Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2023, published 112nd ILC session (2024)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2019, published 109th ILC session (2021)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2016, published 106th ILC session (2017)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2013, published 103rd ILC session (2014)

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2013, published 103rd ILC session (2014)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2011, published 101st ILC session (2012)

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2011, published 101st ILC session (2012)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2009, published 99th ILC session (2010)

In several previous direct requests, the Committee requested the Government to keep it informed of the progress made to ensure that all teachers, regardless of their classification as public servants, may exercise strike action without penalty. The Committee notes that the Government indicates in its report that there are 61,500 teachers, of whom 22,500 are civil servants. The Committee notes that the Government indicates that civil servants in Denmark have favourable conditions of employment as compensation in lieu of the right to strike and that, furthermore, a teacher has the possibility to give up being a civil servant and choose the form of employment which includes the right to strike.  The Committee recalls that it has always considered that the right to strike is one of the essential means available to workers and their organizations for the promotion and protection of their economic and social interests. While accepting that the right to strike may be restricted or even prohibited in the public service, the Committee has clearly established that such a limitation may be applied only in the case of public servants exercising authority in the name of the State. In the Committee’s view teachers are not included in this category and should therefore have the right to strike, although the maintenance of a minimum service may be foreseen in the event of strikes in this sector. In these circumstances, the Committee once again requests the Government to take the necessary measures so that teachers who have chosen to keep their status as public employees may have recourse to strike action without the risk of being sanctioned.

Additionally, the Committee had requested the Government to specify the categories of employee considered to be exercising authority in the name of the State, and to whom the status of public servant will henceforth apply, along with the restrictions concerning strike action. The Committee takes due note that the Government indicates that the categories of employee considered to exercise authority in the name of the State, and to whom the status of public servant will henceforth apply, include higher government officials, deputy judges, deputy public prosecutors, judge advocates, employees in the police corps, prison officers, governors of prisons, army personnel, officers in the civil defence forces, and inspectors.

In several of its previous comments, the Committee noted the introduction of a new structure of collective negotiations and agreements in the financial sector which enables the social partners concerned to depart from the agreements negotiated at the central level and conclude an agreement applicable to the company and invited the Government to engage in discussions with the most representative organizations of workers and employers with a view to overcoming the existing limitations to the right to strike in the abovementioned context and to keep it informed in this respect. The Committee notes that the Government indicates that the social partners agreed to introduce a new structure for bargaining and collective agreements with regard to the financial sector, which requires mediation and arbitration if a negotiated solution is not found or if a negotiation result is voted down. The Committee requests the Government to communicate in its next report a copy of the new provisions that have been established.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2009, published 99th ILC session (2010)

The Committee recalls that in several of its previous observations, it requested the Government to indicate the measures taken to ensure that Danish trade unions may represent all their members – residents and non-residents employed on ships sailing under the Danish flag – without any interference from the public authorities, in accordance with Articles 3 and 10 of the Convention and whether, in particular, these unions may freely represent seafarers who are not Danish residents in respect of their individual grievances. The Committee notes with satisfaction that the Government, in its report, indicates that the Danish International Ships Register (DIS) agreement states that seafarers not resident in Denmark working on board DIS ships have the right to be members of several trade unions (i.e. both a Danish trade union, and a trade union in their home country). This agreement enables the seafarers’ contracting parties to represent a seafarer who is not domiciled in Denmark or a foreign trade union in matters relating to the Danish Legislation and assist seafarers without a Danish residence in relation to the Danish public authorities. The Committee requests the Government to include in its next report a copy of the DIS agreement.

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

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2007, published 97th ILC session (2008)

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It hopes that a report will be supplied for examination by the Committee at its next session and that it will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous direct request, which read as follows:

1. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to keep it informed of the progress made to ensure that all teachers, regardless of their classification as public servants, may exercise strike action without penalty. The Committee noted that the Government indicated in its report that, following a 2001 circular containing transitional arrangements, persons employed under a public servant status before 1 January 2001 are entitled to maintain this status, to a certain extent, even if they do not fall within the categories of employees who will, henceforth, be covered by the public servant status. Once the employees benefiting from the transitional arrangements have retired, public servants will be limited to those who are exercising authority in the name of the State, that is public employees who can be deprived of the exercise of the right to strike. The Committee requests once again the Government to continue to keep it informed of the steps that may be envisaged, so that teachers who have chosen to keep their status as public employees may have recourse to strike action without the risk of being sanctioned. The Committee would also be grateful if the Government could indicate how many teachers have chosen to retain their status of public servant and how many teachers exist overall in the workforce. It further requests the Government to provide a copy of the circular mentioned in its report and to specify the categories of employees considered to be exercising authority in the name of the State, and to whom the status of public servant will henceforth apply, along with the restrictions concerning strike action.

