Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 2024, Publication: 112nd ILC session (2024)

Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98) - Türkiye (Ratification: 1952)

Discussion by the Committee

Chairperson – I invite the Government representative of Türkiye, Adviser to the Minister of Labour and Social Security, to take the floor.

Government representative – Before I begin my remarks, I would like to congratulate you and your Vice-Chairpersons on your election to this Committee. I wish you every success in your endeavours to make this Committee’s work more fruitful, objective and meaningful, in a spirit of constructive dialogue.

First of all, I would like to bring to the attention of the Committee that Türkiye is the second country after Finland to ratify Convention No. 98, among Member States party to all fundamental ILO Conventions. This highlights our commitment to international labour standards. Türkiye actively integrates these standards into national legislation through tripartite dialogue, reflecting its dedication to democracy, the rule of law, and universal legal norms. As a founding member of the Council of Europe, G20 and OECD and the 19th largest economy in the world, Türkiye is a significant donor of Official Development Assistance as well.

We regret its inclusion in the final list of individual cases for Convention No. 98 with a double footnote, emphasizing our long-standing partnership with the ILO. Despite geopolitical hardship, along with challenges including a coup attempt, earthquakes and the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, Türkiye urges the Committee to recognize our considerable progress, emphasizing the importance of maintaining the credibility of the supervisory mechanisms.

Since the last discussion in 2013, significant advancements have been made in Türkiye’s labour legislation: the revised articles on determination of the branch of activity; protection of shop stewards; scope and level of the collective labour agreement and benefiting from collective labour agreements; regulating competence; settlement of collective labour disputes; regulating prohibition and postponement of strikes and lockouts; e-membership services for trade union memberships in a few countries worldwide; and initiation of the mediation procedures, encompassing regulations concerning the branch of activity and the extent of collective bargaining agreements. At the same time, there is coverage of the entitlements derived from such agreements, objections regarding competence determinations, competence itself, and prohibitions on strikes and lockouts.

These matters are undeniably significant in the realm of labour, both domestically and internationally, and are addressed with clear favour towards employees. Türkiye’s labour laws and legislation give prominence to the protection of employees, recognizing their position as the weaker party in the employment relationship.

Let me start with the Committee’s concerns on the personal scope of the Convention, particularly regarding prison staff. Collective agreements provide benefits to all public servants, including prison staff, who are ineligible to join unions under article 15, and retired public servants.

A 2023 Constitutional Court decision permits heads of departments, faculty deans, institute and college directors and their deputies to establish and join trade unions, suggesting that their roles in public power do not automatically disqualify them from trade union membership. The justification of this decision may serve as stimulating jurisprudence for narrowing the category of public servants who cannot become members of the trade union.

Regarding locum workers and certain public servants working without a written contract, like teachers, nurses and midwives, their employment relationship is governed by status employment laws, not contracts. Therefore, their exclusion from trade unions aligns with legal stipulations, as outlined in the Public Servants Law.

Correspondingly, the Tripartite Consultation Board, chaired by the Minister of Labour and Social Security Mr Vedat Işikhan, was convened on 20 October 2023, with the agenda entitled “Social Dialogue in the Turkish Century.” Representatives from the Ministry, affiliated institutions, workers and employer confederations attended the meeting to discuss challenges facing the country in this area. Subsequently, it was decided to establish sub-working committees and commence immediate collaboration with confederations, trade unions, lawyers, lecturers and relevant public officials.

The sub-working committee convened its first meeting on 23 May 2024, focusing on challenges within the current Trade Unions Law, particularly concerning the determination of authorization and freedom of association. It has begun to discuss possible amendments to the Law in this regard. It agreed to hold a second meeting on 26 June 2024.

Regarding the allegations of massive dismissals in the public sector, following the 2016 coup attempt, public servants, including some trade union representatives, were dismissed from their positions based on their alleged ties to terrorist organizations. The Inquiry Commission on State of Emergency Actions, operational from 2017 to 2023, aimed to assess and address such dismissals.

Over the past five years, significant judicial efforts have been dedicated to addressing the issues outlined by the Committee.

Accordingly, it is crucial to note that the President of the Republic introduced a judicial reform strategy in May 2019. As part of this strategy, the Eighth Judicial Package, published in March 2024, expanded the mandates and authorities of the Human Rights Compensation Commission, established in 2013, to further shorten litigation processes.

