Seguimiento dado a las recomendaciones del Comité y del Consejo de Administración - Informe núm. 329, Noviembre 2002

Effect given to the recommendations of the Committee and the Governing Body

1. 132. The Committee last examined this case, which concerned amongst other things allegations regarding a legislation which would restrict the right to strike, at its March 2002 session [see 327th Report, paras. 104-106]. It had previously requested the Government to take full account of the principles of freedom of association in the drafting of the amendments of Act No. 2/1991, Collection of Laws on Collective Bargaining, and trusted that all the relevant amendments would be adopted in the near future. In this regard, the Committee later noted that the amendments to Act No. 2/1991 were reflected in Act No. 209/2001, Collection of Laws, which came into force on 1 January 2002.
2. 133. In a communication of 20 May 2002, the complainant organization acknowledges that following the complaint it lodged, and the subsequent recommendations by the Committee, the Act on Collective Bargaining was amended. However, the complainant organization expresses its deep concern over the fact that the Government has considered that the strike staged by the Trade Union Association of Railwaymen in June 2001, which was the basis for the complaint in this case, was a political one and was thus “beyond the principles of freedom of association”. The complainant organization insists on the fact that the said strike was aimed at defending the employees’ interests and that the railwaymen had a legitimate right to organize it.
3. 134. In a communication dated 13 September 2002, the Government indicates that in a statement of January 2002, it categorized the strike staged by the Trade Union Association of Railwaymen, based on the nature of claims demanded via strike action, as a protest (political) strike and not as an occupational or trade union strike. The Government explains that in June 2001 the complainant organization issued a statement in order to coordinate the strike action in several regions, which stated: “We inform everyone that the strike action being prepared on 14 June 2001 is not a strike pursuant to the Act on Collective Bargaining. The objective of the strike is the protection of economic and social interests of employees of the Slovak Republic Railways.” Thus, according to the Government, the objective of the strike was directed against the restructuring of the Slovak Republic railways and was not directly of an occupational nature.
4. 135. The Committee has taken note of the follow-up information provided by the complainant organization as well as the detailed reply from the Government. The Committee wishes to recall that the occupational and economic interests which workers defend through the exercise of the right to strike do not only concern better working conditions or collective claims of an occupational nature, but also the seeking of solutions to economic and social policy questions and problems facing the undertaking which are of direct concern to the workers. Furthermore, while purely political strikes do not fall within the scope of the principles of freedom of association, trade unions should be able to have recourse to protest strikes, in particular where aimed at criticizing a government’s economic and social policies. Finally, the Committee recalls that the right to strike should not be limited solely to industrial disputes that are likely to be resolved through the signing of a collective agreement; workers and their organizations should be able to express in a broader context, if necessary, their dissatisfaction as regards economic and social matters affecting their members’ interests.