The changes in the Hungarian social dialogue since the beginning of the nineties had been influenced among others by factors like the new political pluralism and the transition to market economy.

The decision of the ruling party in the Spring of 1989 to "introduce" the political pluralism and the law on associations (II. Law, 1989) paved the way before approximately 50 parties and proto-parties, 80 movements as well as such interest representation organisations as professional bodies, employers' bodies, social associations, youth organisations, cultural circles, etc.

The transition to market economy - that is the liberalisation, deregulation and privatisation - urged a new style of social dialogue. The attempts to peaceful transition stimulated a tripartite solution of social reconciliation, the elaboration and implementation of tools and mechanism of social concertation in macro-, mezzo and micro-level as well.

After 1988, the 19 sectoral federations of the state socialist period broke up into more than 140 professional trade unions, the former monolithic style of the trade union movement was eliminated. A new trade union configuration started to emerge. In this sense the TDDSZ as well as later the Liga, the Workers Councils have huge role as the renewing capacity of former National Trade Union Council, the Confederation of Public Employees and the Chemical Workers Confederation which later laid down the Autonomous Trade Union. One of the most important events during the starting to dissolve the monolithic power structure was in May 18, 1988, the foundation of the first trade union which has been organised outside of the National Council of Trade Unions and has been officially recognised, that is the TDDSZ (Democratic Trade Union of Scientific Workers.)

The social dialogue carrying out on the so called Three-side Round Table - started at June 1989 -on the one side the ruling party, on the another the nine organisations of the opposition and on the third side the six organisations, among them the trade unions, can be considered as important vehicle of the peaceful transition of regime and power relations. During the following three months took place around 1000 debates.

By 1990 there were clear attempts of the governmental forces to reduce the trade union sphere of influence and significance as well as to increase among them the disagreement.

These attempts started to be particularly strong after the famous blockade of taxi drivers at the end of 1990.

The laws on trade unions in Summer, 1991, had particular importance from point of view of further relationship of trade unions. They evidenced the government (Parliament) disposition to increase the conflicts among the trade unions. Although referring to the parity of chanes among them. The law on fee payment (17 of August 1991) abolished the former system of automatic deduction from salary, but it allowed to the employer to follow to deduct the union's fee. The law on protection of trade union patrimony (12 of July 1991) obliged the unions to make account of their wealth.

The agreement among the six main trade union confederations on the patrimony (September 10, 1992) had been followed by an agreement on minimal co-operation and action on subject of common interest (October 27, 1992). The agreement starts from the fact that in Hungary exists pluralism of trade unions and "their autonomy of political action may only be limited by their own rules and internal mechanisms of decision-making." The six confederations concluded an agreement on controlling their conflicting interests as the common interest of the workers was to hold conflicts among trade unions within regulated limits and to subordinate them to more general aspects of workers' interest representation as well as to harmonise actions on common interests. According to the agreement they endeavour to regulate opposite interests and conflict by negotiations as well as do not make unilateral actions endangering the functioning autonomy of decision of other trade unions. Important part of agreement regulated the social dialogue. The undersigned trade unions supported the idea 1) not to conclude agreements with the government nor with the employers which would risk the autonomy or existence of trade unions, 2) they will not conduct campaign against one another, 3) they will inform each other before actions and before taking a final decision.

With the aim to prevent conflicts or to hold them within limits goodwill commissions will be set up, consisting of legal representatives delegated by the undersigned confederations an unanimously accepted by them. The goodwill commission would not only act as arbitrator in case of conflict, but it will also co-ordinate the position and attitude to be taken in the council of interest Reconciliation and continue to perform this activity even if a conflict arose between the confederations.

The first national level institutionalised tripartite consultations were initiated in the autumn of 1988 by the government of then. By that time the National Council of Interest Reconciliation was set up under the pressure of the deteriorating economic situation and because of need of the government to involve the social partners in some (limited) areas of the decision-making (namely in issues concerning the wage). Between 1988 and 1990, during its existence, the National Council had 8 meetings. Despite of the limited circle of activity and competence, the appearance of the first National Council of Interest Reconciliation had great importance, first of all because of diffusing the spirit and practice of tripartite approach of certain topics.

