Recently, a book, "Labor law with commentary", by a group of authors (among whom are Prof. Zarko Potocnjak, the author of the law, Jozo Skara, the minister for labor in the Croatian government and Vera Babic, assistant to Mr. Skara) was published. Prof. Potocnjak and the representatives of the executive authorities are in agreement when the problems of the 150,000 persons on forced labor are concerned. The authors believe that article 210 of the Labor law (Sindicates or associations of syndicates have a right to call a strike with the goal of protection of economic and social interests of their members) actually means that the aforementioned 150,000 people on forced labor who hadn't received their salaries in 5 months do not have a right to strike. Therefore, if they do call a strike, a court can ban it and police act against the striking workers!
In short, the arguments of the authors are as follows: the right to fair salary is protected by the law. Workers should enforce that right through courts.
The Supreme Court banned the strike giving the same reasons as in the book "Labor law with commentary", with an additional comment that the court has reached its decision through gramatical interpretation of article 210 of the Labor law. I invite the readers and especially lawyers and judges, to carefully read article 210 (quoted at the start of this article) and try to understand how it was possible to reach the conclusion that a strike because of huge wage arrears is illegal. Furthermore, article 60.1 of the Croatian Constitution states: The right to strike is guaranteed.
Detrimental influence of the state authorities and the aforementioned book is obvious from the verdict of the County court in Zagreb. The court banned the strike in Oroslav company Prajs in which the employees hadn't received their salaries for 4 months. The court didn't even bother to justify its decision but took it as self evident that a strike because of wage arrears is illegal. It remains to be seen whether the Supreme Court will insist on the same interpretation of the Labor law when this case comes to its attention.
This interpretation of the Labor law doesn't make sense for several reasons. First, it cannot be reached by the grammatical analysis of the text. Secondly, such interpretation contravenes article 60.1 of the Croatian Constitution. Third, by making such a decision, judicial authorities have overstepped their jurisdiction: they aim to regulate social relations in accordance with the state policy while this should be the prerogative of the parliament. The Parliament should solve the problem either by truthfully interpreting or amending the labor law.
Fourth, and most important, this reading of the law makes it impossible to fairly resolve strike related problems in Croatian conditions, and this judicial practice will unavoidably lead to anarchy. Then, the employers will beg unions to organize strikes, because strikes are, after all, organized actions and protect their property. One of the possible responses of the syndicates to such practice may be to dissolve union locals in those companies where courts ban strike; that way, unions will absolve themselves of responsibility and let employers deal with a mob.
Suggestion to 150,000 workers who haven't received their pay for months, to protect their rights in courts is highly cynical, although such advice may work in legal theory. Unfortunately, we are not engaging in theoretical discussions but are dealing with raw practice. Workers are forced to work without pay for a few more years until the overwhelmed judicial authorities resolve their own and worker's problems!
The example of Krapina textile industry (KTI) is a good illustration of how all this works in practice; Feral has already written about this company several times in the past.
Isn't this another case of implementation of the state policy? There are indications that this might be the case. Recently, during the Krapina arts festival, dissatisfied KTI workers announced a demonstration in front of the invited officials. Allegedly, because of that, unavoidable guest Franjo Tudman this time passed the festival. Instead, minister Ivan Jarnjak and other guests experienced the wrath of the workers. The situation calmed down after the promises by the Interior minister, Ivan Jarnjak, that he himself will come to Krapina and talk to the workers. He kept his promise and, several days later, together with minister Skaro and other collaborators he came to a meeting with approximately 500 KTI workers. According to several people who were present at that meeting, Krapina police chief, Mr. Fruk tried to convince present workers that their suits were useless and that their powerful minister will make sure that KTI problem is resolved by the end of the year; by then all workers will be receiving 500 kunas per month.
Municipal court president admitted that he gave a photocopy of one of the suits, to which only the involved parties are supposed to have access, to minister Jarnjak; Minister Jarnjak used that photocopy for a political showdown with the leftist parties in Krapina. After a long conversation, court president failed to understand that by giving a copy of a suit to the minister, he blatantly broached the principle of the independence of the judiciary, and that minister Jarnjak damaged the integrity of the court by demanding a copy from it.
What position should the lawyer who represents those 598 workers take when the Minister of police and local police chief are reading his documents and publicly trying to convince his clients to give up their suits? And the court doesn't see anything wrong in that! I believe that it is my duty to inform the public about these events, whatever the consequences. I also expect a public apology from Minister Jarnjak and Mr. Fruk.
And now the final malversation:
KTI, with its 700 employees and the property valued at DM 62 million comes under control of the fictive company Krateks Ltd. (!!!) instead of going through the lawful privatization process. At the same time, Krateks Ltd. changes its name to KTI (!!!). With this transaction, Zagrebacka bank, tried and succeeded in avoiding privatisation of KTI, and hence cheated the remaining 700 workers.
In 1995, Zagrebacka Bank sold KTI to alleged fighter for the Croatian state, Zvonimir Rilovic for DEM 4,200,000 (according to some versions for DEM 2,700,000 , by exchange of shares in the Zagreb hotel Esplanade).
At the start of 1996, Zvonimir Rilovic fired all the remaining workers.
The author is a lawyer from Zagreb, specialist for labor laws