Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87) - Switzerland (Ratification: 1975)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2022, published 111st ILC session (2023)

Article 3 of the Convention. The right of organizations to organize their activities and to formulate their programmes. The Committee notes the decision of the Federal Court of 9 October 2018, ruling unconstitutional the prohibition of the right to strike for all cantonal health care personnel, given that the law adopted by the cantonal parliament did not distinguish between categories of personnel of public healthcare establishments, that is between those whose presence was or was not essential for the preservation of the life and health of patients. Referring to its previous comments relating to the denial of the right to strike in the public service in two cantons, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that there have been no new developments in this matter. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on this matter and to indicate, where relevant, any initiatives of the competent cantonal authorities concerned to ensure that the prohibition of the right to strike in the public service is limited strictly to officials exercising authority in the name of the State, or any applications for review by the courts on this subject.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2018, published 108th ILC session (2019)

Article 3 of the Convention. The right of organizations to organize their activities and to formulate their programmes. The Committee recalls that its previous comments addressed the prohibition of the right to strike in the public service in two cantons. In its previous replies, the Government indicated that the right to strike is recognized both in the federal Constitution, and in all other cantons and all communities for public officials and specifies that, on the basis of the federal Constitution and the case law of the federal court, the two cantonal laws would be declared void in the event of a review procedure before a court. Nevertheless, in view of the principle of separation of powers, the Government is not entitled to intervene as such cases are ruled on directly by the courts. The Committee had requested the Government to indicate any initiative by the competent authorities of the cantons concerned to ensure that the prohibition of the right to strike in the public service is limited strictly to public officials exercising authority in the name of the State, or any applications for review by the courts on this subject. In its reply, the Government indicates that there are no new developments or judicial complaint since the last report. The Committee notes these indications and requests the Government to indicate any new developments, including any applications for review by the courts on this subject.

In addition, the Committee notes the communication by the Government of the Federal Court’s decision dated 6 September 2017, the broad scope of which covers various issues, including the recognition of trade unions’ right to access the employer’s premises, as an essential component of freedom of association.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2015, published 105th ILC session (2016)

The Committee notes the observations of the International Organisation of Employers (IOE), received on 1 September 2015, which are of a general nature.

Article 3 of the Convention. The right of organizations to organize their activities and to formulate their programmes. The Committee’s previous comments addressed the need to provide for Confederation personnel, which is excluded from the right to strike, particularly persons exercising authority in the name of the State or providing essential services under federal law, compensatory procedures for the settlement of disputes, such as impartial conciliation or arbitration procedures seen to be reliable by the parties concerned. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the amendment of the Act on Confederation Personnel, which entered into force on July 2013, did not introduce compensatory measures for the settlement of disputes. The Committee requests the Government to indicate situations, if any, in which section 24 of the Act on Confederation Personnel or section 96 of the Ordinance on Confederation Personnel have been used, and to specify the possible avenues for redress that serve as compensatory guarantees for the settlement of disputes.

Furthermore, the Committee’s previous comments addressed the prohibition of the right to strike in the public service in two cantons. Noting that the right to strike is recognized both in the federal Constitution, and in all other cantons and all communities for public officials, the Committee requested the Government to indicate any initiative by the competent authorities of the cantons concerned to ensure that the prohibition of the right to strike in the public service is limited strictly to public officials exercising authority in the name of the State. In its reply, the Government indicates that it referred the issue to the two cantons concerned but that it has not received a reply in return. The Government reiterates that on the basis of the federal Constitution and the case law of the federal court, the two cantonal laws would be declared void in the event of a review procedure before a court. However, given the principle of the separation of powers, it is not incumbent on the Government to intervene, since the cases in question are directly ruled on by the courts. The Committee notes these indications and requests the Government to provide information on any new developments, including any applications for review by the courts on this subject.

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

Comments received from employers’ and workers’ organizations. The Committee notes the comments made by the Union of Swiss Employers (UPS) on 3 September 2012, by the Swiss Federation of Trade Unions (USS) on 30 August 2012, and by Travail.Suisse on 24 August 2012, on the application of the Convention.

The Committee also notes the comments made by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) on 31 July 2012, on the application of the Convention, as well as the reply of the Government to these comments, received on 30 November 2012. The Committee will examine this information at its next session. The Committee requests the Government to provide its observations in reply to these comments which will be examined in the regular cycle.

The Committee further notes the comments made by the Geneva Trade Union Action Group (CGAS), dated 30 August 2012, which question the conformity of the provisions of the new Constitution of the Canton of Geneva with the principles of freedom of association contained in the Convention. The Committee observes that the draft new Constitution of the Canton of Geneva contains two provisions relating to freedom of association and the right to strike. Section 36 of the draft provides that freedom of association is guaranteed, that no person may be discriminated against because of trade union membership or activity, that trade union information is available in all workplaces and that disputes are settled primarily through negotiation or mediation. Section 37 of the draft, which deals with the right to strike, provides that this right and the right of collective lay-offs are guaranteed if they relate to employment relationships and are consistent with the obligation to preserve industrial peace or resort to conciliation. Furthermore, according to this provision, the law may prohibit certain categories of persons from striking or restrict a strike in order to ensure a minimum service. The Committee notes the Government’s reply that it is not for the federal administration to comment in view of the principle of cantonal sovereignty. The Government adds that in so far as the Constitution is adopted by popular vote, it will be submitted for approval to the Swiss Parliament. The Committee observes that sections 36 and 37 of the draft Constitution address the exercise of freedom of association and the right to strike only in general terms and do not seem in themselves to violate the Convention.