The new government called together in August 1990 the Council of Interest Reconciliation, which has been renewed by this time, its structure. The participants had partly changed and their circle had grown, according to the new situation. Later, the new labour Code the national-level tool of bargaining among the three parts was the Council of Interest Reconciliation. The law obliged the government to reconcile with the other two sides in issues of general interest on the topic of labour relation. (Labour Code, paragraph no. 16).

In Hungary the workers' right to strike does not depend on trade union membership. The right to strike by individual workers is guaranteed by the (a) Constitution and (b) regulated by Act VII of 15 April 1989 on the Right to Strike. In 1989 - during the emergence of market economy, trade union pluralism and modern social dialogue - has been accepted this specific Act which permits strikes for economic interests, solidarity strikes, while political strikes are considered to be unlawful. (c) Further, the provisions of the Act on Strike are supplemented by the Act XXII of 1992 on the Labour Code. (d) In relation with the railway strike, January 1999 the Supreme Court gave its resolution (2/1999) on issue concerning the wage during the strike. According to its resolution the workers as well as the elected trade unionists taking part in the strike are not entitled to wage during strike.

Before an industrial action takes place, the parties should take recourse to conciliation. If they so agree, they can also avail themselves of the possibility of arbitration procedures according to the Labour Code (articles 194-196). If the reconciliation does not work than the strike may be legal tool.

Six months after the 1990 system-changing democratic elections the nation-wide conflict of taxi drivers against the planned sudden and high rise of price of gasoline erupted, at 26 October the taxi drivers and private truck drivers closed the important routes of the capital and major cities. The specific character of network-like relationship among the taxi drivers (use of URH and CB-radio) made possible the sudden and territorially wide outburst. (By this time the use of URH was allowed only to the police and taxi drivers.)

Originally the conflict had exploded as protestation of a specific profession group but giving the specific stage of political and economic transition it canalised a broader social dissatisfaction of the population. The taxi drivers' blockade was widely supported by the Hungarian population and made all the more evident the disharmony between the country and the country's leadership, and the fact that the new leadership was not really efficient. The blockade moved the country toward civil war but due to great self-control and sobriety on both sides of the barricade nothing irreparable happened.

The renewed, few months old Interest Reconciliation Council had a great part in solving the crisis caused by the strike of taxi-drivers and the positive result had augmented its prestige. This event had strengthened not only the position and reputation of Interest Reconciliation Council but also paved the way for the Labour Code paragraphs on mediation. It regulates the reconciliation process, which must be carried out before a strike can be called on.

A strike must be preceded by conciliation, if not, then the strike is considered illegal. In Hungary do exist procedures to resolve disputes in the company when a dispute arises between an employer and a worker and between an employer and workers’ representatives, through their trade union organisation. It is regulated by the Act XXII of 1992 on the Labour Code. According to the law. Any dispute arising in connection with employment relationships (collective labour dispute) between the employer and the works council or between the employer (the employer's interest representation organisation) and the trade union which does not qualify as a legal dispute shall be settled by negotiations between the parties concerned. Negotiations shall commence upon the submission to the other party of a written statement by the party initiating the talks. In the interest of settling the conflict, the parties may use the mediation of an independent person who is not involved in the conflict. Parties shall jointly request the mediator to participate. The mediator may request information and data from the parties, to the extent deemed necessary, during negotiations. In the interest of settlement of a collective labour dispute, the parties may employ an arbitrator based on an agreement. The decision of the arbitrator shall be binding, if so agreed by the parties in advance in a written statement. The arbitrator may set up a conciliation committee, to which the parties shall delegate an equal number of representatives.

