Text file: 2166.txt
author: igica
downvotes: 2
end consideration date: 2011-12-10
id: '2166'
number comments: 10
number views: 6422
proposal type: Competent authority response
response: ' Response by the Ministry of Labour, Family and Social Affairs

  The Employment Service of the Republic of Slovenia (hereinafter referred to as the
  "Employment Service"), whose position and competences are laid down in the Labour
  Market Act (Official Gazette of the Republic of Slovenia, No 80/10) in Articles
  73 to 84, is the central public institution in the labour market and, as a public
  institution, is organised uniformly for the territory of the Republic of Slovenia.
  Its main task is to work with unemployed persons and other jobseekers in the form
  of job placement and employment counselling, lifelong career orientation, the implementation
  of the unemployment insurance system, the implementation of active employment policy
  measures, as well as the production of analytical, development and other professional
  materials in the field of its activity. As the central public institution in the
  labour market, it makes an important contribution to increasing the employment and
  employability of the Slovenian population through the implementation of its mission
  and tasks, and is a key body for the implementation of the policy of the Government
  of the Republic of Slovenia in relation to the consequences of the global recession
  on the Slovenian labour market. Due to its function, the Institute is a key lever
  of the State in solving the unemployment problem and in the integrated treatment
  of unemployed persons and other jobseekers.

  In order to implement the proposal to abolish the Institute, it would be necessary,
  on the basis of thorough analyses prepared in advance, to ensure at least the smooth
  functioning of the existing system of providing unemployment benefits, and to redefine
  and reorganise the functions and tasks of the Institute or the body that would perform
  the above-mentioned tasks in its place. In our view, the implementation of the proposed
  changes in practice would require, in view of the delicate social situation in which
  individuals find themselves when they lose their jobs, truly serious consideration
  and careful, but at the same time up-to-date and rapid action. The proposal is more
  sensible and understandable insofar as it mentions the following. "The proposal
  is more meaningful in terms of its ''restructuring of the institution'', which we
  understand as a proposal to implement measures that would help to increase the professionalism
  and at the same time streamline the work of the institution, in terms of the impact,
  particularly in terms of new jobs for the unemployed. We have no doubt that the
  Institute''s improved organisational structure and a thorough rationalisation of
  its operations could help it to gain in the eyes of the public, but on the other
  hand it is also necessary to take into account the fact that since 2009 the Institute
  has been experiencing a higher influx of unemployed people and a consequently (with
  virtually unchanged staffing levels) enormously increased volume of work and, on
  the other hand, a fall in the number of vacant posts. As regards the allegations
  that employment counsellors are unhelpful and unprofessional, we would like to point
  out that, in addition to educational qualifications and knowledge of all the relevant
  legislation, practical experience, a sense of sympathy for people in need and the
  ability to understand them are also important factors for the performance of the
  job of employment counsellor. However, due to the fact that the civil servants of
  the institution are bound by the legislation adopted, these qualities are often
  not perceived in practice by the people who come into contact with them. In the
  light of the above, we consider the proposal to be inadequate, since it is clearly
  based primarily on the personal experience of the proposer, who makes basic criticisms
  of the Institute''s work in a simplistic and unsubstantiated manner, while at the
  same time apparently being unaware of the full scope and nature of the tasks that
  the Institute is responsible for carrying out. The State, through the Institute,
  cannot directly influence the employment prospects of unemployed persons with employers
  in the real sector either, but can only act as an intermediary, while each individual
  is largely responsible for his or her own success in finding a job.

  In the light of the above, we believe that in the future efforts should be made
  to make the Institute even more effective, while in our opinion it would be neither
  sensible nor beneficial to abolish the Institute in the current economic and social
  situation in which the Republic of Slovenia finds itself. Moreover, it is not insignificant
  that any such change would also require a broad political and social consensus and,
  last but not least, a political decision at the highest level to implement it. In
  view of the above, we cannot comment more specifically on the proposal, which is
  very general and not very detailed.  '
response date: 2012-01-10
response due date: null
sent date: 2011-11-11
title: Abolition or restructuring of the Employment Service
upvotes: 19
url: https://predlagam.vladi.si/predlog/2166
