Informe en el que el Comité pide que se le mantenga informado de la evolución de la situación - Informe núm. 371, Marzo 2014

1. 814. The complaint is contained in a communication dated 28 September 2012 from the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC).
2. 815. The Government forwarded its observations in a communication dated 11 September 2013. Qatar has not ratified the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), or the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).

A. The complainant’s allegations

1. 816. In its communication dated 28 September 2012, the ITUC alleges that today, migrant workers comprise roughly 94 per cent of Qatar’s workforce, or about 1.2 million workers. That figure continues to rise as workers are recruited in vast numbers, largely from South Asia, to build infrastructure and stadia for the 2022 World Cup. Like many other migrant workers in the Gulf region, they face severe discriminatory policies and practices that violate their fundamental human and labour rights, including freedom of association. Even Qatari nationals have only limited rights in this regard.
2. 817. The ITUC indicates that, together with the Building and Wood Workers’ International Union (BWI), it has endeavoured to work with the Government of Qatar to improve this situation. In addition to several meetings with the Embassy of Qatar in Geneva, an ITUC delegation met with the Labour Minister in June 2012 to express its many concerns with regard to freedom of association and forced labour/trafficking. The ITUC indicates that while it has been informed that legal reforms that would address the concerns were forthcoming, from the Government’s description of the reforms (and characterizations of them in the press), it was clear that they would not come close to affording full freedom of association to workers (whether citizens or migrants). The complainant further states that while the Government has offered to provide a draft of the proposed reforms to the ITUC for a review and comments, despite several requests, no copy of the proposed reforms was ever provided. The complainant indicates that it had since read in the press that some changes to the Labour Law have been adopted by the Cabinet, however, it has no information as to what these changes are and whether any reform was enacted.
3. 818. According to the ITUC, the lack of freedom of association in Qatar is ultimately responsible for the deaths of numerous migrant workers, who face punishing working conditions, including long hours of intensely physical work in extreme heat, construction work without proper safety equipment or safe and appropriate building methods, and squalid living conditions in which workers are packed into sweltering barracks with little if any ventilation. Some employers also cheat workers of their promised wages by paying a much lower wage, by making numerous illegal deductions, or by simply not paying at all. As a result of the lack of a collective voice, which could empower workers to remove themselves from dangerous situations and to bargain with their employer over working conditions, migrant workers face injuries or death.
4. 819. The complainant considers that the Labour Law of Qatar of 2004 violates the principles of freedom of association and refers, in particular, to the following issues. Numerous categories of workers are precluded from forming or joining a union due to their exclusion from the scope of application of the Labour Law. First, the Law stipulates that none of its provisions apply to workers in the following categories (section 3):
   • (a) government/public workers;
   • (b) armed forces, police, and workers employed “at sea”;
   • (c) casual work (defined as less than four weeks);
   • (d) domestic workers (including drivers, nurses, cooks, gardeners, and similar workers);
   • (e) family members of an employer; and
   • (f) agriculture and grazing workers.
5. 820. Secondly, the Law forbids non-Qatari workers from membership in a labour organization (“workers’ committee”), thus excluding more than 90 per cent of the total workforce in the country (section 116). In addition to the abovementioned categories of workers, section 116, which outlines the rights of employees to join unions, does not apply to enterprises employing less than 100 Qatari workers, and thus prohibits any worker employed by a small or medium-sized enterprise from joining a union.
6. 821. The ITUC further indicates that pursuant to section 116 of the Law, workers in an establishment can form only a single “workers’ organization”; multiple organizations are expressly forbidden. Additionally, all workers’ organizations must affiliate to the “General Union of the Workers of Qatar”.
7. 822. The complainant further alleges that while the right to strike is technically established in section 120, the small segment of the workforce that could potentially strike (Qatari nationals) face restrictive conditions and a procedural framework that makes exercising that right nearly impossible. For example, workers in “vital public utilities”, defined as to include “petroleum and gas-related industries, electricity, water, seaports, airports, hospitals and transportation” are barred from striking. The ITUC finds troubling the requirement of the approval by three-quarters of the general committee of the trade or industry to authorize a strike and the requirement of the Government’s prior approval of the time and place. The complainant considers that these requirements are excessive and are likely to impede most strike activity. Also, requiring a strike to be carried out far from the company or during limited hours or limited duration makes the use of the strike limited, if not useless. By referring to a strike vote being held at the level of a trade or an industry, the Law calls into question whether strikes at the enterprise level are even permissible (or permissible only following a vote of the industrial-level union). Furthermore, the ITUC points out that even in sectors deemed to be essential, workers subjected to such restrictions should receive compensatory guarantees to safeguard their interests. By recognizing the unique nature of their employment, essential service workers must have corresponding benefits (such as a guarantee of not being locked out). No such provisions exist under Qatari legislation. Furthermore, strikes are limited only to industrial disputes. The ITUC also considers that the Law is unclear as to whether an arbitration award, which is mandatory if the parties do not agree to a binding conciliation, is binding on the parties (sections 128–130). If that is the case, the ITUC doubts that a strike can ever be legal.
8. 823. The complainant further alleges that section 127 of the Labour Law empowers the Government to regulate the rules and procedures of collective bargaining, the method of representation of the parties, and the content, scope, duration and means of reaching a collective agreement. It therefore considers that under the current legislation, there cannot be said to exist a legitimate collective bargaining process.
9. 824. The ITUC also alleges that section 119 of the Law prohibits unions from engaging in a variety of activities and limits workers’ ability to engage in the political sphere. The Law directly prohibits workers’ organizations from engaging in “the exercise of any political or religious activities”. It further forbids “preparing, printing or distributing any materials insulting to the State” or the status quo. The Ministry of Civil Service Affairs and Housing is empowered to dissolve any organization found to be in violation of these provisions. The ITUC points out that the defence and promotion of the interest of workers is inextricably tied to political freedom; in terms of economic and social policy, the right to criticize the government should be guaranteed.
10. 825. Additionally, according to the ITUC, some union activities, including affiliations to international bodies, require the Government’s approval. It refers, in particular, to the requirement of government approval in order to affiliate with Arab or international organizations.
11. 826. The ITUC also refers to the absence of any form of protection for workers engaged in trade union activities.

