CMNT_TITLE

The Committee notes the Government’s report and the comments submitted by the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) and the Trades Union Congress (TUC) in communications dated 10 August and 31 August 2006, respectively.

Article 2 of the Convention. The Committee notes the TUC’s indication that union representatives do not enjoy a general right of access to workplaces, and that this has been an issue of particular concern in the merchant shipping sector. The TUC states that, in workplaces where unions are recognized, the law requires employers to provide union representatives with limited facilities in order to perform activities relating to consultation rights related to collective redundancies and transfer for undertakings; however, these provisions do not set out a general right for union representatives to access workplaces, carry out union activities and inform workers of the benefits of union membership. The Committee recalls in this connection that freedom of association implies that workers’ and employers’ organizations should have the right to organize their activities in full freedom and formulate their programmes with a view to defending all of the occupational interests of their members, while respecting the law of the land. This includes, in particular, the right to hold trade union meetings, the right of trade union officers to have access to places of work and to communicate with management, certain political activities of organizations, the right to strike and, in general, any activity involved in the defence of members’ rights (see General Survey of 1994 on freedom of association and collective bargaining, paragraph 128). The Committee requests the Government to reply to the concern expressed by the TUC regarding this matter and the impact that the question of access may have on the right of workers to form and join organizations of their own choosing, particularly those working in the merchant shipping sector.

Article 3 of the Convention. 1. The Committee notes the TUC’s indication that the Employment Relations Act of 2004 (ERA) amends the Trade Unions and Labour Relations Act of 1992 (TULRA) so as to make it unlawful for an employer to dismiss an employee for taking part in a lawful strike for the first 12 weeks of the strike. The TUC maintains that this arrangement fails to adequately protect the right to strike of trade unions and refers to the case of Friction Dynamics, where the employer had waited until the statutory period was over to then immediately send dismissal letters to the workers who had participated in the strike. The Committee requests the Government to reply to the TUC’s comments respecting this issue.

2. The TUC states that, in order for an industrial action to be protected by immunity, unions must undertake a complex procedure involving not only a ballot of those called upon to take part in the action, but also the submission of notice to the employer containing detailed information – failure to comply with which may allow the employer to obtain an injunction and so thwart the industrial action on the basis of a technicality. The TUC indicates that the required submissions include: notice of a trade union’s intention to hold a ballot, a sample voting paper, notice of the ballot result, lists of the categories of workers and the workplaces affected by or involved in the action, and at least seven days’ notice of the intention to commence industrial action. The TUC maintains that these notice requirements, though simplified by the ERA, are still unjustifiably burdensome. The Committee asks the Government to reply to the TUC’s concerns respecting this matter.

3. The Committee notes the TUC’s indication that, under section 223 of the TULRA, disputes designed to secure the reinstatement of workers who have been dismissed for taking part in an unofficial strike are unprotected, and that this lack of protection applies regardless of the cause of the unofficial action. The Committee asks the Government to reply to the TUC’s comments concerning this issue.