In July 1, 1996 the National Labour Mediation and Arbitration Service (the Service) has been founded by the Council of Interest Reconciliation. Hungary was among the first countries in Central and Eastern Europe to establish such an institution. (Casale (1999), p. 29). The social partners and the government decided it to organise, and it has been realised after a long preparatory work. The declared mission of the Service is to assist the effective and quick settlement of interest disputes, to contribute to the social peace at national, sector and workplace level and to improve the culture of industrial relations in Hungary. The Service offers conciliation, mediation and arbitration. The participation of the Service in the deadlocked negotiations is based on the common will of the partners and it is voluntary. The Service may take the initiative in one particular case, according to the article number 197 of the Labour Code: the Service may offer its help in a situation endangering the social peace. According to the same article an arbitrator must be employed for disputes in connection with

• Section 63, according to what employers shall cover the justified and necessary costs of election and operation of the works council. The extent of such shall be determined jointly by the employer and the works council. Any dispute in connection therewith shall be settled by negotiations, and
• Subsection (1) of Section 65, in the event of disagreement. That is, works councils shall have right of co-determination with regard to the appropriation of welfare funds specified in the collective bargaining agreement and with regard to the utilisation of institutions and property of such nature.

The Service provides mediation free of charge but the parties must pay the arbitration. Furthermore, the financing of the Service is covered by the central budget.

Presently the Service is managed by the director and co-ordinated by the secretary, who are appointed by the Minister of Social and Family Affairs after consulting with the social partners represented in the tripartite National Labour Council set up in 1999.

The Interest Reconciliation Council has approved the original list of 98 mediators and arbitrators. At the beginning of 2000 the National Labour Council (which has replaced among other bodies the Interest Reconciliation Council) has chosen already only 63 arbitrators as this reduced number seems to be enough for the number of cases.

Source: MüM (1998), p. 102 based on the data of the National Labour Mediation and Arbitration Service

According to the experiences of the period between July 1996 and beginning of 1998 the 36 per cent of the cases managed by the National Labour Mediation and Arbitration service were initiated by the Service, 24-24 per cent by trade unions and individuals. The employers asked the help of the Service in 8 per cent of the cases. The works councils applied for the intervention of service only in one case. The employers went to the service in five cases.

The vast majority of the cases - 64 per cent - in the given period went on the collective labour dispute. In 17 cases - 30 per cent of all affairs - asked individuals the intervention of the Service in their labour dispute.

The Service was very popular in food industry (10 cases) and in public services, mainly in education (8 cases). The vast majority of the affairs since 1996 to 1998 dealt with the wage (39 cases).

Since its establishment until the middle of 2000 the Service has dealt with around 130 conflicts in the business and private sector which concerned mostly wage and staff reduction. According to the mediators it would be advisable to expand the scope of activity of the Service towards the consultation with particular view to the expired collective agreements and their re-negotiation and also to stress more on individual disputes. Presently individual labour conflicts are settled by Labour Courts as well as the Chamber of Labour at the Supreme Court. The Courts are overburdened by cases; the legal processes and procedures are slow.

The conciliation and mediation in the solution of collective labour conflicts has historical roots in the Hungary. The trade union movement since the beginnings inclined to the peaceful solution and consensus (or with the modern expression "concentration"). The more drastic solutions, the strikes were admitted rarely and as latest tool. This character of the Hungarian population in general and labour in particular lead not at least to the peacefulness of change of political regime in 1989 and the quick transition to market economy notwithstanding to its sad effects on the employment, that is the sudden appearance and rise of unemployment. We may conclude that in the second half of 1990-ties the Service largely contributed to the peaceful solution of labour disputes and conflicts.

Strikes have been rare and can be considered mostly insignificant in Hungary since the Strike Act was passed in 1989. After the taxi drivers' blockade - which importance lays in its effect on the development of industrial relations - the most important strikes occurred at the Hungarian State Railways in 1995, and in 1999.

Source: MSZOSZ (1999), p. 187, quoting Berki (1999)

In the period of 1989/1998 the major number of direct actions - 37 - were initiated in 1997, that is the last year of socialists' and free democrats' governing, meanwhile in 1990 their number not exceeded 20, although it was the year of the major action during all period, that is the taxi drivers' blockade. In the first year of the stabilisation measures in 1995-1996 - the so-called Bokros-package, the number of direct action reached the number 28.

