Defend the Right to Strike

Sign up to the New Zealand right to strike cam­paign at http://union.org.nz/our-right-to-strike

While inequal­i­ty is ris­ing, employ­ers’ groups around the world are try­ing to under­mine the right to strike at nation­al and inter­na­tion­al lev­el.

These attacks come at a time when employ­ers and gov­ern­ments imple­ment aus­ter­i­ty mea­sures, the growth of pre­car­i­ous jobs is ram­pant and social protests are crim­i­nal­ized, with the intent to silence work­ers and their demands for decent jobs and social pro­tec­tion.

With­out the right to strike, col­lec­tive bar­gain­ing is noth­ing more than beg­ging.

Since June 2012, employ­ers have been chal­leng­ing the exis­tence of an inter­na­tion­al right to strike and the author­i­ty of the ILO and its super­vi­so­ry mech­a­nism. The increas­ing use of ILO jurispru­dence at nation­al and region­al lev­el, as well as in codes of con­duct on busi­ness and human rights, shows the rel­e­vance and impor­tance of ILO stan­dards and the need for an effec­tive ILO super­vi­so­ry mech­a­nism. This cri­sis is also intend­ed to pre­vent nation­al and region­al courts from deriv­ing a right to strike from inter­na­tion­al law.

ITF pres­i­dent Pad­dy Crum­lin com­ments: “The right to strike, to with­draw one’s labour in pro­tec­tion of eco­nom­ic and indus­tri­al access and respect in the work­place, is essen­tial to decent and sus­tain­able lives of all work­ers. It is one of our most basic labour rights, under­pinned by fun­da­men­tal civ­il and human rights. The work­ing women and men that rely on this free­dom will fight with deter­mi­na­tion and per­sis­tence against the denial of this access to equi­ty and jus­tice through their trade unions and with the wider sup­port of gen­uine­ly demo­c­ra­t­ic and sup­port­ive polit­i­cal, com­mu­ni­ty, eco­nom­ic and social­ly pro­gres­sive organ­i­sa­tions and indi­vid­u­als.

Rosa Pavanel­li, PSI Gen­er­al Sec­re­tary, says: “Unde­mo­c­ra­t­ic regimes attack trade unions and all forms of protest action, while the right to strike is exces­sive­ly reg­u­lat­ed in many indus­tri­al­ized coun­tries through the expan­sion of essen­tial ser­vices, where­as grow­ing num­bers of pub­lic sec­tor work­ers are denied the right to strike. Free trade agree­ments and ad-hoc pri­vate tri­bunals (investor-state dis­pute set­tle­ment or ISDS) that pri­or­i­tize the inter­ests of multi­na­tion­al com­pa­nies over the pub­lic good and democ­ra­cy, aim to replace an inter­na­tion­al sys­tem based on human rights and inter­na­tion­al labour stan­dards. Labour claus­es that refer to ILO stan­dards are no guar­an­tee for the respect of work­ers’ rights if the ILO’s author­i­ty con­tin­ues to be under­mined. That is why this is a pri­or­i­ty issue for all work­ers.”

In March 2015, the ILO Gov­ern­ing Body has to take a deci­sion on the res­o­lu­tion of this con­flict that has had a chill­ing effect on the ILO super­vi­so­ry mech­a­nism since 2012. If no agree­ment can be reached, work­ers demand a refer­ral to the Inter­na­tion­al Court of Jus­tice for an advi­so­ry opin­ion on the mat­ter, as fore­seen in the ILO Con­sti­tu­tion. Many gov­ern­ments sup­port the demand of the labour move­ment to respect the ILO Con­sti­tu­tion and to bring the case before the ICJ. But some are pro­cras­ti­nat­ing. These gov­ern­ments and all groups of employ­ers have to held account­able for their dis­re­spect of inter­na­tion­al law and the cru­cial role of the ILO.

ITUC Gen­er­al Sec­re­tary Sha­ran Bur­row says: “Through­out his­to­ry, when employ­ers and gov­ern­ments have refused dia­logue and nego­ti­a­tion and instead imposed their will, work­ers have still tak­en the step and faced the risks of with­draw­ing their labour. That will not change. Work­ers will con­tin­ue to take strike action when they have to – but the employ­er agen­da would make them crim­i­nals. Tak­ing away the right to strike would turn us all into slaves. We will not allow that to hap­pen.”