European Restructuring Monitor (ERM)
Eurofound's ERM database on restructuring-related legal regulations provides information on regulations in the Member States of the European Union and Norway which are explicitly or implicitly linked to anticipating and managing change.
Article 127, 128
The employer is obliged to notify the competent public employment service of the consultations related to collective redundancies of at least 20 employees, of whom at least 5 made redundant on grounds of severe business conditions. The notification has to contain the information on the duration of consultations with the works council, outcomes and conclusions resulting therefrom, with a statement of the works council attached thereto. The works council may send any comments and suggestions they may have to the competent public authority responsible for employment and to the employer, with regards to the mentioned notification.
Projected collective redundancies notified to the competent public authority responsible for employment take effect no earlier than 30 days after the mentioned notification. The competent public authority responsible for employment may within a period of 30 days request the employer to postpone either collective or individual redundancies for a maximum 30 days if the employer is able to ensure the continuation of employment during this extended period.
After the works council has submitted its observations, the employer has to consider and illustrate all options and proposals that could prevent the expected redundancies. This is an obligation introduced in 2017 for the employer which was not stipulated in the previous labor act. Thus, the legislator gives the works council a slightly more important role in advising in case of collective redundancy. According to the amended labor act, the employer has no longer the obligation to prepare the redundancy (redeployment) program. However, the law does not stipulate who is responsible for the preparation of redundancy (redeployment) program.
With article 218, the legislator is trying to avoid the inevitable, and by administrative measures to complicate and prolong the cancellation procedure, which will, in most cases, end with the termination of employment of certain workers. De facto, it is about the state buying the extension of the workers' notice period, with no real prospects of ultimately affecting the change in the status of the workers who are covered by this kind of notice. The specific provisions "freeze" the implementation of the redundancy plan in the part that foresees the termination of a certain number of workers, for a period of 30 (thirty) days from the date of delivery of the redundancy plan to the competent public employment service. The phrase from paragraph 1 "(...) the employment relationship must not end (...)" has the legal effect of ending the notice period.
Paragraph 2 of the cited article foresees the possibility for the competent public employment service to order a postponement of the cancellation of all or individual workers for whom a redundancy program has been prepared for a maximum of thirty days, if during the extended period it can ensure the continuation of the worker's employment (Graf, 2023).
Although there is no longer an obligation to notify about the measures taken to dispose of redundant workers, the employer still has to at least mention some of the previously mentioned elements, or as an explanation that he has already disposed of some of the workers on that way (e.g. by retraining) and for some other measures even simply mention that he did not have the opportunity to implement them. If this were not the case, there would be nothing to inform the works council about this type of notification. The employer would certainly have to provide the works council with information about the possibility of employing workers in other jobs, regardless of the fact that this is no longer a requirement for business-related dismissal. Namely, given that the law obliges him to give notice of measures to dispose of redundant workers, he or she should also mention to the works council the issue of employing workers on other jobs. In the case that there are no other jobs, he or she should inform the works council about such circumstances. He or she can also state the reason why workers from the collective surplus cannot be employed on freelance jobs (e.g. lack of qualifications, etc.). Employment in other jobs is certainly the most common and most realistic measure to prevent layoffs, so the employer should definitely take this into account when collective redundancy and informing the works council (Rozman, 2023).
Eurofound (2015), Croatia: Public authorities information and consultation on dismissals, Restructuring legislation database, Dublin, https://apps.eurofound.europa.eu/legislationdb/public-authorities-information-and-consultation-on-dismissals/croatia
While large-scale redundancies at major manufacturers dominate the headlines, the true impact of this restructuring is being felt most acutely within the wider supply chain. This article examines the uneven distribution of job losses, the growing geographical shifts in production, ...
Eurofound’s ERM restructuring legislation database offers an overview of key restructuring-related regulations in the EU Member States and Norway. Its content is continuously updated to reflect any changes made by national legislators in response to, for instance, policy shifts, legal ...
Can Europe still achieve its ambitions for battery manufacturing? To answer this, the article looks at data from Eurofound’s European Restructuring Monitor and explores what recent large-scale restructuring events reveal about the state of play in the EU battery sector.
This working paper offers a comprehensive methodological overview of the European Restructuring Monitor (ERM) databases. Even though the methodology has not changed over time, new categories have been added, and the way it has been used by researchers and policymakers ...