2. Finally, in its previous comments, the Committee noted the information provided by the Government on the introduction of a new structure of collective negotiations and agreements in the financial sector which enables the social partners concerned to depart from the agreements negotiated at the central level and conclude an agreement applicable to the company. The Government indicated that there is no right to strike linked to the negotiations of the original company agreement and to its renewal. If the parties fail to reach an agreement, the matter should be referred to mediation and arbitration; the exercise of the right to strike remains in respect of the renewal of the collective agreements negotiated at the central level. The Committee invites the Government to engage in discussions with the most representative organizations of workers and employers with a view to overcoming the existing limitations to the right to strike in the abovementioned context and to keep it informed in this respect.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2007, published 97th ILC session (2008)

The Committee notes with regret that the Government’s report has not been received. It must therefore repeat its previous observation which read as follows:

The Committee recalls that, in its previous observations, it requested the Government to indicate in its next report the measures taken to ensure that Danish trade unions may represent all their members – residents and non-residents employed on ships sailing under the Danish flag – without any interference from the public authorities, in accordance with Articles 3 and 10 of the Convention and whether, in particular, these unions may freely represent seafarers who are not Danish residents in respect of their individual grievances. Noting that the Government does not provide information in this respect, the Committee once again requests the Government to provide it in its next report.

The Committee is also addressing a request on other points directly to the Government.

The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the very near future.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2006, published 96th ILC session (2007)

The Committee takes note of the Government’s report and regrets that it did not discuss the issues previously raised by the Committee. In these circumstances, the Committee once again refers to the same issues.

1. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to keep it informed of the progress made to ensure that all teachers, regardless of their classification as public servants, may exercise strike action without penalty. The Committee noted that the Government indicated in its report that, following a 2001 circular containing transitional arrangements, persons employed under a public servant status before 1 January 2001 are entitled to maintain this status, to a certain extent, even if they do not fall within the categories of employees who will, henceforth, be covered by the public servant status. Once the employees benefiting from the transitional arrangements have retired, public servants will be limited to those who are exercising authority in the name of the State, that is public employees who can be deprived of the exercise of the right to strike. The Committee requests once again the Government to continue to keep it informed of the steps that may be envisaged, so that teachers who have chosen to keep their status as public employees may have recourse to strike action without the risk of being sanctioned. The Committee would also be grateful if the Government could indicate how many teachers have chosen to retain their status of public servant and how many teachers exist overall in the workforce. It further requests the Government to provide a copy of the circular mentioned in its report and to specify the categories of employees considered to be exercising authority in the name of the State, and to whom the status of public servant will henceforth apply, along with the restrictions concerning strike action.

2. Further, in its previous comments and in light of Case No. 1971 last examined by the Committee on Freedom of Association in 1999, the Committee noted that section 12 of the Conciliation Act might have a negative impact on the possibility of workers’ organizations to exercise the right to strike, in so far as they might be bound by a labour market decision to accept an overall draft settlement to which a collective agreement concerning their sector had been linked. The Committee deals with this question in its observation on the application of Convention No. 98.

3. Finally, in its previous comments, the Committee noted the information provided by the Government on the introduction of a new structure of collective negotiations and agreements in the financial sector which enables the social partners concerned to depart from the agreements negotiated at the central level and conclude an agreement applicable to the company. The Government indicated that there is no right to strike linked to the negotiations of the original company agreement and to its renewal. If the parties fail to reach an agreement, the matter should be referred to mediation and arbitration; the exercise of the right to strike remains in respect of the renewal of the collective agreements negotiated at the central level. The Committee invites the Government to engage in discussions with the most representative organizations of workers and employers with a view to overcoming the existing limitations to the right to strike in the abovementioned context and to keep it informed in this respect.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2006, published 96th ILC session (2007)

The Committee takes note of the Government’s report. The Committee notes the comments of the Danish Confederation of Trade Unions (LO), the United Federation of Danish Workers (3F) and the Confederation of Danish Employers (DA), attached to the Government’s report.

The Committee recalls that, in its previous observations, it requested the Government to indicate in its next report the measures taken to ensure that Danish trade unions may represent all their members – residents and non-residents employed on ships sailing under the Danish flag – without any interference from the public authorities, in accordance with Articles 3 and 10 of the Convention and whether, in particular, these unions may freely represent seafarers who are not Danish residents in respect of their individual grievances. Noting that the Government does not provide information in this respect, the Committee once again requests the Government to provide it in its next report.

The Committee deals with the other issues raised by the LO and the 3F connected to this point in its observation on the application of Convention No. 98.

