Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 1989, Publication: 76th ILC session (1989)

A Government representative stated that in his country trade union unity came into existence spontaneously, long before the present legislation came into force. Furthermore, Law No. 74 of 1973 provided specifically that trade unions may be set up freely, without previous authorisation which is otherwise required for setting up associations of other types. No attempt has been made by the workers to establish trade union organisations other than the existing one. This fact, and the nearly universal membership of the workers in the revolutionary trade union movement led to the conclusion that the existing trade union movement in his country corresponded with the wish of the workers and these wishes, in turn, were respected by the Government.

Moreover the Committee of Experts pointed out that, in spite of the absence of legislative restrictions concerning other trade union organisations, the very fact that the revolutionary trade union movement was referred to by name in the Constitution and other legislation, and that the Labour Code granted extensive powers to this organisation, led to the conclusion that, in a strictly legal sense, Article 2 of the Convention was not fully applied.

His Government had expressed in its written reports its willingness to amend the legislation should a new, strong trade union organisation be set up. It was difficult for his Government, however, to propose a major change, when the law completely covers the existing needs and the party concerned, the existing trade union organisation, resists the change. Amendments were made to the Labour Code in relation to the provisions of the law on state enterprises. The amended Labour Code was recently sent to the ILO. In the amended sections of the Code, the reference to the Revolutionary Trade Union Movement by name was consistently replaced by the general reference to the "respective trade union body". Reference to the Revolutionary Trade Union Movement remained unchanged, however, in certain other sections.

The case was not considered settled. The Government called attention to the profound changes that took place or were expected to take place in the Czechoslovak economic system. Those changes would lead to greater independence of enterprises, and it could be expected that changes in the present pattern of industrial relations would follow. Further and possibly more profound amendments to the labour legislation would have to be made and this would be the right occasion to examine once again, with a fresh outlook, the present provisions concerning the special status of the Revolutionary Trade Union Movement. The speaker assured the present Committee that the Government remained committed to the obligations undertaken by the ratification of Convention No. 87.

The Employers' members stated that the opportunity for trade unionism pluralism was a fundamental principle of the Convention. It was not surprising that only one trade union existed given the constitutional provision which expressly stated that the only trade union organisation to be recognised was the Revolutionary Trade Union Movement. The amendments to the Labour Code at best appeared to be an attempt to address the concerns of freedom of association indirectly, rather than directly stating that more than one trade union could exist in the country. Nothing had been said by the Government representative concerning the right to organise for members of collective farms. Since the Government's position, at least as reflected in the Committee of Experts' report, was that there was no obstacle to the right to organise for co-operative farmers, it was requested to communicate the provision which ensured that right. Since Czechoslovakia ratified this Convention some 25 years ago, it was urged and commended to change the legal situation.

The Workers' members stated that the fact that the dialogue continued was a good thing in itself but that the situation was not yet satisfactory. Workers do not love compulsory pluralism, nor obligatory unity. It was, therefore, not very likely that the Czechoslovakian workers would not form organisations of their choice if they had a real possibility to do so. The Workers' members shared the opinion of the Committee of Experts that the possibility of forming organisations of their own choice did not exist for Czechoslovakian workers. What are the legal provisions or regulations providing the right of freedom of association for members of collective farms? It had been stated that new texts were adopted. It was also necessary to hope that the Committee of Experts would be able to examine them and that we would be in a position to note progress, because at present, Czechoslovakia had not fully and correctly applied Convention No. 87.

The Government representative of Czechoslovakia, in -response to observations made by the Employers' members and the Workers' members, stated that trade union monopoly was not imposed. By virtue of an Act adopted in the beginning of the 1950s, the formation of all associations had to be authorised by the Ministry of the Interior, who also had to approve the statutes. By virtue of another Act, however, adopted following the dialogue with the Committee of Experts, the general provisions of the Act on associations did not apply to trade unions. Consequently, trade unions could be created without prior authorisation. At issue before this Committee was the special status of the Revolutionary Trade Union Movement derived from the Labour Code, and to a certain degree, the Constitution. This special status effectively poses a problem, because the creation of other organisations is impeded. The Government is, however, looking for a solution. It is difficult to propose profound changes in the legislation in force because, as the national debates concerning the amendments of the Labour Code can prove, the special status of the Revolutionary Trade Union Movement is not called into question by anyone.

