observed at the Naftan oil refinery, the Hrodno Azot fertilizer plant, and other Belarusian enterprises.

In 2020, when the Supreme Court of Belarus dissolved the independent unions in the country claiming their activities to be “extremist”, the FPB also remained silent. Although, one could hardly expect anything else as the Federation’s leadership openly state that they are “a conduit” for all directives coming from the authorities and are directly accountable to them.

Participants of the FPB X-th Congress joining the flash mob “Our Victory! Our President!”

“Some of the FPB leaders even prevent workers from calling in the labour inspectorate, proposing to settle all issues “among ourselves inside the workplace””

Today, many workplace unions affiliated to the Federation do not oppose arbitrary dismissals or putting pressure on workers, particularly if the workers in question are on the lists of the “disloyal ones”. Employers lay people off with the consent of their pocket union committee with no real checks on the grounds for the dismissals, which is a violation of workers’ right to protection.

As, after the elimination of independent trade unions, the FPB remains the only trade union (only by name, but still) organization in the country, the vast majority of workers are its members by default. And if somebody turns out to be a “white crow”, Article 365 of the Labour Code is there to remind them that bonuses and various benefits are available to union members only.

Surplus payments stipulated in collective bargaining agreements (CBAs) can be quite sizeable. So, it is easy to understand why the majority of workers would think twice before giving up their FPB membership. Besides, the predominant atmosphere of fear, intimidation, and repressions in the country forces people to be very cautious.

The Labour Law expert Leanid Sudalenka tells “Salidarnast” that these days the CBAs signed with the FPB involvement at many workplaces do not offer workers genuine protection from arbitrary dismissals, unpaid overtime work, and other violations:

“The FPB representatives, including the Head of the FPB Legal Department Maria Lazar, admit that they often identify violations related to disciplinary sanctions, irregular working hours and rest time, particularly in the agro-industrial and commercial sectors. Yet, the specific measures designed to protect workers in such situations remain vague.

“The FPB is tasked with monitoring the compliance with the Labour Code in the workplace, but its affiliates often ignore cases of excessive work load, unpaid overtime work, inadequate sanitary conditions. And some union leaders even keep workers from calling in the Labour Inspectorate, proposing to settle all issues “among ourselves inside the workplace”

Violations related to overtime work are particularly numerous in the healthcare sector of Belarus where overtime work has become commonplace as there is a keen shortage of personnel. And supervisors often have to breach the law when, for instance, they draft the night duty schedules. Both the Government and the unions are well aware of this yet all keep mum, blaming either the management of healthcare institutions or medical doctors themselves.

“A union that was getting its subscriptions through a check-off system had no qualms issuing a proxy to its in-house lawyer to represent… their employer in court!”

Leanid Sudalenka recalls his personal experience of an arbitrary dismissal:

“Article 372 of the Labour Code requires the unions to defend workers in case of dismissals, labour disputes, or transfers. However, when I worked as a lawyer at the OAO Beltransgas, the employer refused to extend my labour contract without quoting any meaningful grounds.

“I went to court, claiming a discriminatory dismissal. And there I found out that my workplace union had not only decided to steer clear of my case, refusing to defend me as a member, but had even fraudulently backdated its signature on the labour contract termination consent form to be used as evidence against me in court.

“As a result, I, a conscientious worker with no record of labour and performance discipline breaches and a father of three, was denied my right to work based exclusively on the employer’s biased opinion.

“I can recall quite a number of examples from my experience when the FPB representatives not only remained idle but actually sided with their members’ opponents.

“For instance, as the legal inspector of the Belarusian Radio and Electronics Workers’ Union (REP) I, working by proxy, represented the interests of some female workers of a poultry farm in the District Court of the Vetkovsky District of the Homyel Region where the farm was located.

“The defendant in the case (the poultry farm) was represented by the lawyer of the FPB-affiliated Agro-Industrial Workers’ Union. And that union whose subscriptions were stopped from the wages of the poultry farm workers had no qualms issuing a proxy to its legal officer to defend the interests of… the employer, the poultry farm, against its own members!!!

“Well, we won the case and the employer paid up whatever they owed the female workers.

“I also remember a story about Lukashenka’s Decree No. 3 “On Prevention of Social Parasitism” which actually introduced the notion of idlers’ tax in the society. At the time, there were other unions active in country apart from the FPB, and one of them, the REP union, offered the FPB to join efforts and make the authorities abrogate the Decree as anti-popular, unlawful, and unjust.

“But the Federation chose to decline the cooperation offer. It just would not go against the powers that be, although the Decree affected a huge number of people and, evidently, who but the unions should be the first to stand up for them.”

Pavel Sakalousky, former Deputy Chair of the Belarusian Independent Union’s (BNP) affiliate at the 1st Mining Division of the OAO Belaruskali potash fertilizer company, is convinced that, the Trade Union Federation is, in essence, a servicing organization for the elite in power:

“Look, today all enterprise managers are union members and they, of course, are in this or that way connected to the powers that be and their structures and are accountable to them. What independent union policy is there to talk about in this situation?

“For instance, today, the official union at the Belaruskali prevents workers from filing complaints with the Labour Inspectorate because all floor managers are, in fact, members of the union. And when there is a complaint or an issue emerges, they go to their superiors – depending on the scale of the issue in question.

“But, as a rule, such issues are settled locally, on the ground: a person who has filed a complaint is summoned by their direct manager and gets intimidated, leaving them no chance to actually have the issue resolved. And the problems keep piling up. While people, when they see all this, simply stop making complaints fearful of retaliation.

“Belarus has a very “employer-friendly” system: the employer does not have to explain to the employee why exactly they get the sack”

For over 25 years now the majority of economically active population in Belarus are employed under fixed-term labour contracts. In this situation, all employers, regardless of the form of ownership, have the right to terminate employment relations with any worker once their fixed-term contracts expire. And there is no need to give any grounds!

Comfy, isn’t it? You have a dispute with your boss, you harbour all the wrong thoughts in your head, you have LIKEed the wrong post in the social media – Good-Bye! You say your performance record is blameless? Doesn’t matter none! You are fired and done with. Moreover, there is no effective legal remedy for such situations, since, formally, your labour contract has simply expired.

That said, the system is in stark conflict with several Conventions of the International Labour Organization (ILO) that guarantee workers’ rights and establish a floor of international labour standards (and Belarus, in the area of labour legislation, still recognizes the prevalence of universally accepted principles of the international law).

In particular, one of the ILO Conventions prohibits the use of work as a tool of political pressure, retaliation for taking part in a strike action, or as a means of discrimination.

Yet what we observe in Belarus is exactly the opposite: the fixed-term labour contract system – more to the point, the threat of the contract non-extension – is used a way to control workers. And the Trade Union Federation – which has not made a single attempt to challenge the system – is snugly built into this mechanism and will never oppose its operation, particularly, if this could mean being disloyal to the authorities.

Victoria Leontieva

Read this text in рус