Definitive Report - REPORT_NO230, November 1983

1. 294. The Athens Workers' Centre, an organisation which claims to be a section of the Greek General Confederation of Labour (hereafter referred to as the GCL), submitted a complaint alleging violation of freedom of association in Greece on 13 April 1983. It sent additional information in support of its complaint on 18 May 1983. The Government, for its part, replied in a communication of 11 August 1983. Furthermore, the President of the Free Democratic Trade Union Movement, Mr. Karakistos, who signed the initial complaint in his capacity as President of the Athens Workers' Centre, stated that he supported the complaint from the Athens Workers' Centre in a communication received on 4 October 1983. This communication was immediately sent to the Government for its comments.
2. 295. Greece has ratified both the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87) and the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).

A. The complainant's allegations

1. 296. The Athens Workers' Centre, which claims to consist of 625 trade unions and 400,000 members, alleges in its communication of 13 April 1983 that the Government forced the GCL's Executive, which had been elected just 45 days before, to resign, and appointed a new Executive, of which 80 per cent of the members belong to organisations of the party in power. The complaint also concerns Act No. 1264/82 which allegedly deprived workers of their right to draw up the statutes of their occupational organisations and to elect their representatives, Act No. 1320/80 which abolished free collective bargaining, and Act. No. 1346/82 which allegedly empowered the Minister of Labour to finance occupational organisations so as to bring them under his influence in view of the forthcoming GCL Congress; the complaint also alleges a wave of persecution launched by the Government against opposing trade unionists in order to frighten people into accepting a state form of trade unionism, which, states the complainant organisation, is "a phenomenon only encountered in totalitarian countries". This communication is signed, amongst others, by the former Minister of Labour, Mr. Laskaris, the former Minister of Justice, Mr. Stefanakis, an Honorary President of the GCL, the Secretary-General of the Administration elected by the GCL, Mr. Saitis, a legal expert from the Court of Appeal and the former Secretary of the Administration elected by the GCL; it also lists the names of President Karakitsos and the Secretary-General Mr. Saitis, referring to them as members of the Executive of the Administration legally elected by the Greek GCL, which was dismissed by judicial decision.
2. 297. In a second very long communication of 18 May 1983, the complainant organisation points out that the executives of many trade union organisations had allegedly been dissolved, not only that of the GCL. Whilst acknowledging that these dissolutions had been ordered by judicial courts, it maintains that they had been carried out "in a climate of terror and unprecedented psychological pressure", enabling the Government to pass an Act, which aims at completely subjugating the trade union movement and silencing the voice of the workers.
3. 298. According to the complainant organisation, the GCL Executive was dissolved in the following way: 32 days after the GCL Congress ended, when Andréas Papandreou had been in power since 18 October 1981, five trade union organisations linked to the government party lodged an appeal with the Athens Peace Tribunal, questioning the validity of the elections of the GCL Executive and requesting that measures be taken to stay execution of the decisions taken at the GCL Congress. In fact, recalls the complainant, the Executive had been elected with a majority of 65 per cent of the votes. Deferment of the decisions taken at the GCL Congress was announced on 17 November 1981 by the Justice of the Peace which, states the complainant organisation, is the lowest instance in the Greek legal system. This decision was obviously the result of pressure from certain circles because it granted the wishes of trade unions affiliated to the Government. On 7 December 1981, the five above-mentioned trade union organisations proceeded to request the appointment of a provisional Executive. The hearing of the matter was held on 9 December, following lightning legal proceedings. The representatives of 26, trade union federations and workers' centres upheld the complainant's point of view in the presence of a single Justice of the Peace, but the applicants, rival organisations of the complainant, requested and obtained the appointment for one year of a new Executive, made up of trade unionists belonging exclusively to the party in power and to the two Communist Parties existing in Greece. On 15 December 1981, the applicants, rival organisations of the complainant, asked the Justice of Peace to defer an appeal until March 1982, to which he agreed by fixing the hearing on 12 February 1982. Meanwhile, on 29 December 1981, the Athens Court of First Instance had appointed the provisional Executive at the head of the GCL, made up of totally incompetent people. This decision was adopted upon an order from the party in power, without taking account of the 26 trade union organisations who were present at the hearing and which pleaded on behalf of the elected GCL Executive. The appeal lodged by the rival organisations of the complainant was examined on 12 February 1982 by the Justice of Peace who excluded the respondent, that is the complainant, from the hearing. The