With regard to the freedom of association workers in agriculture, of members of collective farms, it was necessary to explain the difference between collective farms and state farms. The members of collective farms are affiliated to the Union of Collective Farmers, which is not a full fledged trade union because its statute was be approved by the state authority, The Union defends in a satisfactory fashion the interests of its members. This union is not affiliated to the Revolutionary Trade Union Movement. As concerns the members of state farms, their status is identical to that of other workers, and although they are free to create their own organisation, they have not expressed that wish and prefer to join the Revolutionary Trade Union Movement.

The Committee took note of the remarks made in the Committee of Experts' report, as well as the explanations provided by the Government representative. The Committee recalled that the Committee of Experts, and the Conference Committee itself, had examined the question of trade union monopoly, which is in contradiction with the provisions of Convention No. 87, for a number of years. Furthermore, the Committee noted the absence of freedom of association of members of collective farms.

The Committee regretted that no changes had yet been made with a view to implementing Convention No. 87. The Committee considered that it was time for measures to be taken in order to amend the relevant legislation and that the Government should report as soon as possible the progress made in this area.

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

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2019, published 109th ILC session (2021)

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

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2013, published 103rd ILC session (2014)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2011, published 101st ILC session (2012)

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

The Committee notes the comments made by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) dated 24 August 2010, concerning the application of the Convention, and the Government’s reply thereon.

Article 2 of the Convention. In its previous comments, the Committee had noted that Act No. 361/2003 concerning the service relations of members of the security corps stipulates in section 13(1)(h) that only a citizen who is not a member of a trade union may be accepted in the intelligence service. The Committee recalls that it has always taken the view that the armed forces and the police were the only categories of workers which, in accordance with the Convention, may be excluded from the guarantees provided therein, and that civilian employees of the intelligence service did not come within the scope of this exemption. The Committee takes note that the Government indicates in its report that Act 154/1994 Coll. on the Security Information Service, as amended, pursuant to the Security Information Service is an armed intelligence service and its tasks are executed by members of the Security Information Service (sections 1 and 2(1)) and therefore, the Act does not, in this sense, apply to civil employees, if any.

Article 3. The Committee’s previous comments concerned the need to ensure that balloting for industrial action only takes account of the votes cast and that the required quorum and majority are fixed at a reasonable level. The Committee noted that as a result of amendments, section 17 of the Act on Collective Bargaining (Act 2/1991), which deals with the right to strike, established a majority requirement of two-thirds of the votes cast, subject to a quorum requirement of 50 per cent of the employees concerned by the agreement. The Committee notes that the Government indicates in its report that it considers the condition of consent of a least two-thirds of the voters to be reasonable since a strike is a serious and ultimate measure, and adds that it is necessary to prevent a strike to be declared by a small number of workers which would imply that the majority of workers – who would prefer to continue the negotiations – is submitted to the decision of a minority, given the serious economic consequences and impact on workers a strike can have. While taking due note of the point of view expressed by the Government, the Committee recalls that the right to strike is one of the essential means available to workers and their organizations for the promotion and protection of their economic and social interests, and that these interests not only have to do with better working conditions and pursuing collective demands of an occupational nature, but also with seeking solutions to economic and social policy questions and to labour problems of any kind which are of direct concern to the workers. In this sense, the Committee recalls that although the requirement of a strike ballot does not, in principle, raise problems of compatibility with the Convention, the ballot method, the quorum and the majority should not be such that the exercise of the right to strike becomes very difficult, or even impossible in practice. If a member State deems it appropriate to establish in its legislation provisions which require a vote by workers before a strike can be held, it should ensure that the required majority is fixed at a reasonable level (see General Survey of 1994 on freedom of association and collective bargaining, paragraphs 147 and 170). Accordingly, the Committee considers that the requirement of a two-thirds majority, as provided by section 17 of the Act on Collective Bargaining, exceeds such a reasonable level. In these circumstances, the Committee hopes that the Government will take all the necessary measures to amend the legislation taking into account the abovementioned principles, and requests it to provide in its next report information on any measures adopted in this respect.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2009, published 99th ILC session (2010)

