Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1989, published 76th ILC session (1989)

The Committee takes note of the report submitted by the Government.

1. Dismissal of strikers at the Eschler-Urania undertaking. Having examined the judgement issued on 18 June 1985 by the Civil Court of the Federal Tribunal concerning the dismissal of ten strikers in June 1979 at the above-mentioned enterprise, the Committee recalls its earlier comments relating to the right to strike which, in its opinion, is one of the essential means which workers and their organisations should have to promote and defend their social and economic interests.

Therefore, the Committee requests the Government and, through it, the representative workers' organisations mentioned in the report to indicate whether the courts have issued other judgements in like cases, namely dismissals for strike action and, if yes, to communicate the texts of said judgements.

2. The right to strike of public servants. The Committee has noted the information provided by the Government concerning the various joint committees and personnel committees established at the federal and cantonal levels. It observes, however, that they seem to have only an advisory function.

Concerning more specifically the right to strike of public servants, the Committee wishes to recall that the principle whereby the right to strike may be limited or prohibited in the public service or in essential services, whether public, semi-public or private, would become meaningless if the legislation defined the public service or essential services too broadly. As the Committee has already mentioned, the prohibition should be confined to public servants acting in their capacity as agents of the public authority or to services whose interruption would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population. Moreover, if strikes are restricted or prohibited in the public service or in essential services, appropriate guarantees must be afforded to protect the workers who are thus denied one of the essential means of defending their occupational interests. Restrictions should be offset by adequate impartial and speedy conciliation and arbitration procedures, in which the parties concerned can take part at every stage and in which the awards should in all cases be binding on both parties. Such awards, once rendered, should be rapidly and fully implemented (General Survey, 1983, paragraph 214).

Therefore, the Committee requests the Government and, through it, the representative workers' organisations mentioned in the report, to provide information on the practical application of the legislative provisions which prohibit strikes by public servants, by indicating, for example, whether there exist conciliation and arbitration procedures enabling them to defend their social and economic interests before an impartial body vested with the authority to issue binding decisions, and to indicate whether monetary, administrative, judicial or other sanctions have been imposed in the past on public servants for their participation in industrial action.