Article 3 of the Convention. The right of organizations to carry out their activities in full freedom and to formulate their activity programmes. The Committee recalls that for many years its comments have addressed the need to provide for Confederation personnel excluded from the right to strike, particularly persons exercising authority in the name of the State or providing essential services under federal law, compensatory procedures for the settlement of disputes, such as mediation or impartial arbitration procedures seen to be reliable by the parties concerned. Thus, in its previous comments the Committee noted the review being carried out of the Act on Confederation Personnel and asked the Government to address the issue of including such measures in the Act, in consultation with the trade unions concerned. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the revision of the Act on Confederation Personnel does not provide for any compensatory measures for the settlement of disputes. The Committee once again urges the Government to take the necessary measures, in consultation with the trade unions concerned, to ensure that the Confederation workers exercising authority in the name of the State or providing essential services who are denied the right to strike are afforded compensatory guarantees, in accordance with the above principles.

The Committee recalls that for many years its comments have also addressed the issue of the prohibition on the right to strike in the public service in certain cantons. It notes the Government’s indication that striking is recognized in the federal Constitution, in all cantons and all communities, except for two cantons which prohibit all their public officials from striking. The Committee notes that, according to Travail.Suisse, the general prohibition on strikes in the two cantons offends against the federal Constitution and the organization expects the Secretariat for Economic Affairs to remind the cantons concerned of the restrictions on the right to strike deriving from the Constitution. In these circumstances, the Committee once again urges the Government and the competent authorities of the cantons concerned to undertake any initiatives, measures or consultations needed to ensure that the prohibition on the right to strike in the public service is limited strictly to public officials exercising authority in the name of the State. The Government is requested to indicate in its next report any development in this regard.

In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to guarantee respect of the principle that trade unions must be able to enter the workplace. The Committee notes that, in its latest communication, the USS/SGB again cites new instances of obstacles to the presence of unions at the workplace in one canton’s public administration as well as in the catering and retail sectors. The Committee is bound to point out once again that the right conferred by Article 3 of the Convention on workers’ and employers’ organizations to organize their activities and formulate their action programmes in full freedom in order to defend the occupational interests of their members, in observance of the law, includes in particular the right to hold trade union meetings and the right of trade union officers to have access to places of work and to communicate with management. The Committee trusts that the Government will ensure full observance of this principle in the future.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2010, published 100th ILC session (2011)

The Committee notes the comments submitted by the Union of Swiss Employers (UPS) and the Swiss Federation of Trade Unions (USS/SGB) in September 2010, and the Government’s reply. It further notes the comments made by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) on 24 August 2010 concerning the application of the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to send its observations in reply to the ITUC’s comments.

Article 3 of the Convention. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that the Ordinance on Confederation Personnel, which took effect on 1 January 2002, excludes from the right to strike persons exercising authority in the name of the State or providing essential services, and asked the Government to take the necessary steps to establish compensatory machinery for workers exercising authority in the name of the State or providing essential services who are denied the right to strike. The Committee notes that, in its report, the Government states that: (1) the Federal Council decided at its sitting of 12 March 2010 to postpone revision of the Act on Confederation Personnel until a federal strategy on personnel has been adopted; (2) in revising the abovementioned Act and simplifying decision-making and dispute-settlement procedures, the Confederation as employer seeks greater flexibility in its relations with its employees; (3) the revision of the Act pursues a number of objectives, such as greater flexibility in regulating the termination of employment relationships and the simplification of appeals procedures; and (4) as regards the interpretation of Article 3 of the Convention, it refers to its previous comments. The Committee is bound once again to recall its basic position that the right to strike is an intrinsic corollary of the right to organize protected by the Convention and, where this right is restricted or prohibited, workers who are thus deprived of an essential means of defending their socio-economic and occupational interests should be afforded compensatory guarantees, for example conciliation and mediation procedures leading, in the event of deadlock, to arbitration machinery seen to be reliable by the parties concerned. The Committee trusts that in the process to adopt a federal strategy on personnel which should culminate in the revision of the Act on Confederation Personnel, due account will be taken of the need to provide workers exercising authority in the name of the State or providing essential services, who are deprived of the right to strike, with compensatory guarantees for the settlement of disputes. The Committee requests the Government to address this matter in consultation with the trade union organizations concerned and in its next report to indicate all progress made in this regard.

With regard to the prohibition on the right to strike for public officials of some cantons and the obstacles to the exercise of this right which allegedly exist in some communes, the Committee has been pointing out for many years that any prohibition on the right to strike in the public service should be confined to public officials exercising authority in the name of the State. In this connection, the Government refers the Committee to its previous reports in which it stated that it is the responsibility in the first place of the cantons and communes to bring their laws and regulations into conformity with the Federal Constitution, under which strike action is lawful in certain circumstances. The Committee requests the Government and the competent authorities to ensure that the prohibition of the right to strike in the public service is limited to public officials exercising authority in the name of the State. The Government is requested to indicate in its next report any initiatives, measures or consultations undertaken on this matter.

