Govsi podkast: O delavskih pravicah in inšpektoratu za delo

V najnovejši, že 15. epizodi podkasta GOVSI, je gostja glavna inšpektorica Inšpektorata za delo, Katja Čoh Kragolnik. Voditelj Zoran Potič je z njo razpravljal o aktualnih vprašanjih delavskih pravic, zakonodaje ter vlogi inšpektorata v praksi. 

V Sloveniji imamo trenutno rekordno nizko brezposelnost in skoraj milijon zaposlenih, je glavna inšpektorica Čoh Kragolnik poudarila, da nizka brezposelnost ne pomeni nujno manjšega števila kršitev delavskih pravic. Med najpogostejšimi kršitvami je izpostavila neizplačilo plač, regresa in odpravnin, nepravilnosti pri odpovedih pogodb ter kršitve na področju varnosti in zdravja pri delu. 

V pogovoru se dotakneta tudi nove zakonodaje, kot je pravica do odklopa, in odprtih vprašanj v zvezi z beleženjem delovnega časa, kjer se soočajo s sistematičnimi kršitvami. 

Katja Čoh Kragolnik je predstavila tudi delovanje skupine inšpektorjev za hitro odzivanje, ki se osredotoča na najbolj pereče primere kršitev. Poudarila je, da so delavci v Sloveniji enako zaščiteni, ne glede na državljanstvo, vendar opozorila na poskuse obvoda zakonodaje pri zaposlovanju delavcev iz tretjih držav. 

V podkastu je glavna inšpektorica odgovorila tudi na nekaj konkretnih vprašanj, zastavljenih prek vladnih profilov na socialnih omrežjih. 

Vabljeni k poslušanju in ogledu epizode. 

[ENGLISH VERSION]
Gov.si Podcast: On Workers’ Rights and the Labor Inspectorate 

In the latest, 15th episode of the GOVSI podcast, the guest is the Chief Labor Inspector, Katja Čoh Kragolnik. Host Zoran Potič discussed pressing issues surrounding workers’ rights, legislation, and the practical role of the Labor Inspectorate with her. 

While Slovenia currently boasts a record-low unemployment rate and nearly one million employed individuals, Chief Inspector Čoh Kragolnik emphasized that low unemployment does not necessarily mean fewer violations of workers’ rights. Among the most common violations, she highlighted non-payment of wages, holiday allowances, and severance payments, irregularities in contract terminations, and breaches of occupational health and safety regulations. 

The conversation also touched upon new legislation, such as the right to disconnect, and unresolved issues related to recording working hours, where systematic violations are being observed. 

Katja Čoh Kragolnik also introduced the operations of the rapid-response inspector team, which focuses on the most pressing cases of violations. She stressed that workers in Slovenia are equally protected regardless of their citizenship but pointed out attempts to circumvent legislation when employing workers from third countries. 

In the podcast, the Chief Inspector also addressed specific questions posed through government social media profiles. 

You are invited to listen and watch the episode.   

Transcript

Vladni podkast Gov.si.

Voditelj Zoran Potič: Lep pozdrav v najnovejši, že 15. izvedbi podkasta Gov.si, ki ga pripravlja Urad vlade za komuniciranje, in tokrat z vami tudi Zoran Potič. Tokrat vam bom poskušal razkriti tančice skrivnosti dela in kdo drug bi lahko na to temo kaj več povedal kot glavna inšpektorica inšpektorata za delo Katja Čok Kragolnik.

Glavna inšpektorica za delo Katja Čoh Kragelnik: Lepo pozdravljeni in hvala za povabilo.

Voditelj: Lep pozdrav, Katja. Delo predstavlja ključni dejavnik v življenju posameznika. Ima ekonomske, socialne, psihološke razsežnosti, zato ne pretiravam, če ugotovim, da je delo z vidika zakonodaje, norm in pravil izjemno pomembno področje, če ne najbolj pomembno. Evropska listina o človekovih pravicah in slovenska ustava pravita, da ima vsakdo, torej državljani, pravico do dela in do opravljanja svobodno izbranega ali sprejetega poklica. Evropska listina tudi določa, da državljani tretjih držav, ki smejo delati na ozemlju držav članic, imajo pravico do enakih delovnih pogojev kot državljani Unije. In tu gre za neko teoretično izhodišče, ki pa terja vpogled v prakso. Teorija in praksa se po navadi tepeta, zelo pogosto je to, in bi me, gospa Čoh Kragolnik, zanimalo sledeče. V Sloveniji trenutno beležimo milijon zaposlenih, skoraj. Tako visoke zaposlenosti v samostojni Sloveniji še nismo zabeležili. Stopnja brezposelnosti trenutno znaša dobre 3,5 odstotka, kar je rekordno nizka številka in vprašanje je, ali bo še kdaj v prihodnje mogoče nižja. Na osnovi tega bi dejali, da so za delavca v Sloveniji rajske razmere. Je tako po vašem, glede na to, da imate kot glavna inšpektorica pravico in dolžnost pogledati, kaj se dogaja na področju dela?

Čoh Kragelnik: Ja, o tem bi se vsekakor dalo debatirati. Sicer so trenutni trendi nizke brezposelnosti spodbudni, vendar pa zgolj samo zaradi tega še ne moremo govoriti o manjšem številu kršitev, ko gre za delavske pravice. Verjamem, da če bi se ta trend nadaljeval, kar si verjetno vsi želimo, bi morda čez leto ali celo več lahko govorili tudi o neki boljši delovni kulturi in zmanjšanju števila ugotovljenih kršitev. 

Voditelj: Torej ni vse v zakonodaji. Tudi kultura je tisti dejavnik, mehki dejavnik, ki dviguje pogoje, izboljšuje pogoje dela.

Čoh Kragelnik: Verjamem, da ja. Verjamem, da lahko tudi delavci sami pripomoremo k temu, da postavimo neke meje, če so nam pravice kršene. Veseli me in opažam, da predvsem mlajše generacije dandanes hitreje zamenjajo delodajalca, se pravi v okoljih, kjer niso spoštovani, kjer prihaja do kršitev pravic delavcev. Ne bodo ostajali ti ljudje v teh okoljih, ampak bodo preprosto zamenjali zaposlitev.

Voditelj: Mogoče za začetek bi bilo zanimivo slišati, kakšne so sploh naloge inšpektorata za delo. Pa mogoče, koliko je inšpektorjev v Sloveniji, ki v bistvu nadzirajo to področje?

Čoh Kragelnik: Ja, inšpektorat za delo je organ v sestavi ministrstva, pristojnega za delo. In na inšpektoratu opravljamo inšpekcijsko nadzorstvo, in sicer na treh področjih. Na področju varnosti in zdravja pri delu, na področju delovnih razmerij in na področju socialne varnosti. Kaj pomeni to, da opravljamo inšpekcijsko nadzorstvo? Gre za to, da torej preverjamo, ali zavezanci spoštujejo zakonodajo, se pravi predpise, zakone, pravilnike, kolektivne pogodbe in drugo. V primeru, ko ugotovimo kršitve, lahko zoper delodajalca ukrepamo tako v upravnem postopku, imamo pa tudi posebna pooblastila po Zakonu o prekrških, tako da v primeru ugotovljenih kršitev vodimo tudi prekrškovne postopke.

Voditelj: Pa vas kršitelji ubogajo, poslušajo, upoštevajo odločbe, odloke in tako naprej, navodila inšpektorjev? Kakšne so vaše izkušnje?