complainant alleges that the decision granted the GCL Executive, imposed from outside, the right to pass judgement on the allegations concerning electoral fraud during the Congress. Furthermore, it alleges that, through appeals to the courts, other trade union organisations had been taken over by militants, whom it qualifies as "fanatics" from Pasok (Greek Socialist Party) and the two Greek Communist Parties. The Executive elected by the GCL lodged an appeal against the appointment of the provisional Executive, in which it stated that the court had failed to take into account all the parties present at the hearing; furthermore, it alleged that the court had adjudicated more than was asked for, and it had gone beyond the scope of the matter referred to it by the organisations concerned. The complainant adds that the appeal was first examined on 1 October 1982 by the members of the first instance of the Appeal Court, presided over by Mr. Consta who had just been appointed to this position. The Appeal Court, concludes the complainant, rejected this appeal as it considered that the Athens Workers' Centre, even if it was one of the respondents during the hearing which had resulted in the unfavourable decision, was not entitled to appeal to the Court since it was not a correspondent party in the decision.
4. 299. With respect to the allegation that Act No. 1264/82 of 1 July 1982 denies workers the right to draw up their own statutes and elect freely their representatives, the complainant states that in section l(3) of the Act, local sections of trade unions are considered as first-level trade union organisations; this, it claims, is contrary to Articles 2, 3 and 4 of Convention No. 87 which acknowledges as an established principle the pyramid-shaped structure of the trade union organisation. Sections 1 and 2 of the Act confer legal personality on mere works committees, thereby contravening Article 5 of Convention No. 87 which does not authorise the setting up of a federation or confederation by one simple trade union organisation and does not provide for the setting up of local associations by this organisation. Sections 2 and 3 of the Act, stipulating that documents and any other material concerning the trade unions (account books, etc) must be put at the disposal not only of the members of this organisation but also of persons having "legitimate interests", might enable the state to control the trade unions' activities. The complainant alleges that section 7 of the Act, which obliges unions to accept members because the Justice of Peace (the lowest legal instance) can automatically have them enrolled if the union in question has refused to accept them, and section 12, which imposes proportional representation as the electoral system and establishes the number of votes required for election and the distribution of seats between each organisation, are contrary to Articles 3 and 8 of Convention No. 87; indeed, the impugned sections are not in keeping with the general principles of the right of association in Greece, in other words with the provisions contained in the Civil Code. Section 9 of the Act, stipulating the length of the executive bodies' term of office and forbidding a trade union which does not obtain a specific number of members to stand for election to the second-level organisations, would force more organisations to disband and is contrary to the spirit and letter of Convention No. 87. This is also the case for section 14 of the Act which abolishes the right to vote and eligibility of retired journalists.
5. 300. With respect to the allegation concerning the abolition of the right to free collective bargaining, the complainant considers that it results from section 27 of Act 1320/82. The provisions contained in this Act stipulate that any strike to support wage claims is illegal and should be sanctioned as such.
6. 301. With respect to the allegation concerning government interference in the trade unions' financial matters, the complainant is of the opinion that under section 23 of Act No. 1346 of 14 April 1983, the Government has deprived unions of their financial independence. It affirms, for example, "in this way, the Government's objectives, i.e. to subjugate the trade union movement, are clearly brought to light and its enormous lies are uncovered". It believes that the Government adopted this Act to mislead the international trade union organisations, the ILO and public opinion, by granting the Minister the power to finance the trade unions with government leanings, as he thinks fit in an arbitrary way, in order to pressure every trade union organisation into joining the trade union movement affiliated to the Government. Furthermore, according to the complainant, the funds of ODEPES (Trade Union Special Fund Management Organisation) have been handed over to a workers' hostel - a governmental body - and the Minister of Labour will distribute these funds as he thinks fit.
7. 302. As regards the allegation concerning the persecution of trade unionists, the complainant maintains that never in the history of the Greek trade union movement has there been such a wave of persecutions against trade union leaders. These consist of transferring independent trade unionists to remote areas of the country and subjecting them to psychological pressure and blackmail by downgrading their positions in the job hierarchy. There are hundreds of these persecutions and it would be impossible to list them in detail. The complainant ends by stating that it has the intention of submitting lists of the victims' names in due course.