The Committee is also addressing a request on other points directly to the Government.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2005, published 95th ILC session (2006)

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It must, therefore, repeat its previous observation, which read as follows:

The Committee reiterates the request previously addressed to the Government to indicate in its next report the measures taken to ensure that Danish trade unions may represent all their members – residents and non-residents employed on ships sailing under the Danish flag – without any interference from the public authorities, in accordance with Articles 3 and 10 of the Convention and whether, in particular, these unions may freely represent seafarers who are not Danish residents in respect of their individual grievances.

The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the very near future.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2004, published 93rd ILC session (2005)

The Committee takes note of the observations made by the Danish Confederation of Trade Unions (LO) as well as the Government’s observations thereon. The observations and the Government’s reply which concerned both the application of this Convention, and the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98), will be treated under Convention No. 98 (see below).

The Committee reiterates the request previously addressed to the Government to indicate in its next report the measures taken to ensure that Danish trade unions may represent all their members - residents and non-residents employed on ships sailing under the Danish flag - without any interference from the public authorities, in accordance with Articles 3 and 10 of the Convention and whether, in particular, these unions may freely represent seafarers who are not Danish residents in respect of their individual grievances.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2003, published 92nd ILC session (2004)

In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to keep it informed of the progress made to ensure that all teachers, regardless of their classification as public servants, may exercise strike action without penalty. The Committee notes that the Government indicates in its report that the Ministry of Finance published a circular on the employment of public servants which entered into force on 1 January 2001. The circular contains some transitional arrangements under which the persons employed under a public servant status before 1 January 2001 are entitled to maintain this status, to a certain extent, even if they do not fall within the categories of employees who will, henceforth, be covered by the public servant status. Once the employees benefiting from the transitional arrangements will have retired, public servants will be limited to those who are exercising authority in the name of the State, that is public employees who can be deprived of the exercise of the right to strike. The Government adds that the Central Organizations’ Joint Committee (CFU), the Association of Local Government Employees’ Organizations (KTO) and the Salaried Employees’ and Civil Servants’ Confederation (FTF) have declared that they will not take any further action in this matter, including with the ILO.

The Committee recalls that the same question was examined by the Committee on Freedom of Association following a complaint lodged by he Danish Union of Teachers (DUT) and the Salaried Employees’ and Civil Servants’ Confederation (FTF) (Case No. 1950). At that time, the Committee had recalled that the right to strike could only be restricted or prohibited in: (1) the public service, only for public servants exercising authority in the name of the State; or (2) in essential services in the strict sense of the term (that is, services the interruption of which would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population). Like the Committee on Freedom of Association, this Committee considers that workers in education are not an essential service in the strict sense of the term, nor are they public servants exercising authority in the name of the State. The Committee has duly noted that, under the transitional arrangements provided for in the circular, the workers concerned have been given the choice to maintain their status of public servant with the accompanying advantages, but are also being deprived of the right to strike because of this status; or to fall outside this status, thus enjoying the right to strike. In this respect, the Committee would like to recall that no one should be penalized for carrying out or attempting to carry out a legitimate strike, and that sanctions for strike action should be possible only where the prohibitions in question are in conformity with the principles of freedom of association recalled above (see General Survey of 1994 on freedom of association and collective bargaining, paragraph 176). Therefore, the Committee requests the Government to continue to keep it informed of the steps that may be envisaged, so that teachers who have chosen to keep their status as public employees may have recourse to strike action without the risk of being sanctioned. The Committee would also be grateful if the Government could indicate how many teachers have chosen to retain their status of public servant and how many teachers exist overall in the workforce. It further requests the Government to provide a copy of the circular mentioned in its report and to specify the categories of employees considered to be exercising authority in the name of the State, and to whom the status of public servant will henceforth apply, along with the restrictions concerning strike action.

Further, in its previous comments and in light of Case No. 1971 examined by the Committee on Freedom of Association, the Committee noted that section 12 of the Conciliation Act might have a negative impact on the possibility of workers’ organizations to exercise the right to strike, in so far as they might be bound by a labour market decision to accept an overall draft settlement to which a collective agreement concerning their sector had been linked. Recalling that by virtue of Articles 3, 8 and 10 of the Convention, workers’ organizations should have the right to organize their activities and to formulate their programmes for the purposes of furthering and defending the interests of their members, including the possibility to exercise industrial action, the Committee requested the Government to take the necessary steps to amend its legislation so as to ensure that the view of the majority of workers in a given sector is not subordinated to the view of the majority of the entire labour market as concerns the possibility of undertaking industrial action.

The Committee notes the indication in the Government’s report that the question has been taken up in the permanent ILO committee in the country and that the parties are presently reviewing it. The Committee hopes that, following the tripartite discussions, the necessary steps will be taken to amend section 12 of the Conciliation Act for the reasons recalled above. The Committee requests the Government to keep it informed of any progress made in this regard.