Čoh Kragelnik: Ja, lahko rečem, da veliko delodajalcev upošteva in izpolni potem to obveznost, ki jo morajo izpolniti, in potem nekako, to je navadno v tistih primerih, kjer pride do nekih nepravilnosti zaradi neke nepazljivosti, pomote, napake, v drugih primerih, ko pa prihaja do kršitev zaradi neke večje malomarnosti ali pa celo naklepnega ravnanja, tam pa se moramo kar večkrat pojaviti, da dosežemo neke spremembe.

Voditelj: Pa je tega veliko?

Čoh Kragelnik: Tega je kar precej. Še vedno je kar veliko število ugotovljenih kršitev oziroma na podlagi predkaznovanosti ugotavljamo, kdo so tisti delodajalci, ki pogosteje kršijo zakonodajo.

Voditelj: Katere pa so te najpogostejše kršitve pravic delavcev? Koliko je tega, za kaj gre? Imate to razdelano?

Čoh Kragelnik: Ja, imamo. Beležimo statistične podatke po institutih oziroma ugotovljenih kršitvah. Zdaj, lahko rečem, da se na področju delovnih razmerij še vedno največ kršitev nanaša na plačilo za delo, se pravi, da delodajalci ne izplačajo plače do 18. v mesecu za pretekli mesec oziroma jo kasneje izplačajo, potem ko gre za minimalno plačo. Tudi neizplačilo regresa je še vedno precej prisotno, potem neke druge kršitve, kot so recimo v postopkih odpovedi pogodbe o zaposlitvi ali prekarno delo. Potem tudi kršitve zakona, ki ureja trg dela oziroma zaposlovanje. Na področju varnosti in zdravja pri delu pa se precej kršitev nanaša na oceno tveganja, izdelavo te ocene tveganja, na zagotavljanje zdravega okolja za delavca. To so najpogostejše kršitve.

Voditelj: Pa je, glede na to, da so znaki, indikatorji v Evropi, recimo, da se trg dela ohlaja, industrija se ohlaja. Je to že čutiti mogoče na področju pravic delavcev, da so pritiski tukaj že prisotni kot posredni indikator?

Čoh Kragelnik: Ja, moram reči, da z zaskrbljenostjo spremljamo dogajanje v gospodarstvu, te novice, ki se vsakodnevno objavljajo. Se pravi, ko se napovedujejo neke odpovedi večjega števila delavcev. Tukaj beležimo po navadi ene in iste kršitve v zvezi s plačilom za delo, kjer prihaja do tega, da kar nekaj zadnjih plač ni izplačanih, v zvezi z neizplačilom regresa. Sami postopki odpovedi so večkrat neustrezni in pa tudi do neizplačila odpravnin prihaja.

Voditelj: Kaj pa tu, mislim, ko inšpektorat ugotovi kršitev. Kaj lahko delavec v tem primeru potem stori, če gre podjetje v stečaj, če nima sredstev? Kaj lahko doseže v tem primeru?

Čoh Kragelnik: Bližje kot je stečaj, težje je recimo inšpektorjem potem nekaj učinkovito izreči neko kazen oziroma to lahko izrečemo, vendar kazen ne bo plačana. Šla bo terjatev, v stečajno maso in tako naprej. Tako da v teh primerih je predvsem bistveno to, da so delavci seznanjeni s svojimi pravicami, da se obrnejo na stečajnega upravitelja, ki potem dejansko vodi postopke odpovedi oziroma poskrbi, da dobijo izplačano plačo oziroma da morajo prijaviti vse svoje denarne terjatve v stečajno maso. Žal je potem že nekoliko pozno, ko smo že tako daleč, ko govorimo o stečaju.

Voditelj: Ja. No, upajmo na najboljše, da bo tega čim manj.

Čoh Kragelnik: To si vsi želimo, ja.

Voditelj: Če se dotakneva zdaj nekih podrobnosti in aktualnosti. Pravica do odklopa bo v kratkem uveljavljena in gre za neko novost, ki jo prinaša Zakon o delovnih razmerjih. In kakšno, v bistvu prvo vprašanje, kakšno vlogo bo sploh imel inšpektorat pri uveljavljanju te pravice do odklopa?

Čoh Kragelnik: Inšpektorat za delo bo preverjal, ali so delodajalci sprejeli ustrezne ukrepe za zagotovitev pravice do odklopa in na kakšen način so jih sprejeli. Se pravi tam, kjer delodajalca zavezuje kolektivna pogodba dejavnosti, bodo ti ukrepi navedeni v tej kolektivni pogodbi. Če te ni, pridejo v poštev kolektivne pogodbe ožje ravni. To so tako imenovane podjetniške kolektivne pogodbe. Če pa pri delodajalcu ni organiziranega sindikata in tudi nima delavskega zaupnika oziroma sveta delavcev, pa je dolžan delodajalec delavce obvestiti o ukrepih. Vsekakor jih mora tudi v tem primeru sprejeti. Torej delavce obvestiti na pri delodajalcu običajen način in sprejeti nek notranji akt.

Voditelj: Kako pa vi razumete to pravico do odklopa? Ker verjetno mora najprej inšpektor razumeti, da potem zna pravilno to odmerjati pri delodajalcu. Kako naj razumemo to pravico do odklopa?

Čoh Kragelnik: Jaz temu pravim, da pravica do odklopa utrjuje pravico do počitka oziroma do prostega časa delavca. V bistvu gre in ne gre za neko novo pravico. Namreč, če se spoštuje delovni čas, odmori in pa počitki delavcev, potem nam ni treba govoriti o pravici do odklopa, ker je ta nekako samoumevno upoštevana oziroma izpolnjena. Ko pa temu ni tako, je pa to neka dodatna pravica, ki nalaga neke dodatne aktivnosti delodajalcu, da ozavesti, zakaj je prosti čas delavcev pomemben, pa da ozavestimo tudi delavce, zakaj je to tako. Mislim, da se je v določenih poklicih vzpostavila neka kultura stalnega priklopa, kar je lahko nevarno dolgoročno za zdravje delavca. Namreč sčasoma to vodi potem v absentizem, v odsotnosti, kar tudi ni v interesu delodajalca. Tako da jaz vidim kot neko mehko pravico, ki pa lahko ogromno pripomore.

Voditelj: Namreč pred sto in več leti, ko so se uveljavljale delavske pravice, ko so se borili na ulicah, so se borili za kaj? Za osemurni delovnik in osemurni počitek in osemurno pravico do spanja. Skratka, da se nekako vračamo očitno pri tem razumevanju pravic. Očitno pa je to povezano z neko spremembo v tehnologiji, načinom dela. Ni več teh klasičnih delovnih mest 8 do 8 in tako naprej, ampak je vse bolj digitalizirano, na daljavo. In kako pravico do počitka v tem primeru konkretizirati, kjer imamo nočne izmene ali pa v poklicih, mogoče v državni upravi, v javni upravi, kjer so potrebne nočne izmene, je treba zagotavljati 24-urno delo v bolnicah in tako naprej. Kako tukaj pravico do počitka, do odklopa uveljaviti recimo v primeru, če nekdo, ki na delovnem mestu zboli, pa potem je treba najti zamenjavo. Tukaj se verjetno znajdejo vodje oddelkov, direktorji v nekih težavah mogoče pri tej pravici. Kakšen odgovor imate na te izzive?

Čoh Kragelnik: Jaz mislim, da je treba zelo razumno presojati oziroma gledati na to pravico. Posega res samo v tisti čas, ko je delavec popolnoma prost, se pravi ni v pripravljenosti, ni v času dežurstva, ampak takrat, ko je dejansko na počitku, odklopljen od službe. Zdaj, seveda, nekako se moramo še vedno sporazumevati, ko pride do nekih izrednih situacij, nenadnih in je treba nekoga poklicati. Jaz mislim, da to ne bi smela biti težava.

