ILO-en-strap
NORMLEX
Information System on International Labour Standards

Observación (CEACR) - Adopción: 2008, Publicación: 98ª reunión CIT (2009)

Convenio sobre la libertad sindical y la protección del derecho de sindicación, 1948 (núm. 87) - Malta (Ratificación : 1965)

Otros comentarios sobre C087

Solicitud directa
  1. 2017
  2. 2006
  3. 2004

Visualizar en: Francés - EspañolVisualizar todo

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

In its previous comments, the Committee had requested the Government, pursuant to comments by the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU, now ITUC – International Trade Union Confederation) dated 10 August 2006, alleging death threats against leaders of the General Workers Union (GWU), to conduct an inquiry into these allegations and to provide information on the result. The Committee requests the Government to send its observations in its next report concerning these allegations.

The Committee also once again requests the Government to send its observations on the comments made by the ICFTU in 2006 with regard to suspensions of strikers, freezing of union assets and suits filed against unions following industrial action.

Article 3 of the Convention. In its previous comments, the Committee had requested the Government to clarify whether sections 74 and 75 of the Employment and Industrial Relations Act 2002, continue to impose compulsory arbitration over disputes of interest – just like the repealed Industrial Relations Act, 1976 – or whether the jurisdiction of the industrial tribunal (under section 75(1) of the Act) is now limited to disputes of rights only. The Committee had also requested information on the number of strikes and the incidents of recourse to the Minister’s power to refer disputes to the Industrial Tribunal at the request of only one party. The Committee notes that the Government’s report does not contain any information on these points.

The Committee had noted the Government’s reply to the request previously addressed to it with regard to the resolution of eight strikes held in 2003, to the effect that all of them were resolved through mediation by the authorities and not through recourse to the Industrial Tribunal.

The Committee recalls once again that restrictions on strike action through a compulsory arbitration procedure seriously limit the means available to trade unions to further and defend the interests of their members and are acceptable only in cases of essential services in the strict sense of the term, or public employees exercising authority in the name of the State, and at the request of both parties. The Committee once again asks the Government to clarify whether the Industrial Tribunal’s jurisdiction is limited to questions arising from disputes of right, or whether it is also entitled to hear disputes of interest and issue binding decisions thereon and, if so, to take the necessary measures to amend sections 74 and 75 of the Employment and Industrial Relations Act 2002, so as to ensure that compulsory arbitration may be imposed only in cases of essential services in the strict sense of the term and public employees exercising authority in the name of the State.

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

 

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