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:

1. Article 2 of the Convention. The Committee noted that Act No. 361/2003 concerning the service relations of members of the security corps, which recently entered into force, stipulates in section 13(1)(h) that only a citizen who is not a member of a trade union may be accepted in the intelligence service.

The Committee recalls that it has dealt previously with the problem of trade union rights within the intelligence service and that it has always taken the view that the armed forces and the police are the only categories of workers which, in accordance with the Convention, may be excluded from the guarantees provided therein. The Committee has considered that civilian employees of the intelligence service do not come within the scope of this exemption (see CEACR 1987/59th Session, observation on the United Kingdom).

In the light of the foregoing, the Committee asks the Government to indicate in its next report the measures taken or envisaged in order to ensure that Convention No. 87 is fully applied to civilian employees of the intelligence service.

2. Article 3. The Committee’s previous comments concerned the need to amend section 17 of the Act on Collective Bargaining so as to ensure that balloting for industrial action only takes account of the votes cast and that the required quorum and majority are fixed at a reasonable level.

The Committee noted that as a result of recent amendments, section 17 of the Act on collective bargaining, which deals with the right to strike, establishes a majority requirement of two-thirds of the votes cast, subject to a quorum requirement of 50 per cent of the employees concerned by the agreement.

The Committee recalls that although the requirement of a strike ballot does not, in principle, raise problems of compatibility with the Convention, the ballot method, the quorum and the majority should not be such that the exercise of the right to strike becomes very difficult, or even impossible in practice. If a member State deems it appropriate to establish in its legislation provisions which require a vote by workers before a strike can be held, it should ensure that the required majority is fixed at a reasonable level. The Committee considers that the requirement of a two-thirds majority exceeds such a reasonable level.

The Committee once again requests the Government to indicate in its next report any measures taken or contemplated so as to ensure that the required majority for the staging of strikes is lowered to a reasonable level.

The Committee notes the comments made by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) and by the Czech-Moravian Confederation of Trade Unions (CMKOS).

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2007, published 97th ILC session (2008)

The Committee takes note of the Government’s report.

1. Article 2 of the Convention. The Committee notes from the Government’s report that Act No. 361/2003 concerning the service relations of members of the security corps, which recently entered into force, stipulates in section 13(1)(h) that only a citizen who is not a member of a trade union may be accepted in the intelligence service.

The Committee recalls that it has dealt previously with the problem of trade union rights within the intelligence service and that it has always taken the view that the armed forces and the police are the only categories of workers which, in accordance with the Convention, may be excluded from the guarantees provided therein. The Committee has considered that civilian employees of the intelligence service do not come within the scope of this exemption (see CEACR 1987/59th Session, observation on the United Kingdom).

In the light of the foregoing, the Committee asks the Government to indicate in its next report the measures taken or envisaged in order to ensure that Convention No. 87 is fully applied to civilian employees of the intelligence service.

2. Article 3. The Committee’s previous comments concerned the need to amend section 17 of the Act on Collective Bargaining so as to ensure that balloting for industrial action only takes account of the votes cast and that the required quorum and majority are fixed at a reasonable level.

The Committee notes from the Government’s report that as a result of recent amendments, section 17 of the Act on collective bargaining, which deals with the right to strike, establishes a majority requirement of two-thirds of the votes cast, subject to a quorum requirement of 50 per cent of the employees concerned by the agreement.

