Solicitud directa (CEACR) - Adopción: 2006, Publicación: 96ª reunión CIT (2007)

Convenio sobre la libertad sindical y la protección del derecho de sindicación, 1948 (núm. 87) - Georgia (Ratificación : 1999)

The Committee notes the recently adopted Labour Code and wishes to raise in this respect the following points.

–         According to section 49(1), strike is a temporary and voluntary refusal by an employee to partially or fully fulfil his/her obligations under the labour contract with the purpose of regulating subsequent relations within the framework of a labour dispute (defined, under section 47(3), as a dispute connected with the violation of human rights and freedom envisaged by the Georgian legislation – dispute of rights and with a violation of the contract and/or labour conditions – contractual dispute). It is therefore not clear whether workers may go on strike regarding interests, disputes or in respect of a violation of conditions of work contained in an existing collective agreement. It is further unclear whether recourse to sympathy strikes and to protest strikes is permitted. The Committee requests the Government to provide the information clarifying these matters.

–         According to section 51(4) and (5), the strike of employees who are informed about termination of the contract before the dispute arises, shall be considered illegal and if the right to strike arises before the termination of the time-based contract, the strike shall be considered illegal after the expiration of the term of the contract. While bearing in mind the ban on dismissing workers during a strike set out in sections 36(6), 49(10) and 52(1), the Committee considers that limitations on strike action related to termination of contracts could totally restrict any protest action taken by workers relating to what they might consider to be unjustifiable terminations. The Committee requests the Government to repeal provisions contained in section 51(4) and (5) and to keep it informed of the measures taken or envisaged in this respect.

–         Section 49(1) stipulates that “persons specified in the Georgian legislation do not have the right to participate in strikes”. The Committee requests the Government to provide a list of persons who do not have a right to strike along with the relevant legislation.

–         Section 51(2) prohibits strikes in sectors where “work is impossible to suspend due to the technological mode of work”. The Committee recalls that the only possible exceptions to the right to strike are those which may be imposed for public servants exercising authority in the name of the State, workers in essential services in the strict sense of the term, and in the event of an acute national emergency. The authorities may however establish a system of minimum service in services which are of public utility in order to avoid damages which are irreversible or out of all proportion to the occupational interests of the parties to the dispute, as well as damages to third parties, namely the users or consumers who suffer the economic effects of collective disputes. The minimum services could be appropriate in situations in which a substantial restriction or a total prohibition of strike action would not appear to be justified and where, without calling into question the right to strike of the large majority of workers, one might consider ensuring that users’ basic needs are met or that facilities operate safely or without interruption (see General Survey of 1994 on freedom of association and collective bargaining, paragraphs 160 and 162). The Committee requests the Government to amend section 51(2) accordingly to the above principle and to keep it informed of the measures taken or envisaged in this respect.

–         Section 49(8) provides that a strike cannot continue for more than 90 calendar days. The Committee considers that no such arbitrary periods of limitations should be placed on the right to strike and advises the Government to give consideration to appropriate mechanisms of conciliation, mediation or voluntary arbitration instead.

–         Section 49(5) provides that, after the warning strike, the parties shall participate in the work of the conciliatory commission pursuant to the Labour Code. The Committee notes, however, that the Code does not seem to provide for any rules or procedure of such a commission. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the functioning, the mandate and the effect of this commission.

–         According to section 46(1) and (2), an employee’s rights may be limited by the labour contract due to the importance of the production process and if it may cause direct damage to the interests of the employer. The Committee expresses its concern over the impact this section might have on the exercise of the legitimate trade union rights and requests the Government to indicate how this section is used in practice.