The Compensation Commission is mandated to examine applications related to delayed proceedings within one month from the date of investigation, trial or final decision. It also assesses individual applications at the Constitutional Court within three months and applications made to the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) within three months of the Constitutional Court’s decision of rejection or, as of 10 October 2023, from the notification of the decision of inadmissibility.

As regards allegations of insufficient protection against anti-union dismissals and discrimination in both private and public sectors, out of nearly 1.5 million decisions by the Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office, only 791 were related to impeding trade union rights, with 357 deemed unnecessary for prosecution. This suggests a fair and equitable judicial process.

Special laws governing decisions by Chief Public Prosecutors’ Offices show that only 1,465 out of over 433,000 files fall under the Meetings and Demonstrations Law, with non-prosecution decisions rendered for 877 files.

The last National Employment Strategy workshops, led by the Ministry of Labour and Social Security in 2024, aimed to prevent workplace discrimination and promote civil liberties through collaboration with the social partners. The Human Rights and Equality Institution of Türkiye (TİHEK) will conduct meetings, research studies, workshops and training programmes in the coming years to further these goals.

Collective bargaining bonuses are paid directly to trade union members to ensure unity, simplicity and practicality. Payments are deducted from employees’ salaries and deposited into the trade union’s account as membership dues.

Regarding the observations of the Health Services Union (SAHİM-SEN) on collective bargaining bonuses, the Constitutional Court decision in 2024 nullified the 2 per cent threshold provision. After this cancellation, all public servants who are trade union members began receiving collective bargaining support. I believe all these statistical data and legal developments reflect a positive trend toward the improvement and development of trade union rights in Türkiye.

Collective labour agreements can be established at various levels, including workplaces, companies, multi-employer groups and through framework arrangements. This system has evolved within Türkiye’s robust industrial relations framework over time.

In order to further advance collective bargaining and trade union rights in our country, the Tripartite Consultation Board focuses on strategies to enhance union organization in Türkiye. It anticipated changes in trade union thresholds and challenges faced in determining collective bargaining authorization processes. At the end of the meeting of the Tripartite Consultation Board, two sub-working committees, including social partners, were established to revise the Labour Law and the current Trade Unions Law. The Labour Law sub-working committee started meetings in January 2024 and held three subsequent meetings. The current Trade Unions Law sub-working committee held its first meeting in May 2024, with participation from social partners.

On the other side, regarding the scope of the law on collective bargaining rights of public servants, the Public Personnel Advisory Board convened in November 2023, chaired by the Minister, to enhance social dialogue in the public sector and address challenges faced by public servants, including the expansion of the scope of dialogue and the election mechanism for the Chairman and members of the Public Servants’ Arbitration Board.

At the end of the meeting of the Public Personnel Advisory Board, it was decided to establish sub-working committees to discuss these issues, especially the review of the legislation. The sub-working committees not only addressed the Public Servants Law reviews, but also the development of the framework of financial and social rights, such as reimbursement and food allowance for public officials, as discussed.

Last but not least, the Thirteenth Labour Assembly, which could not convene after its last meeting in 2019 due to the pandemic and the devastating earthquakes, convened in Ankara in April 2024, with the presence of Minister Mr Vedat Işıkhan, Ms Beate Andrees, Assistant Director-General and Regional Director for Europe and Central Asia, Mr Youcef Ghellab, Head of the ILO Social Dialogue Unit, and the team from the ILO Office for Türkiye. The ILO Director-General, Mr Gilbert F. Houngbo, addressed the assembly via video message, congratulating all Türkiye’s parties for their commitment to social dialogue and their contributions to decent work and social justice.

The Assembly, on the theme of “The Labour Life in the Turkish Century: The Future of Labour, Unionization and Employment,” was actively attended by experts, academicians, government officials, workers’ and employers’ organizations, public servants’ unions, and chambers. Discussions with a broad participation of more than 1,000 participants focused on advancing unionization, collective bargaining procedures, expediting judicial processes related to labour rights, and ensuring the effective continuation of social dialogue.

