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

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

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

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2012, published 102nd ILC session (2013)

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

The Committee recalls that for several years it has been commenting upon several provisions of the Industrial Relations Act (IRA) concerning the issues of trade union registration and the exercise of the right to strike. The Committee notes that, according to the information provided in the Government’s report, while a review of the IRA is high on the list, it will only be undertaken after the revision of the Employment Act, currently under review. The Government indicates that once the committee responsible to review the IRA is set up, the Committee’s observations will be brought to its attention for further action. The Committee therefore once again requests the Government to amend the following sections of the IRA:

–      section 9(1)(b) and (f), which confers to the registrar discretionary power to refuse registration;

–      section 52(1)(a)(iv), which provides that a strike has to be approved by two-thirds of union members present and voting at the meeting called for the purpose of considering the issue;

–      section 52(4), which allows the minister to declare a strike to be unlawful if he is of the opinion that its continuance would endanger, amongst other things, “public order or the national economy”;

–      section 52(1)(b), which provides for a cooling-off period of 60 days before a strike may begin; and

–      section 56(1), which imposes penalties of up to six months of imprisonment for organizing or participating in a strike declared unlawful on the basis of the IRA provisions.

The Committee expresses the hope that the Industrial Relations Act will soon be amended, taking into account previous comments by the Committee and requests the Government to indicate any progress in this respect.

In its previous observation, the Committee had noted the Government’s desire to avail itself of the technical assistance of the Office in this process. The Committee trusts that the necessary technical assistance of the Office, requested by the Government, will be provided in the near future.

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

The Committee recalls that for several years, it has been commenting upon several provisions of the Industrial Relations Act (IRA) concerning the issues of trade union registration and the exercise of the right to strike. The Committee notes that, according to the information provided in the Government’s report, there have been no changes in the legislation and that the IRA has not yet been revised. The Committee therefore once again requests the government to amend the following sections of the IRA:

–      section 9(1)(b) and (f), which confers to the registrar discretionary power to refuse registration;

–      section 52(1)(a)(iv), which provides that a strike has to be approved by two-thirds of union members present and voting at the meeting called for the purpose of considering the issue;

–      section 52(4), which allows the Minister to declare a strike to be unlawful if he is of the opinion that its continuance would endanger, amongst other things, “public order or the national economy”;

–      section 52(1)(b), which provides for a cooling-off period of 60 days before a strike may begin; and

–      section 56(1), which imposes penalties of up to six months of imprisonment for organizing or participating in a strike declared unlawful on the basis of the IRA provisions, some of which, as mentioned above, are not in conformity with the principles of freedom of association.

In its previous observation, the Committee had noted that the Employment Department in the Ministry of Economic Planning and Employment had started to undertake consultations with social partners and other stakeholders on the issues raised by the Committee. The Committee had also noted the Government’s desire to avail itself of the technical assistance of the Office in this process. The Committee expresses the hope that the Industrial Relations Act will soon be amended, taking into account previous comments by the Committee and requests the Government to indicate any progress in this respect. The Committee trusts that the necessary technical assistance of the Office, requested by the Government, will be provided in the near future.

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

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

For many years the Committee’s comments have focused on the following points:

–      section 9(1)(b) and (f) of the 1993 Industrial Relations Act conferring to the registrar discretionary power to refuse registration;

–      section 52(1)(a)(iv) stipulates that a strike has to be approved by two-thirds of union members present and voting at the meeting called for the purpose of considering the issue;

–      section 52(4) allows the Minister to declare a strike to be unlawful if he is of the opinion that its continuance would endanger, amongst other things, “public order or the national economy”;

–      section 52(1)(b) provides for a cooling-off period of 60 days before a strike may begin; and

–      certain prohibitions of, or restrictions on, the right to strike which may or may not be in conformity with the principles of freedom of association, sometimes provide for civil or penal sanctions against strikers and trade unions that have violated these provisions.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the Industrial Relations Act of 1993 was reviewed in 1994 in light of the Committee’s observations and that, as a result, provision 9(1)(b) was repealed. In this respect, the Committee observes that the 1994 amendment of the Industrial Relations Act refers to section 9(1)(e) and not 9(1)(b). Moreover, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that there has been no instance where a trade union has been refused registration under provision 9(1)(b).

The Committee further notes the Government’s indication that section 9(1)(f) and a few other provisions commented upon by the Office fall short of the Convention’s requirements and that, as a result, the Employment Department in the Ministry of Economic Planning and Employment has started to undertake consultations with social partners and other stakeholders on the matter. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that it has already expressed its desire to avail itself of the technical assistance of the Office towards bringing the Industrial Relations Act into conformity with Convention No. 87. The Committee notes the Government’s statement to the effect that draft legislation is being prepared and will be sent to the Office in the not too distant future. The Committee expresses the hope that this draft legislation will take into account previous comments by the Committee and requests the Government to keep it informed of any progress in this respect.

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

The Committee notes the Government’s report. It notes, however, that the report does not respond to the points the Committee has been raising in its comments for many years.