In its previous comments, the Committee asked the Government to provide any information, including decisions and judgements, on instances of trade union leaders being denied access to the workplace. The Committee notes that in its latest communication the USS/SGB yet again cites new instances of obstacles to the presence of unions at the workplace. The Committee notes that in reply the Government states that the principle of the separation of powers bars it from taking a position on decisions made by judicial bodies. The Committee can only recall once again that the right conferred by Article 3 of the Convention on workers’ and employers’ organizations to organize their activities and to formulate their programmes in full freedom in order to defend the occupational interests of their members, in observance of the law, includes in particular the right to hold trade union meetings and the right of trade union officers to have access to places of work and to communicate with management. The Committee requests the Government to ensure full observance of this principle.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2008, published 98th ILC session (2009)

The Committee has taken note of the comments made by the Union of Swiss Employers (UPS) and the Swiss Federation of Trade Unions (USS) transmitted by the Government. The Committee notes the comments from the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) of 29 August 2008 which refers to issues already raised by the Committee, as well as to obstacles to the exercise of trade union activities. The Committee requests the Government to send its observations on the comments above.

Article 3 of the Convention. In its previous comments, noting that the Ordinance on Confederation Personnel, which entered into force on 1 January 2002, excludes from the right to strike persons exercising authority in the name of the State or providing essential services, the Committee had asked the Government to take the necessary steps to set up procedures for the compensation of persons exercising authority in the name of the State or providing essential services who are deprived of the right to strike. The Committee points out that, according to the Government in its report, a partial revision of the Act on Confederation Personnel is at present being negotiated with the staff associations. However, it specifies that this revision does not concern the compensatory measures referred to by the Committee, and that dialogue on the draft revision of the Act will start in the autumn. The Committee notes that, according to the USS, there have been no negotiations on the revision of the Act, and at the very most a consultation with the trade unions concerned. The Committee can only recall, once again, its position of principle whereby the right to strike is an intrinsic corollary to the right to organize protected by the Convention. Consequently, the right to strike is one of the recognized activities of workers’ organizations within the meaning of Article 3 of the Convention. If this right is restricted or prohibited, workers who are thus deprived of an essential means of defending their socio-economic and occupational interests, should be afforded compensatory guarantees, for example, conciliation and mediation procedures leading, in the event of deadlock, to arbitration machinery seen to be reliable by the parties concerned (see General Survey of 1994 on freedom of association and collective bargaining, paragraphs 149 and 164). The Committee requests the Government to take the necessary steps to ensure that persons exercising authority in the name of the State or providing essential services, who are deprived of the right to strike, might benefit from compensatory guarantees for the settlement of disputes. The Government is encouraged to raise this matter in consultation with the trade union organizations concerned in the context of the process under way to review the Act on Confederation Personnel and to indicate any new developments in this respect.

With regard to the prohibition of the right to strike for public officials of some cantons and the obstacles to the exercise of this right which allegedly exist in some communes, the Committee had noted in its previous comments that the results of consultations with the cantons had been forwarded to a parliamentary committee entrusted with considering an initiative seeking ratification by Switzerland of the European Social Charter. It had recalled that its comments did not seek to obtain recognition of the right to strike for all public employees of the cantons and communes, but only for those who do not exercise authority in the name of the State in the few cantons where this right is still not recognized. The Committee notes that, according to the Government, the parliamentary initiative was set aside on 17 December 2004. Taking into account the Government’s previous replies that it is the responsibility in the first place of the cantons and communes to bring their laws and regulations into conformity with the Constitution which recognizes the lawfulness of strike action in certain circumstances, but recalling that, by virtue of the provisions of the Convention, the prohibition of the right to strike in the public service should be limited to public officials exercising authority in the name of the State, the Committee requests the Government to indicate any consultations, initiatives or measures, at all levels, to bring about recognition of the right to strike for public employees who do not exercise authority in the name of the State in those cantons where this right is still not recognized.

In its previous comments, the Committee had requested the Government to comment, or at least provide information, on any judicial procedures under way or any judgements concerning obstacles to the access of trade union leaders to the workplace. The Committee notes the Government’s reply that the only information at its disposal consists of decisions and judgements officially published, which are therefore open to the public, or cases under examination in which it cannot take a position because of the principle of the separation of powers. The Committee also notes that the USS and ITUC refer once again to this matter in their communications. The Committee recalls that the right, by virtue of Article 3 of the Convention, for workers’ and employers’ organizations to organize their activities in full freedom and formulate their programmes with a view to defending all of the occupational interests of their members, while respecting the law of the land, includes in particular the right to hold trade union meetings, and the right of trade union officers to have access to places of work and to communicate with management (see General Survey, op. cit., paragraph 128). The Committee requests the Government to provide any information, including decisions and judgements, concerning obstacles to the access of trade unions to the workplace.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2006, published 96th ILC session (2007)

The Committee takes note of the Government’s report. It also notes the comments by the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) dated 10 August 2006, those of the Swiss Federation of Trade Unions dated 12 September 2006, and those of the Swiss Employers’ Federation dated 28 September 2006, all of which refer to matters that the Committee has already raised.