Voditelj: Ni to kršitev?

Čoh Kragelnik: Jaz osebno na to ne gledam kot tako. Je pa res, da zakon ne predpisuje, kakšni naj bodo ti ukrepi. Tako da to je še vedno eno odprto polje. Morda nam bo sčasoma sodna praksa podala kaj več odgovorov tudi na vse te manjše izzive oziroma odprta vprašanja, s katerimi se soočamo še danes.

Voditelj: S kakšnimi vprašanji pa se že obračajo na vas, na inšpektorat v zvezi s to temo? Kakšna vprašanja se zastavljajo?

Čoh Kragelnik: Zaenkrat moram reči, da nismo dobili prav velikega števila vprašanj še na to temo. Je pa res, da je ministrstvo, pristojno za delo, na svoji spletni strani objavilo smernice oz. neke konkretne napotke. Tja smo jih tudi napotovali, tako da morda so si pa tam pogledali, kako in kaj lahko uredijo. Skratka, praksa bo pokazala svoje, pravite tudi sodna praksa.

Voditelj: Kakšne pa so kazni, če se ugotovi kršitev? Kakšne so sankcije?

Čoh Kragelnik: Ja, se pravi, če delodajalci ne zagotovijo ustreznih ukrepov za pravico do odklopa, so predpisane globe, in sicer za pravno osebo od 1500 do 4000 €, za manjšega delodajalca od 300 do 2000 evrov, za odgovorno osebo pravne osebe pa od 150 do 1000 evrov.

Voditelj: To so kar lepi zneski, ampak če smo malo praktični. Ne vem. Šef, direktor pošlje sporočilo delavcu izven delovnega časa. Ne vem. Mail, sporočilo, treba nekaj urediti. In to, recimo, da delavcu to ne bo všeč, mu ne bo, pa ne bo sprejel tega. Kaj se v tem primeru zgodi? Je to kršitev, ni kršitev? Kakšna je globa? Neki spori se bodo verjetno pojavili.

Čoh Kragelnik: Ja.

Voditelj: Kako reševati takšne primere?

Čoh Kragelnik: Delavci morajo biti predvsem seznanjeni, da se v takem primeru niso dolžni odzvati in opravljati delovnih nalog, takrat seveda, ko niso v delovni obveznosti. Sedaj mi na inšpektoratu bomo presojali torej v prvi vrsti, ali ima delodajalec sploh sprejete ukrepe, kje so, kako so zapisani in na kakšen način so jih sprejeli. Če bo nekje prišlo do spora med delavcem in delodajalcem, bo to stvar delovnega sodišča. Bo pa dokazno breme na delodajalcu. Ta bo moral izkazati, da je delavcu zagotovil pravico do odklopa. Je pa tudi ta izbira prepuščena delodajalcu, kakšne ukrepe bo sprejel. Ker tudi delodajalci so si seveda različni glede na dejavnosti, glede na profile in tako dalje. Tako da lahko sprejme neke mehkejše ukrepe, se pravi v smislu ozaveščanja, obveščanja, izobraževanja na to temo. Ne vem, da ima elektronsko sporočilo spodaj še eno opozorilo, da se delavec v tem času v tem primeru ni dolžan odzvati, taki primeri.

Voditelj: No, to bo kar pestro očitno.

Čoh Kragelnik: Verjamem, da bo še kar nekaj odprtih vprašanj in izzivov, na katere bomo morali vsi skupaj še odgovoriti. Tako da pustimo času čas.

Voditelj: Ja. Tudi ena, ni več noviteta, je pa povzročala kar nekaj, če tako rečem, hude krvi, je beleženje delovnega časa. Tukaj je letelo veliko kritik na pristojno ministrstvo, češ da so rešitve neživljenjske, nepotrebne, povečujejo birokratske procedure in zlasti administrativno delo, s tem pa povečanje stroškov. Kako na inšpektoratu gledate na to tematiko? Beleženje delovnega časa. Ti očitki držijo? Je tudi vam morda zapletlo, povečan obseg dela zaradi teh novih pravil?

Čoh Kragelnik: Lahko bi temu celo pritrdila. Namreč, ugotovili smo kar precej večje število kršitev že letos tam nekje do septembra kot pa lani celotno leto, tako da je dodalo nekaj dela. Vendar mislim, da za dober namen. Mi smo ... 

Voditelj: Dober namen.

Čoh Kragelnik: Ja. Se pravi, s tem seveda lahko razumemo, da imajo delavci večje varstvo pravic. Mi smo v bistvu že leta in leta v svojih letnih poročilih opozarjali, da ureditev, ki je bila iz leta 2006, ni ustrezna, namreč ni bila ustrezna ne za učinkovito delo inšpektorja ne za varovanje pravic delavcev. Zato smo bili oziroma smo pozdravili sprejem novele zakona, ki ureja evidentiranje delovnega časa. Menimo, da prinaša spremembo na bolje, zato bi si želeli, da kot taka ostane v veljavi.

Voditelj: Čeprav so napovedane spremembe.

Čoh Kragelnik: Drži.

Voditelj: Ste bili, ste sodelovali v teh razpravah?

Čoh Kragelnik: Smo tudi sodelovali v teh razpravah, ki še niso zaključene. Smo pa tudi izražali svoje mnenje. Zdaj lahko povem, da je za nas bistven podatek beleženje časa prihoda na delo in odhoda z dela, tako da od tega smo rekli, da ne odstopamo, ker je to res ključen podatek. Namreč moramo vedeti, da inšpektor ravno na podlagi tega podatka lahko sploh ugotavlja kršitve v zvezi z odmori, počitki, delovnim časom. Lahko sploh ugotovi, kako je delovni čas pri delodajalcu organiziran in ali dela delavec polni delovni čas ali dela krajši delovni čas, ali je imel možnost koristiti letni dopust celo, potem ali dela delo v izmenah, ali dela delo v manj ugodnem delovnem času, kot je nočno delo, delo na praznike, vikende. Veliko pravic je vezanih ravno na evidentiranje delovnega časa, zato je za nas to ključna sprememba na bolje in jo pozdravljamo.

Voditelj: Kakšne pa so te, saj nekaj ste že omenili, ampak te najbolj tipične kršitve med prihodom in odhodom? Očitno se tu marsikaj dogaja. Katere so te kršitve? Kakšne težave opažate?

Čoh Kragelnik: Te kršitve so povezane predvsem v prvi vrsti, torej z beleženjem, evidentiranjem delovnega časa, da delodajalci ne beležijo vseh podatkov, ki bi jih morali beležiti v evidence. Kar pa zadeva odmore, počitke, delovni čas na splošno, pa prihaja pogosto do kršitev posebej v tistih primerih, ko je delovni čas neenakomerno razporejen in bi moral imeti delavec med dvema zaporednima delovnima dnevoma najmanj 11 ur počitka, v celem tednu pa delovni čas ne sme presegati 56 ur dela. Pogosto presegajo te številke. Se pravi delavci nimajo 11 ur počitka med dvema zaporednima dnevoma in nimajo tedenskega počitka. Delajo več kot 56 ur. Na koncu to pomeni tudi, da delavci mnogokrat niti ne vidijo evidenc delovnega časa, ki jih beleži delodajalec, si sicer sami v svojih beležkah beležijo te oddelane ure, ki jih potem primerjajo tudi s plačilno listo. In ko vidijo, da tukaj nekaj ne drži, se obrnejo na nas in vedno povedo, delali smo cele dneve, za to pa smo dobili izplačano minimalno plačo brez vsakršnih dodatkov. Torej, ko govorimo o nočnem delu, nadurnem delu, delu na praznike. In nekako ne razumejo seveda tega pisnega obračuna plač. Tako da mislim, da je dobra novost te novele zakona, ki ureja evidentiranje delovnega časa tudi ta, da mora delodajalec delavce obvestiti, seznaniti z evidenco oziroma da imajo delavci sploh možnost vpogledati v evidenco delovnega časa pri delodajalcu.