Articles 2 and 3 of the Convention. Right of workers to establish organizations of their own choosing without previous authorization; right of workers’ organizations to formulate their programme of action without interference by the public authorities. The Committee noted previously that the conditions set in section 9(1)(b) of the Industrial Relations Act of 1993 allow the registrar to refuse registration at his discretion. The Committee also noted that under section 9(1)(f) of the Act, the registrar may refuse registration if the trade union’s constitution does not contain adequate provision, or is not organized to provide adequately, for the protection and promotion of the interests of its members in every trade which it purports to represent. The Committee reminds the Government that workers’ organizations have the right to draw up their own administrative rules and regulations and that the public authorities must refrain from intervening in any way which would impair that right. It therefore once again asks the Government to provide information in its forthcoming reports on any instances of the registrar refusing registration on the basis of sections 9(1)(b) or 9(1)(f).

Articles 3 and 10. Right to strike. For many years the Committee’s comments have focused on the following points:

-  section 52(1)(a)(iv) of the 1993 Industrial Relations Act stipulates that a strike has to be approved by two-thirds of union members present and voting at the meeting called for the purpose of considering the issue;

-  section 52(4) allows the Minister to declare a strike to be unlawful if he is of the opinion that its continuance would endanger, amongst other things, "public order or the national economy";

-  section 52(1)(b) provides for a cooling-off period of 60 days before a strike may begin; and

-  certain prohibitions of, or restrictions on, the right to strike which may or may not be in conformity with the principles of freedom of association, sometimes provide for civil or penal sanctions against strikers and trade unions that have violated these provisions.

The Committee notes the Government’s statement that it is strongly committed to bringing its legislation into conformity with the principles of freedom of association. The Committee expresses the firm hope that the necessary steps will be taken in the near future and reminds the Government that it may avail itself of the technical assistance of the Office if it so wishes.

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

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It must therefore repeat its previous observation, which read as follows:

The Committee recalls that its previous comments concerned the following:

Articles 2 and 3 of the Convention. Legislative restrictions on the right of workers to establish organizations of their own choosing without previous authorization, and on the right of workers’ organizations to formulate their programme of action to further and defend the professional interests of their members without interference by the public authorities. The Committee had noted that the conditions set out in section 9(1)(b) of the Industrial Relations Act of 1993, for the compulsory registration of trade unions, confer on the Registrar a discretionary power to refuse registration. The Committee further notes that the Registrar may refuse to register a trade union under section 9(1)(f) of the Act if its constitution does not contain adequate provision, or it is not organized to provide adequately, for  the protection and promotion of the interests of its members in every trade which it purports to represent. The Committee recalls that workers’ organizations have the right to draw up their constitutions and their rules and that public authorities should refrain from any interference which would restrict this right, and thus requests once again the Government to keep it informed in its next reports of any instance where the Registrar has refused registration under sections 9(1)(b) or 9(1)(f).

Articles 3 and 10. The right to strike. The Committee recalls that it has been commenting for several years on the following points:

-  section 52(1)(a)(iv) stipulates that a strike has to be approved by two-thirds of union members present and voting at the meeting called for the purpose of considering the issue;

-  section 52(4) allows the Minister to declare a strike to be unlawful if he is of the opinion that its continuance would endanger, amongst others, "public order or the national economy";

-  section 52(1)(b) provides for a cooling-off period of 60 days before a strike may commence; and

-  certain prohibitions of, or restrictions on, the right to strike, which may or may not be in conformity with the principles of freedom of association, sometimes provide for civil or penal sanctions against strikers and trade unions who have violated these provisions.

The Committee once again requests the Government to keep it informed of the measures taken or envisaged to amend sections 52(1)(a)(iv), 52(1)(b), 52(4) and 56(1)(a) and (b) in order to bring its legislation into conformity with the provisions of the Convention.

The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the very near future.

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

The Committee takes note of the Government’s report. It notes in particular the Government’s indication that steps have already been taken to bring all the comments that were raised in the past before the National Tripartite Employment and Labour Council (NTELC). It further notes that the Government has approached the Office for assistance with regard to a national programme entitled Consolidating Rights at Work and Labour Relations in Seychelles in which revision of labour laws is one of the major programmes to be implemented.

The Committee recalls that its previous comments concerned the following:

Articles 2 and 3 of the Convention. Legislative restrictions on the right of workers to establish organizations of their own choosing without previous authorization, and on the right of workers’ organizations to formulate their programme of action to further and defend the professional interests of their members without interference by the public authorities. The Committee had noted that the conditions set out in section 9(1)(b) of the Industrial Relations Act of 1993, for the compulsory registration of trade unions, confer on the Registrar a discretionary power to refuse registration. The Committee further notes that the Registrar may refuse to register a trade union under section 9(1)(f) of the Act if its constitution does not contain adequate provision, or it is not organized to provide adequately, for  the protection and promotion of the interests of its members in every trade which it purports to represent. The Committee recalls that workers’ organizations have the right to draw up their constitutions and their rules and that public authorities should refrain from any interference which would restrict this right, and thus requests once again the Government to keep it informed in its next reports of any instance where the Registrar has refused registration under sections 9(1)(b) or 9(1)(f).