During the Assembly, representatives of the social parties discussed issues within the scope of the current Trade Unions Law such as trade union thresholds, collective bargaining authority determination processes, reinstatement and court proceedings based on the objection of the employer, and strike postponement decisions. Article 15 of the Public Servants Law sets out that public employees cannot become members of trade unions, the scope of collective agreements in the public sector, locum workers and the structure of the High Arbitration Board.

Following this Assembly meeting, a declaration will be published after it is finalized by the Scientific Board, which carries out academic studies in the fields of labour legislation and industrial relations. This declaration will accelerate the work of two sub-committees with the participation of the relevant social partners to carry out the review and rearrangement of the legislation on the issues discussed in the Labour Assembly, taking into account the opinions and evaluations of the Committee of Experts.

We are committed to providing the Committee with regular updates on developments in this regard, ensuring transparency and accountability in our progress towards enhancing labour rights and social dialogue.

The momentum gained through three large and seven sub-working committee meetings in the last seven months will bring about significant progress, especially relating to legislative changes, issues highlighted by the social partners regarding the Labour Law, article 15 of the Public Servants Law and articles 25, 34 and 41 of the current Trade Unions Law.

We have initiated work on reviewing and revising the aforementioned issues in the sub-working committees through active collaboration with our social partners and we are confident that the Government will finalize this work, together with the social partners.

Worker members – Our Committee is examining the application of Convention No. 98 by the Government of Türkiye. This case has already appeared 11 times before our Committee and was double-footnoted by the Committee of Experts, pointing out the seriousness of the violations of trade union rights occurring in the country.

Since 2016, the Government of Türkiye has been relentlessly pursuing an anti-union agenda, using state of emergency laws to justify the massive dismissal and demotion of thousands of civil servants. Since then, many trade union members have sought redress through an Inquiry Commission on State of Emergency Actions in charge of examining appeals.

The Committee of Experts noted that this Inquiry Commission considered only whether a link, even tangential, could be established between the dismissed civil servants and terrorist groups, as determined by the National Security Council. Applicants had no possibility to be informed of, let alone challenge, the information gathered against them. As stated by the Government, the purpose of the dismissals was to “terminate the existence of terrorist organizations within the public institutions” and the Inquiry Commission focused solely on determining whether the dismissals were justified in view of this purpose. This Inquiry Commission rendered more than 127,000 decisions, only 14 per cent of which led to an acceptance decision.

No specific information was submitted by the Government as to the appeals submitted by dismissed trade union members and officers. We note with deep concern that 4 confederations, 19 federations and 19 trade unions were shut down after the courts found that they were affiliated with terrorist organizations. We also note with concern that according to the Confederation of Public Employees’ Trade Unions (KESK), a total of 4,267 of their members were arbitrarily dismissed from all public sectors under the emergency laws.

We deplore the failure of the Government to put in place an independent, effective and fair process to review the appeals of public servants against their anti-union dismissals. We note that the Inquiry Commission concluded its five-year mandate. Now, workers have to go through a lengthy process before the courts for the review of their cases. We urge the Government to establish an independent, expeditious and in-depth process for investigation and remedy of cases brought against anti-union dismissals in the framework of the emergency laws.

Furthermore, we note with concern that despite the expiration of the state of emergency, governors and ministries continue to use exceptional legal provisions to dismiss public servants.

A second long-standing issue is the total lack of protection of workers against anti-union discrimination in the private and public sectors. As pointed out by the Committee of Experts, Law No. 6356, the Law on Trade Unions and Collective Labour Agreements, which specifically regulates anti-union dismissals in the private sector, merely provides that in case of “termination of contract of employment for reasons of trade union activities”, “union compensation” shall be ordered, while reinstatements can legally be refused by the employers. There are no administrative or penal sanctions applicable in case of anti-union dismissal. Similarly, in the public sector, there are no legal provisions sanctioning those responsible for anti-union discrimination or awarding compensation to victims.

This lack of effective protection and dissuasive sanctions in the legislation created a permissive environment for employers to engage in systematic union busting. Over the years, trade unions in the country have denounced countless examples of targeted dismissals of trade unionists and workers attempting to form or join a trade union.

These are issues that have been raised by the ILO supervisory bodies for years. However, so far, their recommendations have remained unheeded. Our Committee in 2013 requested the Government to establish a system for collecting data on anti-union discrimination in both private and public sectors. Eleven years later, the Government can show no progress in this regard.