As we saw the Law on Strike since 1989 and the Labour Code since 1992 has served as regulator of direct actions. The National Labour Mediation and Arbitration Service has started to intervene in the middle of 1996.

In 1989/1998 the majority of the industrial actions in Hungary were warning strikes and demonstrations. They together responded for 55 per cent of all actions.

Around 20 per cent of actions were strikes, with a tendency of decrease during the decade. In 1989 there were initiated 7 strikes, meanwhile in 1989 only 2. There is a similar tendency concerning warning strikes, following 1993 their number did not exceeded 10, although in 1998 the number of warning strikes doubled in comparison of previous year. Only in one year, in 1997 the number of strikes surpassed the number of warning strikes.

The greatest number of strikes happened in 1991. The number of warning strikes, strikes and solidarity strikes were together 21. Since 1994 the strike activity significantly decreased and the number of three types of strike together oscillated around 10.

1995 and 1997 were years of demonstrations, almost half of all demonstration of the period 1989-1999 occurred in these two years.

During the first years of transition, and change of regime in 1989-1994 the number of demonstrations were low, it oscillated between 1 and 5. Their number passed 10 in two years, in 1995, that is the introduction of the so called Bokros stabilisation package and in 1997, the last year of the Horn-government.

Source: MSZOSZ (1999), p. 189, quoting Berki (1999)

The majority of direct action in Hungary is actions in front of one employer, that is workplace activities. During 1989-1999 64 per cent of all industrial (direct) actions and among them 92 per cent of strikes took place in front of one employer. On sector or multi-sectoral level the workers protested by collecting signatures, demonstrating and by petitions.

In the 138 warning strikes and strikes in 1989-1999 participated around 800 thousand –1 million person, (almost around 10 per cent of the population). The strikes were short; one participant spent half an hour in strike yearly.

In one third of demonstrations (19 demonstrations) participated less than 300 persons and the mass only in case of 11 demonstrations went over 3000 persons. The major demonstrations mobilising more than ten thousand participants occurred in the public sector with the aim of pressure to Parliament or government. (Berki (2000)).

Source: MSZOSZ (1999), p. 192, quoting Berki (1999)

During the examined period the majority of direct actions occurred in the capital of Hungary, which is not a surprise if we take into account that Budapest and its agglomeration concentrates the Hungarian production and population. In the area of warning strikes the third place is occupied by the county Fejér, characterised by the latest years by the most dynamic growth in the industrial output.

Taking into consideration all direct actions, on the second and third places were the counties Tolna and Borsod-Abaúj-Zemplén, the first characterised by crisis due to low level of development and the second due to the structural changes of production.

Source: MSZOSZ (1999), p. 192, quoting Berki (1999)

The 42 per cent of addresses of all direct action were the employers. 70 per cent of warning strikes and 56 per cent of strikes were addressed toward the employers, while the demonstrations in 72 per cent wanted to raise the attention of a central governmental body or Parliament and only in 12 per cent were addressed against the employers.

Source: MSZOSZ (1999), p. 199, quoting Berki (1999)

39 per cent of all direct action were performed during the period of examination in the industrial sector, and in this sense the second place is occupied by the education. More than half of warning strikes was organised in the industry and the transport sector. The employees in the health sector - a restricted area for strikes - organised mainly demonstrations expressing their protest against the low wages and bad working conditions. The mining sector was one of the most concerned during the transition to market economy. The miners protested in form of strike and demonstration against the deterioration of their position.

The vast majority of industrial actions in Hungary were initiated by the trade unions. The pressure-initiating role of Hungarian trade union confederations during 1989-1999 varied. Almost one third of direct actions was started by the MSZOSZ representing mainly industrial workers. On the second place we find SZEF, the confederation of public sector employees and the Liga takes the third place almost with the same percentage. The Autonomous occupied the fourth place, and the two smallest confederations, the Workers Councils and the Confederation of Intellectual Workers the latest ones. This order is more or less responds to the volume of these representative confederations.