Articles 3 and 10. The right to strike. The Committee recalls that it has been commenting for several years on the following points:

-  section 52(1)(a)(iv) stipulates that a strike has to be approved by two-thirds of union members present and voting at the meeting called for the purpose of considering the issue;

-  section 52(4) allows the Minister to declare a strike to be unlawful if he is of the opinion that its continuance would endanger, amongst others, "public order or the national economy";

-  section 52(1)(b) provides for a cooling-off period of 60 days before a strike may commence; and

-  certain prohibitions of, or restrictions on, the right to strike, which may or may not be in conformity with the principles of freedom of association, sometimes provide for civil or penal sanctions against strikers and trade unions who have violated these provisions.

The Committee once again requests the Government to keep it informed of the measures taken or envisaged to amend sections 52(1)(a)(iv), 52(1)(b), 52(4) and 56(1)(a) and (b) in order to bring its legislation into conformity with the provisions of the Convention.

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

The Committee takes note of the Government’s report. The Committee recalls that its previous comments concerned the following discrepancies between the national legislation and the guarantees provided for in the Convention.

Articles 2 and 3 of the Convention. Legislative restrictions on the right of workers to establish organizations of their own choosing without previous authorization, and on the right of workers’ organizations to formulate their programme of action to further and defend the professional interests of their members without interference by the public authorities.  The Committee had noted that the conditions set out in section 9(1)(b) of the Industrial Relations Act of 1993, for the compulsory registration of trade unions, confer on the Registrar a discretionary power to refuse registration. In its latest report, the Government indicates that the public authorities are not at all involved in the drafting of the workers’ organization’s constitution and their rules and pointed out that the Registrar may refuse to register a trade union under section 9(1)(f) of the Act if its constitution does not contain adequate provision, or it is not organized to provide adequately, for the protection and promotion of the interests of its members in every trade which it purports to represent. While taking note of this information, the Committee recalls that workers’ organizations have the right to draw up their constitutions and their rules and that public authorities should refrain from any interference which would restrict this right, and thus requests the Government to keep it informed in its next reports of any instance where the Registrar has refused registration under sections 9(1)(b) or 9(1)(f).

With regard to senior public officials, namely those exercising senior managerial or policy-making responsibilities, the Committee had drawn the Government’s attention to the fact that these public servants should be entitled to establish their own organizations. In this respect, the Government indicates that all public servants, other than those specified under section 3(2) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1993, are entitled to establish and join organizations of their own choosing. The Government points out that there is a teachers, medical and other public service employees’ union, of which membership is open to senior public officials if they wish to join the union, and that there are currently senior officials who are members of this union. The Committee takes note of this information with interest.

Articles 3 and 10. The right to strike.  The Committee recalls that it has been commenting for several years on the following points:

-  section 52(1)(a)(iv) stipulates that a strike has to be approved by two-thirds of union members present and voting at the meeting called for the purpose of considering the issue;

-  section 52(4) allows the Minister to declare a strike to be unlawful if he is of the opinion that its continuance would endanger, amongst others, "public order of the national economy";

-  section 52(1)(b) provides for a cooling-off period of 60 days before a strike may commence; and

-  certain prohibitions of, or restrictions on, the right to strike, which may or may not be in conformity with the principles of freedom of association, sometimes provide for civil or penal sanctions against strikers and trade unions who have violated these provisions.

The Committee notes that the Government indicates in its latest report that an Employment Task Force has been created in the Ministry of Social Affairs and Manpower Development to consider the issues related to sections 52(1)(a)(iv), 52(1)(b), 52(4) and 56(1)(a) and (b). The matter will thereafter be placed before the social partners and other relevant stakeholders at the National Employment and Labour Council for further discussion. The Committee takes note of this information and requests once again the Government to keep it informed of the measures taken or envisaged to amend sections 52(1)(a)(iv), 52(1)(b), 52(4) and 56(1)(a) and (b) in order to bring its legislation into conformity with the principles of freedom of association.

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

The Committee takes note of the Government's report. The Committee recalls that its previous comments concerned the following:

Articles 2 and 3 of the Convention. With regard to the Registrar's power to refuse registration under section 9(1)(b) of the Industrial Act of 1993, the Committee took note of the decision of the Appeal Court in March 1995 which confirmed the Registrar's decision to refuse registration of the Seychelles Union of Public Employees on the grounds that article 15 of the Rules of the Union was ambiguous and too wide and would then conflict with the provisions of the 1993 Industrial Act. The Committee notes from the Government's latest report that the proposed Seychelles Union of Public Employees did not pursue registration based on an amended Constitution or otherwise. While taking note of this information, the Committee recalls that workers' organizations have the right to draw up their constitutions and their rules and that public authorities should refrain from any interference which would restrict this right. In addition, in relation to senior public officials, namely those exercising senior managerial or policy-making responsibilities, the Committee draws the Government's attention to the fact that these public servants should be entitled to establish their own organizations (see paragraph 57 of the General Survey on freedom of association and collective bargaining of 1994).

