Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2016, published 106th ILC session (2017)

Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87) - Denmark (Ratification: 1951)

The Committee takes note of the observations of the International Organisation of Employers (IOE) received on 1 September 2016, which are of a general nature. The Committee also notes the observations from the Danish Confederation of Trade Unions (LO) received on 27 August 2014 and 26 August 2015, as well as the Government’s comments on the 2014 LO observations, which are examined under the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98). The Committee further notes the 2016 LO observations submitted with the Government’s report, as well as the Government’s comments thereon.

Article 2 of the Convention. Right of workers, without distinction whatsoever, to join organizations. In its previous comments, and its 2015 comments under the Maritime Labour Convention, 2006, the Committee requested the Government to clarify whether seafarers not resident in Denmark working on board ships registered in the Danish International Ships Register (DIS), whether employed under a collective agreement according to section 10(3) of the Act on Danish International Register of Shipping (DIS Act) or individually employed, have the right to become members of a Danish trade union that is not party to the Danish International Ships Register Main Agreement (DIS Main Agreement). The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the DIS Main Agreement comprises the majority of social partners in the shipping industry (Danish Shipowners’ Association, Shipowners’ Association of 2010, Danish Maritime Officers, Danish Engineers’ Association and Danish Metalworkers’ Union – Maritime Section) and observes that the Government reiterates its previous comments that under section 7(1), last indent of the DIS Main Agreement, seafarers employed under a collective agreement in line with section 10(3) of the DIS Act may choose to be members of a Danish trade union. According to the Government, the legislation thus does not prevent a seafarer not resident in Denmark who is working on board a DIS ship from becoming a member of any Danish trade union provided that the membership is in accordance with the individual trade union’s rules. However, the Committee notes the LO’s statement that: (i) since section 7 of the DIS Main Agreement is only applicable to trade unions which are signatories to it, the Government’s indication that a seafarer may, in accordance with the DIS Main Agreement but as an employee under section 10(3) of the DIS Act, choose to be a member of a Danish trade union, is insufficient; (ii) the adoption of the DIS Main Agreement does not affect the LO’s criticism of section 10 of the DIS Act, the construction of which differentiates between the negotiating powers of Danish and foreign trade unions, for instance a Danish industrial dispute in the form of a strike against ships manned by seafarers without residence in Denmark is illegal as such workers are not covered by a collective agreement concluded in Denmark; and (iii) the DIS Act is an ad hoc Act with which the Government aims to attract foreign ships by providing favourable conditions to the shipping companies and offering what the LO considers to be a trade union-free zone. Taking due note of the information provided and in light of the discrepancies between the Government’s comments and the LO’s observations, the Committee requests the Government once again to clarify whether seafarers not resident in Denmark but working on board DIS ships, whether employed under a collective agreement according to section 10(3) of the DIS Act or individually employed, have the right to become members of a Danish trade union that is not party to the DIS Main Agreement.