The Committee recalls that although the requirement of a strike ballot does not, in principle, raise problems of compatibility with the Convention, the ballot method, the quorum and the majority should not be such that the exercise of the right to strike becomes very difficult, or even impossible in practice. If a member State deems it appropriate to establish in its legislation provisions which require a vote by workers before a strike can be held, it should ensure that the required majority is fixed at a reasonable level. The Committee considers that the requirement of a two-thirds majority exceeds such a reasonable level.

The Committee requests the Government to indicate in its next report any measures taken or contemplated so as to ensure that the required majority for the staging of strikes is lowered to a reasonable level.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2007, published 97th ILC session (2008)

The Committee notes the Government’s report and its reply to the comments made by the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU, now ITUC – the International Trade Union Confederation) in 2006. The Committee also notes the comments of the ITUC dated 28 August 2007, on issues already under examination by the Committee.

The Committee recalls that its previous comments concerned the need to amend section 17 of the Act on collective bargaining so as to ensure that balloting for industrial action only takes account of the votes cast and that the required quorum and majority are fixed at a reasonable level.

The Committee notes with interest from the report of the Government that section 17 of the Act on collective bargaining, which deals with the right to strike, has recently been amended so as to lift the obligation to submit the names of the employees who will participate in the strike and ensure that balloting for industrial action only takes account of the votes cast, subject to a quorum requirement of 50 per cent of employees concerned by the agreement.

The Committee is raising other points in a request addressed directly to the Government.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2006, published 96th ILC session (2007)

The Committee notes the comments of the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) dated 10 August 2006, concerning legislative issues already raised. The ICFTU further objects to the list of essential services in which strikes are prohibited. The Committee requests the Government to communicate its observations on these comments in its next report.

The Committee will examine the other matters it raised in its previous direct request (see 2005 direct request, 76th Session) next year in the context of the regular reporting cycle.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2005, published 95th ILC session (2006)

The Committee notes the information provided in the Government’s report. The Committee further notes the comments of the Czech-Moravian Confederation of Trade Unions (CMKOS) and the Government’s reply thereto. The Committee finally notes the comments of the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU).

1. Article 2 of the Convention. Right of all workers without distinction whatsoever, to establish and join organizations of their own choosing. The Committee recalls that its previous comments concerned the need to amend the Act on Associations so as to ensure that all workers without distinction, whether nationals or foreigners working in the territory, enjoy the right to form and join organizations of their own choosing. The Committee notes that, according to the Government’s report, although a bill to amend the Act on association of citizens (No. 83/1990) is under preparation and should come into effect in 2006, this amendment is not likely to substitute a more general term for the term "citizen" in the text of the law, for the following reasons. First, the Charter on Fundamental Rights and Freedoms (promulgated through Act No. 23/1991) provides in section 42 that "if the existing law uses the term ‘citizen’, this is to mean every person, if it concerns fundamental rights and freedoms, regardless of nationality". Second, section 27 guarantees freedom of association as a fundamental right and section 1 provides that all other acts and legal norms must be in compliance with the Charter. Thus, the Government indicates that the right to organize is guaranteed for everybody regardless of nationality. The Committee takes note of this information.

2. Article 3. Right to strike. The Committee takes note of the comments made by the ICFTU with regard to legislative restrictions on the right to strike which had been previously raised by the Committee in its comments. The Committee recalls that its previous comments concerned the need to amend section 17 of the Act on collective bargaining so as to ensure that balloting for industrial action only takes account of the votes cast and that the required quorum and majority are fixed at a reasonable level. The Committee had noted the Government’s indication that the quorum requirements were under revision so that a union could declare a strike if it had the support of more than half of the voting employees concerned, on the condition that at least half of the concerned employees voted. It had further noted with interest the Government’s indication that the provision on the submission of a list of strikers should be repealed. The Committee notes from the Government’s report that an amendment proposal to Act No. 2/1991 on collective bargaining is under consideration. It contains, among other things, a change in section 17(1) and (2) of the Act concerning the required majority vote for a strike to be declared, as well as a provision abolishing the requirement to submit a list of strikers. The Committee requests the Government to indicate progress made in the adoption of amendments to section 17 of Act No. 2/1991 in its next report.

