ILO-en-strap
NORMLEX
Information System on International Labour Standards
NORMLEX Home > Country profiles >  > Comments > All Comments

Display in: French - Spanish

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2023, published 112nd ILC session (2024)

Previous comment

The Committee notes the observations of the General Confederation of Lebanese Workers (CGTL) transmitted with the Government’s report, which refer to matters addressed in the present comment.
2015 and 2016 observations of Education International. Wage increases in the education sector. The Committee previously requested the Government to clarify, in relation to the 2015 and 2016 observations of Education International, which concerned reported wage increases for teachers in the public and private sectors, whether such increases were the result of collective bargaining. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the increase in wages mentioned in Act No. 46 of 21 August 2017 is the outcome of collective bargaining over several years. The Government further reports that in the public sector, wage increases have been approved over the past two years in the form of social assistance and are thus currently not included in the salary and that although relative increases to the value of educational and hospital grants were approved, they are insufficient. The Committee notes that the CGTL highlights in this regard that workers in State administration, who are not subject to the Public Sector Staff Act (applicable to employees in public administration) or the Labour Code but to Decree 5883/1994 would benefit from mainstreaming the provisions of the Labour Code and further reviewing the salaries and boosting the allowances owing to the economic crisis in the country. Welcoming the wage increases obtained as a result of collective bargaining and noting the Government’s indication that further improvements can be made for public sector teachers, the Committee encourages the Government to continue to promote and strengthen collective bargaining, in law and in practice, as an effective means of enhancing working conditions of teachers both in the private and public sectors.

Legislative amendments

Labour Code review. The Committee recalls that for many years, it has been emphasizing the need to revise a number of provisions of the Labour Code and the draft Labour Code submitted by the Government in 2004. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that, following several consultative meetings between employers and workers, a draft Labour Code was sent to the Cabinet of Ministers in April 2022 but has not yet been adopted due to the persistent change of governments. The Committee understands from the Government’s report that one of the objectives of the draft Labour Code is to address the issues raised by the Committee, as described below. The Committee also notes the observations of the CGTL, which indicates that the review of the Labour Code should be done in compliance with the Convention and points to the need to conduct genuine awareness-raising in this regard among the relevant stakeholders, as well as cooperation among the Government, the social partners and the relevant actors. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any developments concerning the adoption of the draft Labour Code and expects the legislative reform to fully take into account the Committee’s previous and present comments. The Committee requests the Government to provide a full copy of the draft Labour Code.
Scope of application of the Convention. Domestic workers. The Committee recalled in its previous comments that domestic workers who work for private households are excluded from the scope of application of the Labour Code of 1946 (section 7(1)). The Committee notes with interest the Government’s indication that the draft Labour Code proposes to amend sections 7 and 8 to make foreign and Lebanese domestic workers alike subject to the provisions of the Labour Code. The Government further states that: (i) domestic workers have the right to address ill-treatment or conflicts with employers or recruitment agencies by filing complaints at the Ministry of Labour, either individually, through their embassy or with the assistance of civil society groups and non-governmental organizations; and (ii) if amicable settlements fail, legal recourse is available through competent courts, including Labour Arbitration Councils, which have issued various rulings, including compensation for losses, damages and unpaid wages. While taking note of the procedures to address violations of domestic workers’ individual rights, the Committee observes that the information provided by the Government does not refer to the possibility for domestic workers to join workers’ organizations and be represented by them. The Committee trusts that the new Labour Code, once adopted, will fully guarantee all the rights enshrined in the Convention to domestic workers, whether national or foreign workers, including the right to join organizations of their own choosing and to engage in collective bargaining. The Committee also requests the Government to take the necessary measures to promote the enjoyment of these rights by domestic workers in practice and to provide information in this regard, such as the names of relevant workers’ organizations and the number of collective agreements concluded.
Articles 4 and 6 of the Convention. Promotion of collective bargaining. The Committee notes the Government´s information that the new draft Labour Code: (i) aims to effectively assert the right to collective bargaining and to active social dialogue (section 3); (ii) stipulates that collective bargaining is a dialogue between workers’ and employer’s representatives, which regulates and improves working conditions, regulates relations between employers and workers and creates means and resources to secure fundamental principles and rights at work (section 195); (iii) defines a collective employment contract (section 107); and (iv) regulates the procedure for collective bargaining, including in relation to the scope, the parties, the location of bargaining and its mandatory aspects (section 106). The Committee further observes, on the basis of the provisions of the draft Labour Code provided by the Government that some aspects of the draft law may raise issues of compatibility with the Convention, in particular: (i) section 106(1) gives the labour authorities the power to approve the subject of collective bargaining previously agreed to by the parties (this should not be subject to the approval of the authorities); and (ii) section 110 establishes excessive requirements for the validation of collective agreements (a quorum of more than half of union members present at a meeting and the approval of two-thirds of those members, as previously reported by the ITUC). The Committee also observes certain issues relating to the extension of collective bargaining agreements. In particular, it is unclear whether agreement is required from the employers or their organizations and workers’ organizations in the establishments to which the agreements aim to be extended (section 118). The Committee further observes that under section 121, the collective contract follow-up committee (composed of the Director General of the Ministry of Labour, two representatives of workers and two representatives of employers), which is responsible for providing opinion on the extension of collective agreements, can engage in valid meetings if more than half of its members are present. The Committee understands that this could lead to situations where opinions are issued only by the Chairperson and representatives of either workers or employers. Furthermore, the Minister has broad powers to accept or refuse extension of a collective agreement after the opinion of the collective contract follow-up committee (opinion is only binding for refusal to extend) (section 118). In line with the above, the Committee requests the Government to engage in further consultations with the social partners to ensure that all provisions of the draft Labour Code, including those on collective bargaining, are in line with the Convention and reminds the Government that it may avail itself of ILO technical assistance in this regard. Recalling the importance granted to the involvement of workers and employers in the process of extension by Paragraph 5(2)(c) of the Collective Agreement Recommendation, 1951 (No. 91), the Committee requests the Government to provide clarification on the concerns raised in relation to the extension of collective agreements and to provide furtherinformation on the special provisions and penalties regulating violations of collective agreements, referred to by the Government (section 128 of the draft Labour Code).
Excessive restrictions on the right to collective bargaining. In its previous comment, the Committee recalled that the support of 50 per cent of Lebanese workers concerned, for collective bargaining to be considered as valid, stipulated in the draft Labour Code (a proposed reduction from 60 per cent), could pose problems of compatibility with the Convention, as it would prevent a representative union without an absolute majority from being able to engage in bargaining. The Committee observes in this regard that section 108 of the draft Labour Code stipulates that the discussion, amendment or cancellation of a collective agreement (but not its renewal without change) require workers’ representatives to obtain the mandate of at least 51 per cent of members of the body and that the Minister of Labour shall determine the method for verifying the validity of the mandate. The Committee recalls that a workplace threshold of over 50 per cent of workers to be able to negotiate a collective labour agreement covering a workplace or an enterprise, is not conducive to harmonious industrial relations and does not promote collective bargaining in line with Article 4 of the Convention. For the same reason, as well as to respect the collective autonomy of the trade union organization, the Committee considers that the approval of a collective agreement by a two-thirds majority of the participants in a general meeting of the body, which brings together at least half of its members and associates, as stipulated in section 110, may constitute an obstacle to the right to organize and collective bargaining. The Committee therefore requests the Government to ensure that, if no union represents the required percentage to be declared the exclusive bargaining agent, collective bargaining rights should be granted to all unions in the unit, at least on behalf of their own members and that trade unions should subsequently be able to make decisions in line with their statutes.
Right to collective bargaining in the public sector and the public service. The Committee recalled, in its previous comment, that public sector workers not engaged in the administration of the State, governed by Decree No. 5883 of 1994, should be able to enjoy the right to collective bargaining and observed that the draft Labour Code proposed amendments to this effect. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that section 15 of the draft Labour Code establishes that all employers and workers at all establishments of all kinds, including workers and staff of municipalities and unions of municipalities (unless they are subject to special regulations) and staff working in public administrations and institutions who are not subject to special regulations (such as workers assigned to work by the administration itself) are subject to the provisions of the Labour Code. According to the Government, the different categories of workers will be eligible for the same protection and entitlements as those granted to other workers, while public servants are subject to their own system or to staff regulations for public administrations and institutions. It also notes that municipalities can provide their staff with a special status. While taking note of this information, the Committee recalls that only public servants engaged in the administration of the State can be excluded from the right to collective bargaining (Article 6 of the Convention). The Committee therefore requests the Government to clarify the exact categories of public servants or employees that are excluded from the scope of application of the draft Labour Code or who can be excluded therefrom as a result of being subject to specific regulations, and to indicate to what extent these workers have the right to organize and engage in collective bargaining under the different provisions regulating their status and working conditions.
Compulsory arbitration. In its previous comment, the Committee noted that, according to Decree No. 13896 of 3 January 2005, all public and private economic enterprises responsible for managing public services on behalf of the State or on their own account must resort to compulsory arbitration should negotiations fail. The Committee pointed to the need to take the necessary measures to ensure that compulsory arbitration in the context of collective bargaining can only be imposed in line with the Convention, that is, in relation to public servants engaged in the administration of the State (Article 6 of the Convention), essential services in the strict sense of the term and in the event of an acute national crisis. The Committee notes that while the Government refers to an amendment of section 222 of the draft Labour Code of 2010 with regard to collective labour dispute resolution mechanisms, it does not clarify what the amendment is. The Government further points to section 182 of the draft Labour Code, which defines a collective labour dispute and section 183, which establishes that mediation and arbitration, as a means of settling collective labour disputes, shall be free and voluntary. While taking noting of these proposed amendments, the Committee observes that the Government does not inform about whether Decree No. 13896, which provides for compulsory arbitration, continues to be applicable to economic enterprises responsible for managing public services on behalf of or on the account of the State. The Committee therefore requests the Government to clarify the status of Decree No. 13896 and the amendment to section 222 of the draft Labour Code, reported by the Government, and trusts that any amendments made will take into account the above considerations in relation to collective bargaining.
Collective bargaining in practice. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the last collective agreement adopted was an agreement between the Association of Banks in Lebanon and the Federation of Unions of Bank Employees in Lebanon. The Committee requests the Government once again to provide statistics on the number of collective agreements concluded and in force and to indicate the sectors and number of workers covered.
Observing that support took place at a previous stage of the elaboration of the draft Labour Code, the Committee recalls that the Government can continue to avail itself of the technical assistance of the Office in this respect.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2022, published 111st ILC session (2023)