The employees and their interest representation organisations were obliged to use the most serious tools on hand during the tripartite or bipartite negotiations when the partners did not want start negotiation or simply reach an end of the negotiation. In case of public employees the strike replaced the sector-level collective negotiations.

In many cases the trade unions felt themselves obliged to organise an action to exhibit simply their “raison d’être”.

According to an analysis the series of public employees’ action in since March 1995 (appearance of so called Bokros-stabilisation packet) until December 1995, was typical case when “Too much invested, to quit”.

As a total, in 1989/1999 around 45 per cent of direct actions focused on wages, 17 per cent on employment question, 11 per cent on reorganisation problems, 7 per cent on collective agreements, 7 per cent on non-wage income, 5 per cent on privatisation problems, 4 per cent on issues concerning the management, 3 per cent concerning overwork. (Berki (2000)).

The most important demands of the direct actions in every year in 1989-1999 – with the exception of 1992 – were the wage demands and agreements on wage. In 1989 the price rises were at the centre of attention of actions, like in August 1989 the warning strike of half an hour initiated by the Trade Union of Metal Workers, or in 1990 the taxis drivers’ blockade which originally was declared against the price rise of gasoline. At the first years of 1990 it was crucial to fight against the consequences of privatisation and structural changes of the production, like the closing of plants, staff reduction, etc. At the beginning of the nineties the employees and the population expressed their opinion or protest in the labour issues requiring adequate legal regulation.

At the second half of the 1990-ies the demands expressed by the actions focused on wage and collective agreements. In the years 1995 and 1997 the employees of public sector protested against the firing.

At spring, 1999 as consequence of the new Government endeavour the almost 10 years old interest reconciliation system has been abolished. In April 1999 started to exist a totally new system of social dialogue in the Hungary. The negotiating partners signed the Statues of National Labour Council thereby establishing the new tripartite forum. The National Labour Council is considered as the legal successor of the Interest Reconciliation Council but it does not the right any more to deal with issue of EU integration.. In the same April, 1999 has been emerged a totally new forum, the Economic Council, a forum on consultation on economic policy not only for employees and employers but also for other institutions like the trade chambers, representatives of multinational companies, bank sector, etc. The trade unions expressed their reservation as the Government has taken its decision on the Economic Council without any consultation with the Interest Reconciliation Council. In the new macro system of interest reconciliation the scope of former International Working Group has been divided in two bodies: the European Integration Council and the ILO Council. By the end of June 1999 established the European Integration Council with the participation of six Hungarian confederations, the nine employers' federation, the government (Ministry of Foreign Affairs), the three chambers of industry. Furthermore, the National Integration Commission of Hungarian Trade Unions has on its own right "permanent invitation" to the forum. But, in contrast to the former International Working Group, the European Integration Council (as well as the ILO Council) is not organically related with the other (new) elements of the reconciliation system.

During the Orbán-government the major direct actions were initiated by the public workers, railways, transport workers, health and education sector, police workers and farmers. The demonstrations served to draw the attention to the hard living conditions and low financing of public services like health and education. The most significant events were the railway workers wage strikes:

A partial railway strike began at the beginning of January 1999, after the Free Union of Railway Employees (VDSZSZ) called out its 16,000 members to reach an acceptable wage agreement.

The union agreed that in order to allow essential services to continue two trains a day will run on each line. International and postal trains, however, will not work and freight transport will be reduced to the minimum. Hungarian State Railways originally wanted 812 trains to run daily during the strike, including all international and intercity trains.

While there was public support shown through the number of people signing petitions, the two of the three rail unions, the Trade Union of Engine Drivers and the Trade Union of Railways Workers, did not join the strike and will sign an agreement they reached on 31 December, which promised a 16% pay rise for 1999. They originally demanded a 21% rise.