B. The Government’s reply

1. 827. In a communication dated 11 September 2013, the Government explains that temporary resident migrant workers and their families represent the largest segment of the inhabitants of the State of Qatar and that it is keen to assume, within the framework of the ILO standards, its international and regional role to establish the foundations of justice and equality and to ensure security, stability and equal opportunity. According to the Government, it pays great attention to its resident workforce as the Qatar labour market draws to it about 71 per cent of the population of the country, with migrant workers accounting for 93 per cent of its economically active population. It recalls that a migrant workers population is an integral part of Qatari society which cannot be overlooked in drafting development plans or future visions. The Government further adds that in the last decades, Qatar has confronted the realities of migrant workers, their issues and challenges through the adoption of new frameworks dictated by the need to manage the migrant workforce and to provide comprehensive protection for this segment of society. A comprehensive legal system protects this workforce and preserves its rights while seeking to reconcile local practices and international standards. In this respect, the Government refers to the Constitution of the State of Qatar, which provides in its Article 30 that “the relation between workers and employers is based on social justice and is regulated by law” and in its Article 52 that “every person who is a legal resident of the State shall enjoy protection of his person and property as provided by law”.
2. 828. The Government indicates that Labour Act No. 14 of 2004 was promulgated to organize the relation between employers and workers and that this law has recognized many of the workers’ rights and privileges, strengthened worker protection against occupational hazards, and provided compensation for occupational injuries and for a worker’s minimum rights to terminate his or her employment when he or she chooses to do so and to receive compensation for the period of employment, specifying that any measure contrary or voluntary abdication of these rights are null and void. Ministerial Decrees have been promulgated by the competent authorities to strengthen these rights. These Decrees deal with such issues as the work of the conciliation and arbitration committees for collective labour disputes; hours of work in open space during summertime; workers’ organizations; and conditions and specifications for adequate housing.
3. 829. The Government informs that it has concluded 31 bilateral agreements with labour exporting countries. It adds that the Labour Ministry is one of the main actors involved in following the situation of migrant workers, supervising the application of occupational health and safety measures, issuing warnings, reporting violations, and settling disputes arising between labour providing agencies and employers. It assumes these tasks through its departments of employment, labour inspection and labour relations, together with the human rights department within the Ministry of Interior, the National Human Rights Committee and the Qatari Foundation to Combat Human Trafficking. According to the Government, this reflects the State’s concern and the priority given to the protection of migrant workers’ rights, which are part of human rights.
4. 830. The Government points out that the complaint submitted by the ITUC and BWI does not contain any reference to any prior complaint or grievance by any organization or local workers’ committee directly affected by the matter raised in the complaint and that the claims contained therein are not founded on any grievance or demand from a local workers’ organization, officially or unofficially, nor are based on facts. The Government further considers that for a complaint regarding violations of labour and union rights to be admissible it must be clearly articulated in a petition, be well documented and be based on comprehensive and reliable information. According to the Government, it is not sufficient to interpret the legislation in force in a country to conclude to violations of the workers’ rights. The Government insists that the claims submitted by the complainants are hearsay and dangerous as they fail to include any document or list of names which could provide clear proof of the alleged facts; any examples of cases where employers have paid workers less than the promised wages; any document or list of names providing clear proof of cases of workers’ injuries or deaths, including police reports or records of death or injury; and any individual grievances from workers or members of their families which could assist in determining the truth. The Government further considers that to be examined by the Committee, a complaint must be devoid of any apparent political connotation. The Government considers that in the present case, in light of the above, it can only be concluded that the complaint is malicious and seeks to undermine the reputation of the State as it prepares to host the World Cup in 2022.