The Committee notes with concern that the Government’s report has not been received. It is therefore bound to repeat its previous comments.
Repetition
The Committee notes the observations of the General Confederation of Lebanese Workers (CGTL), communicated with the Government’s report. The Committee observes that the Government has not replied to the observations made by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) in 2010, alleging that the law imposes a high threshold on representative organizations for engaging in collective bargaining, as well as imposing the requirement of obtaining the agreement of two-thirds of the union membership at a general meeting to validate a collective agreement.The Committee once again requests the Government to send its comments concerning the observations made in 2010 by the ITUC.
With regard to the observations submitted by Education International (EI) in 2015 and 2016 concerning the situation of public and private educational staff and the wage freeze since 1996, the Committee notes that: (i) through the adoption of Decree No. 63 in 2008, teachers in the public and private sectors have had a wage increase; (ii) in 2013, following a wage increase in the private sector, public sector employees, including teachers, were granted an advance on their salary; and (iii) Act No. 26, published in the Official Gazette of 21 August 2017, also provides for a wage increase for teachers in the public and private sectors.The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether these wage increases are the result of collective bargaining.
Scope of application of the Convention. Domestic workers. In its previous comments, the Committee observed that the Government had not replied to the observations made by the ITUC concerning the exclusion of domestic workers from the Labour Code. The Committee observes that “domestic workers who work for private households” are excluded from the scope of application of the Labour Code of 1946 (section 7(1)), and that the contractual relationships between domestic workers and the individuals who employ them to perform domestic work in their households are governed by the Act on obligations and contracts. Moreover, the Committee notes that, in its concluding observations of 2018, the United Nations Human Rights Committee expressed concern that migrant domestic workers are excluded from protection under domestic labour law and are subjected to abuse and exploitation under the sponsorship (kafala) system. It also expressed concern about the lack of effective remedies against such abuses and the existence of anti-union reprisals (CCPR/C/LBN/CO/3).The Committee requests the Government to provide clarification in this respect, by indicating the manner in which domestic workers and migrant domestic workers can enjoy the protection of the Convention, including the right to engage in collective bargaining through the organization of their own choosing, and to indicate whether consideration is being given to amending the above-mentioned provision of the Labour Code. The Committee also requests the Government to indicate how these rights are exercised in practice, by indicating the names of any organizations that represent domestic workers and migrant domestic workers and the number of collective agreements covering them.
Legislative amendments
Articles 4 and 6 of the Convention. Promotion of collective bargaining. The Committee recalls that, in the comments that it has been repeating for many years, it has been emphasizing the need to revise a number of provisions of the Labour Code in force and to reword certain provisions on collective bargaining in the draft Labour Code communicated by the Government in 2004.
Excessive restrictions on the right to collective bargaining. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that section 3 of Decree No. 17386/64 required trade unions to obtain the support of at least 60 per cent of the Lebanese employees concerned in order for a collective agreement negotiation to be considered valid, and considered this threshold to be excessive. The Committee also noted that section 180 of the draft Labour Code provided for the reduction of the threshold to 50 per cent and reminded the Government that such a solution could nevertheless pose problems of compatibility with the Convention, as it would prevent a representative union without an absolute majority from being able to engage in bargaining. It therefore asked the Government to ensure that if no union represents the required percentage of workers to be declared the exclusive bargaining agent, collective bargaining rights are granted to all the unions in the unit, at least on behalf of their own members.
Right to collective bargaining in the public sector and the public service. In its previous comments, the Committee asked the Government to amend its legislation so that public sector workers not engaged in the administration of the State, governed by Decree No. 5883 of 1994, are able to enjoy the right to collective bargaining. In this regard, the Committee noted that section 131 of the draft Labour Code established that workers in the public administration, municipalities and public enterprises responsible for administering public services on behalf of the State or on their own account would have to right to engage in collective bargaining.
Compulsory arbitration. For many years, the Committee has been asking the Government to take measures so that recourse to arbitration in the three public sector enterprises governed by Decree No. 2952 of 20 October 1965 is only at the request of both parties. The Committee also requested the amendment of section 224 of the draft Labour Code, which provides that, should mediation fail, any dispute in the case of the three public sector enterprises governed by Decree No. 2952 will be settled by an arbitration board. The Committee notes with regret the Government’s indication that Decree No. 2952 has been replaced by Decree No. 13896 of 3 January 2005, and that now all investment enterprises in the private and public sectors which are responsible for managing public services on behalf of the State or on their own account must resort to compulsory arbitration should negotiations fail. The Committee recalls that compulsory arbitration is generally not compatible with the promotion of free and voluntary collective bargaining required by Article 4 of the Convention and therefore that compulsory arbitration in the context of collective bargaining is only acceptable in relation to public servants engaged in the administration of the State (Article 6 of the Convention), essential services in the strict sense of the term (services the interruption of which would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population) and in the event of an acute national crisis.Noting with regret that the Government has been merely indicating, for over a decade, that the draft Labour Code is under examination and that due account will be taken of the Committee’s comments, and that the Labour Code in force continues to contain provisions that are not compatible with the Convention, the Committee urges the Government to take the necessary legislative measures to amend the Labour Code in force so as to guarantee the collective bargaining rights of workers, including domestic workers. The Committee reminds the Government that it may avail itself of technical assistance from the Office in this regard.
Collective bargaining in practice. The Committee requests the Government to provide statistics on the number of collective agreements concluded and in force and to indicate the sectors and number of workers covered.
The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the near future.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It is therefore bound to repeat its previous comments.
Repetition
The Committee notes the observations of the General Confederation of Lebanese Workers (CGTL), communicated with the Government’s report. The Committee observes that the Government has not replied to the observations made by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) in 2010, alleging that the law imposes a high threshold on representative organizations for engaging in collective bargaining, as well as imposing the requirement of obtaining the agreement of two-thirds of the union membership at a general meeting to validate a collective agreement. The Committee once again requests the Government to send its comments concerning the observations made in 2010 by the ITUC.
With regard to the observations submitted by Education International (EI) in 2015 and 2016 concerning the situation of public and private educational staff and the wage freeze since 1996, the Committee notes that: (i) through the adoption of Decree No. 63 in 2008, teachers in the public and private sectors have had a wage increase; (ii) in 2013, following a wage increase in the private sector, public sector employees, including teachers, were granted an advance on their salary; and (iii) Act No. 26, published in the Official Gazette of 21 August 2017, also provides for a wage increase for teachers in the public and private sectors. The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether these wage increases are the result of collective bargaining.
Scope of application of the Convention. Domestic workers. In its previous comments, the Committee observed that the Government had not replied to the observations made by the ITUC concerning the exclusion of domestic workers from the Labour Code. The Committee observes that “domestic workers who work for private households” are excluded from the scope of application of the Labour Code of 1946 (section 7(1)), and that the contractual relationships between domestic workers and the individuals who employ them to perform domestic work in their households are governed by the Act on obligations and contracts. Moreover, the Committee notes that, in its concluding observations of 2018, the United Nations Human Rights Committee expressed concern that migrant domestic workers are excluded from protection under domestic labour law and are subjected to abuse and exploitation under the sponsorship (kafala) system. It also expressed concern about the lack of effective remedies against such abuses and the existence of anti-union reprisals (CCPR/C/LBN/CO/3). The Committee requests the Government to provide clarification in this respect, by indicating the manner in which domestic workers and migrant domestic workers can enjoy the protection of the Convention, including the right to engage in collective bargaining through the organization of their own choosing, and to indicate whether consideration is being given to amending the above-mentioned provision of the Labour Code. The Committee also requests the Government to indicate how these rights are exercised in practice, by indicating the names of any organizations that represent domestic workers and migrant domestic workers and the number of collective agreements covering them.
Legislative amendments
Articles 4 and 6 of the Convention. Promotion of collective bargaining. The Committee recalls that, in the comments that it has been repeating for many years, it has been emphasizing the need to revise a number of provisions of the Labour Code in force and to reword certain provisions on collective bargaining in the draft Labour Code communicated by the Government in 2004.
Excessive restrictions on the right to collective bargaining. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that section 3 of Decree No. 17386/64 required trade unions to obtain the support of at least 60 per cent of the Lebanese employees concerned in order for a collective agreement negotiation to be considered valid, and considered this threshold to be excessive. The Committee also noted that section 180 of the draft Labour Code provided for the reduction of the threshold to 50 per cent and reminded the Government that such a solution could nevertheless pose problems of compatibility with the Convention, as it would prevent a representative union without an absolute majority from being able to engage in bargaining. It therefore asked the Government to ensure that if no union represents the required percentage of workers to be declared the exclusive bargaining agent, collective bargaining rights are granted to all the unions in the unit, at least on behalf of their own members.
Right to collective bargaining in the public sector and the public service. In its previous comments, the Committee asked the Government to amend its legislation so that public sector workers not engaged in the administration of the State, governed by Decree No. 5883 of 1994, are able to enjoy the right to collective bargaining. In this regard, the Committee noted that section 131 of the draft Labour Code established that workers in the public administration, municipalities and public enterprises responsible for administering public services on behalf of the State or on their own account would have to right to engage in collective bargaining.
Compulsory arbitration. For many years, the Committee has been asking the Government to take measures so that recourse to arbitration in the three public sector enterprises governed by Decree No. 2952 of 20 October 1965 is only at the request of both parties. The Committee also requested the amendment of section 224 of the draft Labour Code, which provides that, should mediation fail, any dispute in the case of the three public sector enterprises governed by Decree No. 2952 will be settled by an arbitration board. The Committee notes with regret the Government’s indication that Decree No. 2952 has been replaced by Decree No. 13896 of 3 January 2005, and that now all investment enterprises in the private and public sectors which are responsible for managing public services on behalf of the State or on their own account must resort to compulsory arbitration should negotiations fail. The Committee recalls that compulsory arbitration is generally not compatible with the promotion of free and voluntary collective bargaining required by Article 4 of the Convention and therefore that compulsory arbitration in the context of collective bargaining is only acceptable in relation to public servants engaged in the administration of the State (Article 6 of the Convention), essential services in the strict sense of the term (services the interruption of which would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population) and in the event of an acute national crisis. Noting with regret that the Government has been merely indicating, for over a decade, that the draft Labour Code is under examination and that due account will be taken of the Committee’s comments, and that the Labour Code in force continues to contain provisions that are not compatible with the Convention, the Committee urges the Government to take the necessary legislative measures to amend the Labour Code in force so as to guarantee the collective bargaining rights of workers, including domestic workers. The Committee reminds the Government that it may avail itself of technical assistance from the Office in this regard.
Collective bargaining in practice. The Committee requests the Government to provide statistics on the number of collective agreements concluded and in force and to indicate the sectors and number of workers covered.
The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the near future.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2018, published 108th ILC session (2019)