The union estimated that a quarter of the 10,000 employees working the night and early morning shift joined the strike. VDSZSZ believed that it was a sufficient number to paralyse regular railway traffic. A day after strike had began according to the union 20% of railwaymen stayed away from work, while Hungarian State Railways said only 14% went on strike. According to the railway, there were 3,978 railwaymen on duty between midnight and 1am, of whom only 596 went on strike. VDSZSZ accused the railway company of putting pressure on VDSZSZ members to force them to work and replacing strikers by calling in workers on sick leave, or those not on duty.

The strike lasted 108 hours. Hungarian State Railways lost an estimated Ft500 million ($2,3 million) during the strike. Romania has announced its claim of lei 475 million ($43,300) as compensation for damages. The trade union connected between the weekend suicide of a VDSZSZ member in a northeastern town, Nyékládháza and the supposed pressure displayed by the management.

According to the agreement between the union and the Hungarian State Railway all railway employees will receive a 16% pay rise, a figure which had been suggested before the strike.

Minister of Transportation, Communication and Water Management Kálmán Katona announced that heavy sums would be paid by people held responsible for the strikes, although so far only (The Budapest Sun, (January 7, 14, 1999)

At the end of 1999 the trade unions were demanding a 14% wage increase while the government said that was not even certain if it could guarantee 8.5%. The railway workers planned to start a national strike starting 20 December.

In the first half of January 2000 almost all trains stopped in Hungary as railway workers performed a 60-hour strike, as they could not reach to make accept their wage claim. Even after the employees reduced their claim to 12-13%, only two or three percentage points over inflation, management declined to raise its offer above 8.5%.

Besides their pay, unions were also asking for collective agreements on a set of other issues such as working conditions, holidays and working hours.

According to the management, 80% of their 56.000 employees did not strike, but traffic ceased because train drivers did. Trade unions only allowed for one pair of trains on all lines, which ran from 9am-9pm.These trains stopped at all stations. All international trains, domestic InterCity and post trains were cancelled. Serious delays occurred in the Budapest suburban area, where instead of the 540 trains, only 36 were in operation. According to the management on the first day of the strike the loses were at least one million passengers and 300,000 tons of cargo.

Other public transport employees, such as bus, tram and subway drivers were also contemplating a strike, but a few hours before the walkout, they reached an agreement with the Budapest Transport Company on a pay raise of 8.5%. BKV employees only held a 30-minute sympathy strike.

The Hungarian State Railways has offered its workers a three-year wage package in hopes of heading off what would be the second strike of the year.

The leader of the Union of Railwaymen (VSZ) called the Hungarian State Railways proposal a "beginning of real negotiations". The union scheduled a strike to start on 31 January with the aim to reach an agreement on even better pay and work conditions. The Free Union of Railway Workers (VDSZSZ) took the lead, and persuaded two other unions to join them.

According to the railways management the strike would already turn public opinion against the railways and lead to a situation in which the company would be unable to pay wages and could not offer pay raise higher than 8.5%.

Emilio Gabaglio, chairman of the European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC), sent letters to the Hungarian Prime Minister and the Minister of Transport, Communication and Water Management, urging them to intervene in the dispute. The ETUC believed that the Hungarian State Railways refusal to even consider the unions’ requests was contrary to the standards of the EU, which Hungary wished to join. (The Budapest Sun (January 13, 27, 2000)).

Negotiations over averting a train strike came to a dead end after a 160-hour meeting between union leaders and railways management. At the beginning of February the company’s 56,000 employees walked off their jobs. This event can be evaluated as one of the most serious challenges facing Hungary’s Government since taking office in 1998.

The management presented a three-year draft agreement to trade unions over the weekend, which remained on the table until Monday night. The proposal showed no significant change on the part of wage increase, it rejected an increase by more than 8.5%. The draft agreement would have raised rail workers’ wages every year in line with inflation. The management also wanted a three-year collective agreement preserving the benefits and allocations of earlier collective contracts. Another pre-condition on what management insisted was that unions declared a three-year moratorium on strikes.