5. 831. In respect of the allegations of restrictions on the establishment of trade unions, the Government indicates that considering the importance of trade unions, in order to enable workers to freely exercise this right, the Labour Law has been promulgated by Act No. 14 of 2004. To allow such organizations to defend workers’ interests and rights in improving conditions of work, negotiating with the employers, etc., this Law dedicates a special chapter to trade union organizations. These organizations have a complete freedom of action in labour matters. The Government adds that the proportion of migrant workers in the overall workforce, which could influence the social demographics, must not be disregarded.
6. 832. As regards the allegation of the absence of protection of trade union activity, the Government states that section 122 of the Labour Law prohibits an employer from compelling a worker to join – or not to join – any labour organization or not to comply with any of its Decrees and section 145 punishes by imprisonment and a fine any violation of this provision. Furthermore, workers have the right to publish their rules of procedure and draft statutes. All of the above demonstrates that the protection of trade union action is guaranteed by the legislation.
7. 833. Concerning the allegation of the effective absence of the right to strike, the Government argues that when employers and workers fail to reach an amicable settlement, section 130 of the Labour Law guarantees the right to strike. It further indicates that, as the right to strike is a means to fulfil workers’ demands, rules and conditions had to be established for the exercise of this right, especially if they help to reach the desired goals and ensure workers’ safety and protect public property. Practical experience has demonstrated that an intervention by the relevant authorities is always on the side of workers as it allows them to settle a dispute and to grant them the rights before strike action is undertaken. Applying these rules and conditions does not mean that the Ministry of Labour or the Ministry of Interior are seeking to prevent workers from exercising their right to strike as guaranteed by the Law, rather their aim is to enable this right. The Government considers that these rules and conditions are in compliance with the provisions of the relevant ILO Conventions, which grant each country the right to decide in which essential sectors strikes may be prohibited due to their importance and potential impact on public property and persons.
8. 834. Regarding the claim made by the complainant on the absence of collective negotiations, the Government emphasizes that section 127 of the Labour Law provides for the right of employers and workers to negotiate collectively and to conclude collective agreements on all work-related matters, with the least interference by the State authorities. The Government indicates that several departments and State authorities supervise the collective bargaining process: the Labour Ministry, through its various organs, tracks the implementation of the rules governing joint agreements and the amicable settlement of labour disputes; the human rights department in the Ministry of Interior is also involved in negotiations with employers and workers helping them to reach an amicable solution between the parties; the National Committee for Human Rights is responsible for the coordination between the parties to settle a dispute and to enable workers to obtain their rights; and, the Qatar Foundation to Combat Human Trafficking coordinates with the relevant authorities to enable workers to obtain, negotiate and secure their rights. Positive endeavours in the field by these organs and departments confirm the existence of constructive collective negotiations in the country.
9. 835. The Government further indicates that the Labour Law does not contain any restrictions or conditions which would impede the exercise of trade unions’ duties, rather such organizations are granted full authority to draft their rules and enjoy independence in performing their activities and mandate, namely the protection and defence of workers’ interests and rights.
10. 836. The Government adds that other guarantees are available in the country for the protection of workers’ individual and collective rights. The Ministry of Labour has established mechanisms providing workers with the necessary protection, such as hotlines where qualified staff receive workers’ complaints and queries and take prompt actions. A dedicated email account has been created to receive questions and complaints; these are quickly responded to. The Ministry, in cooperation with the Supreme Council of the Judiciary, has opened its office on the Court’s premises to follow up and facilitate litigation procedures between workers and employers; it provides free of charge services. The Ministry, in cooperation with the embassies in Qatar of labour exporting countries, examines problems faced by their nationals with the view to finding appropriate solutions and helping these workers to have their rights respected. Finally, the Government indicates that the Human Rights Department in the Ministry of Interior is responsible for the protection of the rights of migrant workers and helps them to submit complaints. It deals with workers’ complaints and grievances arising out of problems in the work environment between employers and migrant workers. In doing so, it is operating against the background of the Labour Law, the Law organizing the admission and departure of incoming workers, their residence and terms of guarantee; Criminal Procedure Law and other pertinent legislation.