Article 3 of the Convention. 1. In its previous comments, noting that the Ordinance on Confederation Personnel, which entered into force on 1 January 2002, excludes from the right to strike persons exercising authority in the name of the State or providing essential services, the Committee asked the Government to indicate the compensatory guarantees provided for in the legislation for the staff of the federal administration (other than the armed forces) who are deprived of the right to strike, and in particular for civilian customs personnel. The Committee notes the Government’s statement that no measures or procedures are in place or planned for staff of the federal administration who are denied the right to strike, and that there have been no judgements concerning federal staff and the Convention. The Government also indicates that the Committee’s interpretation of the Convention’s provisions on the right to strike is not authoritative and was not taken up by the Conference Committee.

The Committee once again points out that the right to strike must be considered as an activity of workers’ organizations within the meaning of Article 3 of the Convention and that if this right is restricted or prohibited, workers who are thus deprived of an essential means of defending their socio-economic and occupational interests should be afforded compensatory guarantees, for example conciliation and mediation procedures leading, in the event of deadlock, to arbitration machinery seen to be reliable by the parties concerned (see General Survey of 1994 on freedom of association and collective bargaining, paragraphs 149 and 164). The Committee therefore requests the Government to take the necessary steps to set up procedures for the compensation of persons exercising authority in the name of the State or providing essential services who are deprived of the right to strike, and to provide information in its next report on all such measures taken.

2. With regard to the prohibition of the right to strike for public officials of some cantons and the obstacles to the exercise of this right which are said to exist in some communes, the Committee noted previously that the results of consultations with the cantons had been sent to a committee of the National Council, and asked the Government to provide information on the results of these consultations to enable it to examine the legislation and practice. The Committee notes that, according to the Government, the results of the consultation were indeed forwarded to a parliamentary committee charged with considering a parliamentary initiative filed in 1991 seeking ratification by Switzerland of the European Social Charter. In the Swiss parliamentary system, a parliamentary initiative is dealt with directly by Parliament and the Government assists Parliament with specific tasks. Here, the matter was examined in the light of Article 6(4) of the European Social Charter which refers to the right to strike, and not the Convention, which says nothing on the subject. In accordance with the principle of the separation of powers and in view of the fact that, in Switzerland, parliamentary initiatives are dealt with directly by Parliament and not by the Government, the Government has no authority to disseminate a text intended for a parliamentary committee. The Government wished to point out that the Swiss Federation of Trade Unions has asked that the Tripartite Committee on ILO Matters discuss the situation regarding the right to strike in the cantons and communes in the light of article 28 of the Federal Constitution and that it is not in a position to be seized of the matter because recognition of the right to strike in general and for the personnel of the cantons and communes in particular does not derive from the Convention. The Committee would point out that it sought in its comments to obtain recognition of the right to strike not for all public employees of the cantons and communes, but only for those who do not exercise authority in the name of the State in the few cantons where this right is still not recognized. The Committee takes note of the Government’s view on the Convention’s requirements in this matter. It nevertheless observes that the Government has embarked on a dialogue and in-depth consultations on the matter in the context of the European Social Charter and requests it to report on any progress made in this respect.

3. The Committee previously requested the Government to comment on any judicial procedures under way or any judgements concerning obstacles to trade union leaders’ access to the workplace. The Committee notes the Government’s statement that it does not interfere in matters that are the domain of the judiciary and that the Swiss courts are under no obligation to send their decisions to the Government. The Committee notes that the Swiss Federation of Trade Unions has provided some fairly specific information on the matter. In the Committee’s view, the Government should be in a position at least to provide information on any administrative or judicial proceedings. It again asks the Government to send its comments on the matter.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2004, published 93rd ILC session (2005)

The Committee takes note of the Government’s report, as well as the observations made by the Swiss Federation of Trade Unions (USS) and the Swiss Employers’ Federation transmitted with the Government’s report.

The Committee notes, in particular, the Government’s indication that there has been no change in the law or practice.

Article 3 of the Convention. 1. In its previous comments, the Committee had noted that the Ordinance on Confederation Personnel, which entered into force on 1 January 2002, prohibited the right to strike for persons exercising authority in the name of the State or providing essential services. It had asked the Government to indicate the compensatory guarantees provided for in the legislation for these categories of workers.

The Committee notes the Government’s statement that no compensatory guarantees are provided for the personnel of the federal administration who are deprived of the right to strike.

The Committee recalls in this regard that the right to strike must be considered as an activity of workers’ organizations within the meaning of Article 3 and that if this right is subject to restrictions or a prohibition, workers who are thus deprived of an essential means of defending their socio-economic and occupational interests should be afforded compensatory guarantees, for example conciliation and mediation procedures leading, in the event of deadlock, to arbitration machinery seen to be reliable by the parties concerned (see General Survey on freedom of association and collective bargaining, 1994, paragraphs 149 and 164).

The Committee therefore asks the Government to indicate, in its next report, the measures taken or envisaged to establish compensatory procedures for the personnel of the Federal administration - other than the members of the armed forces - who are deprived of the right to strike, in particular for the civil customs personnel.