The right to strike. The Committee recalls the following points:

-- section 52(1)(a)(iv) stipulates that a strike has to be approved by two-thirds of union members present and voting at the meeting called for the purpose of considering the issue;

-- section 54(4) allows the minister to declare a strike to be unlawful if he is of the opinion that its continuance would endanger, amongst others, "public order of the national economy";

-- section 52(1)(b) provides for a cooling-off period of 60 days before a strike may commence; and

-- certain prohibitions of, or restrictions on the right to strike which may be in conformity with the principles of freedom of association sometimes provide for civil or penal sanctions against strikers and trade unions which violate these provisions.

The Committee notes the Government's information in its latest report according to which sections 52(1)(a)(iv), (1)(b) and (4) and 56(1)(a) and (b) have been submitted to the Attorney General for possible amendments. Nevertheless, the Committee, with regard to section 52(1)(a)(iv), recalls that a simple majority of workers having taken part in the voting in a bargaining unit should suffice to call a strike. With respect to section 52(4), the Committee reiterates its previous comments to the effect that the restrictions on the right to strike should be limited to situations of acute national crisis. Concerning section 52(1)(b), the Committee considers the cooling-off period of 60 days before a strike may commence to be too long, especially since persons involved in an unlawful strike are liable to imprisonment for six months under section 56(1)(a) and (b). Finally, the Committee reiterates the fact that, while certain prohibitions or restrictions on the right to strike may provide for civil or penal sanctions against strikers and trade unions which violate these provisions, such sanctions should not be disproportionate to the seriousness of the violations (see General Survey op. cit., paragraph 178).

The Committee requests the Government to keep it informed of the measures taken or envisaged to amend sections 52(1)(a)(iv), (1)(b) and (4) and 56(1)(a) and (b) in order to bring its legislation into greater conformity with the principles of freedom of association.

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

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 takes note of the Government's report and draws the Government's attention to the following points:

Article 2 of the Convention

Concerning the Registrar's power to refuse registration under section 9(1)(b) of the Industrial Act of 1993, the Committee takes note of the decision of the Appeal Court which confirmed the Registrar's decision to refuse registration of a trade union on the grounds that article 15 of the Rules of the Union was ambiguous and too wide and would then conflict with the provisions of the 1993 Industrial Act. In this respect, the Committee requests the Government to inform it if the Union in question has since modified its statutes and if so, if it has been duly registered.

Articles 3 and 10 of the Convention

The right to strike

The Committee recalls its previous comments which dealt with the following points:

-- section 52(1)(a)(iv) stipulates that a strike has to be approved by two-thirds of union members present and voting at the meeting called for the purpose of considering the issue;

-- section 52(4) allows the minister to declare a strike to be unlawful if he is of the opinion that its continuance would endanger, amongst others, "public order or the national economy";

-- section 52(1)(b) provides for a cooling-off period of 60 days before a strike may commence;

-- certain prohibitions of, or restrictions on the right to strike which may be in conformity with the principle of freedom of association sometimes provide for civil or penal sanctions against strikers and trade unions which violate these provisions.

While noting the Government's reply on these comments, the Committee, with regard to section 52(1)(a)(iv), reiterates the point that a simple majority of workers having taken part in the voting in a bargaining unit should suffice to call a strike and urges the Government to amend its legislation accordingly. With respect to section 52(4), the Committee also reiterates its previous comments to the effect that the restrictions on the right to strike should be limited to situations of acute national crisis. Concerning section 52(1)(b), the Committee once again considers the cooling-off period of 60 days before a strike may commence to be too long, especially since persons involved in an unlawful strike are liable to imprisonment for six months under section 56(1)(a) and (b). Finally, the Committee reiterates the fact that, while certain prohibitions or restrictions on the right to strike may provide for civil or penal sanctions against strikers and trade unions which violate these provisions, such sanctions should not be disproportionate to the seriousness of the violations (see 1994 General Survey on freedom of association and collective bargaining, paragraph 178).

The Committee once again requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to amend sections 52(1)(a)(iv), (1)(b) and (4) and 56(1)(a) and (b) in order to bring its legislation into greater conformity with the principles of freedom of association.

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

The Committee notes that the Government's report has not been received. It must therefore repeat its previous observation which dealt with the following:

The Committee once again requests the Government to provide in its next report comments on the observations made by the Seychelles Workers' Union (SWU) on the application of the Convention.

The Committee is also addressing a direct request to the Government on a number of issues relating to the Industrial Relations Act of 1993.

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

The Committee takes note of the Government's report and draws the Government's attention to the following points:

Article 2 of the Convention

Concerning the Registrar's power to refuse registration under section 9(1)(b) of the Industrial Act of 1993, the Committee takes note of the decision of the Appeal Court which confirmed the Registrar's decision to refuse registration of a trade union on the grounds that article 15 of the Rules of the Union was ambiguous and too wide and would then conflict with the provisions of the 1993 Industrial Act. In this respect, the Committee requests the Government to inform it if the Union in question has since modified its statutes and if so, if it has been duly registered.

