ILO-en-strap
NORMLEX
Information System on International Labour Standards
NORMLEX Home > Country profiles >  > Comments

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

Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87) - Russian Federation (Ratification: 1956)

Other comments on C087

Replies received to the issues raised in a direct request which do not give rise to further comments
  1. 2016

Display in: French - SpanishView all

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

Article 2 of the Convention.  In its previous comments, the Committee had noted the Government’s indication that the provision of the Labour Code, as amended in 1992, which appeared to maintain trade union monopolies at the enterprise level (section 230) had not been included in the draft Labour Code under preparation. The Committee notes from the Government’s latest report that the draft Labour Code is under the consideration of the State Duma and that the text will be sent to the Office after its adoption. The Committee recalls that section 230 refers to the rights of the trade union committee elected at the enterprise or workplace and thus leaves doubt about the possibility of more than one union existing at the same time in the same enterprise. The Committee trusts that this ambiguity will not be retained in the new Code and requests the Government to transmit a copy of the new Code as soon as it is adopted.

Article 3.  Referring to its earlier comments concerning the obligation to declare the duration of a strike under section 14(5) of the 1995 Act on procedures for the resolution of collective labour disputes, the Committee had noted the Government’s previous indication that workers who did not cease strike action on the day after the notified date on which the strike is to end may be subjected to disciplinary penalties under the Labour Code, including rebukes, reprimands or, as a last resort, dismissal. In its latest report, the Government indicates that, in accordance with sections 18 and 22 of the Act on procedures for the resolution of collective labour disputes, disciplinary punishment due to strike action may only be imposed in the event of non-compliance with a court order. The Committee further notes however that section 17 of the Act establishes that a strike is illegal if it was declared without regard for the time frames, procedures and requirements stipulated by the sections of the Act, including section 14. The Committee considers that forcing the employees and their organizations to specify the length of a strike would restrict the right of workers’ organizations to organize their administration and activities and to formulate their programmes. The right to strike is effectively, by definition, a means of applying pressure which the workers and their organizations may use to promote and defend their social and economic interests and achieve satisfaction in their claims. The Committee therefore requests the Government to eliminate the obligation to notify the duration of the strike, and asks it to include details in its next report on the measures effectively taken in this connection.

Finally, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that, in its opinion, the Act on the procedure of the settlement of collective labour disputes sets out a clear-cut definition of the terms and conditions under which strike action is not available. The Committee considers however that the numerous requirements set out, in particular in sections 14 and 16 of the Act, concerning the declaration of a strike and the course of action during a strike could easily render strikes illegal on the basis of minor procedural flaws. The Committee notes, for example, that the failure to provide a minimum service may result in a strike being declared illegal under the Act, while the determination of the minimum to be provided will be made by the executive body or body of local self-government in cases where the parties have not been able to agree. In cases of disagreement concerning minimum services, however, the Committee considers that it is preferable for such disagreements to be resolved by an independent body. These and other requirements give rise to a rather complex and complicated procedure for the exercise of legal strike action that may place unnecessary obstacles to its exercise in practice. The Committee would therefore request the Government to consider reviewing and simplifying the Act so as to ensure that the requirements for undertaking legal strike action do not effectively hinder the right of workers’ organizations to organize their activities. Furthermore, it requests the Government to transmit copies of any recent relevant court judgements concerning the legality of strike action.

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