Finally, the Committee notes the information provided by the Government on the introduction of a new structure of collective negotiations and agreements in the financial sector which enables the social partners concerned to depart from the agreements negotiated at the central level and conclude an agreement applicable to the company. The Government indicates that there is no right to strike linked to the negotiations of the original company agreement and to its renewal. If the parties fail to reach an agreement, the matter should be referred to mediation and arbitration. The exercise of the right to strike remains in respect of the renewal of the collective agreements negotiated at the central level. The Committee requests the Government to specify the source of the restriction to the right to strike concerning the negotiation or renewal of company agreements and, in particular, whether it results from an agreement between the parties concerned. It also requests the Government to provide samples of company collective agreements and of any provisions governing recourse to industrial action, with its next report.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2003, published 92nd ILC session (2004)

The Committee notes the information provided in the Government’s report, in the light of which it will pursue its examination in respect of section 10 of Act No. 408 of 23 June 1988, which sets up a Danish International Shipping Register (DIS).

The Committee recalls that, since 1989, it has been requesting the amendment of this provision, because it has the effect of prohibiting workers employed on Danish flagships who are not residents of Denmark from being represented in collective bargaining, if they so wished, by Danish trade unions of which they are members in contravention of Article 3 of the Convention.

The Committee has taken note of the considerations presented by the Government in its report. In particular, the Committee has noted that the agreements between the national social partners - the agreement on mutual information, coordination and cooperation concerning DIS ships and the framework agreement relating to the conclusion of collective agreements with foreign trade unions and individual agreements concerning foreign seafarers from outside the European Union and the European Economic Area - have been replaced by new agreements, valid for a period of three years as of 1 March 2002. The Committee notes that these agreements confirm the right to enter into collective agreements with foreign unions, in accordance with Act No. 408, and that Danish trade unions have a right to be represented at negotiations between Danish shipping companies and foreign trade unions, in order to ensure that the results in respect of wages and other working conditions are at an internationally acceptable level. The Committee also notes, however, that two of the parties to the previous agreements, namely the General Workers’ Union in Denmark/Seamen’s Union in Denmark and the Association of the Restaurant Business, decided not to be parties to the new agreements. The Committee has also duly taken note of the figures presented by the Government concerning the Danish shipping industry, and in particular that, out of a total of 7,729 seafarers, 3,350 were foreigners, as of 30 September 2001.

The Committee welcomes the renewal of the agreements between the social partners for a period of three years. At the same time, the Committee notes that the legislative aspect of the matter has not been resolved yet and that two parties have decided not to be bound by the new agreements. The Committee would like therefore to underline that section 10 of Act No. 408 has the effect of restricting the activities of Danish trade unions by prohibiting them from representing in the collective bargaining process those of their members who are not considered as residents in Denmark. Therefore, the Committee requests the Government to keep it informed on the measures taken or envisaged to amend section 10 of Act No. 408, so as to ensure that there can be no deviation from the spirit of the abovementioned agreements, and so that Danish trade unions may freely organize their activities, in particular by representing all their members - residents and non-residents in Denmark - in the collective bargaining process without any interference from the public authorities, in accordance with Articles 3 and 10 of the Convention. The Committee also requests the Government to indicate in its next report whether Danish trade unions may freely represent seafarers who are not residents in Denmark in respect of their individual grievances.

The Committee is also addressing a request on other points directly to the Government.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2002, published 91st ILC session (2003)

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It hopes that a report will be supplied for examination by the Committee at its next session and that it will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous direct request, which read as follows:

With reference to its previous comments concerning the need to take measures so as to ensure that public servants who are not exercising authority in the name of the State, such as teachers, are not penalized for having exercised strike action, the Committee noted from the Government’s latest report that discussions had been undertaken with the local authority employers as well as with various organizations on the matter, including on the content of possible legislation. According to the Government’s report, the discussions had been postponed at the request of the organizations, including the Federation of Salaried Employees’ and Public Servants’ Organizations, but the Government expected the discussions to be resumed shortly. The Government added that the number of teachers employed as public servants continued to decline, given that all new recruitments took place on contractual terms. Recalling its position that the prohibition of strikes by public servants other than those exercising authority in the name of the State may constitute a considerable restriction of the potential activities of trade unions counter to Article 8, paragraph 2, of the Convention, the Committee requests the Government to keep it informed of the progress made to ensure that all teachers, regardless of their classification as public servants, may exercise strike action without penalty.