The Committee notes the observations of the General Confederation of Lebanese Workers (CGTL), communicated with the Government’s report. The Committee observes that the Government has not replied to the observations made by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) in 2010, alleging that the law imposes a high threshold on representative organizations for engaging in collective bargaining, as well as imposing the requirement of obtaining the agreement of two-thirds of the union membership at a general meeting to validate a collective agreement. The Committee once again requests the Government to send its comments concerning the observations made in 2010 by the ITUC.
With regard to the observations submitted by Education International (EI) in 2015 and 2016 concerning the situation of public and private educational staff and the wage freeze since 1996, the Committee notes that: (i) through the adoption of Decree No. 63 in 2008, teachers in the public and private sectors have had a wage increase; (ii) in 2013, following a wage increase in the private sector, public sector employees, including teachers, were granted an advance on their salary; and (iii) Act No. 26, published in the Official Gazette of 21 August 2017, also provides for a wage increase for teachers in the public and private sectors. The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether these wage increases are the result of collective bargaining.
Scope of application of the Convention. Domestic workers. In its previous comments, the Committee observed that the Government had not replied to the observations made by the ITUC concerning the exclusion of domestic workers from the Labour Code. The Committee observes that “domestic workers who work for private households” are excluded from the scope of application of the Labour Code of 1946 (section 7(1)), and that the contractual relationships between domestic workers and the individuals who employ them to perform domestic work in their households are governed by the Act on obligations and contracts. Moreover, the Committee notes that, in its concluding observations of 2018, the United Nations Human Rights Committee expressed concern that migrant domestic workers are excluded from protection under domestic labour law and are subjected to abuse and exploitation under the sponsorship (kafala) system. It also expressed concern about the lack of effective remedies against such abuses and the existence of anti-union reprisals (CCPR/C/LBN/CO/3). The Committee requests the Government to provide clarification in this respect, by indicating the manner in which domestic workers and migrant domestic workers can enjoy the protection of the Convention, including the right to engage in collective bargaining through the organization of their own choosing, and to indicate whether consideration is being given to amending the above-mentioned provision of the Labour Code. The Committee also requests the Government to indicate how these rights are exercised in practice, by indicating the names of any organizations that represent domestic workers and migrant domestic workers and the number of collective agreements covering them.
Legislative amendments
Articles 4 and 6 of the Convention. Promotion of collective bargaining. The Committee recalls that, in the comments that it has been repeating for many years, it has been emphasizing the need to revise a number of provisions of the Labour Code in force and to reword certain provisions on collective bargaining in the draft Labour Code communicated by the Government in 2004.
Excessive restrictions on the right to collective bargaining. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that section 3 of Decree No. 17386/64 required trade unions to obtain the support of at least 60 per cent of the Lebanese employees concerned in order for a collective agreement negotiation to be considered valid, and considered this threshold to be excessive. The Committee also noted that section 180 of the draft Labour Code provided for the reduction of the threshold to 50 per cent and reminded the Government that such a solution could nevertheless pose problems of compatibility with the Convention, as it would prevent a representative union without an absolute majority from being able to engage in bargaining. It therefore asked the Government to ensure that if no union represents the required percentage of workers to be declared the exclusive bargaining agent, collective bargaining rights are granted to all the unions in the unit, at least on behalf of their own members.
Right to collective bargaining in the public sector and the public service. In its previous comments, the Committee asked the Government to amend its legislation so that public sector workers not engaged in the administration of the State, governed by Decree No. 5883 of 1994, are able to enjoy the right to collective bargaining. In this regard, the Committee noted that section 131 of the draft Labour Code established that workers in the public administration, municipalities and public enterprises responsible for administering public services on behalf of the State or on their own account would have to right to engage in collective bargaining.
Compulsory arbitration. For many years, the Committee has been asking the Government to take measures so that recourse to arbitration in the three public sector enterprises governed by Decree No. 2952 of 20 October 1965 is only at the request of both parties. The Committee also requested the amendment of section 224 of the draft Labour Code, which provides that, should mediation fail, any dispute in the case of the three public sector enterprises governed by Decree No. 2952 will be settled by an arbitration board. The Committee notes with regret the Government’s indication that Decree No. 2952 has been replaced by Decree No. 13896 of 3 January 2005, and that now all investment enterprises in the private and public sectors which are responsible for managing public services on behalf of the State or on their own account must resort to compulsory arbitration should negotiations fail. The Committee recalls that compulsory arbitration is generally not compatible with the promotion of free and voluntary collective bargaining required by Article 4 of the Convention and therefore that compulsory arbitration in the context of collective bargaining is only acceptable in relation to public servants engaged in the administration of the State (Article 6 of the Convention), essential services in the strict sense of the term (services the interruption of which would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population) and in the event of an acute national crisis. Noting with regret that the Government has been merely indicating, for over a decade, that the draft Labour Code is under examination and that due account will be taken of the Committee’s comments, and that the Labour Code in force continues to contain provisions that are not compatible with the Convention, the Committee urges the Government to take the necessary legislative measures to amend the Labour Code in force so as to guarantee the collective bargaining rights of workers, including domestic workers. The Committee reminds the Government that it may avail itself of technical assistance from the Office in this regard.
Collective bargaining in practice. The Committee requests the Government to provide statistics on the number of collective agreements concluded and in force and to indicate the sectors and number of workers covered.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2016, published 106th ILC session (2017)

The Committee notes the observations received on 4 August 2011 and 1 September 2015 from the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) concerning in particular the situation of domestic migrant workers as well as the observation of Education International (EI) and two of its affiliates received on 8 September 2015 and 6 September 2016 concerning the situation of public and private educational staff and the freeze of salaries since 1996. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments thereon.
The Committee notes with concern that the Government’s report has not been received. It expects that the next report will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous comments.
The Committee had noted the comments dated 24 August 2010 from the ITUC to the effect that the law imposes a high threshold on representative organizations for engaging in collective bargaining, as well as imposing the requirement of obtaining the agreement of two-thirds of the union membership at a general meeting to validate a collective agreement. The Committee requests the Government to send its observations in reply to the comments made in 2010 by the ITUC.
Legislative amendments. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that the draft new Labour Code had been the subject of comments from a tripartite committee established pursuant to Ordinance No. 210/1 of 21 December 2000 and that a committee had been given the task of reviewing the draft in order to include certain amendments concerning collective bargaining and collective agreements. The Committee had then reiterated certain points contained in its previous comments so that the Government could take due account of them when finalizing the draft new Labour Code.
Article 4 of the Convention. The Committee previously noted that the draft amendments to the Labour Code had reduced the percentage of representation required by a trade union for collective bargaining from 60 to 51 per cent and asked the Government to take the necessary steps to ensure that, if no trade union represents the percentage required in order to be declared as the exclusive bargaining agent, collective bargaining rights are granted to the most representative unions of the unit concerned, at least on behalf of their members. The Committee therefore reiterates its previous comments.
Article 6. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that section 224(c) of the draft new Labour Code provides with respect to the three public sector enterprises governed by Decree No. 5883 of 1994 (port administration, joint tobacco company and Radio Orient) that, should mediation fail, the dispute will be settled by an arbitration board. The Committee asked the Government to ensure that the draft be amended in such a way that recourse to compulsory arbitration is only at the request of both parties. The Committee recalled that, except in the case of essential services in the strict sense, compulsory arbitration imposed by the authorities or at the request of one party is generally contrary to the principle of the voluntary negotiation of collective agreements established in the Convention. The Committee noted the Government’s indication that the draft new Labour Code was still under examination and that due account would be taken of the Committee’s comments. The Committee expresses the strong hope that the points which it reiterates above will be taken into account in the finalization of the draft new Labour Code and requests the Government to indicate the measures taken to this end in its next report.
The Committee reminds the Government of the possibility of availing itself of technical assistance from the Office with respect to the revision of the Labour Code and requests the Government to send a copy of the final legislative text adopted.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2015, published 105th ILC session (2016)