B. The Government's reply

1. 303. In its reply of 11 August 1983, the Government explains that, as soon as it came to power in 1981, it committed itself to restoring workers' trade union rights and democratising the trade union movement. It maintains that, as a result, the trade union movement now enjoys an independence and financial autonomy based on democratic principles which are acknowledged both inside the country and abroad, whereas the legislation previously in force fell short in this respect, especially Acts Nos. 330 of 1976 and 643 of 1977.
2. 304. Denying all the allegations of the complainant organisation, the Government considers that Act No. 1264 of 1 July 1982 on the democratisation of the trade union movement and the protection of trade union freedoms adopted by the Greek Parliament is one of the most progressive pieces of legislation in existence and that it complies with the requirements laid down in the provisions of Conventions Nos. 87 and 98. It states, moreover, that this fact had been noted with satisfaction by the ILO Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations' at its 53rd Session on 23 March 1983; indeed, it referred to many sections in Act No. 1264, and commented especially on improvements to the existing legislation including the widening of the hitherto limited scope of protection afforded to trade union leaders and trade unionists, the abolition of ODEPES (Organisation for the Management of Trade Union Special Funds), the possibility of the unions to finance themselves by the check-off system and especially the employers' obligation to re-engage workers who, under Act No. 330, had been dismissed for trade union activities.
3. 305. Going back in detail over the various points contained in the complaint, the Government regrets that the complainant, by producing tracts and making slanderous accusations, has tried to libel and undermine the honour of Greek justice. With respect to the appointment of the GCL Executive, it states that the matter was conducted in accordance with the official procedure laid down by the legislation in force, without intervention from any authority whatsoever and without interference in the internal affairs of the trade union organisations, which had established their own legal machinery for settling disputes.
4. 306. The Government explains more specifically that the terms of office of the second-level trade union organisation members would normally have terminated at the end of 1982, but that on 3, 4 and 5 October 1981, well before the normal date on which they were due to expire, the GCL convened a "Congress" at Halkidiki in great haste to elect new members so that, according to the Government, it could subordinate the trade union movement to a fraction of trade union representatives and exclude second-level trade union organisations from the GCL. This prompted the latter trade union organisations, which have the greatest number of members, to lodge an appeal against the validity of this Congress as the Executive had refused their request, although made within the allotted time limit for the registration of adherent members, to attend the Congress in Halkidiki.
5. 307. The competent court, the Athens Peace Tribunal, decided on 8 December 1981 to stay the decision taken by the GCL Congress concerning the election of returning Officers for the General Council and the GCL Executive, thus acting upon the request made on 10 December 1981 by the five trade union organisations with the highest membership rate. On 26 April 1982, the Government continues, the same Peace Tribunal declared the Congress null and void. The Government cites some examples from the reasons adduced for the judgement in question, specifying that the Congress was held "contra legem" and infringed the provisions of the GCL statutes: firstly, the trade union organisations had, more than two years previously, made a request to be included in the special register of members affiliated to the respondent confederation (13 organisations are quoted), however (in breach of Article 7, paragraph 2 of the respondent confederation's statutes), the respondent confederation's Executive did not register these organisations as affiliated members during the following six months, but waited until just before the date of the Congress so that they would be excluded, leading to a falsification of the election results; secondly, in breach of the statutes in force (Article 18), the provisional officers of the Congress had not allowed persons to stand as candidates for election for the chair of the Congress and their officers, or for the election of the Credentials Committee; thirdly, although the competent Peace Tribunal had annulled the election results appointing representatives from the workers' centres of the islands of Eboea and Eleusis (of which more than 20 were delegates at the Congress in question), these delegates illegally attended the Congress and influenced the election results with their votes; furthermore, during a secret ballot to elect a tripartite committee for supervising the running of the elections, persons who were not adherent members had attended, such as staff from the GCL, other federations, the hotel etc; and fourthly, by unlawfully using the right conferred upon it by statutory provisions, the GCL Executive Committee refused to enrol adherent members of second-level trades union, etc., in its register.
6. 308. The Government acknowledges that several trade union organisations with the highest number of members, i.e. the General Federation of Workers' in the State Electrical Company, the Federal of Insurance Companies, the Federation of Building Workers, the Panhellenic Federation of Accountants, the Federation of Workers in the Building and Woodworking Industries, the Panhellenic Federation of Trade Unions for Specialised Workers in the Tile, Pottery and Allied Industries and the Federation of Retired Bank Employees, filed actions with the Athens Court of First Instance (with a single judge) on 7, 8, 9, 10 and 14 December 1981, to appoint a new provisional Executive and to renew members of the GCL Governing Body. These appeals were declared admissible on 29 December 1981 and the judge proceeded to make the said appointments, in proportion to the electoral capacity granted to the representatives on behalf of their trade union organisations within the GCL.