Notwithstanding the management as a new element - was prepared to increase wages in real terms to an extent equal to about half of the economic growth rate, which the Government projected to be 4.5% in 2000. The unions said they accepted the draft agreement as a basis for negotiations, but wanted it to be backdated to January 1, 2000. They also wanted the agreement to include compensation for any unforeseen increases in inflation. (The Budapest Sun (February 3, 2000))

Negotiations between trade unions and representatives of management of the railways at the second week of February were still deadlocked with no light in sight at the end of the tunnel.

After 13 days and 17 hours the longest railway strike in the nation’s history ended by the middle of February. The Train Drivers’ Union, the last to finally fold, announced it would accept an offer by Hungarian State Railways for an average 8.4% wage increase for railway workers.

The strike cost the Government an estimated Ft1.5 billion ($5.7 million) in lost revenues (The Budapest Sun (February 17, 2000))

In January 1999 the transport workers get 15% raise as after days of negotiations, the Budapest Transportation Company (BKV) have agreed to a 15% pay rise with the public transport unions representing 5000 vehicle drivers, in consequence of a threat with warning strike.

Originally company management had said the company could not afford the pay demand and offered the unions 12.4%. The union said that a company with Ft51 billion-per-year budget could allocate a Ft400-500 million-pay raise for their employees. The agreement helped avoid a strike with possibly hard consequences for the public. (The Budapest Sun, (January 28, 1999))

Police, border guards and other Interior Ministry employees demonstrated in March 1999 in Budapest for higher wages. They complained against wage freezes and other cutbacks that the Ministry has initiated in the name of budget constraints. The strike was organised by the five biggest trade unions of the employees of the Ministry of the Interior, including border guards and soldiers from the National Guard. The trade unions demanded a 15 to 16% pay increase retroactive from January 1 and the lifting of a freeze on salaries for public employees. They also protested against planned staff cuts. The trade unions agreed that if the Government does not take steps to ease the tensions, ministry workers would begin striking. Some 200 workers and children demonstrated against the planned closure of 12 nursery schools and kindergartens used exclusively by the Ministry of Interior. (The Budapest Sun (March 11, 1999) the demands of trade unions concerning wages were fulfilled meanwhile the demonstration against the closure of nursery schools and kindergartens ended without exit.

In the second half of March 1999 nearly 20,000 public workers demonstrated on Kossuth tér, in front of the Hungarian Parliament. Health care workers, central and local public administration officers, representatives of teachers' union and others participated in the demonstration. In the petition, employees demanded a 16% salary raise from an independent budget source retroactive to March 1 and the cancellation of the wage freeze and the staffing cut. The demonstrators also challenged the Government to consider the buying power of pensions, which average Ft20,000 ($91), net per month. The protest was organised by the Forum of Trade Union Co-operation (SZEF). The Trade Union of Intellectual Workers (ÉSZT) has assured the demonstrators of support. (The Budapest Sun (March 24, 1999))

In December 2000 public healthcare workers staged a series of warning strikes and demonstrations over three days. The protests began after demands by the Hungarian Health Workers Democratic Trade Union (EDDSZ) for Ft240 billion ($8 million) in additional State-funding for wage increases and improvements to hospitals.

The actions culminated in a demonstration in front of the Parliament, mobilising 10,000 people. EDDSZ president presented a list of demands to the Government. Health Minister, who had already commenced talks with the EDDSZ before demonstration to discuss the budget and general state of the healthcare sector, criticised the demonstration as "senseless" and related to the personal ambitions of the EDDSZ president. According to vice-state secretary, Ministry of Economics wages must be increased by at least 20%, and the wage increases in the healthcare sector would be the only way to prevent an exodus of workers to EU countries after Hungary joined the Union. Hospital directors said the overwhelming majority of patients in the 28 hospitals affected by the actions appeared to support them. (Budapest Sun (December 14, 2000))

