CMNT_TITLE

The Committee notes the comments made by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) in a communication dated 24 August 2010 alleging numerous violations of trade union rights in practice, including denial of registration of trade unions, interference by the authorities in internal trade union affairs, harassment of trade union leaders, and restrictions on the rights to strike. The Committee recalls that in its previous observations it had also noted communications submitted by the ITUC containing similar allegations. The Committee further notes the comments submitted by the Russian Labour Confederation and the Seafarers’ Union of Russia in a communication dated 16 December 2009. The Committee notes with regret that the Government once again did not provide observations on the comments submitted by the ITUC or other workers’ organizations. The Committee strongly urges the Government to provide its observations thereon, as well as on the previous comments of the ITUC.

Article 3 of the Convention. Right of workers’ and employers’ organizations to organize their administration and activities. Right to strike. Labour Code. The Committee recalls that it had previously requested the Government to amend section 412 of the Labour Code, so as to ensure that any disagreement concerning minimum services in organizations responsible for safety, health and life of people and vital interests of society, where the minimum services must be ensured during a strike, is settled not by the executive body but by an independent body having the confidence of all parties to the dispute. The Committee notes that while the Government confirms that a body of executive power of the Russian Federation is entitled to define minimum services, it indicates that such a decision may be appealed by the parties to the collective labour dispute to the court. The Committee considers that since the system of minimum services restricts one of the essential means of pressure available to workers to defend their economic and social interests, their organizations should be able, if they so wish, to participate in defining such a service, along with employers and the public authorities. It would be highly desirable for negotiations on the definition and organization of the minimum service not to be held during a labour dispute, so that all parties can examine the matter with the necessary objectivity and detachment. The parties might also envisage the establishment of a joint or independent body responsible for examining rapidly and without formalities the difficulties raised by the definition and application of such a minimum service, and empowered to issue enforceable decisions (see General Survey on freedom of association and collective bargaining, 1994, paragraph 161). The Committee therefore once again requests the Government to amend section 412 of the Labour Code so as to ensure that any disagreement concerning minimum services is settled not by the executive body but by an independent body having the confidence of all the parties to the dispute.

The Committee recalls that it had previously requested the Government to amend section 413 of the Labour Code so as to ensure that when a strike is prohibited, any disagreement concerning a collective dispute is settled by an independent body and not by the Government. The Committee takes due note of the Government’s explanation that it is entitled to stop a strike in services of a vital interest until the issue is solved by the court under this section, but this injunction may not last longer than ten days.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the Ministry of Health and Social Development together with the social partners are elaborating the Concept of the Social Partnership Development and that within the framework of this exercise, it is envisaged to address the issues related to the provisions of the Labour Code and other rules and regulations regarding the organization and conduct of strikes, to establish an efficient mechanism for solving labour collective disputes and to improve the labour legislation taking into account the comments of the ILO supervisory bodies. The Government further indicates that the permanent tripartite working group of the State Duma Committee on Labour and Social Policy has resumed its work with a view to study the legal practice and prepare proposals aimed at improving labour legislation. This working group intends to consider proposals of the social partners on the Labour Code amendments. In this respect, the Committee notes the comments submitted by the Russian Labour Confederation and the Seafarers’ Union of Russia alleging that the work on amending the Labour Code pursuant to the recommendations of the ILO supervisory bodies was not moving forward. The Committee hopes that the work of the abovementioned working group will result in the near future in a legislative reform that will take into account the abovementioned comments and requests the Government to provide information on any further developments in this respect. The Committee once again reminds the Government that it can avail itself of the technical assistance of the Office if it so wishes.

Other legislation. The Committee recalls that it had previously requested the Government to ensure that workers of postal services, municipal services and railways can exercise the right to strike and, to that effect, amend section 9 of the 1994 Federal Postal Service Act, section 11(1(10)) of the 1998 Federal Municipal Services Act and section 26 of the 2003 Federal Rail Transport Act. It further requested the Government to indicate whether there are any legislative restrictions imposed on the right to strike of civil servants other than civil servants exercising authority in the name of the State. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the right to strike of the following categories of workers is restricted: workers of the federal courier communications and the municipal employees, as well as certain categories of railway workers. The Government further indicates that the Law on State Civil Service of the Russian Federation of 2004 prohibits civil servants from stopping their duties to solve a labour dispute. The Committee notes that the Government considers that the restrictions imposed on the right to strike of certain categories of workers do not contradict international standards and indicates that workers whose right to strike is restricted have the possibility of using other means of solving collective labour disputes, such as mediation procedure or applying to the Government. The Government refers, in particular, to Article 8(2) and (3) of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and points out that under these provisions, a State may impose prohibition on the exercise of the right to strike by members of the armed forces, of the police, or of the administration of the State, but that nothing in this Article shall authorize States parties to Convention No. 87 to take legislative measures which would prejudice, or apply the law in such a manner as would prejudice, the guarantees provided for in that Convention. The Committee recalls its basic position that the right to strike is an intrinsic corollary of the right to organize protected by Convention No. 87. It further recalls that in addition to the armed forces and the police (members of which could be excluded from the application of the Convention), the right to strike may be restricted or prohibited only for public servants exercising authority in the name of the State and in essential services in the strict sense of the term, i.e. services the interruption of which would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population. The Committee considers that railway services and postal services do not constitute essential services. The Committee therefore once again requests the Government to amend the abovementioned legislative acts so as to bring its legislation into conformity with the Convention and ensure that workers of the federal courier communications, railway workers, municipal employees, as well as public servants who do not exercise authority in the name of the State, can exercise the right to strike. It requests the Government to indicate in its next report all measures taken in this respect.

The Committee had previously requested the Government to specify the categories of workers employed in the internal affairs agencies who are prohibited from striking. The Committee takes due note of the Government’s indication that members of the police, holding the rank and file or command posts, are prohibited from stopping their duties in order to solve a labour dispute.

The Committee is raising other points in a request addressed directly to the Government.