2. As regards the prohibition of the right to strike for public officials of some cantons and the obstacles to the exercise of this right which are said to exist in some Swiss communes, the Committee notes that the results of the consultation with the cantons has been transmitted to a Commission of the National Council. It asks the Government to provide it with information on the results of these consultations so that it may examine the legislation and practice in this regard.

3. Noting that the USS refers in its comments to judicial procedures underway and to judgements concerning obstacles to trade union leaders’ access to the workplace, the Committee asks the Government to transmit its observations thereon.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2002, published 91st ILC session (2003)

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its report. It notes in particular the entry into force on 3 July 2001 of the Ordinance respecting employees of the Confederation (Opers), and the ruling by the Federal Tribunal of 28 June 1999 on the exercise of the right to strike.

Article 3 of the Convention. 1. Right to strike and recourse to compulsory arbitration. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to explain whether recourse to arbitration on the issue of compensation for cost-of-living increases, in the context of the collective agreements covering the federal railways and the Swiss post, was compulsory for the parties or whether the latter could decline recourse to the arbitration tribunal on this matter and, as a consequence, have recourse to strike action. The Committee notes the information contained in the Government’s report to the effect that it considers that recourse to an arbitration tribunal by the parties to the collective agreement is not of a compulsory nature, but rather a possibility offered to each party. Furthermore, the Government mentions that respect for absolute labour peace is envisaged by the collective agreement and that, if the latter is violated or placed under threat, for example by strike action, the parties undertake to enter into negotiations and, if they do not reach agreement, recourse to conciliation and arbitration procedures then becomes compulsory.

2. Furthermore, the Committee notes that the Ordinance respecting employees of the Confederation, which prohibits the right to strike for persons in positions of authority or providing essential services was approved on 3 July 2001 by the Federal Council and entered into force on 1 January 2002. In this respect, the Committee recalls that workers who are thus deprived of an essential means of defending their occupational interests should be afforded compensatory guarantees, for example appropriate, impartial and rapid conciliation and arbitration procedures, in all stages of which those concerned should be able to participate, and that the awards should be binding on both parties and once issued should be implemented rapidly and completely (see the General Survey on freedom of association and collective bargaining, paragraph 164). The Committee requests the Government to indicate in its next report the compensatory guarantees envisaged in the legislation for these categories of workers.

3. Finally, the Committee notes the comments made by the Swiss Federation of Trade Unions (USS) concerning the absolute prohibition of the right to strike for public officials in seven cantons and the obstacles to this right which exist in many Swiss communes. In this respect, the Committee notes the Government’s reply that article 28 of the Federal Constitution recognizes the lawful nature of strikes under certain conditions and it is the responsibility in the first place of the cantons and communes to bring their laws and regulations into conformity with this constitutional requirement. The Government explains that public institutions are sovereign with regard to regulations respecting the right to strike, and that it is not therefore for the Confederation to enumerate the cantons and communes which prohibit the right to strike of their employees in light of the above constitutional provision. While noting this information, the Committee wishes to recall that, both at the level of the cantons and of communes, the prohibition on the right to strike in the public service should be limited to public officials exercising authority in the name of the State. The Committee also requests the Government to keep it informed of the outcome of the consultations that it intends to hold with the cantons in the context of the parliamentary initiative for the ratification of the European Social Charter.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2001, published 90th ILC session (2002)

The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government in its report.

It notes in particular that section 16 of the new Act on Confederation Employees, in its third paragraph, states that when labour relations are regulated by a collective labour agreement pursuant to section 38, the collective agreement shall regulate compensation for cost of living increases. If the parties fail to reach agreement on the amount of such compensation, the amount shall be set by the arbitration court. Furthermore, under section 38(3), the collective agreement shall provide for referral to arbitration, with the court of arbitration deciding the matter when the parties fail to agree on the amount of the compensation or on social coverage. The Committee asks the Government in its next report to explain whether the parties may decline to take the matter to the court of arbitration and resort directly to industrial action, or whether they must submit the dispute regarding cost of living increases to arbitration and are bound by that decision.

The Committee noted in an earlier report sent by the Government the statement that the various departments were being consulted about the draft ordinance on federal employees which was to allow employees of the federal administration to strike, with the exception of those employees in positions of authority or essential services. The Committee asks the Government to report on the status of the above consultations and to provide a copy of the ordinance as soon as it is adopted.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2001, published 90th ILC session (2002)

The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government in its report, as well as the additional information sent by the Government in reply to the specific comments made last year by the Swiss Federation of Trade Unions concerning restrictions on the right to strike in certain cantons which was received during the Committee’s meeting. The Committee will examine this additional information at its next meeting.

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

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its report and the observations made by the Swiss Federation of Trade Unions, the Swiss Union of Arts and Crafts (USAN) and the Vaud Chamber of Arts and Crafts.

The Committee notes with satisfaction the information provided by the Government in its report to the effect that a new article 28, entitled "freedom of association", has been added to the revised Federal Constitution, which came into force on 1 January 2000. Paragraph 1 of this article explicitly enshrines the right of workers, employers and their organizations to associate in the defence of their interests, establish associations and join them or not, while paragraphs 2 to 4 of article 28 recognize the legality of strikes and lockouts, provided that they are related to industrial relations and are in conformity with the obligations of maintaining labour peace and having recourse to conciliation.