The Committee further noted the conclusions of the Committee on Freedom of Association in Case No. 1971 (316th Report, approved by the Governing Body at its 275th Session (June 1999)). In this case, the Committee on Freedom of Association had noted that section 12 of the Conciliation Act may have a negative impact on the possibility of a workers’ organization to exercise the right to strike in so far as it may be bound by a labour market decision to accept an overall draft settlement to which a collective agreement concerning their sector has been linked. The Committee recalls that, by virtue of Articles 3, 8 and 10 of the Convention, workers’ organizations should have the right to organize their activities and to formulate their programmes for the purposes of furthering and defending the interests of their members, including the possibility to exercise industrial action. Noting (from Case No. 1971) that section 12 of the Conciliation Act has been used on a number of occasions so as to restrict this right, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary steps to amend its legislation so as to ensure that the view of the majority of workers in a given sector is not subordinated to the view of the majority of the entire labour market as concerns the possibility of undertaking industrial action. It requests the Government to keep it informed of the progress made in this respect.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2002, published 91st ILC session (2003)

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It must repeat its previous observation, which read as follows.

The Committee recalls that it has been commenting since 1989 on the need to amend section 10 of the Act No. 408 of 1988 establishing the Danish International Ships’ Register (DIS) which prohibited workers employed on board Danish ships but who are not residents of Denmark from being represented in collective bargaining by Danish trade unions if they so wished, in contravention of Articles 2, 3 and 10 of the Convention.

The Committee had noted from the Government’s last report that a two-year agreement was entered into between the social partners in September 1999 confirming the fundamental principle that Danish labour organizations have a right to be represented at negotiations between Danish shipping companies and foreign trade unions in order to ensure that the results in respect of wages and other working conditions are at an internationally acceptable level. Pursuant to the agreement, a contact committee was established with the purpose of developing and extending cooperation between the parties and, on 25 February 2000, the parties further entered into a framework agreement on the establishment of collective agreements with foreign unions and individual agreements for foreign seafarers from outside the European Union which sets minimum standards to be upheld. According to the Government, the Danish trade unions had agreed to have a "truce" over section 10 of the Danish International Shipping Register Act.

While further noting the Government’s view that any position towards the Danish International Shipping Register should await a broad discussion in the ILO of international registers and second registers based on an upcoming study on their impact on the conditions of employment of seafarers, the Committee reaffirms its hope that the Government will take the necessary steps to amend section 10 of Act No. 408 so as to ensure that non-resident seafarers will have the right to be represented by organizations of their own choosing that is to say foreign trade union or Danish trade unions depending on their own will. It requests the Government to indicate in its next report any measures taken or envisaged in this respect.

The Committee is also addressing a request on other points directly to the Government.

The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the very near future.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2000, published 89th ILC session (2001)

With reference to its previous comments concerning the need to take measures so as to ensure that public servants who are not exercising authority in the name of the State, such as teachers, are not penalized for having exercised strike action, the Committee notes from the Government’s report that discussions have been undertaken with the local authority employers as well as with various organizations on the matter, including on the content of possible legislation. According to the Government’s report, the discussions were postponed at the request of the organizations, including the Federation of Salaried Employees’ and Public Servants’ Organizations, but the Government expects the discussions to be resumed shortly. The Government adds that the number of teachers employed as public servants continues to decline, given that all new recruitments take place on contractual terms. Recalling its position that the prohibition of strikes by public servants other than those exercising authority in the name of the State may constitute a considerable restriction of the potential activities of trade unions counter to Article 8, paragraph 2, of the Convention, the Committee requests the Government to keep it informed of the progress made to ensure that all teachers, regardless of their classification as public servants, may exercise strike action without penalty.

The Committee further notes the conclusions of the Committee on Freedom of Association in Case No. 1971 (316th Report, approved by the Governing Body at its 275th Session (June 1999)). In this case, the Committee on Freedom of Association had noted that section 12 of the Conciliation Act may have a negative impact on the possibility of a workers’ organization to exercise the right to strike in so far as it may be bound by a labour market decision to accept an overall draft settlement to which a collective agreement concerning their sector has been linked. The Committee recalls that, by virtue of Articles 3, 8 and 10 of the Convention, workers’ organizations should have the right to organize their activities and to formulate their programmes for the purposes of furthering and defending the interests of their members, including the possibility to exercise industrial action. Noting (from Case No. 1971) that section 12 of the Conciliation Act has been used on a number of occasions so as to restrict this right, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary steps to amend its legislation so as to ensure that the view of the majority of workers in a given sector is not subordinated to the view of the majority of the entire labour market as concerns the possibility of undertaking industrial action. It requests the Government to keep it informed of the progress made in this respect.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2000, published 89th ILC session (2001)

The Committee notes the information provided in the Government’s report.

The Committee recalls that it has been commenting since 1989 on the need to amend section 10 of the Act No. 408 of 1988 establishing the Danish International Ships’ Register (DIS) which prohibited workers employed on board Danish ships but who are not residents of Denmark from being represented in collective bargaining by Danish trade unions if they so wished, in contravention of Articles 2, 3 and 10 of the Convention.

