Observation (CEACR) - adoptée 2021, publiée 110ème session CIT (2022)

Repetition

The Committee notes the observations of the General Confederation of Lebanese Workers (CGTL), communicated with the Government’s report. The Committee observes that the Government has not replied to the observations made by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) in 2010, alleging that the law imposes a high threshold on representative organizations for engaging in collective bargaining, as well as imposing the requirement of obtaining the agreement of two-thirds of the union membership at a general meeting to validate a collective agreement. The Committee once again requests the Government to send its comments concerning the observations made in 2010 by the ITUC.

With regard to the observations submitted by Education International (EI) in 2015 and 2016 concerning the situation of public and private educational staff and the wage freeze since 1996, the Committee notes that: (i) through the adoption of Decree No. 63 in 2008, teachers in the public and private sectors have had a wage increase; (ii) in 2013, following a wage increase in the private sector, public sector employees, including teachers, were granted an advance on their salary; and (iii) Act No. 26, published in the Official Gazette of 21 August 2017, also provides for a wage increase for teachers in the public and private sectors. The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether these wage increases are the result of collective bargaining.

Scope of application of the Convention. Domestic workers. In its previous comments, the Committee observed that the Government had not replied to the observations made by the ITUC concerning the exclusion of domestic workers from the Labour Code. The Committee observes that “domestic workers who work for private households” are excluded from the scope of application of the Labour Code of 1946 (section 7(1)), and that the contractual relationships between domestic workers and the individuals who employ them to perform domestic work in their households are governed by the Act on obligations and contracts. Moreover, the Committee notes that, in its concluding observations of 2018, the United Nations Human Rights Committee expressed concern that migrant domestic workers are excluded from protection under domestic labour law and are subjected to abuse and exploitation under the sponsorship (kafala) system. It also expressed concern about the lack of effective remedies against such abuses and the existence of anti-union reprisals (CCPR/C/LBN/CO/3). The Committee requests the Government to provide clarification in this respect, by indicating the manner in which domestic workers and migrant domestic workers can enjoy the protection of the Convention, including the right to engage in collective bargaining through the organization of their own choosing, and to indicate whether consideration is being given to amending the above-mentioned provision of the Labour Code. The Committee also requests the Government to indicate how these rights are exercised in practice, by indicating the names of any organizations that represent domestic workers and migrant domestic workers and the number of collective agreements covering them.

Legislative amendments

Articles 4 and 6 of the Convention. Promotion of collective bargaining. The Committee recalls that, in the comments that it has been repeating for many years, it has been emphasizing the need to revise a number of provisions of the Labour Code in force and to reword certain provisions on collective bargaining in the draft Labour Code communicated by the Government in 2004.

Excessive restrictions on the right to collective bargaining. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that section 3 of Decree No. 17386/64 required trade unions to obtain the support of at least 60 per cent of the Lebanese employees concerned in order for a collective agreement negotiation to be considered valid, and considered this threshold to be excessive. The Committee also noted that section 180 of the draft Labour Code provided for the reduction of the threshold to 50 per cent and reminded the Government that such a solution could nevertheless pose problems of compatibility with the Convention, as it would prevent a representative union without an absolute majority from being able to engage in bargaining. It therefore asked the Government to ensure that if no union represents the required percentage of workers to be declared the exclusive bargaining agent, collective bargaining rights are granted to all the unions in the unit, at least on behalf of their own members.

Right to collective bargaining in the public sector and the public service. In its previous comments, the Committee asked the Government to amend its legislation so that public sector workers not engaged in the administration of the State, governed by Decree No. 5883 of 1994, are able to enjoy the right to collective bargaining. In this regard, the Committee noted that section 131 of the draft Labour Code established that workers in the public administration, municipalities and public enterprises responsible for administering public services on behalf of the State or on their own account would have to right to engage in collective bargaining.

Compulsory arbitration. For many years, the Committee has been asking the Government to take measures so that recourse to arbitration in the three public sector enterprises governed by Decree No. 2952 of 20 October 1965 is only at the request of both parties. The Committee also requested the amendment of section 224 of the draft Labour Code, which provides that, should mediation fail, any dispute in the case of the three public sector enterprises governed by Decree No. 2952 will be settled by an arbitration board. The Committee notes with regret the Government’s indication that Decree No. 2952 has been replaced by Decree No. 13896 of 3 January 2005, and that now all investment enterprises in the private and public sectors which are responsible for managing public services on behalf of the State or on their own account must resort to compulsory arbitration should negotiations fail. The Committee recalls that compulsory arbitration is generally not compatible with the promotion of free and voluntary collective bargaining required by Article 4 of the Convention and therefore that compulsory arbitration in the context of collective bargaining is only acceptable in relation to public servants engaged in the administration of the State (Article 6 of the Convention), essential services in the strict sense of the term (services the interruption of which would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population) and in the event of an acute national crisis. Noting with regret that the Government has been merely indicating, for over a decade, that the draft Labour Code is under examination and that due account will be taken of the Committee’s comments, and that the Labour Code in force continues to contain provisions that are not compatible with the Convention, the Committee urges the Government to take the necessary legislative measures to amend the Labour Code in force so as to guarantee the collective bargaining rights of workers, including domestic workers. The Committee reminds the Government that it may avail itself of technical assistance from the Office in this regard.

Collective bargaining in practice. The Committee requests the Government to provide statistics on the number of collective agreements concluded and in force and to indicate the sectors and number of workers covered.