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

The Committee notes the information provided in the Government’s report. The Committee further notes the comments of the Czech-Moravian Confederation of Trade Unions (CMKOS) and the Government’s reply thereto.

The Committee recalls that its previous comments concerned:

-  the need to amend the Act on Associations so as to ensure that all workers without distinction, whether nationals or foreigners working in the territory, enjoy the right to form and join organizations of their own choosing; and

-  the need to amend section 17 of the Act on Collective Bargaining so as to ensure that balloting for industrial action only takes account of the votes cast and that the required quorum and majority are fixed at a reasonable level.

The Committee notes from the Government’s latest report that the draft Act on association in confederations, societies and other associations has been dropped from inter-departmental discussions and that, at present, the Ministry of Interior is only preparing a bill to amend the Act on association of citizens (No. 83/1990). It further notes the Government’s indication that the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs has taken the Committee’s comments concerning section 17 of the Act on Collective Bargaining into account with a view to preparing a solution. The Committee notes with interest the Government’s indication in this regard that a quorum should be regulated in such a way that a union can declare a strike if it has the support of more than half of the voting employees concerned, on the condition that at least half of the concerned employees vote. It further notes with interest the Government’s indication that the provision on the submission of a list of strikers should be repealed. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the progress made in this regard in its next report.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2003, published 92nd ILC session (2004)

The Committee notes the information provided in the Government’s latest report.

The Committee recalls that its previous comments concerned:

-  the need to amend the Act on Associations so as to ensure that all workers without distinction, whether nationals or foreigners working in the territory, enjoy the right to form and join organizations of their own choosing; and

-  the need to amend section 17 of the Act on Collective Bargaining so as to ensure that balloting for industrial action only takes account of the votes cast and that the required quorum and majority are fixed at a reasonable level.

The Committee notes from the Government’s latest report that a draft statement of intent concerning the new Act on Associations is currently being prepared and that the law is expected to be submitted to Parliament in 2004. The Government adds that work on a draft labour code and related regulations continues, in cooperation with the social partners, and will include consideration of the Committee’s comments in respect of section 17 of the Act on Collective Bargaining.

The Committee requests the Government to transmit a copy of the draft legislation in preparation so that it may examine its conformity with the provisions of the Convention.

[The Government is asked to reply in detail to the present comments in 2004.]

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2002, published 91st ILC session (2003)

The Committee notes the information in the Government’s report. It further notes the observations transmitted by the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) in November 2001 on the application of the Convention and the detailed comments made by the Government on the matters raised.

Article 2 of the Convention. In its previous comments, the Committee urged the Government to take measures to amend the legislation so as to ensure that all workers, without distinction whatsoever, whether nationals or foreigners working in the territory, would have the right to form and join workers’ organizations. The Committee notes from the Government’s latest report that the Ministry of the Interior is planning to rewrite the draft Act on association in 2003 with a view to submitting it to Parliament in 2004. The Committee urges the Government to take the necessary measures in the near future to ensure that all workers, including foreigners, may fully benefit from the organizational rights laid out in the Convention and requests the Government to indicate, in its next report, the progress made in this regard.

Article 3. In its previous comments, the Committee recalled that section 17 of the Act on collective bargaining, 1990, requires the vote of half the workers in the enterprise or, in the case of higher level collective agreements, the vote of half the workers to whom the agreement will apply in order to call a strike. The Committee notes the indication in the Government’s report that work on the draft Labour Code is continuing and that the question of voting to call a strike will be examined during the legislative process in close consultation with the social partners. The Committee trusts that the necessary measures will be taken to ensure that the legislation is amended so as to ensure that balloting for industrial action will only take account of the votes cast and that the required quorum and majority will be fixed at a reasonable level. It once again requests the Government to indicate, in its next report, the progress made in this regard.