Furthermore, with reference to its previous comments on the need to amend the national legislation (section 23(1) of the Federal Act of 30 June 1927, prohibiting strike action by public servants), in order to ensure that public employees other than those exercising authority in the name of the State, and their organizations, have the right to strike as a means of defending their economic, social and occupational interests, the Committee notes with interest that section 24 of the Act respecting federal employees, which was endorsed by the Federal Chambers on 24 March 2000, provides that the Federal Council may only restrict or prohibit the right to strike where so required by the security of the State, the safeguard of its interests governed by external relations or the guarantee of vital supplies or goods for the country. The Committee notes that, according to the Government, the Act will come into force on 1 July 2002 at the latest.

The Government also states that a draft ordinance respecting federal employees, which is currently being submitted for consultation to the offices, provides that the right to strike is prohibited for certain categories of personnel who exercise functions of authority or who provide essential services. All the other employees of the federal administration enjoy the right to strike.

The Committee requests the Government to make its comments on the observations of the Swiss Federation of Trade Unions concerning restrictions on the right to strike in certain cantons.

[The Government is asked to report in detail in 2001.]

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1998, published 87th ILC session (1999)

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its report concerning the application of the Convention.

With reference to its previous comments on the need to amend the national legislation (section 23(1) of the Federal Act of 30 June 1927, prohibiting strike action by public servants), in order to ensure that public employees other than those exercising authority in the name of the State, and their organizations, have the right to strike as a means of defending their economic, social and occupational interests, the Committee notes that the Government again indicates in its report that the statement concerning the total revision of the Act of 1927 has not yet been adopted. It nevertheless adds that the draft text in respect of the employees of the Confederation was submitted for consultation on 6 May 1998, and that the consultation procedure should be concluded by 31 August 1998. This statement should be submitted to the Federal Council at the beginning of 1999. The draft text is expected to come into force on 1 January 2001.

The Committee notes with interest that section 34 of the draft text repeals the Act of 30 June 1927 respecting the conditions of service for public servants and that section 21 of the draft text provides that the Federal Council can only restrict or withdraw the right to strike if the security of the State, the safeguard of its interests governed by external relations or the guarantee of vital supplies or goods for the country so require.

The Committee is bound once again to express the firm hope that the revision of the Federal Act on the conditions of public service, taking into account the principles of freedom of association, and, in particular, no longer denying public servants other than those who exercise authority in the name of the State, the right to strike in order to defend their occupational interests, will be adopted in the very near future. The Committee again expresses the firm hope that in its next report the Government will be able to provide information on the measures taken in order to bring its legislation into conformity with the principles of freedom of association without undue delay.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1996, published 85th ILC session (1997)

The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government in its report on the application of the Convention.

1. The ban on strikes by public employees. With reference to its previous comments on the need to amend the national legislation (section 23 (1) of the Federal Act of 30 June 1927, banning strikes by public servants), in order to ensure that public employees other than those exercising authority in the name of the State, and their organizations, have the right to strike as a means of defending their economic, social and occupational interests, the Committee notes that the Government again indicates in its report that the Declaration concerning the total revision of the 1927 Act has not yet been adopted. It none the less adds that a parliamentary committee has conducted a detailed analysis of the question of the right to strike in Switzerland, which was published in its report of 17 November 1995 concerning the parliamentary initiative on the ratification of the European Social Charter. The report refers to a ruling of 23 March 1995 by the Supreme Court on the right to strike in the public service, which expressly confirms the theory that the effect of a strike is the suspension rather than the outright termination of a contract. Lastly, the Government indicates that article 22 of the draft reform of the Federal Constitution is in keeping with this theory in that it recognizes the right to strike and to lockout, and authorizes the law-makers to "establish the procedures for them" and "ban strikes by certain categories of public employees".

The Committee can only express once again the firm hope that the total revision of the Federal Act on the conditions of service of the public service will take account of the principles of freedom of association and, in particular, that it will not deny public servants other than those who exercise authority in the name of the State the right to strike in order to defend their occupational interests if they so wish (see General Survey of 1994 on freedom of association and collective bargaining, paragraph 158). The Committee again expresses the firm hope that the Government's next report will indicate any measures taken to bring its legislation into line with the principles of freedom of association.

2. Penalties imposed on railwaymen for striking in 1989. The Committee notes with interest that the penalties imposed on railwaymen in September 1989 following a demonstration of their discontent which was treated as a strike, have been quashed without further ado.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1995, published 82nd ILC session (1995)

The Committee notes the Government's report concerning the application of the Convention.

1. The ban on strikes by public employees. With reference to its previous comments on the need to amend the national legislation (section 23(1) of the Federal Act of 30 June 1927, banning strikes by public servants), in order to ensure that public employees other than those exercising authority in the name of the State, and their organizations, have the right to strike as a means of defending their economic, social and occupational interests, the Committee notes the Government's indication in its report that the federal Declaration concerning the total revision of the 1927 Act will not be adopted before 1995, and that it is therefore unable to provide particulars of the amendments envisaged.