C. The Committee’s conclusions

1. 837. The Committee notes that the ITUC’s allegations relate to several provisions of the Labour Law of 2004, which the complainant considers to be in violation of freedom of association and collective bargaining rights. While noting that the Government of Qatar has not ratified Conventions Nos 87 or 98, the Committee nevertheless recalls that when a State decides to become a Member of the Organization, it accepts the fundamental principles embodied in the Constitution and the Declaration of Philadelphia, including the principles of freedom of association [see Digest of decisions and principles of the Freedom of Association Committee, fifth (revised) edition, 2006, para. 15]. The Committee recalls that freedom of association is one of the primary safeguards of peace and social justice. The Committee expresses its concern at the seriousness of the allegations of violation of freedom of association in Qatar.
2. 838. The Committee notes that in the Government’s view, for a complaint regarding violations of labour and union rights to be admissible it must be clearly articulated in a petition, be well documented and be based on comprehensive and reliable information. The Government is of the view that it is not sufficient to interpret the legislation in force in a country to conclude to violations of the workers’ rights. The Government refutes the complaint submitted by the ITUC which it states does not contain any reference to any prior complaint or grievance by any organization or local workers’ committee directly affected by the matter raised in the complaint and that the claims contained therein are not founded on any grievance or demand from a local workers’ organization, officially or unofficially, nor are they based on facts. The Government further considers that to be examined by the Committee, a complaint must be devoid of any apparent political connotation and considers that, in the present case, the complaint is malicious and seeks to undermine the reputation of the State as it prepares to host the World Cup in 2022.
3. 839. The Committee recalls in this respect that it is precisely within its mandate to examine whether, and to what extent, satisfactory evidence is presented to support allegations of infringements of freedom of association. Furthermore, the mandate of the Committee consists in determining whether any given legislation or practice complies with the principles of freedom of association and collective bargaining laid down in the relevant Convention and in promoting respect for trade union rights in law and in fact [see Digest, op. cit., paras 9, 6 and 3]. Where national laws, including those interpreted by the high courts, violate the principles of freedom of association, the Committee has always considered it within its mandate to examine the laws, provide guidelines and offer the ILO’s technical assistance to bring the laws into compliance with the principles of freedom of association, as set out in the Constitution of the ILO and the applicable Conventions [see Digest, op. cit., para. 11]. The Committee will therefore proceed to examine the legislative provisions, which, according to the complainants, violate freedom of association and collective bargaining rights.
4. 840. The Committee notes the position of the Government, according to which the Labour Law sufficiently protects the right of workers to establish trade unions to defend their interests and for the purpose of representation in collective bargaining with employers. According to the Government, the Law also provides for the right of employers and workers to negotiate collectively and to conclude collective agreements on all work related matters, with the least interference by the State authorities. The ITUC alleges, however, that the Law jeopardizes the right of workers, without distinction whatsoever, to establish and join trade unions of their own choosing. It refers, in this respect, to sections 3 and 116 of the Law, which read as follows:

   Section 3

   • Except as otherwise provided for in any other law, the provisions of this law shall not apply to the following categories:
     • 1. The employees and workers of the ministries and other governmental organs, public institutions, corporations and companies which are established by Qatar Petroleum by itself or with others, and the workers whose employment affairs are regulated by special laws.
     • 2. The officers and members of the armed forces and police and the workers employed at sea.
     • 3. The workers employed in casual work.
     • 4. The persons employed in domestic employment such as drivers, nurses, cooks, gardeners and similar workers.
     • 5. Working members of an employer’s family. These are the wife, ascendants and descendants who are residing with and wholly dependent on him.
     • 6. The workers employed in agriculture and grazing other than the persons employed in the agricultural establishments processing and marketing their own products or those who are permanently employed in the operation or repair of the necessary agricultural mechanical appliances.
   • The provisions of this law or any part thereof may, by a resolution of the Council of Ministers upon the recommendation of the Minister, be applied to categories 3, 4, 5 and 6 referred to in this section.

