Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2012, published 102nd ILC session (2013)

Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98) - Syrian Arab Republic (Ratification: 1957)

The Committee notes the observations of the Government on the 4 August 2011 International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) comments. The Committee notes the comments made by the ITUC on 31 July 2012 concerning issues that have been raised in the past, including the fact that collective bargaining hardly exists, as well as allegations that, while the right to collective bargaining is recognized in Labour Law No. 17 of 2010, the Ministry of Social Affairs and Labour has vast powers to object to and refuse the registration of concluded collective agreements. The Committee requests the Government to provide its observations on the 2012 ITUC comments. The Committee also notes the claim of the ITUC that, while the state of emergency that has been in place since 1963, with heavy restrictions on civil and political rights and trade unions under the full control of the regime, was finally lifted in April 2011 in response to protestor’s demands, at the end of 2011 the situation in the Syrian Arab Republic was seen as increasingly one of civil war.

The Committee noted, in its previous observation, the adoption of Labour Law No. 17 of 2010, which contains a chapter on collective bargaining (sections 178–202). In this respect, it draws the attention of the Government to the following issues.

Scope of the Convention. Sections 1 and 5(1), (2) and (4)–(7) exclude certain workers from the scope of the law (independent workers, civil servants, agricultural workers, domestic servants and similar categories, workers in charity associations and organizations, casual workers and part-time workers whose hours of work do not exceed two hours per day). Recalling that these workers are covered by the Convention, the Committee requests the Government to indicate whether the rights enshrined in the Convention are provided to these workers by other legislation, and, if this is not the case, to take measures to recognize to these workers, in the legislation, the rights enshrined in the Convention.

Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention. Protection against anti-union discrimination and interference. The Committee notes that section 67(a) states that, according to section 67, employers may not dismiss a unionized worker performing, organizing or taking part in trade union activities; in case reinstatement is not possible, section 67(c) provides that compensation equals two months’ wages for each year in service. In this respect, the Committee underlines the need to reinforce the sanction against anti-union dismissal by providing sufficiently dissuasive sanctions. The Committee hopes that the Government will take the necessary measures to amend this provision. The Committee further notes that the Labour Law does not prohibit acts of interference on the part of employers or organizations of workers in each other’s affairs, in accordance with the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to take measures in order to adopt clear and precise provisions prohibiting acts of interference accompanied by sufficiently dissuasive sanctions.

Article 4. Collective bargaining. Section 187(c) states that, during the 30-day period between filing the agreement and having it approved by the Ministry of Social Affairs and Labour, the Ministry may object to and refuse to register the agreement, and inform contracting parties, by registered letter, of such objection/refusal and the reasons thereof. The Committee underlines that this provision grants excessive power to the Ministry to object or refuse to register a collective agreement. The Committee recalls that such an objection/refusal to register a collective agreement may only be made on the basis of a procedural flaw or because it does not conform to the minimum standards laid down by the labour legislation. The Committee requests the Government to take measures to amend this provision in order to fully guarantee the principle of free and voluntary collective bargaining established in the Convention.

The Committee notes that section 214 states that, in case mediation does not result in an agreement, either party may file a request to initiate dispute settlement through arbitration. The Committee recalls that, in general, arbitration to end a collective labour dispute is acceptable if it is at the request of both parties involved in a dispute, or with regard to disputes in essential services in the strict sense of the term, or in respect of civil servants exercising authority in the name of the State. The Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that arbitration initiated by only one party to the dispute can only take place in the cases mentioned above.

Arbitration bodies. According to section 215, arbitration tribunals are composed of a chairperson and a member, appointed by the Ministry of Justice, a member appointed by the Ministry of Social Affairs and Labour, one member appointed by the General Federation of Trade Unions and one member appointed by the Federation of Chambers of Industry, Commerce and Tourism, or the Contractors Association at the governorate level. The Committee underlines that the composition of the arbitration tribunal could raise questions concerning its independence and impartiality and could call into question the confidence of the concerned parties in such a system. The Committee requests the Government to take measures to amend this provision so as to ensure that the composition of the arbitration tribunals is balanced and can engender the confidence of the parties in the arbitration mechanism.

The Committee hopes that legislation and practice will be brought into line with the Convention and requests the Government to provide information on any developments in this regard.