The Committee notes with interest from the Government’s report that a two-year agreement was entered into between the social partners in September 1999 confirming the fundamental principle that Danish labour organizations have a right to be represented at negotiations between Danish shipping companies and foreign trade unions in order to ensure that the results in respect of wages and other working conditions are at an internationally acceptable level. Pursuant to the agreement, a contact committee was established with the purpose of developing and extending cooperation between the parties and, on 25 February 2000, the parties further entered into a framework agreement on the establishment of collective agreements with foreign unions and individual agreements for foreign seafarers from outside the European Union which sets minimum standards to be upheld. According to the Government, the Danish trade unions have agreed to have a "truce" over section 10 of the Danish International Shipping Register Act.

While further noting the Government’s view that any position towards the Danish International Shipping Register should await a broad discussion in the ILO of international registers and second registers based on an upcoming study on their impact on the conditions of employment of seafarers, the Committee reaffirms its hope that the Government will take the necessary steps to amend section 10 of Act No. 408 so as to ensure that non-resident seafarers will have the right to be represented by organizations of their own choosing that is to say foreign trade union or Danish trade unions depending on their own will. It requests the Government to indicate in its next report any measures taken or envisaged in this respect.

The Committee is also addressing a request on other points directly to the Government.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1998, published 87th ILC session (1999)

The Committee notes the examination by the Committee on Freedom of Association of Case No. 1950 (311th Report, approved by the Governing Body at its 273rd Session (November 1998)). It notes, in particular, the recommendations of the Committee on Freedom of Association concerning the need to ensure that all teachers, regardless of their classification as public servants, are granted the right to strike. The Committee recalls that since 1959 it has been expressing the opinion that the prohibition of strikes by public servants other than public officials acting in the name of the public powers may constitute a considerable restriction of the potential activities of trade unions and that this restriction may run counter to Article 8, paragraph 2, of the Convention (see reminder of this position in the 1994 General Survey on freedom of association and collective bargaining, paragraph 147). The Committee emphasizes the importance of taking the necessary measures so as not to penalize public servants who are not exercising authority in the name of the State, or their organizations, for having exercised the right to strike. It requests the Government to indicate in its next report any measures taken or envisaged in this respect.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1998, published 87th ILC session (1999)

The Committee notes the information provided in the Government's report.

The Committee recalls that its previous comments concerned section 10 of Act No. 408 of 1988 establishing the Danish International Ships' Register (DIS) which prevented workers employed on board Danish ships but who are not residents of Denmark from being represented in collective bargaining by organizations of their own choosing, in contravention of Articles 2, 3 and 10 of the Convention. The Committee notes that the Government maintains the point of view which it has expressed in previous reports concerning the need for a broader discussion within the ILO on international registers based upon a study which could be made on the effects of such registers on non-domiciled seafarers' working and living conditions. The Government adds that most seafarers' organizations have made a two-year truce with the shipping federations in March 1997 securing the organizations' right to be represented in collective negotiations with the foreign organizations in order to make sure that the concluded agreements are at an acceptable international level.

While noting that an agreement has temporarily been reached with some seafarers' organizations concerning negotiations in respect of non-resident seafarers on board Danish ships, the Committee recalls that Articles 2, 3 and 10 provide that workers, without distinction, shall have the right to join the organization of their own choosing and that such organizations shall be able to function to ensure the furtherance and defence of their interests. It once again trusts that the Government will consider taking the necessary steps to ensure these non-resident seafarers the right to be represented by organizations of their own choosing.

The Committee is also addressing a request on another point directly to the Government.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1996, published 85th ILC session (1997)

With reference to its previous comments concerning the need for the Government to amend its legislation to ensure that non-resident workers employed aboard Danish ships are free to be represented in collective bargaining by organizations of their own choosing, the Committee notes the Government's indication in its latest report that the structural changes in the shipping industry, resulting in the establishment of second registers, call for a discussion at the international level. Then, discussions within the ILO with the social partners could be based upon a study made on the effects of second registers on non-domiciled seafarers' working and living conditions.

The Committee once again recalls that section 10 of Act No. 408 of 1988 which established the Danish International Ships' Register (DIS) prevents workers employed on board Danish ships but who are not residents of Denmark from being represented in collective bargaining by organizations of their own choosing, in contravention of Articles 2, 3 and 10 of the Convention. It once again expresses the hope that steps will be taken in the near future to ensure these non-resident workers the right to be represented by organizations of their own choosing and requests the Government to keep it informed of any progress made in this regard.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1995, published 82nd ILC session (1995)

The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government in its report.