   Section 116

   • Workers working in an establishment where the number of Qatari workers is not less than one hundred workers may form a committee from amongst themselves to be named “the workers’ committee” and more than one committee in the establishment may not be formed.
   • Workers’ committees in the establishments engaged in one trade or industry or similar or interrelated trades or industries are entitled to form a general committee from amongst themselves to be named the General Committee for the Workers of Trade or Industry.
   • General committees of the workers of the various trades and industries may form amongst themselves a general union to be named the “General Union of the Workers of Qatar”.
   • Membership in the two committees referred to and in the General Union of the Workers of Qatar shall be confined to the Qatari workers. The Minister shall specify the conditions and procedures for the formation of the workers’ organizations referred to and the membership therein and the way of carrying out their business and the interrelated and similar trades and industries.
5. 841. The Committee recalls that Article 2 of Convention No. 87 is designed to give expression to the principle of non-discrimination in trade union matters, and the words “without distinction whatsoever” used in this Article mean that freedom of association should be guaranteed without discrimination of any kind based on occupation, sex, colour, race, beliefs, nationality, political opinion, etc., not only to workers in the private sector of the economy, but also to civil servants and public service employees in general [see Digest, op. cit., para. 209]. To illustrate the above general principle, the Committee draws the Government’s attention to the following paragraphs of the above-cited Digest:
   • 216. All workers, without distinction whatsoever, including without discrimination in regard to occupation, should have the right to establish and join organizations of their own choosing.
   • ...
   • 219. Public servants, like all other workers, without distinction whatsoever, have the right to establish and join organizations of their own choosing, without previous authorization, for the promotion and defence of their occupational interests.
   • 220. Public employees (with the sole possible exception of the armed forces and the police, by virtue of Article 9 of Convention No. 87) should, like workers in the private sector, be able to establish organizations of their own choosing to further and defend the interests of their members.
   • ...
   • 229. Civilians working in the services of the army should have the right to form trade unions.
   • ...
   • 241. Agricultural workers should enjoy the right to organize.
   • ...
   • 255. All workers, without distinction whatsoever, whether they are employed on a permanent basis, for a fixed term or as contract employees, should have the right to establish and join organizations of their own choosing.
   • ...
   • 267. Domestic workers are not excluded from the application of Convention No. 87 and should therefore be governed by the guarantees it affords and have the right to establish and join occupational organizations.
6. 842. With regard to the restriction on the right to organize based on nationality, as it appears to be the case pursuant to the first sentence of paragraph 4 of section 116 of the Law, the Committee considers that such restriction prevents migrant workers from playing an active role in the defence of their interests, especially in sectors where they are the main source of labour. The right of workers, without distinction whatsoever, to establish and join organizations implies that anyone legally residing in the country benefits from trade union rights without any distinction based on nationality. The Committee further recalls the resolution concerning a fair deal for migrant workers in a global economy adopted by the ILO Conference at its 92nd Session (2004) according to which “[a]ll migrant workers also benefit from the protection offered by the ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work and its Follow-up (1998). In addition, the eight core ILO Conventions regarding freedom of association and the right to bargain collectively, non-discrimination in employment and occupation, the prohibition of forced labour and the elimination of child labour, cover all migrant workers, regardless of status” [para. 12].
7. 843. With regard to collective bargaining rights, the Committee recalls that only armed forces, the police and public servants engaged in the administration of the State may be excluded from their application.
8. 844. In light of the above, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures in order to ensure that, with the only possible abovementioned exceptions, all workers, without distinction whatsoever, may enjoy freedom of association and collective bargaining rights. In particular, the Committee requests the Government to consider amending section 3, or, with regard to the categories of workers mentioned under subsections 3–6, taking the necessary measures for the adoption of a Council of Minister’s resolution as referred to in the last paragraph of that section. The Committee further urges the Government to eliminate the restriction placed on the organizing rights of migrant workers by repealing the first sentence of paragraph 4 of section 116 of the Labour Law, which limits organizing rights to Qatari workers.
9. 845. The Committee also notes that according to section 116, paragraph 1, a workers’ committee can only be established at enterprises employing not less than 100 Qatari workers. Recalling that the workers’ right to organize should not be dependent on the size of the enterprise, or the number of workers employed by it, and understanding that with the predominantly migrant labour force, the number of enterprises where over 100 Qataris are employed may be very few, especially as regards small and medium-sized enterprises, the Committee urges the Government to take the necessary measures to repeal this provision without delay.
10. 846. The Committee further notes that, as per the ITUC’s allegation, according to section 116, only one workers’ committee can be formed in an establishment, which can create general committees at the level of trade or industry, which, in turn can form a general union under the name of the General Union of the Workers of Qatar. The Committee recalls in this respect that the right of workers to establish organizations of their own choosing implies, in particular, the effective possibility to create – if the workers so choose – more than one workers’ organization per enterprise. Furthermore, unity within the trade union movement should not be imposed by the State through legislation because this would be contrary to the principles of freedom of association [see Digest, op. cit., paras 315 and 321]. The Committee therefore urges the Government to take the necessary measures without delay to amend section 116 so as to bring it into conformity with the abovementioned principle.
11. 847. The Committee also requests the Government to provide a copy of the procedures regulating the formation, membership and activities of workers’ organizations, adopted pursuant to the last sentence of section 116 of the Law.
12. 848. With regard to the allegation that the Labour Law effectively denies the right to strike, the Committee notes that according to the Government, the Law guarantees the right to strike. The Government adds, however, that as the right to strike is a means to fulfil workers’ demands, rules and condition must be established for the exercise of this right to assist in reaching the desired goals, to ensure workers’ safety and to protect public property. It further indicates that the authorities are always on the side of workers as such interventions allow settling of disputes before resorting to a strike action. Applying these rules and conditions does not mean that the Ministry of Labour or the Ministry of Interior are seeking to prevent workers from exercising their right to strike as guaranteed by the Law, rather it seeks to enable this right. The Government considers that these rules and conditions are in compliance with the provisions of the relevant ILO Conventions, which grant each country the right to decide in which essential sectors strikes may be prohibited due to their importance and potential impact on public property and persons
13. 849. The Committee notes the following sections of the legislation:

    Section 120

    • The workers may go on strike if amicable settlement of the dispute between them and the employer becomes impossible in accordance with the following measures:
      • 1. Approval by three-quarters of the General Committee of the workers of the trade or industry.
      • 2. Giving to the employer a period of not less than two weeks before commencing the strike and securing approval of the Ministry [Ministry of Civil Service Affairs and Housing] after coordination with the Minister of Interior Affairs in respect of the time and place of the strike.
      • 3. Provided that there is no detriment to the property of the State and of the individual and their security and safety.
      • 4. Prohibition of the strike in vital public utilities such as petroleum and gas-related industries, electricity, water, seaports, airports, hospitals and transportation.
      • 5. Non-resort to strike before the amicable settlement between the workers and employer by conciliation or arbitration in accordance with the provisions of this law becomes impossible.

    Section 129

    • If any dispute arises between the employer and some or all of his workers, the two parties to the dispute shall try to settle it between themselves and if there is a joint committee in the establishment, the dispute shall be referred to it for settlement.
    • If the two parties fail to settle the dispute the following steps shall be taken:
      • 1. The workers shall submit their complaint or claim in writing to the employer with a copy thereof to the department.
      • 2. The employer shall reply in writing to the complaint or claim of the workers within a week from his receiving the same and shall send a copy of the reply to the department.
      • 3. If the reply of the employer does not lead to the settlement of the dispute, the department shall try to settle the dispute through its mediation.