The Committee notes the observations received on 4 August 2011 and 1 September 2015 from the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) concerning in particular the situation of domestic migrant workers as well as the observation of Education International (EI) and two of its affiliates received on 8 September 2015 concerning the situation of public and private educational staff and the freeze of salaries since 1996. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments thereon.
The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It hopes that the next report will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous comments.
The Committee had noted the comments dated 24 August 2010 from the ITUC to the effect that the law imposes a high threshold on representative organizations for engaging in collective bargaining, as well as imposing the requirement of obtaining the agreement of two-thirds of the union membership at a general meeting to validate a collective agreement. The Committee requests the Government to send its observations in reply to the comments made in 2010 by the ITUC.
Legislative amendments. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that the draft new Labour Code had been the subject of comments from a tripartite committee established pursuant to Ordinance No. 210/1 of 21 December 2000 and that a committee had been given the task of reviewing the draft in order to include certain amendments concerning collective bargaining and collective agreements. The Committee had then reiterated certain points contained in its previous comments so that the Government could take due account of them when finalizing the draft new Labour Code.
Article 4 of the Convention. The Committee previously noted that the draft amendments to the Labour Code had reduced the percentage of representation required by a trade union for collective bargaining from 60 to 51 per cent and asked the Government to take the necessary steps to ensure that, if no trade union represents the percentage required in order to be declared as the exclusive bargaining agent, collective bargaining rights are granted to the most representative unions of the unit concerned, at least on behalf of their members. The Committee therefore reiterates its previous comments.
Article 6. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that section 224(c) of the draft new Labour Code provides with respect to the three public sector enterprises governed by Decree No. 5883 of 1994 (port administration, joint tobacco company and Radio Orient) that, should mediation fail, the dispute will be settled by an arbitration board. The Committee asked the Government to ensure that the draft be amended in such a way that recourse to compulsory arbitration is only at the request of both parties. The Committee recalled that, except in the case of essential services in the strict sense, compulsory arbitration imposed by the authorities or at the request of one party is generally contrary to the principle of the voluntary negotiation of collective agreements established in the Convention. The Committee noted the Government’s indication that the draft new Labour Code was still under examination and that due account would be taken of the Committee’s comments. The Committee expresses the strong hope that the points which it reiterates above will be taken into account in the finalization of the draft new Labour Code and requests the Government to indicate the measures taken to this end in its next report.
The Committee reminds the Government of the possibility of availing itself of technical assistance from the Office with respect to the revision of the Labour Code and requests the Government to send a copy of the final legislative text adopted.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2014, published 104th ILC session (2015)

The Committee notes the observations received on 4 August 2014 from the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) concerning restrictions to the migrant and Palestinian workers’ rights as enshrined in the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments thereon.
The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It hopes that a report will be supplied for examination by the Committee at its next session and that it will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous comments.
The Committee had noted the comments dated 24 August 2010 from the ITUC to the effect that the law imposes a high threshold on representative organizations for engaging in collective bargaining, as well as imposing the requirement of obtaining the agreement of two-thirds of the union membership at a general meeting to validate a collective agreement. The Committee requests the Government to send its observations in reply to the comments made in 2010 by the ITUC.
Legislative amendments. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that the draft new Labour Code had been the subject of comments from a tripartite committee established pursuant to Ordinance No. 210/1 of 21 December 2000 and that a committee had been given the task of reviewing the draft in order to include certain amendments concerning collective bargaining and collective agreements. The Committee had then reiterated certain points contained in its previous comments so that the Government could take due account of them when finalizing the draft new Labour Code.
Article 4 of the Convention. The Committee previously noted that the draft amendments to the Labour Code had reduced the percentage of representation required by a trade union for collective bargaining from 60 to 51 per cent and asked the Government to take the necessary steps to ensure that, if no trade union represents the percentage required in order to be declared as the exclusive bargaining agent, collective bargaining rights are granted to the most representative unions of the unit concerned, at least on behalf of their members. The Committee therefore reiterates its previous comments.
Article 6. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that section 224(c) of the draft new Labour Code provides with respect to the three public sector enterprises governed by Decree No. 5883 of 1994 (port administration, joint tobacco company and Radio Orient) that, should mediation fail, the dispute will be settled by an arbitration board. The Committee asked the Government to ensure that the draft be amended in such a way that recourse to compulsory arbitration is only at the request of both parties. The Committee recalled that, except in the case of essential services in the strict sense, compulsory arbitration imposed by the authorities or at the request of one party is generally contrary to the principle of the voluntary negotiation of collective agreements established in the Convention. The Committee noted the Government’s indication that the draft new Labour Code was still under examination and that due account would be taken of the Committee’s comments. The Committee expresses the strong hope that the points which it reiterates above will be taken into account in the finalization of the draft new Labour Code and requests the Government to indicate the measures taken to this end in its next report.
The Committee reminds the Government of the possibility of availing itself of technical assistance from the Office with respect to the revision of the Labour Code and requests the Government to send a copy of the final legislative text adopted.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2010, published 100th ILC session (2011)

Observations made by the ITUC. In its previous comments the Committee asked the Government to send its observations in reply to the comments made by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) dated 29 August 2008, according to which the legislation hampers any possibilities of launching collective bargaining, that the authorities interfere in trade union activities and that migrant workers, particularly domestic workers, and Palestinian workers do not have any trade union rights. The Committee notes that the Government refers in its report to the new draft Labour Code, which contains an appropriate definition of collective bargaining, that it refutes the allegation of interference by the authorities in trade union activities, indicating that its role is merely to monitor the smooth running of trade union elections, and that it indicates that domestic workers have the right to join any trade union authorized by the Ministry of Labour. In addition, an amendment is planned to section 59 of the Labour Code in order to grant Palestinian workers the same trade union rights as national workers. The Committee notes the comments dated 24 August 2010 from the ITUC to the effect that the law imposes a high threshold on representative organizations for engaging in collective bargaining, as well as imposing the requirement of obtaining the agreement of two-thirds of the union membership at a general meeting to validate a collective agreement. The Committee requests the Government to send its observations in reply to the comments made in 2010 by the ITUC.

Legislative amendments. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that the draft new Labour Code had been the subject of comments from a tripartite committee established pursuant to Ordinance No. 210/1 of 21 December 2000 and that a committee had been given the task of reviewing the draft in order to include certain amendments concerning collective bargaining and collective agreements. The Committee had then reiterated certain points contained in its previous comments so that the Government could take due account of them when finalizing the draft new Labour Code.

Article 4 of the Convention. The Committee previously noted that the draft amendments to the Labour Code had reduced the percentage of representation required by a trade union for collective bargaining from 60 to 51 per cent and asked the Government to take the necessary steps to ensure that, if no trade union represents the percentage required in order to be declared as the exclusive bargaining agent, collective bargaining rights are granted to the most representative unions of the unit concerned, at least on behalf of their members. In its report, the Government indicates that, under the terms of section 180 of the draft new Labour Code, the figure of 51 per cent corresponds to the threshold of representativeness required in the bargaining unit nominated by a trade union for engaging in bargaining with respect to a collective labour contract, not a collective agreement. The Committee therefore reiterates its previous comments.

Article 6. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that section 224(c) of the draft new Labour Code provides with respect to the three public sector enterprises governed by Decree No. 5883 of 1994 (port administration, joint tobacco company and Radio Orient) that, should mediation fail, the dispute will be settled by an arbitration board. The Committee asked the Government to ensure that the draft be amended in such a way that recourse to compulsory arbitration is only at the request of both parties. The Committee recalled that, except in the case of essential services in the strict sense, compulsory arbitration imposed by the authorities or at the request of one party is generally contrary to the principle of the voluntary negotiation of collective agreements established in the Convention. The Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that the draft new Labour Code is still under examination and that due account will be taken of the Committee’s comments. The Committee expresses the strong hope that the points which it reiterates above will be taken into account in the finalization of the draft new Labour Code and requests the Government to indicate the measures taken to this end in its next report.

The Committee also notes that the Government has supplied a copy of the draft amendments to the Labour Code with its report. The Committee will continue its examination of these amendments once they have been translated. In the meantime, the Committee reminds the Government of the possibility of availing itself of technical assistance from the Office with respect to the revision of the Labour Code and requests the Government to send a copy of the final legislative text adopted.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2008, published 98th ILC session (2009)

The Committee notes the observations dated 29 August 2008 from the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), which state that the legislation hampers any possibilities of launching collective bargaining, that the authorities interfere in trade union activities and that migrant workers, particularly domestic workers, and Palestinian workers do not have any trade union rights. The Committee requests the Government to send its comments in reply to these observations.