The Committee recalls that it had considered section 10 of Act No. 408 of 1988, which established the Danish International Ships' Register (DIS), to be contrary to Articles 2, 3 and 10 of the Convention, since it prevented workers who were employed on board Danish ships but who were not residents of Denmark, from being represented in collective bargaining by organizations of their own choosing. The Government stresses that it has called for a discussion at the international level on issues relating to international ships' registers.

While noting the Government's statement in this regard, the Committee nevertheless would request the Government to take steps to ensure that its legislation is amended so that non-resident workers who are employed aboard Danish ships are free to be represented in collective bargaining by organizations of their own choosing. The Committee requests the Government to keep it informed of any progress made in this respect.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1993, published 80th ILC session (1993)

With reference to its previous comments, the Committee notes with interest the information supplied by the Government stating that the 1987 legislation prohibiting strikes has expired and that all 1991 contracts are negotiated agreements.

The Committee also notes the Government's comments regarding article 10 of Act No. 408 of 1988, on the Danish International Ship's Register, an Act which, contrary to Articles 2, 3 and 10 of the Convention, inhibits non-resident workers who are employed aboard Danish ships from being represented in collective bargaining by organizations of their own choosing. The Committee notes the Government's statement that the issue falls primarily under Convention No. 98, and that the Government is preparing a complete reply for 1993 under the said Convention. The Committee asks the Government to keep it informed of any development in this regard.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1991, published 78th ILC session (1991)

The Committee takes note of the Government's reports.

1. With reference to its previous comments on the legislative prohibition of strikes in various sectors, the Committee notes from the information supplied by the Government in its latest report that negotiations were held in the spring of 1989 in the public and private sectors, including the fields in which the Government had intervened in 1987, in the belief that the strikes in question would have affected services it considered to be essential. While noting with interest that, according to the Government, it has not been necessary to call strikes in sectors in which the parties concluded collective agreements in 1989, the Committee once again requests the Government to indicate whether the prohibition on strikes has been raised in the sectors that it does not consider to be essential.

2. With reference to the questions relating to the Danish International Ships' Register, the Committee refers to its comments under Convention No. 98, as follows:

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its report and its communication of 6 March 1991, the extensive debate before the Committee of the Conference in 1989, as well as the comments of the Danish Seamen's Union (DSU).

1. With reference to its previous comments relating to restrictions on free collective bargaining and fixing of wage rates, the Committee notes that, in the spring of 1989, there were negotiations covering practically all agreements in the private and public sectors, where the parties agreed on average wage increases of 2.5 per cent. The Committee also refers to its observation under Convention No. 87 in this respect, as follows:

The Committee takes note of the Government's reports.

1. With reference to its previous comments on the legislative prohibition of strikes in various sectors, the Committee notes from the information supplied by the Government in its latest report that negotiations were held in the spring of 1989 in the public and private sectors, including the fields in which the Government had intervened in 1987, in the belief that the strikes in question would have affected services it considered to be essential. While noting with interest that, according to the Government, it has not been necessary to call strikes in sectors in which the parties concluded collective agreements in 1989, the Committee once again requests the Government to indicate whether the prohibition on strikes has been raised in the sectors that it does not consider to be essential.

2. With reference to the questions relating to the Danish International Ships' Register, the Committee refers to its comments under Convention No. 98 and recalls that section 10 of Act No. 408 is not in conformity with Articles 2, 3 and 10 of the Convention.

2. As regards the Danish International Ships' Register (DIS) established under Act No. 408 of 1988 and the conclusions of the Committee on Freedom of Association in Case No. 1470, the Committee recalls that article 10 of that Act reads as follows:

(1) Collective agreements on wage and working conditions for employees on vessels in this register shall explicitly state that they shall be applicable for such employment only.

(2) Collective agreements as mentioned in subsection (1) which have been concluded by a Danish trade union organisation may only comprise persons who are considered to be residents of Denmark or who, by virtue of incurred international obligations, shall be put on an equal footing with Danish citizens.

(3) Collective agreements as mentioned in subsection (1) which have been concluded by a foreign trade union organisation may only comprise persons who are members of the organisation concerned, or persons who are citizens in the country where the trade union organisation is domiciled, in so far as they are not members of another organisation with which an agreement, as mentioned in subsection (1), has been concluded.