Voditelj: Kakšne ukrepe pa ima inšpektor inšpektorat na voljo, če ugotovi, da se morda sistematično dogajajo te kršitve evidenc beleženja delovnega časa?

Čoh Kragelnik: Ja. Inšpektorat lahko torej v primeru, da ugotovi kršitve, zoper delodajalca ukrepa v prekrškovnem postopku, se pravi, mu izreče globo oz. v primeru manjših ugotovljenih nepravilnosti tudi opomin ali opozorilo.

Voditelj: Globa je? 

Čoh Kragelnik: Globe so sicer različne, odvisno od kršitve, ampak se gibljejo od 1500 do 20.000 evrov oziroma od 3000 do 20.000 evrov za pravno osebo in pa od 150 do 2000 evrov za odgovorno osebo in pa od 300 do 2000 evrov za odgovorno osebo prav tako.

Voditelj: So tudi kar velike globe, bi rekli, kar imajo težo.

Čoh Kragelnik: Mislim, da ja. 

Voditelj: Pa kako opažate odzive? Mislim, na kršitve se odzivajo delodajalci?

Čoh Kragelnik: Veliko njih se odzove. Moram reči, da v večini primerov potem kar te kršitve odpravijo. Je pa tako. Obstajajo pa, kot sem že prej omenila, eni in isti ali pa mogoče taki večji prekrškarji, ki pa potem nekako te kršitve še vedno ponavljajo. Tako da s tem namenom, bom rekla, smo pristopili tudi k organizaciji oziroma ustanovitvi novega sektorja.

Voditelj: To je ta skupina inšpektorjev za hitro odzivanje, če se ne motim.

Čoh Kragelnik: Drži.

Voditelj: Kaj? Čemu? Zakaj je nastala ta skupina in čemu služi?

Čoh Kragelnik: Ja. Kot sem ravno rekla, ravno za te grobe kršitve pravic delavcev ali pa takrat, ko opažamo, da delodajalci kljub temu, da so že bili v preteklosti kaznovani, še vedno kršijo delavske pravice. Za takšne primere smo mnenja, da jih je treba hitreje nasloviti, hitreje tudi pripeljati do epiloga in hitreje sankcionirati, torej da je sankcija čim prej in seveda, da je ta učinkovita. Tako da za takšne primere, torej najbolj pereče primere, smo ustanovili sektor za prednostno odzivanje. Trenutno v sektorju deluje devet oziroma deset inšpektorjev. Pokrivajo tako področje varnosti in zdravja pri delu kot delovna razmerja.

Voditelj: Na katera področja se bodo osredotočali? Te izjemne primere? Mogoče še kakšne specifike?

Čoh Kragelnik: Ja, ko gre, se pravi za plačilo za delo oz. ko so kršene pravice večjega števila delavcev, se pravi tam, kjer je več delavcev oškodovanih. Potem tudi v povezavi z urejanjem trga dela, posredovanjem delovne sile, tam, kjer je javni interes močnejši, bom rekla.

Voditelj: Omenjali ste posredovanje delovne sile. To v bistvu zadeva delavce tretjih držav. Kakšno je stanje tu nasploh? Kakšno stanje opažate, da je pri tem? Gre v bistvu za tako imenovane agencijske delavce.

Čoh Kragelnik: Tako. Tudi mi jim pravimo agencijski delavci. Torej gre za tiste primere, ko je delo delavca posredovano nekemu drugemu uporabniku.

Voditelj: Sva pa na začetku dejala, da v bistvu razlik med delavci ni. Od koderkoli prihaja, je delavec in ima enake pravice. Za državljane in za državljane tretjih držav razlik ni, kar se tiče delavske zakonodaje, ustave delavske.

Čoh Kragelnik: Tako je. V slovenskem pravnem redu zakonodaja mora veljati enako za vse delavce, ne glede na državljanstvo delavca.

Voditelj: Kaj vi opažate na tem področju? Koliko je to akutno področje?

Čoh Kragelnik: Precej. Namreč, dogaja se nam, da se skuša obiti zakonodajo.

Voditelj: V kakšnem smislu?

Čoh Kragelnik: Zdaj, moramo ločiti tiste agencije, ki imajo vso pridobljeno dokumentacijo, vsa dovoljenja so vpisana v evidenco pri pristojnem ministrstvu za delo, da lahko opravljajo to delo, se pravi, da lahko legalno posredujejo delo delavca drugemu uporabniku. Teh je kar nekaj registriranih, obstajajo pa tudi drugi delodajalci, ki uradno niti niso agencije, ker niso registrirani, niso vpisani v evidenco, niso pridobili ustreznih dovoljenj, vendar pa kljub temu opravljajo to dejavnost, se pravi na nelegalen način. Opažamo nek trend, kjer določena podjetja v tujini oglašujejo oziroma vabijo delavce iz tujine, predvsem iz teh tretjih držav, Indija, Bangladeš in tako naprej in jih potem zvabijo v Slovenijo. Tukaj se zaposlijo pri delodajalcu, ki pridobi dovoljenje za zaposlitev teh delavcev, potem jih pa ta delodajalec posreduje drugemu delodajalcu, ki teh dovoljenj bodisi ne želi pridobivati ali pa jih ne more dobiti, ker ne more zaposliti tujca s tem razlogom, ker mu je bila v preteklosti že izrečena globa inšpektorata za delo. Ker namreč izrečena globa v nekaterih primerih ima za posledico prepoved zaposlovanja tujcev, tako da je to nek tak obvod, ko se jih potem dejansko posreduje temu drugemu, ki v resnici niti ne bi dobil dovoljenja za to, da lahko uporabi to delo.

Voditelj: Koliko je to razširjeno? Ker pravite, podjetje nima licence, nima dovoljenja za uvoz delavcev, ki prihajajo legalno, so legalni imigranti, bi lahko rekli.

Čoh Kragelnik: Ja. Tudi se legalno zaposlijo pri tem prvem delodajalcu, vendar potem naprej, ko bi morala biti pa dokumentacija urejena, pa ni. Ker velikokrat dejansko gre za posredovanje, ampak zapakirajo pa delodajalci to pod opravljanje neke storitve, tako da so v ozadju potem neke druge pogodbe, o poslovnem sodelovanju. Ampak dejansko pa gre za čisto posredovanje. Je pa res, da je to v postopkih precej težje dokazati, zato smo tukaj ... Imamo kar precej izzivov. In zelo pozorno spremljamo to področje in vlagamo veliko truda in naporov v to, da naredimo korake naprej.

Voditelj: Namreč slovenska industrija in podjetja in tudi drugi sektorji, ki niso toliko povezani z industrijo, pač beležijo pomanjkanje delovne sile. Obračajo se na raznorazne naslove. In v Sloveniji se je že znašlo kar veliko število delavcev, državljanov tretjih držav. Kot so omenili, Indija, Bangladeš. Vemo, Filipini so tudi tukaj zelo zanimivi za Slovenijo. So delodajalci po vašem usposobljeni za uporabo teh delavcev? Tu namreč ni samo vprašanje dela. So še prisotni drugi vidiki, kot je jezik in tako naprej. Kaj bi vi svetovali podjetjem, ki se obračajo na ta naslov po te delavce?

