 |
Disclaimer webinfo@ilo.org |
Objective of the strike (strikes on economic and social issues, political strikes, solidarity strikes, etc.) (Right to strike)Description:(CFA: Digest of Decisions 2006) Subject classification: Freedom of Association Document:1002 Subject: Freedom of Association, Collective Bargaining, and Industrial Relations Display the document in: French Spanish Document No. (ilolex): 2320061002 Objective of the strike (strikes on economic and social issues, political strikes, solidarity strikes, etc.) 526. The occupational and economic interests which workers defend through the exercise of the right to strike do not only concern better working conditions or collective claims of an occupational nature, but also the seeking of solutions to economic and social policy questions and problems facing the undertaking which are of direct concern to the workers. (See the 1996 Digest, para. 479; 304th Report, Case No. 1851, para. 280; 314th Report, Case No. 1787, para. 31; 320th Report, Case No. 1865, para. 526; 326th Report, Case No. 2094, para. 491; 329th Report, Case No. 2094, para. 135; and 331st Report, Case No. 1937/2027, para. 104.) 527. Organizations responsible for defending workers’ socio-economic and occupational interests should be able to use strike action to support their position in the search for solutions to problems posed by major social and economic policy trends which have a direct impact on their members and on workers in general, in particular as regards employment, social protection and standards of living.(See the 1996 Digest, para. 480; 305th Report, Case No. 1870, para. 143; 320th Report, Case No. 1865, para. 526, and Case No. 2027, para. 876; 336th Report, Case No. 2354, para. 682; and 337th Report, Case No. 2323, para. 1039.) 528. Strikes of a purely political nature and strikes decided systematically long before negotiations take place do not fall within the scope of the principles of freedom of association.(See the 1996 Digest, para. 481; 303rd Report, Case No. 1810/1830, para. 61; and 329th Report, Case No. 2094, para. 135.) 529. While purely political strikes do not fall within the scope of the principles of freedom of association, trade unions should be able to have recourse to protest strikes, in particular where aimed at criticizing a government’s economic and social policies.(See the 1996 Digest, para. 482; 300th Report, Case No. 1777, para. 71; 304th Report, Case No. 1851, para. 280, and Case No 1863, para. 356; 314th Report, Case No. 1787, para. 31; 320th Report, Case No. 1865, para. 526; and 333rd Report, Case No. 2251, para. 985.) 530. In one case where a general strike against an ordinance concerning conciliation and arbitration was certainly one against the government’s policy, the Committee considered that it seemed doubtful whether allegations relating to it could be dismissed at the outset on the ground that it was not in furtherance of a trade dispute, since the trade unions were in dispute with the government in its capacity as an important employer following the initiation of a measure dealing with industrial relations which, in the view of the trade unions, restricted the exercise of trade union rights.(See the 1996 Digest, para. 483.) 531. The right to strike should not be limited solely to industrial disputes that are likely to be resolved through the signing of a collective agreement; workers and their organizations should be able to express in a broader context, if necessary, their dissatisfaction as regards economic and social matters affecting their members’ interests.(See the 1996 Digest, para. 484; 300th Report, Case No. 1777, para. 71; and 320th Report, Case No. 1865, para. 526.) 532. The solution to a legal conflict as a result of a difference in interpretation of a legal text should be left to the competent courts. The prohibition of strikes in such a situation does not constitute a breach of freedom of association.(See the 1996 Digest, para. 485.) 533. If strikes are prohibited while a collective agreement is in force, this restriction must be compensated for by the right to have recourse to impartial and rapid mechanisms, within which individual or collective complaints about the interpretation or application of collective agreements can be examined; this type of mechanism not only allows the inevitable difficulties which may occur regarding the interpretation or application of collective agreements to be resolved while the agreements are in force, but also has the advantage of preparing the ground for future rounds of negotiations, given that it allows problems which have arisen during the period of validity of the collective agreement in question to be identified.(See 330th Report, Case No. 2208, para. 601.) 534. A general prohibition of sympathy strikes could lead to abuse and workers should be able to take such action provided the initial strike they are supporting is itself lawful.(See the 1996 Digest, para. 486; 303rd Report, Case No. 1810/1830, para. 61; 307th Report, Case No. 1898, para. 325; 320th Report, Case No. 1963, para. 235; 333rd Report, Case No. 2251, para. 985; and 338th Report, Case No. 2326, para. 445.) 535. The fact that a strike is called for recognition of a union is a legitimate interest which may be defended by workers and their organizations.(See the 1996 Digest, para. 487; and 302nd Report, Case No. 1809, para. 381.) 536. A ban on strikes related to recognition disputes (for collective bargaining) is not in conformity with the principles of freedom of association.(See the 1996 Digest, para. 488; and 321st Report, Case No. 2066, para. 336.) 537. Protest strikes in a situation where workers have for many months not been paid their salaries by the Government are legitimate trade union activities.(See 304th Report, Case No. 1850, para. 216.) 538. A ban on strike action not linked to a collective dispute to which the employee or union is a party is contrary to the principles of freedom of association.(See the 1996 Digest, para. 489; and 307th Report, Case No. 1898, para. 325.) 539. Provisions which prohibit strikes if they are concerned with the issue of whether a collective employment contract will bind more than one employer are contrary to the principles of freedom of association on the right to strike; workers and their organizations should be able to call for industrial action in support of multi-employer contracts.(See the 1996 Digest, para. 490.) 540. Workers and their organizations should be able to call for industrial action (strikes) in support of multi-employer contracts (collective agreements).(See the 1996 Digest, para. 491.) 541. The Committee has stated on many occasions that strikes at the national level are legitimate in so far as they have economic and social objectives and not purely political ones; the prohibition of strikes could only be acceptable in the case of public servants exercising authority in the name of the State or of workers in essential services in the strict sense of the term, i.e. services whose interruption could endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population.(See the 1996 Digest, para. 492.) 542. A declaration of the illegality of a national strike protesting against the social and labour consequences of the government’s economic policy and the banning of the strike constitute a serious violation of freedom of association.(See the 1996 Digest, para. 493.) 543. As regards a general strike, the Committee has considered that strike action is one of the means of action which should be available to workers’ organizations. A 24-hour general strike seeking an increase in the minimum wage, respect of collective agreements in force and a change in economic policy (to decrease prices and unemployment) is legitimate and within the normal fi eld of activity of trade union organizations.(See the 1996 Digest, para. 494.) 544. A general protest strike demanding that an end be brought to the hundreds of murders of trade union leaders and unionists during the past few years is a legitimate trade union activity and its prohibition therefore constitutes a serious violation of freedom of association.(See the 1996 Digest, para. 495.) |
| ILO Home | NORMES home | ILOLEX home | Universal Query | NATLEX |
|
Disclaimer webinfo@ilo.org |