At the 1989 Conference and in its communications, the Government submitted in substance the following arguments:

- without the DIS, there is no doubt that the whole Danish merchant fleet would have flagged out to so-called flags of convenience; the DIS was the only alternative;

- the whole issue of international registers should be discussed in a more global fashion in the appropriate international forum, where all parties could express their views;

- seafarers employed on ships registered on the DIS do not pay income tax (which may represent up to 70 per cent in Denmark); thus, it was necessary to adjust the levels of pay. However, the other conditions of work (holidays, rest periods, etc.) have not changed;

- the establishment of the DIS does not change the fact that full and voluntary collective bargaining is open to all seafarers employed on Danish ships;

- the criterion of residence was naturally chosen in section 10 of Act No. 408 since it is a decisive factor in the actual cost of living; this is not a problem of discrimination based on nationality;

- the real problem is a question of demarcation between different unions; the Government cannot accept that Danish trade unions should have the exclusive right to negotiate on behalf of seafarers employed aboard Danish ships.

The Government further indicates in its report that meetings were held with all representative parties in 1990; although the employees' organisations maintain their criticism about the way in which the DIS was introduced, there seems to be an agreement that it is here to stay. The Government also mentions that in 1989 the parties agreed on new collective agreements for employees on DIS ships. In its communication of 6 March 1991, the Government states that it is still ready for further discussions if the organisations involved express such a wish.

In its recent communication, the Danish Seamen's Union (DSU) maintains that Act No. 408, and in particular section 10 which introduces special rules concerning collective agreements for ships registered in the DIS, remains an obstacle to the right of free bargaining and continues to discriminate against seafarers by reason of their nationality. While the Ministry of Labour held meetings in 1990 with various workers' and employers' organisations, it indicated on 19 December 1990 that, for the time, the matter did not merit further consideration. The DSU requests that the Danish International Ships Register Act be amended.

The Committee notes that under section 10 of Act No. 408, collective agreements concluded by Danish trade unions apply only to persons considered as residents of Denmark. As such, this article prevents these unions from concluding collective agreements on behalf of other seafarers employed aboard Danish ships. The Committee considers that this provision is not in conformity with Article 4 of Convention No. 98, and Articles 2, 3 and 10 of Convention No. 87. In the Committee's opinion, these restrictive provisions do not aim at encouraging and promoting voluntary negotiation between employers' and workers' organisations, nor at allowing workers who are employed aboard Danish ships but who are not residents of Denmark, to join the organisations of their own choosing to defend their interests, free from interference by the public authorities. The Committee invites the Government to hold further constructive discussions on this subject with the organisations involved and to reconsider its position in the light of the foregoing comments.

Furthermore, the Committee wishes to be provided with statistical information on the magnitude of the problem, such as the number and percentages of Danish ships actually registered on the DIS relative to the total fleet, and the number and percentages of Danish and foreign seafarers concerned.

and recalls that section 10 of Act No. 408 is not in conformity with Articles 2, 3 and 10 of the Convention.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1989, published 76th ILC session (1989)

With reference to its previous comments on legislative interventions which, in practice, follow strikes in different sectors, the Committee takes note of the Government's report and of the conclusions reached by the Committee on Freedom of Association in Cases Nos. 1443 (presented by the Danish Computer Workers' Trade Union) and 1470 (presented by several national workers' federations including the Danish Seamen's Union) (approved by the Governing Body respectively in November 1988 and February-March 1989: see 259th Report, paragraphs 163 to 197, and 262nd Report, paragraphs 33 to 78).

According to the Government's report, during 1987 collective bargaining for the renewal of agreements took place without industrial action on a major scale although in a few minor fields in the public sector the Government was obliged to intervene to end industrial action and prolong the agreements: Act No. 246 of 8 May 1987 for junior hospital doctors, Act No. 542 of 20 August 1987 for computer workers, Act No. 657 of 15 October 1987 for the seamen running the only island ship service for the state-owned company "Bornholmstrafikken", and Act No. 289 of 20 May 1987 for ambulance drivers and emergency fire-service workers. In the private sector, it states that Parliament adopted Act No. 408 of 1 July 1988 to set up the Danish International Ships' Register, the aim of which is to improve the competitiveness of the Danish merchant fleet and thus to strengthen employment on board Danish ships. Section 10 of this Act introduces special rules concerning collective agreements for ships registered on the Danish International Ships' Register which necessitate the renegotiation of existing agreements.

The Committee regrets that, despite its comments made over recent years on such interventions, the Government has again resorted to statutory prohibitions of strikes in a number of sectors and, in addition, to interference in current collective agreements for certain Danish-flag ships. It recalls, as does the Committee on Freedom of Association, that recourse to strike action is one of the essential means available to workers and their organisations for the promotion and defence of their occupational interests and that restrictions on strikes should be limited to public servants acting in their capacity as agents of the public authority or to workers in essential services, namely those whose interruption could endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population. The Committee considers that several of the sectors involved in the various legislative interventions do not meet this criterion.

Observing that negotiations in a few sectors are to open in the spring of 1989, the Committee expresses the hope that the Government will remove the prohibition of strikes in those fields which are not essential in the strict sense of the term.