Articles 3 and 10 of the Convention

The right to strike

The Committee recalls its previous comments which dealt with the following points:

-- section 52(1)(a)(iv) stipulates that a strike has to be approved by two-thirds of union members present and voting at the meeting called for the purpose of considering the issue;

-- section 52(4) allows the minister to declare a strike to be unlawful if he is of the opinion that its continuance would endanger, amongst others, "public order or the national economy";

-- section 52(1)(b) provides for a cooling-off period of 60 days before a strike may commence;

-- certain prohibitions of, or restrictions on the right to strike which may be in conformity with the principle of freedom of association sometimes provide for civil or penal sanctions against strikers and trade unions which violate these provisions.

While noting the Government's reply on these comments, the Committee, with regard to section 52(1)(a)(iv), reiterates the point that a simple majority of workers having taken part in the voting in a bargaining unit should suffice to call a strike and urges the Government to amend its legislation accordingly. With respect to section 52(4), the Committee also reiterates its previous comments to the effect that the restrictions on the right to strike should be limited to situations of acute national crisis. Concerning section 52(1)(b), the Committee once again considers the cooling-off period of 60 days before a strike may commence to be too long, especially since persons involved in an unlawful strike are liable to imprisonment for six months under section 56(1)(a) and (b). Finally, the Committee reiterates the fact that, while certain prohibitions or restrictions on the right to strike may provide for civil or penal sanctions against strikers and trade unions which violate these provisions, such sanctions should not be disproportionate to the seriousness of the violations (see 1994 General Survey on Freedom of Association and Collective Bargaining, paragraph 178).

The Committee once again requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to amend sections 52(1)(a)(iv), (1)(b) and (4) and 56(1)(a) and (b) in order to bring its legislation into greater conformity with the principles of freedom of association.

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

The Committee takes note of the Government's report.

Further to its previous comments, the Committee notes with satisfaction that section 9(1)(e) of the Industrial Relations Act of 1993 which provided that "the Registrar shall not register a trade union if its membership is open to persons who are not engaged in the same trade, or in similar or connected trades or in the same undertaking" has been repealed by Act No. 17 of 1994 and that the new Act ensures the possibility of trade union pluralism.

The Committee requests the Government to provide in its next report comments on the observations made by the Seychelles Workers' Union (SWU) on the application of the Convention.

The Committee is also addressing a direct request to the Government on a number of issues relating to the Industrial Relations Act of 1993.

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

Noting that the Government's report contains no information regarding its previous comments, the Committee must once again draw the Government's attention to the following points:

Article 2 of the Convention. 1. The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether the persons mentioned in sections 3(2)(b) and (c) and 3(3)(c) of the Industrial Relations Act of 1993, who are currently excluded from its scope, may freely establish and join organizations under other provisions and, if so, to provide a copy of the relevant legislation.

2. The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether the Minister of Labour and Social Affairs has adopted the notification set out in section 7(1)(b) and, if so, to send it the text. In addition, the Committee requests the Government to inform it of any instance where the Registrar has refused registration under section 9(1)(b).

Article 3. 3. The Committee notes that subsection 20(7) prescribes a maximum period of two years to hold office as an office-bearer of a union. Recalling that organizations should have the right to elect their representatives in full freedom (see 1994 General Survey on freedom of association and collective bargaining, paragraph 121), the Committee requests the Government to clarify whether office bearers are eligible for re-election.

4. In addition, the Committee requests the Government to indicate if it has had recourse to the provisions relating to management of trade union funds (sections 27 and 34(1)(2) and, if so, to provide information in this respect.

The right to strike. 5. The Committee notes that section 52(1)(a)(iv) stipulates that a strike has to be approved by two-thirds of union members present and voting at the meeting called for the purpose of considering the issue. The Committee states that a simple majority of workers having taken part in the voting in a bargaining unit should suffice to call a strike. It also notes that section 52(4) allows the minister to declare a strike to be unlawful if he is of the opinion that its continuance would endanger, amongst others, "public order or the national economy". The Committee considers that the restrictions on the right to strike should be limited to situations of acute national crisis. Finally, the cooling-off period of 60 days before a strike may commence (section 52(1)(b)) is too long, especially since persons involved in an unlawful strike are liable to imprisonment for six months under section 56(1)(a) and (b). The Committee also notes that certain prohibitions of, or restrictions on, the right to strike which may be considered to be in conformity with the principle of freedom of association sometimes provide for civil or penal sanctions against strikers and trade unions which violate these provisions. In the view of the Committee, such sanctions should not be disproportionate to the seriousness of the violations (see 1994 General Survey, op. cit. paragraph 178).

The Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to amend sections 52(1)(a)(iv), 1(b) and (4) and 56 (1)(a) and (b) in order to bring its legislation into greater conformity with the principles of freedom of association.

Article 5. 6. Article 9(1)(e) stipulates that the Registrar shall not register a trade union "if its membership is open to persons who are not engaged in the same trade, or in similar or connected trades or in the same undertaking". The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether first-level organizations of workers are free to establish inter-professional organizations and to join federations and confederations freely.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1995, published 82nd ILC session (1995)

The Committee notes the Government's report as well as the entry into force on 1 January 1994 of the Industrial Relations Act of 1993. It draws the Government's attention to the following points.

1. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on what measures have been taken to allow the persons mentioned in section 3(2)(b) and (c) and 3(3)(c) of the Act and who are currently excluded from its scope, to establish and join organizations in order to promote their occupational interests, in conformity with Article 2 of the Convention. The Committee further requests the Government to provide copies, if any, of the relevant legislation.

2. The Committee would request the Government to indicate whether the Minister has had recourse to the notification provision (section 7(1)(b)) in the case of an application for registration of a trade union and, if so, to indicate the minimum number of members required by the Minister in order to submit such an application.

3. The Committee notes that the conditions set out in section 9(1)(b), for the compulsory registration of trade unions confer on the Registrar a discretionary power to refuse registration. While noting that the union has a right of appeal to the Supreme Court (section 8(7)), the Committee would recall that the existence of the right to appeal to a court is not in itself an adequate safeguard; the competent judges should be able, on the basis of the record, to review the grounds for refusal given by the administrative authorities, which grounds should not be contrary to the principles of freedom of association (see 1994 General Survey on Freedom of Association and Collective Bargaining, paragraph 77). The Committee requests the Government to inform it of any instance where the Registrar has refused registration under section 9(1)(b)).

4. The Committee notes that subsection 20(7) prescribes a maximum period of two years to hold office as an office-bearer of a union. However, organizations should have the right to elect their representatives in full freedom (see 1994 General Survey, op. cit., paragraph 121). The Committee would therefore request the Government to clarify whether office-bearers are eligible for re-election, in conformity with Article 3 of the Convention.

5. Furthermore, the Committee would draw the Government's attention to the incompatibilities between the following provisions and the right of workers' organizations to organize their administration and activities without interference from the public authorities:

(a) section 27 which regulates in detail the conditions in which a first-level trade union may contribute to the political fund of a federation is incompatible with the principle that the greatest possible autonomy should be left to organizations in the administration of their political funds;

(b) section 34(1) and (2) allow the Registrar, at his discretion, to require a trade union to furnish detailed accounts of the funds or other assets of the trade union or its branches within a period of notification of 21 days. However, supervision by the Registrar should be limited to the obligation of submitting periodic financial reports or if there are serious grounds for believing that the actions of an organization are contrary to its rules or the law (see 1994 General Survey, op. cit., paragraph 125).

The Committee accordingly requests the Government to ensure that sections 27, 34(1) and (2) are amended to bring them into line with Article 3.

6. (a) The Committee notes that section 52(1)(a)(iv) stipulates that a strike has to be approved by the votes of two-thirds of union members present and voting at the meeting called for the purpose of considering the issue. The Committee would recall that the majority of two-thirds required for a strike ballot is too high and should be fixed at a reasonable level (see 1994 General Survey, op. cit., paragraph 170).

(b) In addition, section 52(4), which allows the Minister to declare a strike to be unlawful if he is of the opinion that its continuance would endanger, amongst others, "public order or the national economy", is too broadly worded. Inasmuch as general prohibitions of this kind are a major restriction of one of the essential means available to workers and to their organizations for furthering and defending their interests, such measures cannot be justified except in a situation of acute national crisis and then, only for a limited period and to the extent necessary to meet the requirements of the situation. This means genuine crisis situations, such as those arising as a result of a serious conflict, insurrection or natural disaster in which the normal conditions for the functioning of society are absent (see 1994 General Survey, op. cit., paragraph 152).

(c) Finally, the cooling-off period of 60 days before a strike may commence (section 52(1)(b)) is too long especially since persons involved in an unlawful strike are liable to imprisonment for six months under section 56(1)(a) and (b).

The Committee notes that certain prohibitions of, or restrictions on, the right to strike which are in conformity with the principles of freedom of association sometimes provide for civil or penal sanctions against strikers and trade unions which violate these provisions. In the view of the Committee, such sanctions should not be disproportionate to the seriousness of the violations (see 1994 General Survey, op. cit., paragraph 178).

The Committee would therefore request the Government to ensure that sections 52(1)(a)(iv), (1)(b) and (4), and 56(1)(a) and (b) are amended in line with the principles enunciated above.

7. Section 9(1)(e) stipulates that the Registrar shall not register a trade union "if its membership is open to persons who are not engaged in the same trade, or in similar or connected trades or in the same undertaking". The Committee draws the Government's attention to the principle that such restrictions may be applied to first-level organizations only if they are free to establish inter-professional organizations, and to join federations and confederations in the form and manner deemed most appropriate by the workers concerned (see 1994 General Survey, op. cit., paragraph 84). The Committee accordingly requests the Government to confirm that the workers' organizations may enjoy that possibility, in line with Article 6.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1995, published 82nd ILC session (1995)

Referring to its previous longstanding comments concerning the legislative imposition of a trade union monopoly, the Committee notes with interest the entry into force on 1 January 1994 of the Industrial Relations Act of 1993 which according to the Government in its report allows for the formation of multitrade unions. It notes in particular that since the enactment of the said Act, six trade unions have been registered and that the National Workers' Union (NWU) is entitled to register under the Act (section 6(1) and (5)).