This overall anti-union climate has harmful consequences on the ability of workers to collectively bargain, which are further compounded by a restrictive legal framework. The Committee of Experts has made numerous comments on the need to review Law No. 6356, which imposes stringent conditions on collective bargaining in the private sector.

Firstly, the threshold for becoming a collective bargaining agent at the enterprise level is exceptionally high: the union should represent at least 1 per cent of the workers engaged in a given branch of activities and more than 50 per cent of workers employed in the workplace and 40 per cent of workers of the enterprise to engage in collective bargaining.

These requirements have a direct impact on trade unions’ capacity to represent and defend their members in collective bargaining. According to 2023 data provided by the Government, close to three quarters of the unions in the country would not qualify to become a bargaining agent due to the application of the 1 per cent sectoral threshold. These rules create considerable obstacles to collective bargaining in the country, especially for minority unions, as there are no legal provisions regarding their rights to collective bargaining. As a result, according to data from ILOSTAT, only 7.4 per cent of employees in Türkiye were covered by a collective agreement in 2019.

In addition, Turkish trade unions attempting to challenge the recognition of a trade union as an exclusive bargaining agent face a protracted judicial process which can take up to six or seven years. Meanwhile, the bargaining process remains on hold and workers are deprived of the coverage of collective agreements.

Secondly, Law No. 6356 does not allow cross-sector regional and national bargaining, thus unduly restricting the autonomy of the social partners to decide on the levels of collective bargaining.

In the public sector, collective bargaining is also restricted in its scope, which is limited to “social and financial rights”, excluding any other aspects of the professional life of public workers. In addition, representation of trade unions in collective bargaining processes in the public sector are limited to an observation role. Majority unions, while allowed to participate in the Public Servants’ Union delegation, cannot make proposals for collective agreements, in particular where their demands are qualified as general or relate to more than one service branch.

The Government has also persistently ignored the Committee of Experts’ call to review the composition of the Public Employee Arbitration Boards. Currently, 7 out of 11 of its members are nominated by the President of the Republic, leaving some doubt as to its independence and impartiality.

Finally, we note with concern the persistent inaction of the Government to allow prison staff and locum workers, as well as public servants without a written contract, to exercise their rights to organize and collectively bargain.

In view of the heavy legal restrictions that apply to the rights to organize and to collectively bargain and in this persistent anti-union climate, workers and trade unions in Türkiye are effectively prevented from defending their rights and interests. We call on the Government to urgently take measures, in consultation with the social partners, to lift all the legal barriers to the full enjoyment of the rights guaranteed by the Convention and to take meaningful and effective action to address anti-union discrimination both in the private and public sectors.

Employer members – Convention No. 98 is one of the ten fundamental ILO Conventions. Türkiye acceded to the ILO in 1932 and has ratified 59 Conventions, including the 10 fundamental Conventions. Turkey ratified Convention No. 98 in 1952. This is the 12th time that the Committee has examined the application in law and in practice of this Convention by Türkiye. Specifically, the Committee of Experts has already made some 30 observations since 1989 concerning protection against acts of anti-union discrimination and the right to bargain collectively.

Following the attempted coup d’etat on 15 July 2016, the state of emergency required that certain exceptional measures be taken to guarantee national security. This state of emergency ended on 18 July 2018. Very recently, with the support of the ILO, tripartite social dialogue was strengthened within the tripartite Labour Assembly, which met in April 2024, in which a high-level ILO official participated. In addition, an important ILO project financed by the European Union was launched with the participation of the Turkish social partners, which will cover freedom of association and the right to bargain collectively as pillars of fundamental rights.

In its previous observations, the Committee of Experts requested the Government to take the necessary measures, based on Articles 1, 2, 3, 4 and 6 of the Convention, to effectively prohibit and punish acts of anti-union discrimination, follow an effective and impartial procedure where such acts occur, and ensure that collective bargaining is further promoted by the authorities.

