Text file: 8993.txt
author: Marjan Bizilj
downvotes: 1
end consideration date: 2018-03-08
id: '8993'
number comments: 4
number views: 3639
proposal type: Competent authority response
response: "Response by the Ministry of Labour, Family, Social Affairs and Equal Opportunities\n\
  Article 200 of the Employment Protection and Labour Code provides for the enforcement\
  \ of rights by the employer and for judicial protection. Article 200(3) of the ZDR-1\
  \ specifically regulates the exercise of judicial protection in respect of the unlawfulness\
  \ of dismissal and other methods of termination of the employment contract, and\
  \ the unlawfulness of employers' decisions on an employee's disciplinary liability.\
  \ In this case, the employee has a direct remedy by bringing an action before the\
  \ competent labour court within 30 days of the date of service of the termination\
  \ of the employment contract or the date on which the employee had actual knowledge\
  \ of the infringement of the right. On the expiry of that period, the worker loses\
  \ the right to judicial protection.\nWith regard to the proposal to extend the 30-day\
  \ time limit for bringing an action before the competent labour tribunal to one\
  \ year, since the time limit currently set is significantly too short and to the\
  \ detriment of the employee, who is a person who is not legally trained, we would\
  \ like to make it clear that any proposals for changes to the legislation on the\
  \ employment relationship must be considered from the perspective of both the employee\
  \ and the employer. A longer time limit for bringing an action may mean more time\
  \ for the employee to familiarise himself with his legal options, but it also prolongs\
  \ the employee's period of uncertainty, as the outcome of the proceedings is unknown\
  \ (the court may also determine the lawfulness of the termination of the employment\
  \ contract). Similarly, a longer time limit for bringing an action would not be\
  \ in the employer's favour, as it would also prolong the period of uncertainty for\
  \ the employer and would significantly increase the employer's costs in the event\
  \ of the employee's success in the legal proceedings. The need to proceed expeditiously\
  \ in labour disputes is also based on the principle of expediting proceedings, which\
  \ is enshrined in the Law on Labour and Social Courts.\nFinally, we would like to\
  \ recall that social dialogue is the basic way of reaching agreement in our society\
  \ on fundamental issues in the field of labour law, and that changes in the future\
  \ will also have to be the result of constructive social dialogue and the broadest\
  \ possible consensus of the social partners on all the issues discussed in the field\
  \ of labour law.\n "
response date: 2018-04-10
response due date: null
sent date: 2018-02-15
title: Amendment of Article 200(3) of ZDR-1
upvotes: 17
url: https://predlagam.vladi.si/predlog/8993