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

The Committee notes the information provided in the Government’s reports.

Article 2 of the Convention. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to indicate the progress in adopting a new Act on association, which was expected to come into force in 1999, and would ensure that workers without distinction whatsoever, whether nationals or foreigners residing legally in the country, would have the right to form and join workers’ organizations. The Committee notes the Government’s statement that another draft Act on associations had been prepared by the Ministry of the Interior and approved by the Government in January 2000, ensuring the right of all persons to organize. However, the draft was subsequently rejected by Parliament, and the situation remains unchanged. While noting this information, the Committee draws the Government’s attention to the importance of the right of all workers to be able to establish and join workers’ organizations, and urges the Government to take measures to amend the legislation accordingly, and to keep the Committee informed in this respect.

Article 3. In its previous comments, the Committee had noted that section 17 of the 1990 Act on collective bargaining requires the vote of half the workers in the enterprise to whom the agreement at the enterprise level applies or the vote of half the workers to whom the higher level collective agreement applies in order to call a strike. The Committee had recalled the principle that account should be taken only of the votes cast and that the required quorum and majority should be fixed at a reasonable level. The Committee notes the Government’s statement that a new Labour Code is currently being prepared, which should come into force in 2005. The question of strike ballots will be thoroughly examined during the legislative process and will be the subject of consultations with the relevant social partners and the ILO.

Noting the information of the Government, the Committee requests it to indicate in its next report the progress of the new Labour Code through the legislative and consultative process, and to provide information on how the issue of the majority and quorum for strike ballots is addressed in the new Code. The Committee also recalls the availability of ILO technical assistance in the preparation of the new Labour Code.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2000, published 89th ILC session (2001)

With reference to the comments that it has been making for a number of years, the Committee notes that the Government simply refers to the information provided in its previous reports. In this situation, the Committee cannot but once again ask the Government to take the necessary measures in the near future to give effect to the Convention on the following points.

Article 2 of the Convention.  In its previous comments, the Committee recalled the importance it attaches to the observance of this Article which provides that workers without distinction whatsoever (whether national or foreigners residing legally in the country) have the right to establish and join workers’ organizations and requested the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to ensure that this right is guaranteed by law.

The Committee notes with interest the indication in the Government’s report that, the Constitutional Charter of basic rights and freedoms which ensures this right to all persons and has supremacy over the Association of Citizens Act (83/1990) which refers only to citizens. The Ministry of the Interior has nevertheless prepared a new draft Act on Associations on May 1998 which would expressly cover all persons. It further notes the Government’s statement that this Act should come into force in 1999 and that it will be communicated to the Office as soon as it is approved. It requests the Government to indicate the progress made in this regard in its next report.

Article 3.  In its previous comments, the Committee had noted that section 17 of the 1990 Act on collective bargaining required the vote of half the workers in the enterprise to whom the agreement at the enterprise level applies or the vote of half the workers to whom the higher level collective agreement applies in order to call a strike. It recalled the principle according to which account should be taken only of the votes cast and that the required quorum and majority should be fixed at a reasonable level.

The Committee notes with interest from the Government’s report that it is ready to transpose this view into national legislation when new legislation concerning the right to strike will be under discussion. It further notes the Government’s indication that it has decided to fill the legislative gap in respect of strikes outside the collective bargaining process by preparing a draft law generally regulating strikes and that this draft contains regulations concerning strike ballots in full conformity with the views of the Committee of Experts. At present, however, this work has been suspended as the social partners generally refused the intention to regulate the right to strike.