Čoh Kragelnik: Jaz mislim, da bi se delodajalci najprej morali precej dobro informirati, kaj to pomeni, kakšne so njihove zakonske obveznosti v vseh teh primerih. Namreč, moramo se zavedati, da je posredi človeški faktor oziroma človek. To je ena specifična dejavnost, ko ne gre za posredovanje predmetov, ampak posredovanje dela delavca. Govorimo o ljudeh. Tako da jaz mislim, da bi skrbnost za to, da raziščejo, kaj vse morajo pridobiti, da bodo to počeli na legalen način, precej velika bi morala biti. Tako da jaz pozivam vse delodajalce seveda, da se čim bolje informirajo, naj si najamejo pravno pomoč. Lahko pokličejo tudi na inšpektorat, da mi pomagamo v smislu strokovnih pomoči. Kaj storiti, da bodo na varni strani in da bodo pravice delavcev zagotovljene. 

Voditelj: Bi se še obrnil na vprašanja državljanov. Namreč. Seveda ta vprašanja dela in s področja dela jih je kar nekaj. Pa bi mogoče začel z vprašanjem, ki se nanaša na konkretno dilemo sklepanja pogodbe o zaposlitvi za določen čas. Zakon o delovnih razmerjih jasno govori o časovni omejitvi sklepanja pogodb. Kako pa je to v praksi pri delodajalcih? Namreč ta državljan, ki to sprašuje, pravi, da je veliko teh primerov, ko se sklepa več pogodb za določen čas ali eno pogodbo za določen čas, ki presega dobo dveh let. Kaj lahko delavec naredi in kakšne sankcije so lahko za manjšega delodajalca, kjer sta dva zaposlena?

Čoh Kragelnik: Ja. Zakon o delovnih razmerjih res določa omejitve, koliko časa še delodajalec in delavec lahko skleneta pogodbo za določen čas. Pri tem bi opozorila na to, da so pogodbe za določen čas izjeme od pravila. To je pogodba za nedoločen čas. Se pravi se lahko sklenejo v izrecno zakonsko določenih primerih. Največkrat, najbolj pogost razlog je nadomeščanje odsotnega sodelavca. In znotraj teh dveh let je mogoče skleniti več pogodb o zaposlitvi. Vendar pa, ko to presega obdobje dveh let, bi moral delodajalec delavcu ponuditi pogodbo o zaposlitvi za nedoločen čas. V vseh teh primerih, ko temu ni tako, tega je tudi kar nekaj, ima potem delavec možnost vložiti tožbo tudi na delovno sodišče, s katero uveljavlja transformacijo v pogodbo za nedoločen čas.

Voditelj: In tu je še eno zanimivo podvprašanje. Namreč, ali je dovoljen preskok iz zaposlitve za nedoločen čas v zaposlitev za določen čas brez odpovedi ali obrazložitve, samo spremeni se pogodba. To je zanimivo. Tega verjetno ni prav veliko.

Čoh Kragelnik: Zdaj sicer ne vem točno. Težko komentiram, kaj točno je mišljeno tukaj, ampak če gledamo samo, da bi zdaj enostransko delodajalec spremenil pogodbo za nedoločen čas v pogodbo za določen čas, to pač ne gre. Vedno mora biti soglasje volj z obeh strani, se pravi delavca in delodajalca. To je sicer možno. Če se oba strinjata, seveda lahko skleneta, kakršnokoli pogodbo želita, ampak če pa ne, potem pa to ni možno in še vedno velja tista prva. 

Voditelj: In tukaj je tudi vprašanje o izplačilu odpravnine. Gre za izplačilo za nedoločen čas in določen čas. Vse skupaj 18 let. Krajši delovni čas. Bili so sklenjeni aneksi o različnih delovnih urah na teden. Kako pravilno izračunati odpravnino? Torej gre, kako izračunati odpravnino za 18 let dela na 900 evrov osnove. To je kar konkretno.

Čoh Kragelnik: Ja, to je kar konkretno vprašanje, na katerega je težko podati samo na podlagi teh podatkov ustrezen odgovor. Tako da jaz pozivam oziroma predlagam, da oseba, ki je to vprašanje postavila, se vedno lahko obrne tudi na inšpektorat za delo, pošlje to vprašanje tudi direktno k nam in bo prejela tudi strokovno pomoč v zvezi s tem. 

Voditelj: Bi preskočila na drugo vprašanje. Namreč povezano, kar je verjetno zelo pogosto delo v tem obdobju, organizacija in v tem konkretnem primeru organizacija kongresa, recimo organiziraš kongres. Traja tri dni, vključeno je tudi večerno dogajanje. In zaposleni seveda so seznanjeni z vsemi temi okoliščinami in pač delo je treba opraviti, dokler ni končano. Torej, začetne in končne ure pa niso določene. Kako se obračunavajo delovne ure, kjer ekipa dela več kot osem, mogoče 12 ur ali pa še več? Kako je v tem primeru s pravico do odklopa? 

Čoh Kragelnik: Ja, v takih primerih je najprej treba pogledati, kako je pri delodajalcu sploh organiziran delovni čas. Možno je, da je ta neenakomerno razporejen in da potem prihaja v nekem določenem obdobju do večjega števila oziroma daljšega delovnika, spet v drugem obdobju do krajšega delovnika. Seveda se mora to v nekem obdobju tudi izravnati, tako da možna je tudi odreditev nadurnega dela. Seveda ta mora biti pisno odrejena prej. V izjemnih primerih je lahko potem tudi, se pravi najprej ustno pa potem pisno. Tako da to je predvsem odvisno od organizacije delovnega časa v prvi vrsti. S pravico do odklopa pa tudi, nekako je vezana na to. Se pravi, če je delavec še vedno v neki delovni obveznosti, potem ne moremo govoriti o pravici do odklopa. Je pa res seveda, to je treba ustrezno organizirati, prej obvestiti, da se ve, od kdaj do kdaj se bo delalo oziroma pokriti s to pisno odredbo. 

Voditelj: To je namreč verjetno tudi povezano z naslednjim vprašanjem. Kjer je pač nek dogodek, ure se podaljšajo. Recimo organizacija koncerta, ki se uradno zaključi pred dvanajsto, gostje pa ostanejo do četrte ure. Tega je verjetno kar nekaj in tvoja ekipa mora ostati. Kaj storiti v tem primeru s pozicije delavca? 

Čoh Kragelnik: Delodajalec je tisti, ki je zadolžen, da take situacije predvidi in organizira poslovanje in s tem tudi delovni čas delavca. Seveda, če delavec dela, mora biti za to ustrezno plačan. 

Voditelj: In še eno konkretno vprašanje v zvezi s pravico do odklopa. Delodajalec te ne sme kontaktirati izven delovnega časa, ne glede na to, da imaš doma službeni računalnik in uporabljaš službeni telefon. Ko si na dopustu, bolniški, ti ne sme pošiljati e-mailov niti izven delovnega časa. To so neke trditve. Držijo ali ne? 

Čoh Kragelnik: To je odvisno, kakšne ukrepe bo sprejel delodajalec. Ampak načeloma pa ja. Se pravi, če bo spodaj, predvidevam, vsaj neko opozorilo, da se delavec ni dolžan odzvati, če je na dopustu, na nek mail, ki mu nalaga neke delovne obveznosti, ali odgovarjati na maile ali telefonske klice. 