The Committee notes the information sent in the Government’s report, particularly the statement that, further to comments made on the draft new Labour Code prepared by the tripartite committee established pursuant to Ordinance No. 210/1 of 21 December 2000, a committee was given the task of reviewing the draft in order to include certain amendments concerning collective bargaining and collective agreements. The Committee also notes the indication that the committee in question may include any other amendments received within a reasonable time before submitting the draft Code to the Council of Ministers.

The Committee recalls that its previous comments referred to certain provisions of the draft Labour Code which were received in 2004. The Committee notes that a number of amendments, but not all those suggested, were made at the time to take account of its comments. In the absence of more precise information on the nature of the changes made by the committee recently mandated to review the draft in relation to the matters covered by the Convention, the Committee wishes to reiterate the following points contained in its previous comments and hopes that the Government will take due account of them when finalizing the draft new Labour Code.

Article 4 of the Convention. The Committee previously noted that the draft amendments to the Labour Code reduced the percentage of representation required by a trade union for collective bargaining from 60 to 51 per cent and requested the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that, if no trade union represents the percentage required to be declared as the exclusive bargaining agent, collective bargaining rights are granted to the most representative unions of the unit concerned, at least on behalf of their members. The Committee recalls that problems may arise when the law stipulates that a trade union must receive the support of 51 per cent of the members of a bargaining unit to be recognized as a bargaining agent since a trade union which fails to secure an absolute majority may be denied the possibility of negotiating (see General Survey of 1994 on freedom of association and collective bargaining, paragraph 241). In its 2006 report, the Government indicated that the Ministry of Labour wished to include a provision in the draft so that trade unions which did not cover 51 per cent of the members concerned would not be deprived of the right to bargain collectively. The Committee trusts that the Government will take the necessary measures to ensure that the draft amendment to the Labour Code will ensure that unions that do not obtain an absolute majority are not denied collective bargaining rights, at least on behalf of their members.

Article 6. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that section 224(c) of the draft amendments to the Labour Code provides with respect to the three public sector enterprises governed by Decree No. 5883 of 1994 (port administration, joint tobacco company and Radio Orient) that, should mediation fail, the dispute will be settled by an arbitration board. The Committee asked the Government to ensure that the draft be amended in such a way that recourse to compulsory arbitration is only at the request of both parties. The Committee notes that the Government indicated in its 2006 report that compulsory arbitration under the terms of this provision is provided for only in cases where a strike might endanger the life, safety or health of all or part of the population, or might cause a serious economic crisis. According to the Government, the adverse consequences of a strike should be eliminated as quickly as possible and so the arbitration board should have the power to decide to stop the strike.

The Committee recalls that, outside the essential services in the strict meaning of the term, arbitration imposed by the authorities or at the request of one party is generally contrary to the principle of the voluntary negotiation of collective agreements established in the Convention. The Committee trusts that the Government will take the necessary measures to ensure that the provisions of the Labour Code concerning dispute arbitration in public sector enterprises (section 224(c) of the draft amendments to the Labour Code) provide that recourse to compulsory arbitration shall only be at the request of both parties and in accordance with the principle reiterated above.

Finally, the Committee notes that the Government indicated in its 2006 report that the draft amendments to the Labour Code provide that workers in public administration, municipalities and state enterprises responsible for administering public services on behalf of the State or on their own behalf, including workers in public sector enterprises governed by Decree No. 5883 of 1994, shall have the right to form trade unions and bargain collectively.

The Committee requests the Government to supply detailed information on the progress made on the draft amendments to the Labour Code and trusts that due account will be taken of its comments. The Committee reminds the Government of the possibility of availing itself of technical assistance from the Office in this respect.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2004, published 93rd ILC session (2005)

The Committee notes the information transmitted in the Government’s report.

Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention. In its previous comments, the Committee expressed the hope that the future Lebanese Labour Code would prohibit all acts of anti-union discrimination and interference and would contain effective and sufficiently dissuasive sanctions against such acts, as well as rapid remedy procedures. In this regard, the Committee notes with interest that sections 138 and 139 of the draft amendment to the Labour Code protect workers against all acts of anti-union discrimination both in the recruitment process and during employment, and employers’ and workers’ organizations against acts of interference against each other. The Committee requests the Government to indicate what sanctions are provided for in the draft amendment to the Labour Code.

Article 4. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that the draft amendment to the Labour Code reduced the percentage of representation required by a trade union for collective bargaining from 60 to 51 per cent and requested the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that, if no trade union represents the percentage required to be declared as exclusive bargaining agent, collective bargaining rights are granted to the most representative unions of the unit concerned, at least on behalf of their members. In this regard, the Committee notes that the Government indicates that the Convention does not specify any percentage for negotiating and asks whether the legislation must specify a certain percentage, if the right to collective bargaining is granted to the most representative workers’ organizations of the unit in question for the purpose of negotiating on behalf of their members.

Recalling that problems may arise when the law stipulates that a trade union must receive the support of 51 per cent of the members of a bargaining unit to be recognized as a bargaining agent (see General Survey on freedom of association and collective bargaining, 1994, paragraph 241), the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that the draft amendment to the Labour Code guarantees that a trade union which fails to secure an absolute majority is not denied the possibility of negotiating on behalf of its own members.

Article 6. In its previous observation, the Committee requested the Government to amend the legislation so that workers in the public sector governed by Decree No. 5883 of 1994 benefit from the right to collective bargaining and that recourse to compulsory arbitration in the three public sector enterprises covered by Decree No. 2952 of 20 October 1965 is only at the request of both parties. As regards the right of workers in the public sector to benefit from the right to collective bargaining, the Committee notes with interest that section 131 of the draft amendment to the Labour Code states that workers in public administrations, municipalities and public enterprises responsible for administering public services on behalf of the State or on their own account shall have the right to collective bargaining. However, as regards recourse to compulsory arbitration for the three public sector enterprises concerned, the Committee notes that section 224 of the draft amendment to the Labour Code states that, should mediation fail, the dispute will be settled by an arbitration board.

Recalling that outside the public service and essential services in the strict meaning of the term, arbitration imposed by the authorities or at the request of one party is generally contrary to the principle of the voluntary negotiation of collective agreements established in the Convention and thus the autonomy of bargaining partners (see General Survey, 1994, op. cit., paragraph 257), the Committee requests the Government to take all the necessary measures to ensure that section 224 of the draft amendment to the Labour Code is amended in such a way that recourse to compulsory arbitration is only at the request of both parties.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2001, published 90th ILC session (2002)

The Committee notes the Government’s report.

Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention. In its observations concerning the Government’s previous report, while noting that workers and members of trade union committees were protected against dismissal for trade union activities (section 50(d) and (e) of the Labour Code), the Committee had recalled that the protection provided for in Article 1 of the Convention covered not only dismissal, but all other discriminatory measures both at the time of taking up employment and during the course of employment (transfers, demotions and other prejudicial acts). It had also requested the Government to adopt measures providing for effective and sufficiently dissuasive sanctions to protect workers’ organizations against all acts of anti-union discrimination and to protect workers’ and employers’ organizations against acts of interference against each other.

The Committee notes with interest that, according to the Government, under the terms of section 46 of the Budget Act of 2000, the rates of fines for infringements of labour legislation (including the provisions respecting anti-union discrimination) have been multiplied by 25.

The Committee also notes the Government’s indication in its report that the draft amendment to the Labour Code provides adequate protection against acts of interference. The draft also prohibits any discrimination in relation to employment on grounds of trade union membership both at the time of recruitment and during the course of employment.

The Committee requests the Government to provide a copy of the draft amendment to the Labour Code and hopes that the future Code will prohibit all acts of anti-union discrimination and interference and will set out effective and sufficiently dissuasive penalties against such acts, as well as rapid compensation procedures.

Article 4. In its previous observations, the Committee had also requested the Government to ensure that the new legislation lowers the percentage of representation required by a trade union to engage in collective bargaining (60 per cent), as well as the percentage of the members of the general assembly of a union required to approve an agreement so that it can come into effect (two-thirds). The Committee notes that the commission responsible for the amendment of the Labour Code has reduced the percentage of representation from 60 to 51 per cent. The Committee notes that, according to the Government, the level of 51 per cent has never impeded the right of bargaining nor is it opposed in the country, and is justified by the fact that the agreement applies to all the workers in the establishment concerned, whether or not they are unionized. While noting the Government’s indications on the law and practice, the Committee recalls that where, in a system for the designation of an exclusive bargaining agent, no union represents the required percentage to be designated the exclusive bargaining agent, the rights of collective bargaining should be accorded to the most representative trade unions in the unit concerned, at least to bargain on behalf of their own members. In this respect, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to bring its legislation into conformity with the Convention on this point.

With regard to the requirement of the approval of two-thirds of the general assembly for a collective agreement to come into effect, the Government indicates that the commission for the amendment of the Labour Code will examine the question of changing this proportion so that the level of two-thirds is calculated on the basis of the 51 per cent proposed as the quorum required for the general assembly of the union. The Committee requests the Government to keep it informed in this respect and to examine the possibility of this matter being determined by the rules of the bargaining agents.

Article 6. In its previous observations, the Committee had requested the Government to amend the legislation so that workers in the public sector governed by Decree No. 5883 of 1994 benefited from the right to collective bargaining and it had recalled that recourse to compulsory arbitration in three enterprises in the public sector covered by Decree No. 2952 of 20 October 1965 should only be at the request of both parties. The Government indicates in its report that the commission for the amendment of the Labour Code is currently examining the comments of the Committee of Experts.