The Committee would ask the Government to indicate whether the NWU has been registered and to supply a copy of the Rules of the said union currently in force.

In addition, the Committee is addressing a direct request to the Government on a number of issues relating to the new Act.

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

The Committee notes that for the fourth year in succession the Government's report has not been received. It must therefore repeat its previous observation, which read as follows:

The Committee takes note of the statutes of the National Workers' Union. It observes that no new information in addition to the general statements that were made in the first report (1979) submitted since the accession of the country to independence has been supplied on the application of the Convention. The Committee considers that it would be useful to recall the obligation on all States Members under article 22 of the Constitution of the ILO to transmit detailed reports on the effect given to ratified Conventions and to use as a basis the report forms adopted for the purpose by the Governing Body. With reference to its previous comments, the Committee would point out that, after the voluntary dissolution of all trade unions, the "National Workers' Union", representing all categories of workers, was set up in 1979. Under the constitution of the "Seychelles People's Progressive Front", promulgated as a schedule to the national Constitution in 1979, the Union functions under the direction of the Front (section 4); for example, the consent of the Front is necessary for every decision, it must also approve the expenditure of the Union, and it receives 25 per cent of the total amount of union dues (section l2 of the constitution of the Front). The Committee has noted that the law in force provides for the existence of only one trade union organization, mentioned by name and placed under the direction of a political party, as is confirmed by the comments of the National Workers' Union, and thus establishes a system of trade union monopoly, which is contrary to the Convention. The Committee recalls that it has already pointed out in the General Survey on Freedom of Association and Collective Bargaining, which it submitted to the 69th (1983) Session of the International Labour Conference, particularly in paragraphs l32 to l38, that trade union unity imposed directly or indirectly by law is in conflict with express standards of the Convention (Article 2) and that trade unions should have the right to organize their activities and to formulate their programmes in full freedom, and also to draw up their constitutions and elect their representatives in full freedom. The Committee feels bound to emphasize, in reply to the statement of the Government that the socialist development of the country will be carried out in accordance with the doctrine of the party, which advocates the support of a single national trade union organization, that, even in a situation where, at some point in the history of a nation, all workers have preferred to unify the trade union movement, they should, however, be able to safeguard their freedom to set up, should they so wish in the future, unions outside the established trade union structure. Lastly, the Committee considers it useful to recall that the resolution on the Independence of the Trade Union Movement (adopted by the International Labour Conference at its 35th Session, 1952) stresses, in particular, that governments should not seek to transform the trade union movement into a political instrument which they could use to achieve their political aims.

The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the very near future.

[The Government is asked to supply full particulars to the Conference at its 80th Session.]

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

The Committee notes once again with regret that the Government's report has not been received. It must therefore repeat its previous observations that have already been formulated many times in the following terms:

The Committee takes note of the statutes of the National Workers' Union. It observes that no new information in addition to the general statements that were made in the first report (1979) submitted since the accession of the country to independence has been supplied on the application of the Convention. The Committee considers that it would be useful to recall the obligation on all States Members under article 22 of the Constitution of the ILO to transmit detailed reports on the effect given to ratified Conventions and to use as a basis the report forms adopted for the purpose by the Governing Body. With reference to its previous comments, the Committee would point out that, after the voluntary dissolution of all trade unions, the "National Workers' Union", representing all categories of workers, was set up in 1979. Under the constitution of the "Seychelles People's Progressive Front", promulgated as a schedule to the national Constitution in 1979, the Union functions under the direction of the Front (section 4); for example, the consent of the Front is necessary for every decision, it must also approve the expenditure of the Union, and it receives 25 per cent of the total amount of union dues (section l2 of the constitution of the Front). The Committee has noted that the law in force provides for the existence of only one trade union organisation, mentioned by name and placed under the direction of a political party, as is confirmed by the comments of the National Workers' Union, and thus establishes a system of trade union monopoly, which is contrary to the Convention. The Committee recalls that it has already pointed out in the General Survey on Freedom of Association and Collective Bargaining, which it submitted to the 69th (1983) Session of the International Labour Conference, particularly in paragraphs l32 to l38, that trade union unity imposed directly or indirectly by law is in conflict with express standards of the Convention (Article 2) and that trade unions should have the right to organise their activities and to formulate their programmes in full freedom, and also to draw up their constitutions and elect their representatives in full freedom. The Committee feels bound to emphasise, in reply to the statement of the Government that the socialist development of the country will be carried out in accordance with the doctrine of the party, which advocates the support of a single national trade union organisation, that, even in a situation where, at some point in the history of a nation, all workers have preferred to unify the trade union movement, they should, however, be able to safeguard their freedom to set up, should they so wish in the future, unions outside the established trade union structure. Lastly, the Committee considers it useful to recall that the resolution on the Independence of the Trade Union Movement (adopted by the International Labour Conference at its 35th Session, 1952) stresses, in particular, that governments should not seek to transform the trade union movement into a political instrument which they could use to achieve their political aims.

The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the very near future.

[The Government is asked to supply full particulars to the Conference at its 79th Session.]