Voditelj: Katja Čoh Kragolnik, morda še za zaključek eno vprašanje. Ti si, če karikiram, glavna inšpektorica inšpektorata za delo. Nekakšen varuh, če karikiram, delavskih pravic, delavske ustave, to je zakon o delovnih razmerjih. Bi imela kakšno sporočilo za delavce, ki se morda znajdejo v težavah? Imajo probleme na delovnem mestu z delodajalcem, z delovnimi razmerami? Kaj bi ti tem delavcem sporočila? 

Čoh Kragelnik: Jaz tem delavcem sporočam, naj se pozanimajo o svojih pravicah. Če jih ne poznajo, naj se najprej obrnejo na delodajalca in skušajo razrešiti dileme, morda odpraviti tudi nepravilnosti z medsebojnim pogovorom in za boljši odnos v prihodnje, ko pa to preprosto ne gre in delavci menijo, da so jim kršene pravice, se lahko vedno obrnejo na inšpektorat za delo. Lahko pridejo tudi po odgovore na vprašanja, ki jih imajo. V času uradnih ur so jim osebno inšpektorji na voljo, to je po območnih enotah po celotni Sloveniji. Uradne ure so ob ponedeljki in sredah med deveto in enajsto uro, tako da lahko se takrat zglasijo in prejmejo ustrezne odgovore oziroma pojasnila, napotke, kako ravnati. Vedno lahko pošljejo tudi prijavo, lahko tudi anonimno prijavo na inšpektorat za delo, bodisi po elektronski pošti bodisi po pošti. Lahko jo oddajo tudi takrat, v času uradnih ur, na kraju samem pri inšpektorju. Jaz upam, da bo tega čim manj, ampak če pa že pride do tega, smo pa tukaj na voljo tudi za to. 

Voditelj: Prav. Katja Čoh Kragolnik, gostja današnje zadnje in 15. izvedbe podkasta Gov.si, hvala za pojasnila in srečno še naprej. 

Čoh Kragelnik: Hvala vam. Srečno tudi vam.

[ENGLISH VERSION]
Gov.si the Government's Podcast 

Host Zoran Potič: Hello and welcome to the 15th edition of Gov.si, the podcast prepared by the Government Communication Office. I'm Zoran Potić. This time, we'll attempt to unveil the secrets of labor, and who better to tell us about this than Katja Čoh Kragolnik, the Chief Inspector of the Labor Inspectorate. 

Chief Inspector of the Labor Inspectorate Katja Čoh Kragolnik: Hello and thank you for inviting me. 

Host: Hello, Katja. Labor is a key element of our lives. It has economic, social, and psychological aspects, so I'm not exaggerating if I say that it's a highly significant, if not the most significant field in terms of legislation, norms, and rules. The European Convention on Human Rights and our Constitution state that every citizen has the right to work and a freely chosen profession. The ECHR also states that citizens of third countries who are authorized to work in member states have the right to the same conditions as EU citizens. This is a theoretical basis that needs to be checked in practice. Theory and practice are usually in conflict. That's common, so, Ms. Čoh Kragolnik, I'm interested in the following: Slovenia currently has a million people who are employed, almost. We've never had such levels of employment since independence. The unemployment rate is currently just over 3.5%, a record low number. I'm wondering if it could ever go lower? Based on this, we might conclude that things are idyllic for Slovenian workers. Is this the case, given that, as the chief inspector, you have the duty and the responsibility to monitor labor conditions? 

Čoh Kragolnik: This is certainly debatable. The current trends of low unemployment are encouraging, but this fact alone doesn't mean we have fewer violations of labor rights. If this trend were to continue, which we'd all like to see, we may be able to speak about a better labor culture and fewer violations after a year or more. 

Host: So it doesn't depend just on legislation, but also culture as a "soft influencer" to improve labor conditions? 

Čoh Kragolnik: I think so. I feel that we employees can also contribute to this by setting boundaries if our rights are violated. I'm happy to see that younger generations in particular are quicker to switch employers. When they are not respected and when labor rights are violated, they don't stay in those environments and simply switch employers. 

Host: To begin with, I'm curious about the role of the Labor Inspectorate. Also, how many inspectors are there in Slovenia to oversee this area? 

Čoh Kragolnik: The Labor Inspectorate comes under the auspices of the Ministry of Labor. The Inspectorate carries out oversight in three areas: safety and health at work, employment relations, and social welfare. What does our oversight look like? We check whether all parties are respecting labor legislation, in the form of regulations, laws, rules, collective agreements, and so on. When we find violations, we can intervene against the employer by means of an administrative process, and under the Misdemeanors Act, we can initiate misdemeanor processes if violations are found. 

Host: Do violators obey the inspectors' rulings and instructions? What are your experiences? 

Čoh Kragolnik: I can say that many employers abide by them and fulfill their obligations. This happens most often in cases where irregularities happen because of carelessness or errors. However, when violations are the result of gross negligence or even intentional acts, we need to show up several times to get meaningful change. 

Host: Does that happen often? 

Čoh Kragolnik: Quite often. There are still many violations, and based on their histories of violations, we determine which employers are frequent offenders. 

Host: What types of violations do we see most often? How much of this takes place? Do you have a breakdown? 

Čoh Kragolnik: We're tracking statistical data about violations. In terms of employment relationships, most violations concern payment for work. For instance, employers don't issue paychecks by the 18th of every month, issue them at a later date, or don't pay the minimum wage. Non-payment of vacation bonuses is also frequent. Then we have other violations such as those concerning the termination of employment and precarious employment, as well as violations of laws that govern the labor market. In the area of safety and health at work, many violations concern the calculation of risk estimates and the provision of healthy workplaces. These are the most common violations. 

Host: Are the trends we're seeing in Europe, with the labor market and industry seeing a cooldown, already impacting workers' rights? Are these pressures present as an indirect indicator? 

Čoh Kragolnik: We're monitoring business trends and daily events with concern. This includes major layoffs. In this respect, we tend to see the same violations, namely regulations concerning pay, with unpaid wages and unpaid vacation bonuses. The termination processes are often inappropriate, and severance pay is withheld. 

Host: When the Inspectorate finds a violation, what can the worker do if the company declares bankruptcy and has no funds? 

Čoh Kragolnik: The closer a company is to bankruptcy, the harder it is for us inspectors to issue effective fines. We can still do it, but the fines will remain unpaid and the amount will become a part of the bankruptcy assets. In these cases, it's crucial that workers are familiar with their rights and that they turn to the liquidator, who will then run the severance process and ensure the payment of wages after the bankruptcy assets are claimed. Unfortunately, it's already late when bankruptcy is involved. 

Host: Let's hope that we don't have too much of this. 

Čoh Kragolnik: That's our hope.

Host: If we look at some details and new developments, the right to disconnect will soon come into effect. It's a new feature of the Employment Act. What role will the Inspectorate have in enforcing this right? 

Čoh Kragolnik: The Labor Inspectorate will check to ensure that employers take appropriate measures to ensure the right to disconnect and check how they will enact them. In cases where the employer is bound by a sector-wide collective agreement. the measures will be spelled out in that agreement. Otherwise, this is a part of business collective agreements. If an employer is not dealing with a labor union or a workers' representative, the employer is required to notify its employees about the measures, which it also needs to enact. The notification must be done through the usual channels and adopt a company policy. 

Host: How do you view the right to disconnect? An inspector probably has to first understand it in order to adequately assess an employer. How should we view the right to disconnect? 