The Committee must therefore express once again the hope that the Declaration concerning the total revision of the Federal Act on the conditions of service of the public service will take account of the principles of freedom of association and, in particular, that it will not deny public servants other than those who exercise authority in the name of the State the right to strike in order to defend their occupational interests if they so wish (see 1994 General Survey on Freedom of Association and Collective Bargaining, paragraph 158). It again asks the Government to indicate in its next report any measures taken in this regard.

2. Penalties imposed on railway men for striking in 1989. While recalling that the exercise of the right to strike does not in principle justify the imposition of sanctions on striking workers and that the maintaining of the employment relationship is a normal legal consequence of the recognition of the right to strike (see 1994 General Survey on Freedom of Association and Collective Bargaining, page 139), the Committee notes with interest that, in its report, the Government indicates that the representative of the railway men concerned has been contacted with a view to quashing the above penalties which, in any case, have not yet been applied since the appeal has the effect of suspending their execution. In view of the fact that an agreement on the matter should be signed in the near future it is unlikely, according to the Government, that there will be a court decision on the matter. The Committee asks the Government to provide a copy of the above agreement.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1994, published 81st ILC session (1994)

The Committee notes the Government's report and the comments of the Swiss Federation of Trade Unions (USS) on the application of the Convention.

1. Denial of the right to strike of public servants. With reference to its previous comments on the need to amend the national legislation (section 23(1) of the federal Act of 30 June 1927 banning strikes by public servants) in order to guarantee that public servants who are not agents of the public authority and their organizations have the right to strike as a means of defending their economic, social and occupational interests, the Committee notes the Government's statement in its report that the Federal Council has not yet issued any decision as to the amendments it intends to propose to Parliament in the context of the federal Act concerning the conditions of service of the public service, but that it is planned to deal with this issue in the Statement concerning the total revision of the above Act, which is to be adopted in 1994.

The Committee also notes the comments of the USS to the effect that the ban on the right to strike affects all public employees of the Confederation, regardless of their functions or the length of their appointments. The USS also considers that the fact that decisions concerning the status of public servants lie with Parliament does not release the Government from its obligation to propose the revision of the federal Act concerning public servants.

The Committee once again expresses the hope that the Statement concerning the total revision of the federal Act respecting the conditions of service of the public service will take account of the principles of freedom of association, and asks the Government to indicate any measures taken in this respect in its next report, and that it will, in particular, guarantee the right strike for the defence of their professional interests, at least to the civil servants other than those exercising authority in the name of the State (see 1994 General Survey on Freedom of Association and Collective Bargaining, para. 158).

2. Sanctions imposed upon railwaymen for striking. The Committee notes that, in its report, the Government states that no court decisions have been handed down during the period covered by the report.

It notes in this connection that the USS indicates that the workers concerned are unable, because of the type of disciplinary measures to which they are liable, to appeal to the joint disciplinary committee, that they are not entitled to appeal to the Federal Tribunal, and that the USS together with its public service federations is seeking a lower threshold for the lodging of appeals with the Federal Tribunal. According to the USS, generally speaking the protection against dismissal provided for in the law is weak, which enables certain employers to restrict the exercise of the right to strike.

In these circumstances, the Committee must point out that under Articles 3 and 10 of the Convention workers' organizations have the right to organize their activities freely in order to promote and defend the interests of their members, including by calling strikes, and that the authorities must refrain from any intervention liable to restrict this right or to impair the legal exercise thereof. In the Committee's view, moreover, legislation should provide for genuine protection in this respect, otherwise the right to strike may be devoid of content (see 1994 General Survey, op. cit., para. 139).

The Committee recalls the Government's indication in its previous report that 11 employees of the federal railways (CFF) who were penalized for going on strike had filed a second and final appeal, and again asks the Government to provide copies of the respective judgements as soon as they have been handed down.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1993, published 80th ILC session (1993)

With reference to its previous comments, the Committee notes the Government's report, which deals with the following two points:

1. Denial of the right to strike of public servants. The Government indicates in its report that the conditions of service of employees of the federal administration are covered by federal public law. Their general legal status is therefore determined by the federal Parliament, within which associations of federal employees are represented or may have their views put forward. The Government adds that, although no decision as to the principle has yet been taken at this stage, it is envisaged that the conditions of service of federal public servants will be revised. The discussions and consultations which will take place in this context could eventually cover the problem of the right to strike with a view to finding a satisfactory solution. The Government however notes that any decision to modify federal legislation, whether concerning conciliation and arbitration procedures or the right to strike, lies in the final instance with the federal Parliament.

The Committee hopes that the legislation, which establishes consultative machinery but does not establish conciliation or arbitration procedures enabling public servants (who are forbidden to strike by section 23(1) of the federal Act of 30 June 1927 respecting the conditions of service of federal employees) to defend their economic and social interests and put their claims forward to an impartial body which issues binding awards, will be amended in line with the Committee's previous comments. It requests the Government to indicate in its next report the practical measures that it has taken to bring its legislation into conformity with the Convention.

2. Sanctions imposed upon railwaymen for striking. The Committee takes due note of the detailed information supplied by the Government concerning the disciplinary procedure undertaken against certain mechanics employed by the federal railways.

The Committee requests the Government to supply the text of judgements of the appeals which have been made by the workers concerned and are still under way.