The Committee once again requests the Government to ensure that the necessary amendments are made to the labour legislation on all the points raised above so as to bring it into conformity with the requirements of the Convention and to keep it informed of any progress achieved in this respect.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1999, published 88th ILC session (2000)

The Committee notes the Government's report.

1. Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention. Protection against acts of anti-union discrimination and acts of interference. While noting in its previous report that workers and members of trade union committees were protected against dismissal for trade union activities (paragraphs (d) and (e) of section 50 of the Labour Code), the Committee had recalled that the protection provided for in Article 1 covered not only dismissal but all other discriminatory measures both at the time of taking up employment and in the course of employment (transfers, demotions or other prejudicial acts). It also requested the Government to adopt measures providing for effective and sufficiently dissuasive sanctions, to protect workers' organizations against all acts of anti-union discrimination and to protect workers' and employers' organizations from acts of interference against each other.

The Committee notes that the Government refers to the wording of the draft amendment to section 12 of the Labour Code, which provides protection against any discriminatory measure taken in the employment of workers "for reasons of trade union membership or not". The Committee notes the Government's statement that a parliamentary committee is examining the amendment to the Labour Code and that this body will take due note of the Committee's comments. The Committee requests the Government to ensure that the protection by its amendments covers all the relevant points in Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention.

2. Article 4. Excessive constraints on the right to collective bargaining. The Committee had considered excessive the requirement that a union cover more than 60 per cent of the workers of the undertaking in order to be able to bargain and that the draft collective agreement be approved by two-thirds of the general assembly of unions party to it (sections 3 and 4 of Decree No. 17386/64).

The Committee notes, from the Government's report, that it intends to lower the percentage of representation required for collective bargaining from 60 to 51 per cent. The Committee also notes that the parliamentary committee will study the possibility of further lowering the percentage. In this connection, the Committee must stress that, when no union holds a majority, the unions should be granted the right to bargain collectively, at least on behalf of their own members. The Committee therefore hopes that the Government will ensure that the new legislation gives full effect to Article 4 by lowering both percentages actually in effect substantially more than contemplated by the draft amendment to the Labour Code.

3. Article 6. Right of collective bargaining in the public sector and in the public service. The Committee notes that, according to the Government, under Decree No. 2952 of 20 October 1965, the use of compulsory arbitration in collective bargaining is restricted to three public sector enterprises (port administration, mixed public/private tobacco enterprise and Radio Orient). The Committee recalls that recourse to compulsory arbitration in these three sectors may only be made on request by both parties.

In addition, the Committee notes that, according to the Government, the workers governed by Decree No. 5883 of 1994 do not enjoy the right to collective bargaining. In view of the fact that these workers are not public servants in the administration of the State, the Committee considers that, according to the Convention, they should enjoy the right of collective bargaining.

4. The Committee again requests the Government to ensure that the amendments needed on all the points mentioned should be made to the labour legislation so as to bring it into conformity with the requirements of the Convention and to keep it informed on all progress achieved in this field. Finally, the Committee notes that the text of Legislative Decree No. 112 of 1959 issuing the public service regulations is not included in the report.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1997, published 86th ILC session (1998)

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its report. The Committee recalls its previous comments on the following points:

-- The absence of specific statutory provisions on protection against all acts of anti-union discrimination and on the protection of workers' and employers' organizations against acts of interference by each other (Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention). While noting in its previous report that workers and members of trade union committees were protected against dismissal for trade union activities (paragraphs (d) and (e) of section 50 of the Labour Code), the Committee had recalled that the protection provided for in Article 1 of the Convention covered not only dismissal but all other discriminatory measures both at the time of taking up employment and in the course of employment (transfers, demotions, disciplinary measures, deprivation of or limitations on wages or social benefits and other prejudicial acts). Furthermore, the Committee had requested the Government to adopt specific measures, coupled with effective and sufficiently dissuasive sanctions, to protect workers' organizations against acts of anti-union discrimination, as well as to protect workers' and employers' organizations against acts of interference by each other.

-- The requirement by virtue of sections 3 and 4 of Decree No. 17386/64 that employees' representatives must have the approval of at least 60 per cent of the Lebanese workers concerned to be able to negotiate and that a collective agreement must be approved by two-thirds of the general assembly of trade unions party to the agreement (Article 4 of the Convention). The Committee had considered that the percentages laid down in sections 3 and 4 of Decree No. 17386/64 were not such as to encourage the full development and utilization of machinery for voluntary collective bargaining, since under such a system, if no union covered more than 60 per cent of the workers, collective bargaining rights would be denied to the workers in the undertaking. It therefore had requested the Government to ensure that the percentages for negotiating and approving collective agreements were lowered to a reasonable level or eliminated altogether, so as to give full effect to Article 4 of the Convention.

-- Denial of the right to collective bargaining of workers in the public sector by virtue of Decree No. 17386/64 and Decree No. 5883 of 1994 (Salaried Workers' General Regulations), in so far as they are not engaged in the administration of the State (Article 6 of the Convention). The Committee had recalled that only public servants engaged in the administration of the State could be excluded from the scope of the Convention. It had therefore asked the Government to encourage and promote machinery for the voluntary negotiation of collective agreements between the State as employer and organizations of public servants other than those engaged in the administration of the State, as a means of settling their terms and conditions of employment. It had also asked the Government to take such steps, with regard to workers in public sector undertakings responsible for the management of public services, whose right to negotiate collectively is currently subject to compulsory arbitration under the terms of Decree No. 17386/64, as well as with regard to "salaried workers" in the public service who are currently covered by the provisions of Decree No. 5883 of 1994 and who do not enjoy the right to bargain collectively.

The Committee notes that in its report the Government mostly confines itself to repeating information it had already provided the previous year on the above points in order to deny the existence of the above violations of the Convention or, alternatively, to justify the existing legislation. The Committee nevertheless notes the Government's statement that in amending labour legislation, it will endeavour to take into consideration the Committee's comments with regard to protection against acts of interference as well as to the need to lower the percentages required in order to negotiate and approve collective agreements.

The Committee would remind the Government that the above discrepancies between national legislation and the Convention, which the Committee has commented on in detail for several years, constitute serious violations of the Convention which was ratified in 1977. The Committee notes the Government's statement that the Labour Code as well as the Law respecting collective labour agreements, mediation and arbitration (Decree No. 17386 of 3 September 1964) are currently in the process of being reviewed. The Committee therefore would once again request the Government to ensure that the necessary amendments are made to the labour legislation in the very near future so as to bring the latter into conformity with the requirements of the Convention. In preparing such amendments, the Committee would encourage the Government to take into consideration the Committee's previous detailed comments on discrepancies between national legislation and the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to keep it informed of any progress made in this regard in its next report, and reminds it that the ILO remains at its disposal for any assistance it may need in framing provisions and amendments to give effect to the Convention.

Finally, the Committee once again requests the Government to provide a copy of Legislative Decree No. 112 of 1959 (public service regulations) along with its next report.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1996, published 85th ILC session (1997)

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its report with regard to its previous comments on the following points:

- the absence of statutory provisions on protection against acts of anti-union discrimination and acts of interference (Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention);

- the requirement that employees' representatives must have the approval of at least 60 per cent of the Lebanese workers concerned to be able to negotiate and that a collective agreement must be approved by two-thirds of the general assembly of trade unions parties to the agreement (Article 4);

- denial of the right to collective bargaining of workers in the public sector except for employees in offices under state supervision or in undertakings responsible for the management of public services in the name of the State or on their own account, in so far as they are not engaged in the administration of the State (Article 6).

1. Protection against acts of anti-union discrimination and acts of interference. While noting in its previous report that workers and members of trade union committees were protected against dismissal for trade union activities (paragraphs (d) and (e) of section 50 of the Labour Code), the Committee had recalled that the protection provided for in Article 1 of the Convention covered not only dismissal but all other discriminatory measures both at the time of taking up employment and in the course of employment (transfers, demotions, disciplinary measures, deprivation of or limitations on wages or social benefits and other prejudicial acts).

The Government indicates in its report that other discriminatory measures such as transfers, disciplinary measures or the deprivation of social benefits are prohibited in Lebanon because they are contrary to the Constitution and national legislation. As a result, the Government does not consider that amending section 50 of the Labour Code would significantly change things, since full effect is already given to Article 1 of the Convention.

Similarly, the Government stresses that the principle of non-interference is also guaranteed in national legislation. The Government nevertheless indicates that it will draw the attention of the committee responsible for updating the Labour Code to the Committee of Experts' previous comments with regard to the lack of specific statutory provisions on protection against acts of anti-union discrimination and interference. The Committee reminds the Government in this respect that since it has ratified the Convention, it should adopt specific measures, coupled with effective and sufficiently dissuasive sanctions, to protect workers' organizations against acts of interference by employers or their organizations designed to dominate or support workers' organizations by financial or other means.

The Committee takes note of the Government's statement and hopes that it will take the necessary steps to ensure that the Committee's previous comments pertaining to the application of Articles 1 and 2 will be taken into account by the committee responsible for updating the Labour Code. The Committee requests the Government to keep it informed of developments in this respect.

