Demande directe (CEACR) - adoptée 2015, publiée 105ème session CIT (2016)

Convention (n° 87) sur la liberté syndicale et la protection du droit syndical, 1948 - Türkiye (Ratification: 1993)

Autre commentaire sur C087

Observation

Demande directe

Afficher en : Francais - EspagnolTout voir

Article 2 of the Convention. Right of workers to establish and join organizations. The Committee recalls that its previous observation concerned section 7(d) of Act No. 6289 on public servants’ unions and collective agreements, amending Act No. 4688, which requires that trade union statutes provide the place of residence of the founders of an organization to the office of the Governor of the province in order to be incorporated; and section 10(8) which provides for the removal of union executive bodies upon application that can be made by the Ministry of Labour and Social Security in case of non-respect of requirements concerning meetings and decisions of general assemblies, set out in the law.

The Committee duly notes the Government’s indication that incomplete information does not affect the establishment of the union or the acquisition of legal personality. As the Government has not supplied the practical information previously requested, the Committee once again requests the Government to provide information on the manner in which section 7(d) of Act No. 6289 is applied and whether this has given rise to any claims or complaints with respect to delays, difficulties in registration or harassment, and what, if any, steps the Government has taken in this regard.

As regards the removal of union executive bodies in case of non-respect of requirements concerning meetings and decisions of general assemblies upon application that can be made by the Ministry of Labour and Social Security, the Committee requested the Government to review this provision in consultation with the social partners with a view to its amendment. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that such decisions can only be taken after due process of law by the competent courts and are aimed at ensuring the democratic functioning of such meetings. The Committee once again requests the Government to review section 10(8) of Act No. 6289 in consultation with the social partners, and to provide information on its application in practice.

Article 3. Right of workers’ organizations to elect their representatives in full freedom and to organize their activities. In its previous comments, the Committee had noted the concerns raised by the Confederation of Progressive Trade Unions of Turkey (DİSK) and the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) that section 9 of Act No. 6356 on trade unions and collective labour agreements limits the number of board members for branch trade unions to five, reduced from nine in the previous law. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that while this limitation is aimed at preventing abuse of special protections afforded to trade union executives and was agreed to by consensus of the social partners, under subparagraph 2, the parties may set up other organs as they need.

As regards section 58 of Act No. 6356, the Committee had observed, in its previous comments, that this provision restricted lawful strikes to disputes during collective bargaining negotiations and had requested the Government to indicate the manner in which protest action, sympathy strikes and other means of legitimate industrial action are protected in line with the 2010 constitutional amendment. As the Government refers generally to the practical application of this section, the Committee once again requests it to indicate specifically the manner in which the above forms of action are protected.

In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to take steps to review section 65 of Act No. 6356 in consultation with the social partners, in order to ensure that workers’ organizations are able to participate in the determination of a required minimum service at the workplace, and that, failing agreement, the matter may be referred to an independent body that has the confidence of the parties. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government that there is no provision impeding consultation and prior agreement between the employer and the workers’ representatives on the required minimum service before the employer’s decision in this regard, and that the union has the right to challenge the employer’s decision before the courts for a final determination. The Committee considers that, in order to promote the participation of the union in the determination of a minimum service in the event of industrial action, it would be important for the Government to clearly provide for such participation in the law, rather than granting this authority unilaterally to the employer. The Committee therefore once again requests the Government to take steps to review this provision in consultation with the social partners with a view to its amendment, and to provide information on any developments in this regard.

Finally, with reference to its observation, the Committee notes the observations of the Confederation of Public Employees’ Trade Unions (KESK) alleging that the public service in the broad sense of the term is prohibited from taking industrial action, and that the Public Employees Act No. 657 and Act No. 6111 provide disciplinary sanctions for such action. The Committee indicates, in its 2012 General Survey on the fundamental Conventions, paragraph 129, that public servants who are not exercising authority in the name of the State should be able to carry out their activities, including industrial action, without sanction. The Committee requests the Government to review the legislation concerning public service workers with the relevant social partners with a view to its amendment, so as to ensure that the ban on industrial action is limited to public servants exercising authority in the name of the State and those working in essential services.