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

The Committee notes with regret that the Government's report has not been received. It must therefore repeat its previous observation which read as follows:

The Committee notes with regret that the Government merely indicates that, for the period covered by the report, there has been no change in the situation with respect to subjects covered by the Convention. The Committee must therefore repeat its previous observations which read as follows: The Committee takes note of the statutes of the National Workers' Union. It observes no new information in addition to the general statements that were made in the first report (1979) submitted since the accession of the country to independence has been supplied on the application of the Convention The Committee considers that it would be useful to recall the obligation on all States Members under article 22 of the Constitution of the ILO to transmit detailed reports on the effect given to ratified Conventions and to use as a basis the report forms adopted for the purpose by the Governing Body With reference to its previous comments, the Committee would point out that, after the voluntary dissolution of all trade unions, the "National Workers' Union", representing all categories of workers, was set up in 1979. Under the constitution of the "Seychelles People's Progressive Front", promulgated as a schedule to the national Constitution in 1979, the Union functions under the direction of the Front (section 4); for example, the consent of the Front is necessary for every decision, it must also approve the expenditure of the Union, and it receives 25 per cent of the total amount of union dues (section l2 of the constitution of the Front). The Committee has noted that the law in force provides for the existence of only one trade union organisation, mentioned by name and placed under the direction of a political party, as is confirmed by the comments of the National Workers' Union, and thus establishes a system of trade union monopoly, which is contrary to the Convention The Committee recalls that it has already pointed out in the General Survey on Freedom of Association and Collective Bargaining, which it submitted to the 69th (1983) Session of the International Labour Conference, particularly in paragraphs l32 to l38, that trade union unity imposed directly or indirectly by law is in conflict with express standards of the Convention (Article 2) and that trade unions should have the right to organise their activities and to formulate their programmes in full freedom, and also to draw up their constitutions and elect their representatives in full freedom. The Committee feels bound to emphasise, in reply to the statement of the Government that the socialist development of the country will be carried out in accordance with the doctrine of the party, which advocates the support of a single national trade union organisation, that, even in a situation where, at some point in the history of a nation, all workers have preferred to unify the trade union movement, they should, however, be able to safeguard their freedom to set up, should they so wish in the future, unions outside the established trade union structure Lastly, the Committee considers it useful to recall that the resolution on the Independence of the Trade Union Movement (adopted by the International Labour Conference at its 35th Session, 1952) stresses, in particular, that governments should not seek to transform the trade union movement into a political instrument which they could use to achieve their political aims.

TEXT

The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the very near future.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1990, published 77th ILC session (1990)

The Committee notes with regret that the Government merely indicates that, for the period covered by the report, there has been no change in the situation with respect to subjects covered by the Convention. The Committee must therefore repeat its previous observation which read as follows:

The Committee takes note of the statutes of the National Workers' Union. It observes no new information in addition to the general statements that were made in the first report (1979) submitted since the accession of the country to independence has been supplied on the application of the Convention. The Committee considers that it would be useful to recall the obligation on all States Members under article 22 of the Constitution of the ILO to transmit detailed reports on the effect given to ratified Conventions and to use as a basis the report forms adopted for the purpose by the Governing Body. With reference to its previous comments, the Committee would point out that, after the voluntary dissolution of all trade unions, the "National Workers' Union", representing all categories of workers, was set up in 1979. Under the constitution of the "Seychelles People's Progressive Front", promulgated as a schedule to the national Constitution in 1979, the Union functions under the direction of the Front (section 4); for example, the consent of the Front is necessary for every decision, it must also approve the expenditure of the Union, and it receives 25 per cent of the total amount of union dues (section l2 of the constitution of the Front). The Committee has noted that the law in force provides for the existence of only one trade union organisation, mentioned by name and placed under the direction of a political party, as is confirmed by the comments of the National Workers' Union, and thus establishes a system of trade union monopoly, which is contrary to the Convention. The Committee recalls that it has already pointed out in the General Survey on Freedom of Association and Collective Bargaining, which it submitted to the 69th (l983) Session of the International Labour Conference, particularly in paragraphs l32 to l38, that trade union unity imposed directly or indirectly by law is in conflict with express standards of the Convention (Article 2) and that trade unions should have the right to organise their activities and to formulate their programmes in full freedom, and also to draw up their constitutions and elect their representatives in full freedom. The Committee feels bound to emphasise, in reply to the statement of the Government that the socialist development of the country will be carried out in accordance with the doctrine of the party, which advocates the support of a single national trade union organisation, that, even in a situation where, at some point in the history of a nation, all workers have preferred to unify the trade union movement, they should, however, be able to safeguard their freedom to set up, should they so wish in the future, unions outside the established trade union structure. Lastly, the Committee considers it useful to recall that the resolution on the Independence of the Trade Union Movement (adopted by the International Labour Conference at its 35th Session, 1952) stresses, in particular, that governments should not seek to transform the trade union movement into a political instrument which they could use to achieve their political aims. The Committee requests once again the Government to take appropriate measures to ensure that the legislation guarantees the above-mentioned rights.

REQUESTS

The Government is asked to supply full particulars to the Conference at its 77th Session. #CONFERENCE_SESSION:77