7. 309. The judge conferred a trusteeship on the provisional Executive so that it could run the Confederation's affairs, as laid down in the statutes and by laws; furthermore, a GCL Congress to elect the representatives of the Executive was convened for 21-23 October 1983.
8. 310. With respect to the impugned provisions of Act No. 1264 of 1982, the Government replies that, through this Act, effective measures were taken to try to improve and democratise the trade union movement; other forms of trade union organisations are acknowledged for the first time as, in Greece, there are local sections of trade unions for wider areas or for the whole of Greece, as well as associations of individuals. The Act provides for a procedure regulating membership formalities (concerning the entry of adherent members, under judicial control, in the trade union organisations' special registers) and the revision of their registers. The Act dissolved ODEPES and opened the way to the trade union organisations' financial autonomy. It laid the foundations for the restructurisation of organisations in order to correct the organisational weaknesses caused by the fragmentation in tasks and lack of order. A worker may be affiliated to two unions, i.e. to the one in his specific branch of activity and to the one within his undertaking but, to elect his representatives to higher level organisations, he must opt for one trade union; similarly, any first-level trade union organisation may become a member of two second-level trade union organisations (a workers' centre and a federation) but second-level trade union organisations may only join one third-level organisation (confederation). The Act tried to overcome fraud and double representations by laying down provisions stipulating that first-level trade union organisations can only elect their representatives to a third-level trade union organisation through a second-level trade union organisation, in other words, a federation or workers' centre. It introduced the simple majority system for elections to the Executive of the organisation concerned and extended protection to trade union officers, to founders of organisations and, for the first time, to trade union activities in the workplace. It enforced the right to strike by prohibiting the recruitment of strike breakers, lock-out and the suspension of strikes by provisional ordinance. It obliged employers to place premises and a meeting room at the disposal of trade union organisations at the workplace and to receive regularly trade unionists once a month. It provided for penal sanctions against employers and their representatives who violate trade union rights or infringe the free exercise of trade union activities. It abolished all penal sanctions against trade union leaders.
9. 311. Concerning section 22 of Act No. 1320 of 1983, the Government states that it does not abolish the right of collective bargaining but that it fixes a maximum limit for wage increases during a specific period; moreover, it authorises the free exercise of collective bargaining for all other matters which are the subject of collective agreements. By setting a maximum limit for wage increases, the Government is acting in accordance with Article 106 of the Constitution which stipulates that. "In order to consolidate social peace and protect the general interest, the State shall plan and co-ordinate economic activity in the country aiming at safeguarding economic development of all sectors of the national economy". Several judgements have already upheld this decision.
10. 312. With respect to section 23 of Act No. 1346 of 1983, the Government recalls that the Trade Union Act No. 1264 dissolved ODEPES, the organisation for managing the special funds of trade unions which administered, without supervision, the finances of trade union associations, and that the same Act No. 1264 consolidates and guarantees the self-financing of trade union organisations. The latter are now entitled to collect their members' dues either at the workplace or through the check-off system. The legislator left the organisations to decide upon this check-off system by means of collective bargaining, a general collective agreement or an arbitration award. If the organisations delay in settling the matter, it will be settled by Presidential Decree after consulting the most representative organisations. Finally, the Workers' Institute, the so-called "workers' hostel", was granted financial aid on a provisional basis (but in accordance with objective criteria) from the most representative second-level trade union organisations, i.e. the trade union centres. The Government points out that, in accordance with Act No. 1264, this system of financing will be entirely abolished in three months after the promulgation of the above-mentioned Presidential Decree and that the GCL and the Federation of Greek Industries have responded to the Minister of Labour's request by submitting proposals aimed at helping to draw up the Presidential Decree in question.
11. 313. Concerning the allegation that trade union delegates are persecuted, the Government regrets that this is vague, and categorically denies it. It recalls that, on the contrary, it has taken measures to promote the reinstatement of persons dismissed between 1976 and 1982 for having taken part in trade union activities or in a strike. With respect to the isolated cases of dismissals of trade unionists, it stresses that the Ministry of Labour's competence has been widened under the new Act and it is now invested with responsibilities enabling it, to a considerable extent, to contribute towards settling disputes.