Noting furthermore that the Swiss Federation of Trade Unions (USS) has furnished its comments on the two above-mentioned points in a communication received on 17 February 1993, the Committee will examine the substance of these comments following the Government's observations thereon and during the next session on the application of the Convention.

[The Government is asked to report in detail for the period ending 30 June 1993.]

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1991, published 78th ILC session (1991)

The Committee notes the Government's report received in the Office on 18 October 1990, and the comments of the Swiss Federation of Trade Unions (USS), made in a communication dated 5 February 1991.

According to the Government, the legislation does not establish a conciliation or arbitration procedure through which public servants (who are forbidden to strike by section 23(1) of the Federal Act of 30 June 1927 respecting the conditions of service of federal employees) may defend their economic and social interests and put their claims to an impartial body that issues binding awards. The Committee also notes, from the information supplied by the Government in its report, that following a two-week go-slow in September 1989 by the Swiss Locomotive Mechanics Union, 20 strikers were sentenced to disciplinary measures by the court of first instance, ranging from reprimands to suspension, with a corresponding reduction in wages.

The USS states that, in its opinion, there is no justification for the denial of the right to strike in the federal administration and in many cantonal administrations, and that the situation is made worse by the lack of conciliation and arbitration procedures. The "peace at work" referred to by the Government can only be a result of a full negotiating process and cannot be based on restrictions that are imposed on the staff of the public services. The USS affirms that the trade unions of employees in the public service maintain their refusal of the absolute prohibition of strikes and that their latest action in 1986 to have the legislation amended was unproductive, as were several previous such interventions.

1. In the opinion of the Committee, the principle whereby the right to strike may be limited or prohibited in the public service or in essential services would become meaningless if the legislation defined the public service or essential services too broadly. The Committee therefore points out that the prohibition should be confined to public servants acting in their capacity as agents of the public authority or to services whose interruption would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population. Moreover, workers who are thus denied one of the essential means of defending their occupational interests should be afforded, to offset these restrictions, adequate impartial and speedy conciliation and arbitration procedures in which the parties concerned can take part at every stage and in which the awards should in all cases be binding on both parties. Such awards, once rendered, should be rapidly and fully implemented (1983 General Survey, para. 214).

The Committee requests the Government to indicate in its next report the measures that it intends to take to bring its legislation into conformity with the Convention in the sense of the above comments.

2. With regard to the sanctions imposed upon railwaymen for striking, the Committee recalls that by virtue of Articles 3 and 10 of the Convention, workers' organisations, subject to the reservations referred to above, shall have the right to organise in full freedom their activities to further and defend the interests of their members - which should include being able to exercise the right to strike - and that the public authorities shall refrain from any interference which would restrict this right or impede the lawful exercise thereof. The Committee notes that the workers appear in this case to have been subjected to disciplinary sanctions for undertaking a go-slow which, by the Government's admission, only slightly disturbed traffic.

The Committee requests the Government to keep it informed of the circumstances of this affair and to supply it with the text of the rulings relating to the appeals made by the workers concerned. It also requests it to indicate whether the courts have handed down other decisions concerning cases of disciplinary sanctions for strikes or similar action.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1989, published 76th ILC session (1989)

The Committee takes note of the report submitted by the Government.

1. Dismissal of strikers at the Eschler-Urania undertaking. Having examined the judgement issued on 18 June 1985 by the Civil Court of the Federal Tribunal concerning the dismissal of ten strikers in June 1979 at the above-mentioned enterprise, the Committee recalls its earlier comments relating to the right to strike which, in its opinion, is one of the essential means which workers and their organisations should have to promote and defend their social and economic interests.

Therefore, the Committee requests the Government and, through it, the representative workers' organisations mentioned in the report to indicate whether the courts have issued other judgements in like cases, namely dismissals for strike action and, if yes, to communicate the texts of said judgements.

2. The right to strike of public servants. The Committee has noted the information provided by the Government concerning the various joint committees and personnel committees established at the federal and cantonal levels. It observes, however, that they seem to have only an advisory function.

Concerning more specifically the right to strike of public servants, the Committee wishes to recall that the principle whereby the right to strike may be limited or prohibited in the public service or in essential services, whether public, semi-public or private, would become meaningless if the legislation defined the public service or essential services too broadly. As the Committee has already mentioned, the prohibition should be confined to public servants acting in their capacity as agents of the public authority or to services whose interruption would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population. Moreover, if strikes are restricted or prohibited in the public service or in essential services, appropriate guarantees must be afforded to protect the workers who are thus denied one of the essential means of defending their occupational interests. Restrictions should be offset by adequate impartial and speedy conciliation and arbitration procedures, in which the parties concerned can take part at every stage and in which the awards should in all cases be binding on both parties. Such awards, once rendered, should be rapidly and fully implemented (General Survey, 1983, paragraph 214).

Therefore, the Committee requests the Government and, through it, the representative workers' organisations mentioned in the report, to provide information on the practical application of the legislative provisions which prohibit strikes by public servants, by indicating, for example, whether there exist conciliation and arbitration procedures enabling them to defend their social and economic interests before an impartial body vested with the authority to issue binding decisions, and to indicate whether monetary, administrative, judicial or other sanctions have been imposed in the past on public servants for their participation in industrial action.