    Section 130

    • If the mediation of the department does not lead to the settlement of the dispute within 15 days from the date of the employer’s reply, the department shall submit the dispute to a conciliation committee for its decision thereon.
    • The conciliation committee shall be formed of:
      • 1. A chairperson to be appointed by a decision of the Minister.
      • 2. A member to be nominated by the employer.
      • 3. A representative member of the workers to be nominated in accordance with the provisions of the second paragraph of the section.
    • The committee may be assisted by consultation with any of the specialists before deciding on the dispute and shall issue its decision on the dispute within a week from the date of its submission thereto.
    • The decision of the committee shall be binding on the two parties to the dispute if the parties had agreed in writing to referring the dispute to the committee before its meeting to decide on the dispute and if there is no such an agreement in this respect the dispute shall be referred to an arbitration committee within 15 days and the arbitration shall be mandatory for the two parties.
14. 850. As concerns section 120 of the Law, the Committee recalls that the conditions that have to be fulfilled under the Law in order to render a strike lawful should be reasonable and in any event not such as to place a substantial limitation on the means of action open to trade union organizations [see Digest, op. cit., para. 547]. With regard to the majority vote required for the calling of a legal strike, the Committee considers that generally, the requirement of a decision by over half of all the workers involved in order to declare a strike is excessive and could excessively hinder the possibility of carrying out a strike, particularly in large enterprises [see Digest, op. cit., para. 556]. In addition, the right of the Ministry of Civil Service Affairs and Housing to determine the time and the place of the strike could further excessively hinder the exercise of the right to strike.
15. 851. With regard to the prohibition of strike action in “vital public utilities”, such as petroleum and gas-related industries, electricity, water, seaports, airports, hospitals and transportation, the Committee recalls that the right to strike may be restricted or prohibited: (1) in the public service only for public servants exercising authority in the name of the State; or (2) in essential services in the strict sense of the term (that is, services the interruption of which would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population) [see Digest, op. cit., para. 576]. It further recalls that it has previously considered that the following do not constitute essential services: the petroleum sector, ports, transport generally, airline pilots, production, transport and distribution of fuel [see Digest, op. cit., para. 587]. Moreover, even within essential services, certain categories of employees, such as hospital labourers and gardeners, should not be deprived of the right to strike [see Digest, op. cit., para. 593]. However, a minimum service could be appropriate as a possible alternative in situations in which a substantial restriction or total prohibition of strike action would not appear to be justified and where, without calling into question the right to strike of the large majority of workers, one might consider ensuring that users’ basic needs are met or that facilities operate safely or without interruption. A minimum service may be set up in the event of a strike, the extent and duration of which might be such as to result in an acute national crisis endangering the normal living conditions of the population. Such a minimum service should be confined to operations that are strictly necessary to avoid endangering the life or normal living conditions of the whole or part of the population; in addition, workers’ organizations should be able to participate in defining such a service in the same way as employers and the public authorities [see Digest, op. cit., paras 607 and 610]. The Committee therefore uges the Government to take the necessary measures without delay to amend section 120 so as to ensure respect for the principles enunciated above.
16. 852. The Committee notes that, as per the complainant’s allegation, the objective of a strike is limited to disputes between an employer and his/her employees. It recalls in this respect that the occupational and economic interests which workers defend through the exercise of the right to strike do not only concern better working conditions or collective claims of an occupational nature, but also the seeking of solutions to economic and social policy questions and problems facing the undertaking which are of direct concern to the workers. Furthermore, organizations responsible for defending workers’ socio-economic and occupational interests should be able to use strike action to support their position in the search for solutions to problems posed by major social and economic policy trends which have a direct impact on their members and on workers in general, in particular as regards employment, social protection and standards of living. A ban on strike action not linked to a collective dispute to which the employee or union is a party is contrary to the principles of freedom of association [see Digest, op. cit., paras 526, 527 and 538]. The Committee therefore requests the Government to take the necessary measures in order to ensure that workers’ organizations are able to express, if necessary, through strikes or protest actions, in a broader context than currently provided for in section 120, their views as regards economic and social matters affecting their members’ interests.
17. 853. With regard to the ultimate recourse, in section 130, to a procedure of compulsory arbitration, the Committee recalls that the legislation which provides for voluntary conciliation and arbitration in industrial disputes before a strike may be called cannot be regarded as an infringement of freedom of association, provided recourse to arbitration is not compulsory and does not, in practice, prevent the calling of the strike. In as far as compulsory arbitration prevents strike action, it is contrary to the right of trade unions to organize freely their activities and could only be justified in the public service or in essential services in the strict sense of the term [see Digest, op. cit., paras 549 and 565]. The Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to amend section 130 so as to ensure that compulsory arbitration to end a collective labour dispute and a strike is possible only if it is at the request of both parties involved in a dispute, or if the strike in question may be restricted, even banned, that is, in the case of disputes in the public service involving public servants exercising authority in the name of the State or in essential services in the strict sense of the term, namely those services whose interruption would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population [see Digest, op. cit., para. 564].
18. 854. The Committee notes the complainant’s allegation that in the case of essential services, workers whose right to strike is restricted have no corresponding compensatory benefits such as a guarantee of not being locked out. The Committee recalls that employees deprived of the right to strike because they perform essential services must have appropriate guarantees to safeguard their interests, including a corresponding denial of the right of lockout, provision of joint conciliation procedures and where, and only where, conciliation fails, the provision of joint arbitration machinery [see Digest, op. cit., para. 600]. The Committee therefore expects that, where restrictions are placed on the right to strike in essential services and the industrial dispute is being dealt with through conciliation and arbitration, the employer is also restricted with respect to lockout.