2. Unduly high percentages required for employees' representatives to negotiate and for general assemblies of trade unions parties to a collective agreement to approve the agreement. The Committee notes that the Government reiterates its previous statement that these percentages (laid down in sections 3 and 4 of Decree No. 17386/64) are necessary to obtain a majority which is large enough to impose its conditions on a minority that might not agree to the clauses of the collective agreement, so that the democratic system is properly respected. The Government nevertheless indicates that it will transmit the Committee's previous comments on this issue to the committee responsible for updating the Labour Code so that they will be taken into account during the revision of the law respecting collective agreements, mediation and arbitration (Decree No. 17386/64).

Since sections 3 and 4 of Decree No. 17386/64 are not such as to encourage the full development and utilization of machinery for voluntary collective bargaining, the Committee considers that under such a system, if no union covers more than 60 per cent of the workers, collective bargaining rights will be denied to the workers in the undertaking. It therefore trusts that the committee responsible for updating the Labour Code will lower the percentages for bargaining and approving collective agreements to a reasonable level, so as to give full effect to Article 4 of the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to keep it informed of any developments in this regard.

3. Public employees. The Committee notes the Government's statement that workers in public sector undertakings responsible for the management of public services are subject to the law respecting collective agreements, mediation and arbitration (Decree No. 17386/64). The Committee had noted, however, in previous reports, that the right to negotiate collectively of this category of workers was subject to compulsory arbitration.

The Government adds that "salaried workers" in the public service are covered by the provisions of Decree No. 5883 of 1994 and therefore do not fall within the scope of the Labour Code nor within the scope of the Convention.

The Committee reminds the Government, however, that only public servants engaged in the administration of the State may be excluded from the scope of the Convention (see 1994 General Survey on freedom of association and collective bargaining, paragraph 200). It therefore asks the Government to encourage and promote machinery for the voluntary negotiation of collective agreements between the State as employer and organizations of public servants other than those engaged in the administration of the State, as a means of settling their terms and conditions of employment. It would ask the Government to take such steps, with regard to workers in public sector undertakings responsible for the management of public services, within the framework of the revision of the law respecting collective agreements, mediation and arbitration (Decree No. 17386/64).

Finally, the Committee notes the Government's statement that public servants subject to the provisions of Legislative Decree No. 112 of 1959 issuing the public service regulations do not enjoy the guarantees laid down in the Convention, as is stipulated in Article 6. The Committee would ask the Government to provide a copy of Legislative Decree No. 112 of 1959 along with its next report.

4. The Committee also notes the Government's statement that the texts of ratified Conventions were submitted to the competent authorities and were published in a special annex to the Official Journal (No. 10) of 11 March 1993. Moreover, the committee responsible for updating the Labour Code has taken note of the texts of all the international labour Conventions ratified by Lebanon.

5. The Committee takes note of this information. It hopes that the updating of the legislation and the implementation of the provisions of the Convention will enable the latter to be better applied in the near future, in accordance with the above comments. It asks the Government to provide detailed information in its next report on any progress made in this respect and reminds it that the ILO remains at its disposal for any assistance it may need in framing provisions and amendments to give effect to the Convention.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1995, published 83rd ILC session (1996)

The Committee notes that the Government's report has not been received. It hopes that a report will be supplied for examination by the Committee at its next session and that it will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous direct request, which read as follows:

The Committee recalls that its previous comments read as follows:

- the absence of statutory provisions on protection against acts of anti-union discrimination and acts of interference (Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention);

- the requirement that employees' representatives must have the approval of at least 60 per cent of the Lebanese workers concerned to be able to negotiate and that a collective agreement must be approved by two-thirds of the general assembly of trade unions parties to the agreement (Article 4);

- the entry into force of collective agreements after publication in the Official Journal and the Ministry of Labour's authority to request revision of a collective agreement before it is published (Article 4);

- denial of the right to collective bargaining of workers in the public sector except for employees in offices under State supervision or in undertakings responsible for the management of public services in the name of the State or for their own profit, in so far as they are not engaged in the administration of the State (Article 6).

1. Protection against acts of anti-union discrimination and acts of interference. The Committee notes that under section 50 of the Labour Code, as amended by Decree No. 9640 of 6 February 1975, workers and members of trade union committees are protected against dismissal for trade union activities (paragraphs (d) and (e)).

The Committee recalls, however, that the protection provided for in Article 1 of the Convention covers not only dismissal but all other discriminatory measures both at the time of taking up employment and in the course of employment (transfers, demotions, disciplinary measures, deprivation of or limitations on wages or social benefits and other prejudicial acts). It therefore asks the Government to take the necessary steps to give full effect to this Article of the Convention.

It also asks the Government once again to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to guarantee protection against acts of interference, in conformity with Article 2 of the Convention.

2. Unduly high percentages required for employees' representatives to negotiate and for general assemblies of trade unions parties to a collective agreement to approve the agreement. The Committee notes the Government's statement that these percentages (laid down in sections 3 and 4 of Decree No. 17386/64) are necessary to obtain a majority which is large enough to impose its conditions on a minority that might not agree to the clauses of the collective agreement, so that the democratic system is properly respected, and that these provisions have never been a hindrance at any stage of collective bargaining.

Since the provisions in question are not such as to encourage the full development and utilization of machinery for voluntary collective bargaining, the Committee against asks the Government to take the necessary measures, particularly by lowering the percentages for bargaining and approving collective agreements to a reasonable level, to give full effect to Article 4 of the Convention.

3. Entry into force of collective agreements and authority of the Ministry of Labour to request revision of a collective agreement before publication. The Committee takes due note of the Government's explanation that the aim of section of Decree No. 17836/64 is to avoid introducing in collective agreements clauses which are contrary to the public order (hours of work, annual leave, periodic increases, output bonuses, etc.). The Ministry may cancel such clauses so that collective agreements contain no provisions that impair the acquired rights of the parties, and particularly workers' rights. As to the one month waiting period between registration of a collective labour agreement and its entry into force, the Government explains that its purpose is to provide time to correct any errors which might make the agreement unenforceable.

4. Public employees. The Committee notes that the Government indicated in an earlier report that public sector employees in the broad sense of the term do not have the right to organize under Legislative Decree No. 112 of 12 June 1959 issuing the public service regulations and that only persons engaged in offices under state supervision or in undertakings responsible for the management of public services in the name of the State or on their own account enjoy the right to collective bargaining, subject to compulsory arbitration (sections 29 and 47(a) of Decree No. 17386/64). It also notes that the Government adds in a more recent report that all state employees in the public sector, other than those engaged in the public administration, enjoy the guarantees laid down in the Convention, since they are subject to the provisions of the Labour Code. It asks the Government to provide a copy of Legislative Decree No. 112 of 1959 issuing the public service regulations.

Furthermore, the Committee notes that the Government itself acknowledges that staff subject to supervision by the State or staff in establishments providing a public service have the right to negotiate collectively, subject to compulsory arbitration, and reminds the Government that only public servants engaged in the administration of the State may be excluded from the scope of the Convention (see General Survey of 1994 on freedom of association and collective bargaining, paragraph 200). It therefore asks the Government to encourage and promote machinery for the voluntary negotiation of collective agreements between the State as employer and organizations of public servants other than those engaged in the administration of the State, as a means of settling their terms and conditions of employment.

5. The Committee also notes the Government's statement that the texts of ratified Conventions will be submitted to the competent authorities with a view to their publication and that a special committee has been set up to examine the legislative measures needed to apply the Convention.

6. The Committee takes due note of this information. It hopes that the updating of the legislation and the implementation of the provisions of the Convention will enable the latter to be better applied in the near future, in accordance with the above comments. It asks the Government to provide detailed information in its next report on any progress made in this respect and reminds it that the International Labour Office remains at its disposal for any assistance it may need in framing provisions and amendments to give effect to the Convention.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1994, published 81st ILC session (1994)

The Committee notes with interest the Government's detailed report in response to its previous comments on the following points:

- the absence of statutory provisions on protection against acts of anti-union discrimination and acts of interference (Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention);

- the requirement that employees' representatives must have the approval of at least 60 per cent of the Lebanese workers concerned to be able to negotiate and that a collective agreement must be approved by two-thirds of the general assembly of trade unions parties to the agreement (Article 4);

- the entry into force of collective agreements after publication in the Official Journal and the Ministry of Labour's authority to request revision of a collective agreement before it is published (Article 4);

- denial of the right to collective bargaining of workers in the public sector except for employees in offices under State supervision or in undertakings responsible for the management of public services in the name of the State or for their own profit, in so far as they are not engaged in the administration of the State (Article 6).

1. Protection against acts of anti-union discrimination and acts of interference. The Committee notes that under section 50 of the Labour Code, as amended by Decree No. 9640 of 6 February 1975, workers and members of trade union committees are protected against dismissal for trade union activities (paragraphs (d) and (e)).

The Committee recalls, however, that the protection provided for in Article 1 of the Convention covers not only dismissal but all other discriminatory measures both at the time of taking up employment and in the course of employment (transfers, demotions, disciplinary measures, deprivation of or limitations on wages or social benefits and other prejudicial acts). It therefore asks the Government to take the necessary steps to give full effect to this Article of the Convention.

It also asks the Government once again to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to guarantee protection against acts of interference, in conformity with Article 2 of the Convention.

2. Unduly high percentages required for employees' representatives to negotiate and for general assemblies of trade unions parties to a collective agreement to approve the agreement. The Committee notes the Government's statement that these percentages (laid down in sections 3 and 4 of Decree No. 17386/64) are necessary to obtain a majority which is large enough to impose its conditions on a minority that might not agree to the clauses of the collective agreement, so that the democratic system is properly respected, and that these provisions have never been a hindrance at any stage of collective bargaining.