In its reply to our interventions last year, the Government specified the following information:

• persons employed in strategically important organizations, such as prison staff and those involving positions of police and intelligence forces on behalf of the State, cannot join or form a trade union. These limitations are mainly due to the importance of ensuring, impartially, the provision of essential public services by these public servants. However, these workers are covered by collective agreements concluded for the public sector. The Government states that certain locum workers are also not legally entitled to join or form a union and nor are they covered by the collective agreements;
• the Government maintains that, between 22 December 2017 and 22 January 2023, all complaints against massive dismissal in the public sector for so-called anti-union reasons were the subject of an impartial procedure before the Inquiry Commission. The Commission issued a total of 127,292 decisions (17,960 of which were decisions to accept the complaint). The persons concerned could subsequently seek judicial review;
• the Government states that the national legislation is in line with the ILO Termination of Employment Convention, 1982 (No. 158), which Turkey ratified in 1994. Under Turkish law, a worker dismissed for trade union reasons has the right to take legal action for reinstatement and, if the court decides that the dismissal was based on union-related or anti-union grounds, it also sets the amount of compensation to be paid if the employee is not reinstated. Preventing the exercise of trade union rights, however, is a criminal offence carrying criminal penalties. Furthermore, it is very difficult to develop a methodology for collecting data on anti-union dismissals. A report established in 2018 with the ILO and a tripartite workshop organized at the time did not lead to a solution;
• according to the Government, the legal concept of a group-level collective agreement already allows the social partners in the private sector to conclude collective agreements at branch level. However, the Government provides no clarification for the conclusion of inter-sectoral collective agreements;
• the double threshold for recognition as a representative trade union in the private sector was validated by the Constitutional Court. In addition, the rate of union membership in the private sector was 10.6 per cent in the first statistics in January 2015 published after the threshold was lowered to 1 per cent. The rate of union membership has continued to increase since then, reaching 74.5 per cent in the public sector and 14.8 per cent in the private sector. These figures show a positive trend in the country;
• regarding the Arbitration Council for public servants, the Government specifies that these lawyers are not attached to the executive branch and that the independence of the judiciary is guaranteed.

The Employer members reaffirm the vital importance that all ILO Member States observe Convention No. 98 as a fundamental Convention. The right to organize and to bargain collectively, for both employers and workers, is an essential condition for guaranteeing the application of all ILO standards. We insist that national law and practice ensure this fundamental right. Anti-union acts must therefore be punished fairly and effectively. Governments must actively promote the social partners’ right to bargain collectively.

The Employer members would like to make the following remarks in this regard: we consider that the current legislation, which provides for a 1 per cent threshold in the sector for trade unions to be able to engage in collective bargaining, is compatible with Article 4. This determines the best way to achieve the objective of collective bargaining. Article 4 leaves room for governments to settle this question. Through Law No. 6356, the reduction of the legal threshold from 3 to 1 per cent of the workers in a given branch of activity has had a positive impact on the collective bargaining mechanism. The social partners reached prior consensus on reducing this threshold, as they were concerned that if the threshold was simply removed it would result in ill-intentioned practices and a return to chaotically organized industrial relations. Given that there are 228 trade unions in Türkiye, the Employer members consider it legitimate to set objective thresholds above which a trade union may be authorized to conclude collective agreements. Currently, 60 out of 228 unions would meet these criteria. The Employer members indicate that if an employers’ organization or a freely established trade union refuses to respect the conditions of representativeness or does not respect the rules of social dialogue, they should instead be considered mere pressure groups. Recognition of their role as social partners implies strict criteria relating to representativeness, democratic functioning and a responsible attitude to the negotiation of balanced social agreements, which is the opposite of the role played by non-governmental organizations. Only the social partners can request the intervention of the ILO when their rights are threatened or violated.

The Employer members highlight the importance of the national tripartite discussions which were held last April within the Labour Assembly. A joint declaration will shortly be issued as a result of that meeting, containing commitments by all parties to strengthen social democracy. In accordance with the decisions of the Labour Assembly, sub-commissions have been set up to examine the legislation on trade unions and the law on collective bargaining in the public service. These sub-commissions have already started their work.

I close my intervention with two important points. First, it is vital that the legislation on collective bargaining in the public sector applies to all public service workers, in accordance with Convention No. 98, even if certain exceptions in the public sector may be justified. Second, the level of collective bargaining in the private sector must be freely chosen and set by the social partners themselves rather than by law. We hope that the social partners will discuss, in particular, the inter-sectoral level in the extended session of the Labour Assembly that began in April.