Čoh Kragolnik: I like to say that the right to disconnect reinforces the employee's right to rest and leisure. It both is and isn't a new right. If workers' working hours, breaks and free time are observed, we do not need to talk about the right to disconnect, because it is automatically already being fulfilled. But when that is not the case, it is an additional right that imposes additional activities upon employers for them to realise why employees' free time is important, as well as for employees themselves. I think that in some professions a culture of being constantly connected has developed, which can pose long-term risks to a worker's health, as it eventually leads to absenteeism, which isn't in the employer's interest either. I see it as a soft right that can contribute greatly. 100 years ago and more, when people fought in the streets for labour rights, what did they fight for? They fought for eight-hour workdays, eight-hour rest and eight-hour sleep. We are coming back to the understanding of these rights. It seems to be related to changes in technology and work methods. The traditional positions with 8 to 8 workdays are gone. Everything is more digital and remote. 

Host: So, how do we implement the right to disconnect in professions with night shifts, for example, or civil service or public administration, where night shifts are necesary and we need 24-hour work, such as in hospitals et cetera? So, how does one exercise the right to disconnect if, for instance, someone at the workplace falls sick and a replacement needs to be found? Department heads or even directors could find themselves in trouble here with this right. What is your solution to these challenges? 

Čoh Kragolnik: I think that this right needs to be viewed very reasonably. It only affects the time when the employee is completely off of work, so, not on standby or on-call, but during their rest time, when they are disconnected. Naturally, we still need to communicate when emergency situations arise and someone needs to be called. I do not think that should be a problem. 

Host: It is not a violation? 

Čoh Kragolnik: I personally don't see it as such, but the law does not prescribe measures for that, so that field is still open. Case law may eventually give us more answers to the minor or rather open issues that we are still facing today. 

Host: What sort of questions do people turn to the Inspectorate with in regard to this topic? 

Čoh Kragolnik: So far, we have not yet gotten many questions in regard to this topic. But the Ministry of Labour did post guidelines or concrete instructions on its website, where we also directed them to, so they may have seen what they can do there. So, practice and case law will show us how to operate.

Host: What are the penalties like if a violation is discovered?

Čoh Kragolnik: If employers do not provide adequate measures for the right to disconnect, fines are imposed. 1,500 to 4,000 euros for legal entities, 300 to 2,000 euros for smaller employers, and 150 to 1000 euros for legal representatives. 

Host: Let us use a practical example. A boss or CEO sends an employee a message after working hours, an email or message that something needs to be taken care of. Let us say the employee does not like this and they do not accept. What happens in this case? Is it a violation? How high is the fine? Some disputes may arise ... How do you solve such cases? 

Čoh Kragolnik: Employees need to know that, in such cases, they are not obligated to respond and perform their duties outside of their working hours. The Inspectorate will determine whether an employer has measures in place, where they are written and how they were adopted. If a dispute arises between an employee and employer, it becomes a case for the Labour Court. The burden of proof falls on the employer, who needs to prove that the employee was provided the right to disconnect. The employer gets to choose which measures to adopt, as employers vary in their activities, profiles et cetera. So, they may adopt softer measures, like raising awareness, informing and training for the field. Or, the message may contain a warning that the employee is not obligated to respond at that time. It seems that it will get quite interesting. There will be many issues and challenges that we will all need to address, so, let's give it time. 

Host: Yes. Now, this is not a novelty anymore, but it caused quite a bit of bad blood, so to speak, the recording of working hours. The competent ministry received sharp criticism in this regard, saying that the solutions are unreal, unnecessary, they increase bureaucratic procedures, especially administrative work, and consequently costs as well. How does the Inspectorate view the recording of working hours? Are the accusations right? Did your workload also increase due to these new rules? 

Čoh Kragolnik: Yes, as we discovered significantly more violations by September of this year than all of last year. So, we did get additional work, but for a good cause, I believe. 

Host: For a good cause? 

Čoh Kragolnik: Yes, meaning that workers have greater protection of rights. For years, we have been pointing out in our annual reports that the regulation from 2006 is inadequate both for the effective work of an inspector and for protecting workers' rights. That is why we welcomed the adoption of the amendment of the act that regulates the recording of working hours. We believe that it brings a change for the better and we hope that it stays in force as such. Although some changes have been announced. 

Host: Yes. Did you take part in those discussions? 

Čoh Kragolnik: We did, and they are not over yet. We also expressed our opinions. For us, the key data is the record of arrival to and departure from work, and we said that we will not yield on that point. Namely, an inspector can only use this data to discover violations regarding breaks, rest and working hours and determine how an employer's working hours are organised, whether a worker is employed full-time or part-time, whether they had the option of going on annual leave, whether they work in shifts or work in less favourable working hours, such as night shifts, holidays, weekends ... Many rights are tied to the recording of working hours, that is why we welcome this change for the better. 

Host: What are the most common violations between arrival and departure? It seems a lot goes on then. What are the violations? What kinds of problems do you encounter? 

Čoh Kragolnik: Those violations are primarily tied to the recording of working hours, where employers do not record all of the data that they should. Regarding breaks, rest and working hours in general, there are often violations, especially in cases where working hours are unevenly distributed and the worker should have at least 11 hours of rest between two consecutive workdays, and working hours in a week should not exceed 56 hours. They often exceed these numbers. Workers don't get 11 hours of rest and they don't have a weekly rest, they work more than 56 hours. This also means that workers don't see the records of working time that an employer makes. They document the working hours on their own, which they compare with a payroll. When they spot an anomaly, they come to us. They always say that they worked full days, but they got paid a minimum wage without any additions. Here we talk about night work, overtime, working on holidays. They don't understand the pay slips, so I think that it's a good thing about this amendment A that regulates recording of working time also this that an employer has to notify the workers about the records or that they have the option to see these records. 

Host: What measures can the inspectorate use, if it finds out systematic violations of recording the working time? 

Čoh Kragolnik: Yes. The inspectorate can in the case of violations act on it according to the administrative proceeding. It can impose a fine or give a warning in the case of minor irregularities. 

Host: There is a fine? 

Čoh Kragolnik: They are different, depending on the violation. They range from 1500 to 20,000 Euros or from 3000 to 20,000 Euros for legal entity. And from 150 to 2000 Euros for the person responsible. And from 300 to 2000 Euros for the person responsible as well. 

Host: These fines are quite substantial. They have an authority. 

Čoh Kragolnik: I think so. 

Host: Do you see any responses? Do employers respond to violations? 

Čoh Kragolnik: A lot of them respond. Most of them bring the infringements to an end. But as I've said before, there are always the same ones or the worst offenders that repeat the infringements. Because of this we established a new department. 

Host: This is a group of inspectors for quick responses, right? 

Čoh Kragolnik: That's right. 

Host: Why was this group established? What is its purpose? 

Čoh Kragolnik: As I've said, it's meant for flagrant violations of workers' rights or when we notice that employers repeat the violations, even though they were already fined. We believe that we have to address such cases quicker, solve them quicker and sanction them quicker that they get a sanction as soon as possible and that it is effective. For the worst cases we've established a department for prioritisation. At the moment there is nine or ten inspectors working there. They cover safety and health at work and employment relationships. 

Host: Which areas will be in their focus? These special cases or something else? 

Čoh Kragolnik: When payment is in question or when the rights of more workers are violated. Where more workers have been harmed. And in connection to regulating the labour market and personnel recruitment. In areas, where the public interest is stronger. 

Host: You've mentioned personnel recruitment. This concerns workers from third countries. What is the situation here in general? What do you see here? These workers are recruited from an agency. 