19. 855. With regard to the prohibition of certain activities to be carried out by workers’ organizations, the Committee notes section 119 of the Labour Law, according to which,
    • Workers’ Organizations are prohibited from the following:
      • 1. The exercise of any political or religious activities.
      • 2. Preparation, printing or distributing any materials insulting to the State or the Government or the status quo thereof.
      • 3. Entering into any financial speculations of whatsoever nature.
      • 4. Accepting of gifts or endowments except with the approval of the Ministry.
    • The Minister may dissolve any organization if it commits any of the foregoing prohibited matters or works outside the purpose.
20. 856. As to the political activities, the Committee recalls that while trade union organizations should not engage in political activities in an abusive manner and go beyond their true functions by promoting essentially political interests, provisions imposing a general prohibition on political activities by trade unions for the promotion of their specific objectives are contrary to the principles of freedom of association. Furthermore, a general prohibition on trade unions from engaging in any political activities would not only be incompatible with the principles of freedom of association, but also unrealistic in practice. Trade union organizations may wish, for example, to express publicly their opinion regarding the Government’s economic and social policy [see Digest, op. cit., paras 500, 502 and 503]. The Committee further recalls that the right to express opinions without previous authorization through the press is one of the essential elements of the rights of occupational organizations and that the freedom of expression which should be enjoyed by trade unions and their leaders should also be guaranteed when they wish to criticize the Government’s economic and social policy [see Digest, op. cit., paras 156 and 157]. With regard to the need to seek the Ministry’s approval before accepting gifts or endowments, the Committee considers that trade unions should not be required to obtain prior authorization to receive international financial assistance in their trade union activities [see Digest, op. cit., para. 743]. Finally, with regard to the right of the Minister to dissolve a workers’ organization, the Committee emphasizes that measures of suspension or dissolution by the administrative authority constitute serious infringements of the principles of freedom of association and that cancellation of a trade union’s registration should only be possible through judicial channels [see Digest, op. cit., paras 683 and 687]. The Committee therefore urges the Government to take the necessary measures without delay in order to amend section 119 so as to bring it into conformity with the principles above.
21. 857. The Committee further notes that pursuant to section 123 of the Law, “the General Union of the Workers of Qatar may, after approval of the Ministry, join any Arab or international organizations working in the field of workers organizations”. The Committee recalls that a workers’ organization should have the right to join the federation and confederation of its own choosing, subject to the rules of the organizations concerned, and without any previous authorization. It is for the federations and confederations themselves to decide whether or not to accept the affiliation of a trade union, in accordance with their own constitutions and rules [see Digest, op. cit., para. 722]. The Committee therefore urges the Government to take the necessary measures without delay to amend section 123 of the Law accordingly.
22. 858. The Committee also notes the complainant’s allegation that the Labour Law does not provide for any form of protection for workers engaged in trade union activities. While taking due note of the Government’s opinion to the contrary, the Committee regrets to note that with the exception of section 122, which provides that an “employer shall not compel the worker to join or not to join any of the workers’ organizations or to refrain from implementing their decisions”, and section 144 setting out the penalties for the violation of section 122 consisting of imprisonment for a period not exceeding one month and/or a fine of not less than 2,000 Qatari riyals (QAR) and not exceed QAR6,000, there appears to be no other provisions referring to the rapid and effective protection against acts of anti-union discrimination and interference in trade union activities, which are necessary to ensure freedom of association in practice. The Committee is thus bound to emphasize the need to adopt specific legislative provisions in relation to anti-union discrimination and interference. The Committee would refer, in particular, to the need to ensure protection against the following acts: (1) making the employment of a worker subject to the conditions that he or she shall not join a union or shall relinquish trade union membership; or (2) causing the dismissal of, or otherwise prejudicing workers, by reason of union membership or because of participation in union activities outside working hours or, with the consent of the employer, within working hours. The Committee considers that respect for the principles of freedom of association clearly requires that workers who consider that they have been prejudiced because of their trade union activities should have access to means of redress which are expeditious, inexpensive and fully impartial. Furthermore, where legislation does not contain specific provisions for the protection of workers’ organizations from acts of interference by employers and their organizations, it would be appropriate for the Government to examine the possibility of adopting clear and precise provisions ensuring the adequate protection of workers’ organizations against these acts of interference [see Digest, op. cit., paras 820 and 860]. The Committee urges the Government to take the necessary measures without delay to adopt specific legislative provisions to that end.
23. 859. In light of the above, the Committee requests the Government to initiate without delay a labour reform, and expects that this process will include the full participation of the social partners and that any new legislative provisions will be based on the principles enunciated above. It requests the Government to keep it informed of all measures taken or envisaged in this respect and reminds it that it may avail itself of the technical assistance of the Office.
24. 860. Finally, the Committee notes the complainant’s allegation that section 127 of the Labour Law empowers the Government to regulate the rules and procedures of collective bargaining, the method of representation of the parties, and the content, scope, duration and means of reaching a collective agreement and thus undermines the existence of a collective bargaining process. The Committee notes that the text of this provision reads as follows:
    • The employers and workers have the right to conduct collective negotiations and conclude joint agreements on all matters related to the work.
    • The Minister shall issue a Decision on the regulation of the rules and procedures of collective negotiation and the method of representation of the parties therein and the rules regulating the joint agreements, so as to [provide for the] contents, scope, the means of acceding them, the duration and interpretation thereof and the disputes which may arise from its implementation.
25. 861. The Committee requests the Government to provide a copy of the Decision to which reference is made in section 127 of the Labour Law and to indicate the manner in which this is applied in practice.