Public committee proposes statutory right to educational leave

Download article in original language : NO9812103FNO.DOC

The public committee considering the right of employees to educational leave in Norway published its recommendations in December 1998. The committee recommends that all employees should have a statutory right to unpaid leave of up to three years in order to pursue vocational education.

In connection with the proposed continuing vocational training reform in Norway (NO9710127F), questions about the issue of the right of employees to educational leave have to be settled. The government made clear in the spring of 1998 its determination to put forward a proposal for an individual right to educational leave (NO9804161F). It was evident, however, that a wide range of practical questions had to be settled. A public committee was established in August 1998, charged with the task of proposing new legal provisions in relation to the criteria for leave of absence and the conditions under which such educational leave should be granted. According to the committee's terms of reference, the new provisions must ensure that all employees have equal access to educational leave, as well as taking into account the needs of companies in relation to competence development, long-term planning and the use of personnel resources. The committee was also asked to evaluate how potential disputes between employers and employees might be resolved. Apart from the chair, all the members of the committee were representatives from employers' and trade union organisations.

The committee's recommendations

The educational leave committee published its report in December 1998. The main recommendations are set out below.

The right to leave of absence

The committee proposes that a right to apply for educational leave for a three-year period should apply to all employees who have been in employment with the same employer for the last two years and have been in any employment for three years. The implication of the proposal is that part-time employees would have the same right to educational leave as full-time employees, and that temporary employees would also have a similar right to educational leave. In the case of temporary employees, however, the immediate concern would be short-term leave, since the committee assumes that there will be no extension of the term of employment as a consequence of educational leave. The committee members representing the employers' confederations were opposed to allowing temporary employees the right to educational leave.

The committee also considered the extent to which employees should be given the right to partial leave to pursue part-time education. It rejects the idea on the grounds that it might lead to excessive difficulties in relation to the staffing needs of companies, but it does stress at the same time that the employer and employee should be able to agree on more flexible arrangements for leave of absence.

The committee further suggests that employees who have already exercised their right to educational leave could apply for a second period of leave only after one year had elapsed. It is also assumed that an employee could apply for a second period of leave only after a period of time which was double the last period of leave.

The employer could reject, or postpone, any application for educational leave, if the absence of the employee would interfere with the needs of the company.

Closing date for reply

In order to give employers enough time to plan ahead, it is proposed that the employer should be given a maximum of six months to consider the application for leave from an employee before any decision was made. In the case of educational leave of less than a year's duration, employers would be given a shorter period in which to respond to the application. The employers' representatives on the committee proposed an alternative model by which the employer must respond earlier, but the employee could register a complaint with the arbitration committee (see below) only after a period of nine months had passed.

Employment protection

The committee recommends that an employee who takes educational leave should have the right to return to an equal position in the enterprise, which means a position which is equal to the previous position held in terms of pay and responsibility. Employees who take less than one year of educational leave would have the right to return to a similar job in the company.

Types of education

The committee considered what type of education should be covered by the regulations for educational leave. It recommends that educational leave should be permitted only for organised education which provides documented competence, and that the education must be vocationally oriented. The term "vocationally oriented" is understood by the committee to mean "all types of labour market-relevant continuing vocational education" (unofficial translation). It does not presuppose, however, that the education must be relevant to the employee's present position or workplace. An evaluation of what is vocationally relevant should be based on the situation of the individual applicant.

Employees applying for educational leave to complete lower and upper secondary education would be exempted from the requirement of vocational relevance. They would have the right to leave of absence regardless of labour market relevance.

Dispute settlement

To resolve disagreements over the right to leave of absence, the committee proposes the setting up of a seven-member arbitration committee, made up of three employer-side representatives, three employee-side representatives and an impartial chair.

Legislation

The committee proposes incorporating the right to educational leave into the Working Environment Act.

Commentary

The report of the committee very much reflects the general consensus among the labour market parties on the nature of the right to educational leave, within the context of continuing vocational education reform. The members of the committee agree that it should be a statutory individual right that covers all employees, which will allow for educational diversity in relation to labour market relevance. The question of the statutory right to educational leave has previously been debated by the labour market parties. In the spring 1998 bargaining round (NO9805164F), the Norwegian Confederation of Trade Unions (Landsorganisasjonen i Norge, LO) and the Confederation of Norwegian Business and Industry (Næringslivets Hovedorganisasjon, NHO) entered into an agreement to encourage the creation of a statutory right to educational leave.

The fact that the committee's proposal allows the individual employee substantial freedom to choose which type of education to pursue may be said to be a victory for the employee side. The same goes for the fact that educational leave may taken for as much as three years, and that a new period of leave can be requested after a relatively short period of time.

However, although there is a general consensus about the regulatory framework for educational leave, the question remains as to how to finance continuing vocational education. It is evident that reform of competences must be financed, in whole or in part, by setting aside of funds during pay settlements. Thus the implementation of such a reform can take place only in incremental steps. As such, the appropriation of funds to finance the reform is expected to be one of LO's demands during the 1999 pay negotiations. It will also most probably be raised as an issue during renewed discussions between the labour market parties and the government on the creation of a new social pact. (Kristine Nergaard, FAFO Institute for Applied Social Science)