Čoh Kragolnik: That's right. We call them agency workers, when the worker is referred to another user. We've said before that there are no differences between workers. A worker is a worker, wherever they come from. There are the same rights for our citizens and the citizens of other countries. There are no differences as far as labour law is concerned. In Slovenian legal system the legislation is the same for all, regardless of the citizenship. 

Host: What do you notice here? Is this area problematic? 

Čoh Kragolnik: Fairly problematic. Namely, there are cases where legislation is being avoided. 

Host: What do you mean by it? 

Čoh Kragolnik: We have to distinguish the agencies with all documentation and all permits, registered at the Ministry of Labour to do this job and they can legally refer the workers to different users. There are quite of few of such agencies. But there are other employers that are not official agencies, because they are not registered and they don't have the permits. But they offer this service illegally. We notice a tendency, because some foreign companies advertise or recruit workers from abroad, mainly from the third countries, from India, Bangladesh and so on. They entice them in Slovenia, where they are hired by an employer with all the permits. Afterwards this employer refers them to another employer who doesn't want to or can't acquire those permits. They can't employ a foreigner, because he or she was already fined by the inspectorate. The consequence of the fine can be a ban on the employing foreigners. This is a bypass to refer them to another party who can't get a permit for employing. 

Host: How prevalent is this? As you say, the company doesn't have a licence or permit to import the workers who come here legally. They are legal immigrants. 

Čoh Kragolnik: Yes. And they are legally employed by the first employer. But later on the documentation is not in order, because this is a referral, although the employers mask it as doing some kind of service. There are other contracts in play, e.g. on business cooperation, although it's just hiring-out. But this is harder to prove and we have a lot of challenges. We are monitoring this area carefully and putting a lot of effort to make some improvements. Slovenian industry, companies and other sectors that are not connected with the industry are noting labour shortages and are seeking it everywhere. 

Host: There are quite a lot of workers in Slovenia, citizens from the third countries, from India, Bangladesh, the Philippines are also very interesting for Slovenia. Are employers in your opinion qualified for using such workers? 

Čoh Kragolnik: This is probably not just a question of work, there are other factors, like the language and so on. 

Host: What would you advise to companies that seek this kind of help? 

Čoh Kragolnik: The employers should inform themselves, what does this mean, what are their legal obligations. We should be aware that we are talking about humans here. This is a specific activity where it's not about referring an object, but hiring‐out of workers. We are talking about people. They should diligently examine, what they have to acquire to do it legally. They should be quite careful. I appeal to all employers to get informed, hire a legal counsel or call the inspectorate. We provide a technical assistance, what to do to be safe and the workers' rights ensured. 

Host: I have some questions of our citizens. Namely, there are quite a few questions about work and labour issues. Perhaps I should start with a question relating to the specific dilemma of concluding a fixed-term employment contract. The Employment Relations Act is clear about the time limit of contracts. But how does this work in practice for employers? The citizen who's asking this question says that there are many cases where several fixed-term contracts or a fixed-term contract that exceeds two years are concluded. What can the employee do and what sanctions can there be for a small employer where there are, for example, two employees? 

Čoh Kragolnik: The Employment Relations Act does indeed set limits for how long the employer and the employee can conclude a fixed-term contract. I would point out that fixed-term contracts are exceptions to the rule, i. e. an employment contract of indefinite duration. They can be concluded in cases expressly provided for by the act. The most common reason is often to replace an absent colleague. And within these two years, several employment contracts can be concluded. However, when this exceeds the two-year period, the employer should offer the employee an employment contract of indefinite duration. In all those cases where this is not the case ... There are a number of these. The employee has the possibility of bringing an action before an employment tribunal to enforce the transformation into a contract of indefinite duration. 

Host: There's another interesting sub-question, namely whether it's allowed to change permanent employment to fixed-term employment without notice or justification, just by changing the contract. That's interesting. There probably isn't much of that. 

Čoh Kragolnik: I'm not sure what they mean. But if we're looking at an employer unilaterally changing a permanent contract into a fixed-term contract, that's not possible. There must always be a consent from both sides, the employee and the employer. It's possible if they both agree, they can conclude whatever contract they want, but if they don't, then it's not possible and the first one is still in force. 

Host: There's also a question about severance pay. A payment for an indefinite period and a fixed period. 18 years in total, part-time. There have been annexes on different working hours per week. How to calculate the severance pay correctly? With 18 years of work on a 900-euro base. Quite a concrete question. 

Čoh Kragolnik: Yes, and it's difficult to answer only on the basis of this information. I would urge or suggest the person who has asked this question to contact the Labour Inspectorate, to send the question directly to us, and they will receive professional help in this regard. Let's go to another question. Related to what is probably very common work in this period, in this particular case, of organising a congress. Let's say the congress lasts three days, including evening events. Of course, the employees are aware of all these circumstances, and there is work to be done until it's finished. So the starting and finishing times are not fixed. 

Host: How are working hours accounted for where a team works more than 8 hours, maybe 12 hours or even more? What about the right to disconnect? 

Čoh Kragolnik: In such cases, the first thing to look at is how the employer's working time is organised in the first place. It's possible it's unevenly distributed, and that there are then longer working hours in one period and shorter working hours in another period. Of course, this has to even out over a period of time. It's also possible to order overtime. This must be ordered in writing in advance. In exceptional cases, it can also be first verbally and then in writing. It depends primarily on the organisation of working time. The right to disconnect is linked to that. If the employee is still in a certain work commitment, we can't talk about the right to disconnect. But it's true, of course, that this must be properly organised, employees must be informed of their working hours in advance, this needs to be covered by the written order. 

Host: This is probably also related to the next question. When there's an event, the hours are extended. A concert is being organised, it officially ends before twelve o'clock, but the guests stay as late as four o'clock. So the team needs to stay. What can an employee do in this case? 

Čoh Kragolnik: It's the employer's responsibility to anticipate such situations and organise the employee's working time. Of course, the employee must be paid accordingly. 

Host: One more specific question concerning the right to disconnect. Your employer is not allowed to contact you outside working hours, regardless of the fact that you have a work computer at home and use a work phone. When you're on holiday, sick leave or outside working hours, they aren't allowed to send you e-mails. Is that true or not? 

Čoh Kragolnik: It depends on what measures the employer takes. But in principle, yes. If there's at least some warning that the employee on leave is not obliged to respond to an e-mail which imposes work obligations or to answer e-mails or telephone calls. 

Host: Katja Čoh Kragolnik, perhaps one final question. You're the Chief Inspector of the Labour Inspectorate. A kind of guardian of employees' rights. Of the employees' constitution, the Labour Relations Act. Do you have any message for employees who might be in trouble, who are having problems at work with their employer, with working conditions? What message would you give to employees? 

Čoh Kragolnik: I would tell them to find out about their rights. If they're not aware of them, they should first contact their employer and try to resolve their dilemmas, perhaps rectify the irregularities by talking to each other and trying to improve relations in the future, but if this simply doesn't work, and employees feel their rights have been violated, they can always contact the Labour Inspectorate. They can come to us with their questions. Inspectors are available in person during office hours in regional units all over Slovenia. Office hours are on Mondays and Wednesdays between 9am and 11am, so they can come in then and get the answers they need, or explanations and guidance on what to do. They can also always send a report, even an anonymous report, to the Labour Inspectorate, either by e-mail or by post. They can also submit it to the inspector during office hours. I hope this will be kept to a minimum. But if it does come to that, we are here to do that too. 

Host: Okay, Katja Čoh Kragolnik, guest of the fifteenth Gov.si podcast. Thank you for the clarifications and good luck. 

Čoh Kragolnik: Thank you. Good luck to you too.