The Committee requests the Government to indicate in its next report the progress made in limiting the quorum and majority required for a strike ballot to a reasonable level. The Government is further requested to keep the Committee informed of the progress made in respect of the new proposed strike legislation and to provide the Office with a copy of the most recent draft with its next report.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1998, published 87th ILC session (1999)

The Committee notes the information provided in the Government's latest report.

Article 2 of the Convention. In its previous comments, the Committee recalled the importance it attaches to the observance of this Article which provides that workers without distinction whatsoever (whether national or foreigners residing legally in the country) have the right to establish and join workers' organizations and requested the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to ensure that this right is guaranteed by law.

The Committee notes with interest the indication in the Government's report that, the Constitutional Charter of basic rights and freedoms which ensures this right to all persons and has supremacy over the Association of Citizens Act (83/1990) which refers only to citizens. The Ministry of the Interior has nevertheless prepared a new draft Act on Associations on May 1998 which would expressly cover all persons. It further notes the Government's statement that this Act should come into force in 1999 and that it will be communicated to the Office as soon as it is approved. It requests the Government to indicate the progress made in this regard in its next report.

Article 3. In its previous comments, the Committee had noted that section 17 of the 1990 Act on collective bargaining required the vote of half the workers in the enterprise to whom the agreement at the enterprise level applies or the vote of half the workers to whom the higher level collective agreement applies in order to call a strike. It recalled the principle according to which account should be taken only of the votes cast and that the required quorum and majority should be fixed at a reasonable level.

The Committee notes with interest from the Government's report that it is ready to transpose this view into national legislation when new legislation concerning the right to strike will be under discussion. It further notes the Government's indication that it has decided to fill the legislative gap in respect of strikes outside the collective bargaining process by preparing a draft law generally regulating strikes and that this draft contains regulations concerning strike ballots in full conformity with the views of the Committee of Experts. At present, however, this work has been suspended as the social partners generally refused the intention to regulate the right to strike.

The Committee requests the Government to indicate in its next report the progress made in limiting the quorum and majority required for a strike ballot to a reasonable level. The Government is further requested to keep the Committee informed of the progress made in respect of the new proposed strike legislation and to provide the Office with a copy of the most recent draft with its next report.

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

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 notes that in a previous report the Government had stated that freedom of association is essentially governed by Act No. 83 of 1990 on citizens' associations.

In this respect, the Committee emphasizes the importance it attaches to observance of Article 2 of the Convention which provides that workers without distinction whatsoever (whether they are nationals or foreigners residing legally in the country) have the right to establish and join associations.

The Committee requests the Government to indicate in its next report the measures taken or contemplated to ensure that this right is guaranteed by the law.

Furthermore, the Committee notes that in order to call a strike, section 17 of the 1990 Act on collective bargaining requires the vote of half the workers in the enterprise to whom the agreement at the enterprise level applies or the vote of half the workers to whom the higher level collective agreement applies. The Committee is of the view that account should be taken only of the votes cast, and that the required quorum and majority should be fixed at a reasonable level (see 1994 General Survey on freedom of association and collective bargaining, paragraph 170).

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

The Committee notes that in a previous report the Government had stated that freedom of association is essentially governed by Act No. 83 of 1990 on citizens' associations.

In this respect, the Committee emphasizes the importance it attaches to observance of Article 2 of the Convention which provides that workers without distinction whatsoever (whether they are nationals or foreigners residing legally in the country) have the right to establish and join associations.

The Committee requests the Government to indicate in its next report the measures taken or contemplated to ensure that this right is guaranteed by the law.

Furthermore, the Committee notes that in order to call a strike, section 17 of the 1990 Act on collective bargaining requires the vote of half the workers in the enterprise to whom the agreement at the enterprise level applies or the vote of half the workers to whom the higher level collective agreement applies. The Committee is of the view that account should be taken only of the votes cast, and that the required quorum and majority should be fixed at a reasonable level (see 1994 General Survey on freedom of association and collective bargaining, paragraph 170).