C. Additional allegation

1. 314. In a communication received on 4 October 1983, Mr. Karakistos, in his capacity as President of the Free Democratic Trade Union Movement, who also signed the initial complaint as President of the Athens Workers' Centre, stated that he supported the complaint from the Athens Workers' Centre. He points out that the Executive of the Athens Workers' Centre had been dissolved by judicial decision No. 4644 of 16 September 1983, made by one judge, and he denounces the takeover of the Athens Workers' Centre by the Communist Party and PASOK. He also states that he will not attend any congress whatsoever that is convened by the Governing Body appointed to the Athens Workers' Centre and the GCL.

D. The Committee's conclusions

1. 315. The Committee notes that this case concerns, firstly, the dispute within the Greek General Confederation of Labour, secondly, a criticism of recent trade union legislation and thirdly, the alleged repression of trade union leaders.
2. 316. With respect to the first grievance raised by the complainant organisation, i.e. the dissolution of the Governing Body of the highest Greek trade union organisation, the Greek General Confederation of Labour (GCL) which had been elected only 45 days before, announced by the Government and the alleged appointment of a new Governing Body to head the confederation, made up of persons belonging to the organisations affiliated to the party in power, the Committee notes the long and detailed arguments provided both by the complainant and the Government.
3. 317. Generally in cases of disputes concerning trade union elections, the Committee has always emphasised that the authorities should refrain from any interference which would restrict the right of organisations to elect their representatives in full freedom and to organise their administration and activity; furthermore, the Committee also considers that it is not competent to make recommendations on internal dissentions of this nature, so long as the Government does not intervene in a manner which might affect the exercise of trade union rights and the normal functioning of an organisation. One of the basic principles of freedom of association is that the supervision of trade union elections should always been entrusted to the judicial authorities.
4. 318. In this case, it appears from the information supplied by the Government that the date of the trade union elections had been brought forward by the retiring Governing Body, that these elections had been disputed by the rival trade union organisations of the complainant who had been refused the right by the retiring Governing Body to enter their names on the list of voters so that they might take part in the elections, and that these organisations referred the dispute to the judicial authorities, which rendered a final judgement on the matter. While noting that, according to the complainant, the Greek Judiciary did not make an entirely independent judgement in this case, the Committee is not in a position, given the facts in this matter, to agree with this opinion. As the judicial authorities have handed down a final judgement on the dispute concerning the trade union elections, the Committee considers that this aspect of the case does not call for further examination.
5. 319. With respect to the legislative aspect of the case, the Committee, whilst noting the grievances raised by the complainant concerning Act No. 1264 of 1 July 1982, points out that the Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations, 1 at its session in March 1983, examined this legislation in the light of Conventions Nos. 87 and 98 and that it, as the Government mentions, noted with satisfaction certain changes introduced by the new Act and asked to be kept informed of the final solution adopted with respect to the collection of union dues. Concerning the withdrawal of the right to vote and eligibility of retired journalists, the Committee of Experts also pointed out to the Government that this matter should be left up to the statutes of the trade union organisations concerned. The Committee can only reiterate the requests made by the Committee of Experts on these various points. Furthermore, having examined Act No. 1264, the Committee is of the opinion that the issues relating to trade union structure, to elections based on the proportional system, to free access of workers in trade unions under the control of the courts, as well as to the consultation of trade unions' registers deposited with the Clerk of the Court in a case of legitimate interest, do not appear to infringe the principles of freedom of association.
6. 320. With respect to the grievances raised by the complainant concerning section 23 of Act No. 1946/83 of 14 April 1983 on the alleged suppression of the trade union's financial autonomy by the Government which, from henceforth, would be in control of the trade union's financing itself, the Committee, as did the Committee of Experts, notes with satisfaction that, as the supervisory machinery had requested on several occasions, the Trade Union Special Fund Management Organisation (ODEPES) was dissolved by Act No. 1264 which transferred the rights and obligations of this body to the Workers' Institute (section 27 of the Act). However, the Committee trusts that section 23 of Act No. 1326/83 of 14 April 1983 does not empower' the Government to intervene in the financial management of the trade unions. It refers this matter as a whole to the Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations.
7. 321. With respect to the grievance concerning section 27 of Act No. 1320/82, the Committee notes that this provision delays the right of employers to grant wage increases during a period of one year and forbids the same employers to offset any increases in production costs; however, it maintains the right to bargain collectively over working conditions, except for those relating to wage matters. In view of the fact that this provision is more dissuasive rather than mandatory in nature and that it is limited to a period of one year, the Committee considers that it does not appear to contain any measures contrary to Article 4 of the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention (No. 98), especially as, contrary to the complainant's allegation, Act No. 1320/82 does not contain any prohibition of strikes over wage increases. However, if the situation which, in certain respects, restricts the freedom of collective bargaining, should remain unchanged, the Committee might consider it open to criticism.
8. 322. With respect to the alleged persecution of trade unionists, the Committee notes the vague nature of the complainant's allegation and the Government's firm denials. It also notes that the complainant has not supplied information to support its allegation. The Committee therefore considers that this allegation does not call for further examination.