Since the provisions in question are not such as to encourage the full development and utilization of machinery for voluntary collective bargaining, the Committee against asks the Government to take the necessary measures, particularly by lowering the percentages for bargaining and approving collective agreements to a reasonable level, to give full effect to Article 4 of the Convention.

3. Entry into force of collective agreements and authority of the Ministry of Labour to request revision of a collective agreement before publication. The Committee takes due note of the Government's explanation that the aim of section of Decree No. 17836/64 is to avoid introducing in collective agreements clauses which are contrary to the public order (hours of work, annual leave, periodic increases, output bonuses, etc.). The Ministry may cancel such clauses so that collective agreements contain no provisions that impair the acquired rights of the parties, and particularly workers' rights. As to the one month waiting period between registration of a collective labour agreement and its entry into force, the Government explains that its purpose is to provide time to correct any errors which might make the agreement unenforceable.

4. Public employees. The Committee notes that the Government indicated in an earlier report that public sector employees in the broad sense of the term do not have the right to organize under Legislative Decree No. 112 of 12 June 1959 issuing the public service regulations and that only persons engaged in offices under state supervision or in undertakings responsible for the management of public services in the name of the State or on their own account enjoy the right to collective bargaining, subject to compulsory arbitration (sections 29 and 47(a) of Decree No. 17386/64). It also notes that the Government adds in a more recent report that all state employees in the public sector, other than those engaged in the public administration, enjoy the guarantees laid down in the Convention, since they are subject to the provisions of the Labour Code. It asks the Government to provide a copy of Legislative Decree No. 112 of 1959 issuing the public service regulations.

Furthermore, the Committee notes that the Government itself acknowledges that staff subject to supervision by the State or staff in establishments providing a public service have the right to negotiate collectively, subject to compulsory arbitration, and reminds the Government that only public servants engaged in the administration of the State may be excluded from the scope of the Convention (see 1994 General Survey on Freedom of Association and Collective Bargaining, paragraph 200). It therefore asks the Government to encourage and promote machinery for the voluntary negotiation of collective agreements between the State as employer and organizations of public servants other than those engaged in the administration of the State, as a means of settling their terms and conditions of employment.

5. The Committee also notes the Government's statement in its report that the texts of ratified Conventions will be submitted to the competent authorities with a view to their publication and that a special committee has been set up to examine the legislative measures needed to apply the Convention.

6. The Committee takes due note of this information. It hopes that the updating of the legislation and the implementation of the provisions of the Convention will enable the latter to be better applied in the near future, in accordance with the above comments. It asks the Government to provide detailed information in its next report on any progress made in this respect and reminds it that the International Labour Office remains at its disposal for any assistance it may need in framing provisions and amendments to give effect to the Convention.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1993, published 80th ILC session (1993)

The Committee notes with regret that for the second year in succession the Government's report has not been received. It hopes that a report will be supplied for examination by the Committee at its next session and that it will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous direct request, which read as follows:

Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention. The Committee notes that the legislation does not contain any provisions concerning protection against acts of anti-union discrimination and against any acts of interference. It requests the Government to take the measures necessary to guarantee such protection in conformity with Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention.

Article 4. The Committee notes that, to be able to negotiate, the representatives of wage earners must have the membership of at least 60 per cent of the Lebanese workers concerned (Decree 17386/64, section 3) and that a collective agreement must be approved by two-thirds of the general assembly of trade unions parties to the agreement (Decree 17386/64, section 4). The Committee considers that such high percentages restrict the promotion of collective bargaining. It requests the Government to adopt the appropriate measures, particularly by reducing these percentages to a reasonable level to encourage and promote the full development and utilization of machinery for voluntary negotiation of collective agreements in conformity with Article 4 of the Convention.

The Committee would point out that, according to the legislation, a collective labour agreement is only executory after being published in the Official Journal by the Minister of Labour or after the passage of one month from the date of its registration with that Ministry. In addition, it would point out that the Ministry of Labour may request both parties to the collective labour agreement to revise it before the publication. In this case as well the agreement only comes into force after publication or the passage of one month from the date of registration with that Ministry (Decree 17386/64, section 6).

The Committee considers that a possible refusal to register or publish a collective agreement might amount to the requirement of prior authorization for the entry into force of a collective agreement and might thus interfere with the principle of voluntary collective bargaining set out in the Convention.

The Committee requests the Government to indicate what reasons the Ministry of Labour can use to ask both parties to revise a collective agreement before its publication, and to provide information on the frequency of refusals to register and publish.

Article 6. The Committee points out that the guarantees provided for by the Convention extend to persons employed by the State or in the public sector including persons engaged in offices under state supervision or in undertakings responsible for the management of public services in the name of the State or for their own profit, in so far as they are not engaged in the administration of the State. It requests the Government to inform it of the legal provisions in force or envisaged which will allow these persons to enjoy the rights conferred on them by the Convention.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1992, published 79th ILC session (1992)

The Committee notes with regret that the Government's report has not been received. It hopes that a report will be supplied for examination by the Committee at its next session and that it will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous direct requests.

Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention. The Committee notes that the legislation does not contain any provisions concerning protection against acts of anti-union discrimination and against any acts of interference. It requests the Government to take the measures necessary to guarantee such protection in conformity with Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention.

Article 4. The Committee notes that, to be able to negotiate, the representatives of wage earners must have the membership of at least 60 per cent of the Lebanese workers concerned (Decree 17386/64, section 3) and that a collective agreement must be approved by two-thirds of the general assembly of trade unions parties to the agreement (Decree 17386/64, section 4). The Committee considers that such high percentages restrict the promotion of collective bargaining. It requests the Government to adopt the appropriate measures, particularly by reducing these percentages to a reasonable level to encourage and promote the full development and utilisation of machinery for voluntary negotiation of collective agreements in conformity with Article 4 of the Convention.

The Committee would point out that, according to the legislation, a collective labour agreement is only executory after being published in the Official Journal by the Minister of Labour or after the passage of one month from the date of its registration with that Ministry. In addition, it would point out that the Ministry of Labour may request both parties to the collective labour agreement to revise it before the publication. In this case as well the agreement only comes into force after publication or the passage of one month from the date of registration with that Ministry (Decree 17386/64, section 6).

The Committee considers that a possible refusal to register or publish a collective agreement might amount to the requirement of prior authorisation for the entry into force of a collective agreement and might thus interfere with the principle of voluntary collective bargaining set out in the Convention.

The Committee requests the Government to indicate what reasons the Ministry of Labour can use to ask both parties to revise a collective agreement before its publication, and to provide information on the frequency of refusals to register and publish.

Article 6. The Committee points out that the guarantees provided for by the Convention extend to persons employed by the State or in the public sector including persons engaged in offices under state supervision or in undertakings responsible for the management of public services in the name of the State or for their own profit, in so far as they are not engaged in the administration of the State. It requests the Government to inform it of the legal provisions in force or envisaged which will allow these persons to enjoy the rights conferred on them by the Convention.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1991, published 78th ILC session (1991)

The Committee notes that the Government's report has not been received. It hopes that a report will be supplied for examination by the Committee at its next session and that it will contain full information on the points raised in its previous direct request.

Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention. The Committee notes that the legislation does not contain any provisions concerning protection against acts of anti-union discrimination and against any acts of interference. It requests the Government to take the measures necessary to guarantee such protection in conformity with Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention.

Article 4. The Committee notes that, to be able to negotiate, the representatives of wage earners must have the membership of at least 60 per cent of the Lebanese workers concerned (Decree 17386/64, section 3) and that a collective agreement must be approved by two-thirds of the general assembly of trade unions parties to the agreement (Decree 17386/64, section 4). The Committee considers that such high percentages restrict the promotion of collective bargaining. It requests the Government to adopt the appropriate measures, particularly by reducing these percentages to a reasonable level to encourage and promote the full development and utilisation of machinery for voluntary negotiation of collective agreements in conformity with Article 4 of the Convention.

The Committee would point out that, according to the legislation, a collective labour agreement is only executory after being published in the Official Journal by the Minister of Labour or after the passage of one month from the date of its registration with that Ministry. In addition, it would point out that the Ministry of Labour may request both parties to the collective labour agreement to revise it before the publication. In this case as well the agreement only comes into force after publication or the passage of one month from the date of registration with that Ministry (Decree 17386/64, section 6).

The Committee considers that a possible refusal to register or publish a collective agreement might amount to the requirement of prior authorisation for the entry into force of a collective agreement and might thus interfere with the principle of voluntary collective bargaining set out in the Convention.

The Committee requests the Government to indicate what reasons the Ministry of Labour can use to ask both parties to revise a collective agreement before its publication, and to provide information on the frequency of refusals to register and publish.

The Committee notes that collective labour disputes taking place are submitted to an arbitration commission whose decisions are final, executory and without appeal (Decree 17386/64, sections 47 and 60). The Committee considers that the obligatory recourse to arbitration is liable to interfere with the right to collective bargaining of the persons employed in this part of the public sector.

Article 6. The Committee points out that the guarantee provided for by the Convention extend to persons employed by the State or in the public sector including persons engaged in offices under state supervision or in undertakings responsible for the management of public services in the name of the State or for their own profit, in so far as they are not engaged in the administration of the State. It requests the Government to inform it of the legal provisions in force or envisaged which will allow these persons to enjoy the rights conferred on them by the Convention.

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