ILO-en-strap
NORMLEX
Information System on International Labour Standards
NORMLEX Page d'accueil > Profils par pays >  > Commentaires

Observation (CEACR) - adoptée 2004, publiée 93ème session CIT (2005)

Convention (n° 98) sur le droit d'organisation et de négociation collective, 1949 - Danemark (Ratification: 1955)

Autre commentaire sur C098

Demande directe
  1. 2013

Afficher en : Francais - EspagnolTout voir

The Committee takes note of the comments made by the Danish Confederation of Trade Unions (LO) as well as the Government’s observations thereon.

1. Article 4 of the Convention. The comments and the Government’s reply concern section 10 of Act No. 408 of 23 June 1988 which sets up a Danish International Shipping Register (DIS). The Committee has been requesting since 1989 the amendment of this provision because it has the effect of prohibiting workers employed on ships sailing under the Danish flag who are not residents of Denmark from being represented in collective bargaining, if they so wish, by Danish trade unions of which they are members.

The Committee notes that according to the LO, the Government continues to avoid amending the Act and maintains that it is not in contravention of the Convention. The LO indicates that the Government considers that Denmark continues to meet its international obligations although it acknowledges that the Committee has been critical of the DIS. The LO cites to this effect a statement made by the responsible Minister in the Danish Parliament on 14 November 2003 according to which the previous and present Governments have both held the view that a decision on the DIS issue would have to be based on a broad discussion in the ILO of international or secondary registers, such as the DIS. The LO adds that, on that occasion, the Government also announced that it would launch a comparative study of the DIS and other international registers; this comparative study has now been completed and the Government has sent a memorandum to Parliament which contains information on conditions in ship registers in other countries. The LO points to the fact that no other ship register has provisions that correspond to section 10 of the Act.

The Committee takes note of the observations made by the Government on the above comments. The Government points out that: (1) the memorandum noted by LO concerning the comparative study of the DIS and other ship registers has provided Parliament with a detailed description of different national register schemes; (2) the discussion with the social partners on DIS has been and continuously is an agenda item of the regular tripartite meetings of the Danish ILO Committee; (3) the ILO will be kept informed of any development concerning the tripartite discussions on DIS; (4) the Danish Workers’ organizations have had during the years variable approaches on the issue of the DIS as well as the agreements which allow Danish trade unions to be present during negotiations between owners of ships sailing under the Danish flag 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 (namely, 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 which, as noted by the Committee in its previous comments, entered into force on 1 March 2002 for a period of three years).

The Committee recalls that out of a total of 7,729 seafarers, 3,350 were foreigners as of September 2001, according to the figures previously presented by the Government. The Committee recalls from its earlier comments that the abovementioned agreements allowing Danish trade unions to be present during negotiations between owners of ships sailing under the Danish flag and foreign trade unions do not cover all relevant Danish unions as two of them had decided to no longer be parties to the agreements currently in force (the General Workers’ Union in Denmark/Seamen’s Union in Denmark and the Association of the Restaurant Business). The Committee observes moreover that the abovementioned agreements do not enable workers aboard ships sailing under the Danish flag who are not Danish residents to be represented by Danish trade unions even if they are affiliated to them; Danish trade unions can participate in the negotiations only in an observer capacity, while the terms and conditions of employment of the non-residents are determined through negotiations only with foreign trade unions.

In these circumstances, the Committee concludes that section 10 of Act No. 408 has the effect of, on the one hand, restricting the scope of negotiable issues by Danish trade unions by excluding from their bargaining power seafarers working on ships under the Danish flag who are not Danish residents and on the other hand, preventing these seafarers from freely choosing the organization they wish to represent their interests in the collective bargaining process. The Committee therefore requests, once again, the Government to indicate in its next report, the measures taken or envisaged to amend section 10 of Act No. 408 so that Danish trade unions may freely represent all their members - Danish residents and non-residents working on ships sailing under the Danish flag, in the collective bargaining process in conformity with Article 4 of the Convention.

2. The Committee also requests the Government to provide in its next report the information requested by the Committee in its previous comments concerning the collective bargaining rights of majority organizations (see 2003 observation, 74th Session).

© Copyright and permissions 1996-2024 International Labour Organization (ILO) | Privacy policy | Disclaimer