Rapport définitif - Rapport No. 86, 1966

1. 75. The complaint of the Pan-Hellenic Federation of Workers in Electricity and Public Utility Undertakings is contained in a telegram addressed directly to the I.L.O on 16 April 1965. Although informed of their right to supply additional information to substantiate their allegations, the complainants have not done so. The complaint was transmitted for comment to the Government, which replied by a communication dated 27 July 1965.
2. 76. 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. A. The complainants' allegations

1. 77. The complainants allege that a strike called for on 15 and 16 April 1965 by the employees of the Athens and Piraeus public electricity undertaking was broken by the Government, which subjected the workers to " political mobilisation "-an unconstitutional measure in the view of the complainants-and arrested about 30 strikers.
2. 78. In its observations the Government confirms having requisitioned workers. It explains, however, that such action was taken only in respect of a limited number of the staff, namely the technical staff whose presence was vitally necessary to keep the turbines running. The Government adds that the action in question was taken to implement a decision of the Minister for Industry, which was itself based on provisions of the legislation in force which lay down that " requisition measures in respect of staff shall be ordered by the competent ministers, after the Prime Minister has so decided, with the aim of coping with situations of all kinds which might hinder economic development or which might jeopardise the normal life of the State or the social life of the country ".
3. 79. The Government declares that its intention, when it ordered the measure of requisition, was not to infringe freedom of association or the right to strike, but purely " to ensure adequate protection of the public and avoid perturbations in the economic development of the country ". The Government adds that, generally speaking, " the requisitioning of the staff of a public utility undertaking placed in entirely exceptional circumstances of urgent necessity is only ordered very rarely and when there are no other means of ensuring the functioning of that undertaking ".

B. B. The Committee's conclusions

1. 80. On a number of occasions in the past the Committee has had occasion to examine cases having similar or comparable features. In those cases the Committee noted that the requisition of workers was of an exceptional nature in a labour dispute in view of the gravity of its consequences with regard to personal freedoms and trade union rights. It also considered that measures such as the requisition of workers on the occasion of a labour dispute could be justified only by the need to ensure the working of essential services or industries whose suspension would lead to an acute crisis.
2. 81. In the present case it is difficult to determine whether the stopping of the turbines, which according to the Government would have resulted in the cutting off of electric current, the bringing to a standstill of urban transport, etc., would have led to an " acute crisis ". However, since the Government declares that the measure of requisition in question-to which, moreover, recourse is very rarely had as a general rule --was not intended as a deliberate strike-breaking measure or as an infringement of freedom of association, the Committee recommends the Governing Body, while drawing the Government's attention to the observations made in paragraph 80 above, to decide that this aspect of the case does not call for further examination.
3. 82. As regards the arrests alleged to have been made, the Government states that the persons who after the requisition did not return to work were arrested and detained for 24 hours. Although sentenced to detention by the judge of first instance before whom they appeared, according to the Government they were acquitted on appeal.
4. 83. In these circumstances, the persons concerned having been released, the Committee considers that no useful purpose would be served by continuing its examination of this aspect of the case and recommends the Governing Body to consider it as closed.