Demande directe (CEACR) - adoptée 2012, publiée 102ème session CIT (2013)

Convention (n° 87) sur la liberté syndicale et la protection du droit syndical, 1948 - Kirghizistan (Ratification: 1992)

Autre commentaire sur C087

Observation

Demande directe

Afficher en : Francais - EspagnolTout voir

Article 3 of the Convention. Right of workers’ organizations to organize their activities. The Committee recalls that in its previous direct request it had noted that pursuant to section 437 of the Labour Code (2004), the decision to call a strike should be taken by a meeting (conference) of workers, that a minimum of two-thirds of the total number of workers (delegates) should be present at that meeting (conference) and that the decision to strike should be taken by at least half of the number of workers present. Considering that the quorum set out for a strike is too high and may potentially impede recourse to strike action, particularly in large enterprises, the Committee had requested the Government to take the necessary measures to amend its legislation so as to lower the quorum required for a strike ballot and to indicate the measures taken or envisaged in this regard. The Committee notes that in its report, the Government indicates that lowering the number of workers currently required to be present at the meeting is senseless. The Committee once again recalls that the quorum of two-thirds of workers set out for a strike ballot may be difficult to reach and may potentially impede recourse to strike action, particularly in large enterprises. It therefore once again requests the Government to take the necessary measures to amend its legislation so as to lower the quorum required for a strike ballot and to indicate the measures taken or envisaged in this regard.

The Committee further recalls that it had noted that the same legislative provision imposes an obligation to indicate, in the strike notice, the possible duration of the strike as well as to provide proposals on the minimum services to be maintained during the strike. The Committee requested the Government to indicate whether workers could declare a strike for an indefinite period of time, and to specify the sectors of activity in which the minimum services should be maintained. The Committee notes that according to the Government, a strike can be of an indefinite length. With regard to the minimum services, the Committee regrets that no information has been provided by the Government. It therefore once again requests the Government to specify the sectors in which minimum services should be maintained in the event of a strike.

The Committee also recalls that under section 440(b) of the Code, strikes are prohibited in essential services – which include air, railway and water transport and communication – if the strike would endanger the defence and security of the State, as well as the life and health of the population. Considering that air, railway and water transport and communication in general (with the exception of air traffic control and telephone services) are not essential services in the strict sense of the term, the Committee requested the Government to clarify whether workers employed in these services enjoy the right to strike. The Committee notes that the Government confirms that workers engaged in the abovementioned services do not enjoy the right to strike. The Committee once again recalls that the right to strike can be restricted or prohibited in the event of an acute national or local crisis, in case of public servants exercising authority in the name of the State or in essential services in the strict sense of the term, in other words, those the interruption of which would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population, and that air, railway and water transport and communication in general (with the exception of air traffic control and telephone services) are not essential services in the strict sense of the term. The Committee considers, however, that in order to avoid damages which are irreversible or out of all proportion to the occupational interests of the parties to the dispute, as well as damages to third parties, namely the users or consumers who suffer the economic effects of collective disputes, the authorities could establish a system of minimum services in such services, which are of public utility, rather than impose an outright ban on strikes. The Committee therefore requests the Government to take the necessary measures to amend the Labour Code so as to bring it into conformity with the Convention. It requests the Government to provide information on the measures taken or envisaged in this regard.

The Committee regrets that the Government provides no observations on the 2009 and 2010 comments of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) on the application on the Convention in law and practice. The Committee urges the Government to provide its observations thereon and in particular, on the allegation that the amendments made in 2008 to the Act on Public Assembly introduced a number of restrictions on the conduct of public meetings, which, while not directly aimed at trade unions, could nevertheless impair trade union activities.