Teachers across Hungary held 15-minute protests (warning strike) to highlight their repeated demands to the Education Ministry for a 5% wage increase. The protest was organised by the trade unions of teachers. Workers in the public education sector remain amongst the most poorly paid professionals in the country. The protests, organised by the Teachers’ Union (PSZ) followed the strikes and mass rally held by health workers. Teachers were unanimous in their support for the wage demands. Many teachers earn as little as Ft40,000 ($136) a month - equal to the statutory minimum wage set by the Government for 2001. Teachers were not mentioned in the new two-year budget. However after the demonstration, Minister of Education, said they would not be forgotten. Both the Secretary General of the Teachers Trade Union and the leader of the Teachers’ Democratic Trade Union evaluated the warning strikes as successful and they believed a breakthrough was possible. (The Budapest Sun (December 21, 2000))

The year 2000 had been closed and 2001 has been initiated by wage claims.

After frustrated negotiation at February 6, 2001 the trade union of aircraft mechanics at Hungarian airlines Malév initiated a wage rise claiming strike. They claimed a wage increase of 15 per cent (much above the inflation rate in 2000) instead of offered 7+2 per cent.

Passengers booked on the 11 cancelled flights were rerouted to other carriers with delays of one to three hours, with the planes undergoing maintenance in Warsaw and Vienna. The International Transport Workers' Federation (ITF) earlier on Tuesday declared crews at those two airports strike-breakers. The strike forced Malév to cancel flights to New York, Munich, Zurich, London, Berlin, Athens and Beirut, and two flights each to Paris and Brussels. Wage negotiations with union representatives at Aeroplex are scheduled to continue. The strike is estimated to cost Malév Ft 20 million each day.

At the same time a strike-close situation created in the energy-sector when at the branch level wage-negotiation the employers offered an 8 per cent wage increase instead of 13,5 per cent claimed by the trade union. The trade union decided to call for a national-wide warning strike by 17^th of February and organise demonstrations in Essen and München calling the attention of the owners.

The aircraft mechanics and the workers in the energy sector are among the best paid professional groups. The health workers of the hospital Magyar Imre in Ajka are among the worst paid employees in Hungary. They plan to strike in the middle of February, 2000 as the management has carried out the legal wage increase only in part. (Népszabadság (February 6, 2001 )).

Act VII of 1989 on Strike

Act XXII of 1992 on the Labor Code

Erzsébet, Berki (1999), Sztrájkok és más direkt akciók a 90-es években Magyarországon MKI, manuscript

Erzsébet, Berki (2000), Munkahelyi konfliktusok és viták, in: ed. Koltay Jenő,A munkaügyi kapcsolatok rendszere és a munkavállalók helyzete, MTA Közgazdaságtudományi Kutatóközpont, Budapest

Lajos, Héthy (1999), Tripartism and industrial relations in Hungary, in. Social Dialogue in Central and Eastern Europe, ILO, edited by. Giuseppe Casale

MSZOSZ (1999), Gazdasági és Szociális Adattár

MTI (February 7, 2001) Econews

MüM (1998), Munkaügyi politika és munkaügyi folyamatok 1994-1998

Népszabadság (February 6, 2001)

Népszabadság (January 26, 2001), Szakszervezeti széthúzás, p. 5.

The Budapest Sun (December 14, 2000) Fraser Allan, Health workers stage protests

The Budapest Sun (December 21, 2000) Teachers protest to highlight low wages

The Budapest Sun (February 10, 2000) Strike update

The Budapest Sun (February 17, 2000) Rail strikers accept offer

The Budapest Sun (February 3, 2000) Gerson Perry, Strike on track

The Budapest Sun (January 13, 2000) Krisztián R Hildebrand, Strike stops trains in their tracks

The Budapest Sun (January 14, 1999) Eszter Balázs, 'Illegal' strike off

The Budapest Sun (January 27, 2000) Krisztián R Hildebrand, Railways try to avert second strike

The Budapest Sun (January 7, 1999), Strikers and railways disagree

The Budapest Sun (March 11, 1999) Eszter Balázs, Ministry rejects police pay protest

The Budapest Sun (March 24, 1999) Géza Szamosi, Public workers hot on wage freeze

The Budapest Sun,(January 28, 1999)

E-mail