Worker member, Türkiye – We have been discussing Türkiye at this Committee with regard to Conventions Nos 87 and 98 for years. We are pleased to note that there have been improvements, such as the introduction of the e-State system instead of the notary system for trade union affiliation and resignation procedures.

Despite these efforts, problems regarding legislation and implementation in Türkiye continue. Anti-union dismissals are still a significant problem in Türkiye. The legal framework regulating the protection of employment is not adequate. Reinstatement of workers in case of injustice and anti-union termination of the labour contract is very limited in practice. Further to court rulings, employers generally prefer to pay severance and notice rather than opting for reinstatement. In the case of unilateral termination of the employment contract, the employer notifies the authorities not to pay compensation. If workers claim that this practice constitutes unfair dismissal, they must go to court, which is an expensive and lengthy process for the plaintiff. Moreover, while half of the workers who resign in Türkiye seem to do so of their own free will, they in fact were made to sign the resignation document in advance. It is an employer strategy for providing legal grounds not to pay compensation. In addition, workers cannot claim unemployment benefits because they resigned apparently voluntarily.

The prolonged judicial processes focusing on competency to conclude collective agreements is another important issue in Türkiye, and is one of the common and major causes of de-unionization. Another aspect of this issue is the competency objections, which pave the way for an unclear judicial process, also causing resignations from unions. At the sectoral level, this threshold was as high as 10 per cent in the past. It decreased to 1 per cent in 2015, as a result of the consensus among the social partners. A technical mission from the ILO also visited Türkiye and took part in the dialogue process.

Under article 41(1) of Law No. 6356, the threshold at the sectoral level has a regulatory role enabling the participation of the most representative and strongest trade unions.

It must be clearly stated that a union organization environment at the workplace level where the employers and political parties can intervene is not a preferable system for the collective benefit of workers in Türkiye. The absence of a sectoral threshold can cause the proliferation of atomized unions. In addition to this risk, micro-level organizations can be guided by the employers in order to disrupt the strength of the organized labour movement. Furthermore, there can only be one authorized union in any one workplace to conclude the collective agreement, according to the existing legislation. These arrangements were made in dialogue with the social partners, taking into account past experiences. All in all, the right to organize should be interpreted more broadly by the legislative authority to ensure that all persons in the labour market can enjoy the right to organize. I do not want to take the time of my colleague who will speak on the right to organize and collective bargaining of civil servants, which is referred to extensively by the Committee of Experts in its report.

Another Worker member, Türkiye – On behalf of the Turkish Confederation of Public Workers Associations (Kamu-Sen), one of the representative confederations of public employees in Türkiye, I would like to add some information related to public workers’ problems.

The report of the Committee of Experts states that the prohibition against membership under article 15 of the Public Workers Trade Union (PWTU) Law (No. 4688) includes not only prison staff, locum workers and public servants working without a written contract, but also provides for a broader prohibition which covers approximately 20 per cent of the public employees. Many public employees, except police, military workers and public servants engaged in the administration of the State, are still deprived of their rights to organize and collective bargaining with the current prohibited regulation expressed in the mentioned article of the law.

Another issue included in the Committee of Experts’ report concerns public officials dismissed within the scope of the state of emergency. The implementation of the state of emergency was a result of the extraordinary circumstances that occurred after a military coup attempt supported by the FETÖ terrorist organization in 2016. All legal forces, non-governmental organizations and almost all of our people took a position against the FETÖ by closing roads and public areas, and protesting. We managed to get rid of them in six hours. As a result of this coup attempt, our country lost 252 people and our economy was destroyed through the loss of billions of dollars. After the coup attempt was suppressed, a state of emergency was immediately declared, and a large investigation was initiated by the State institutions and organizations to detect all activities of the FETÖ and other terrorist organizations, as well as their connections with public employees. As a result of the evaluations, public employees who were determined to have connections with the FETÖ and other terrorist groups, for judicial reunions, should be removed from their civil servant duties, with due protection during judicial investigations , within the framework of public workers’ law and the provisions of the Turkish Penal Code. However, considering some internal and external judicial decisions and the decisions of the Commission of Inquiry mentioned in the report, it was understood that some dismissals were made without sufficient administrative and judicial review and research. The Turkish authorities stated, at the end of the process, that refunds and compensation for economic and moral losses had been taken into account. But the process is still continuing, and the problem is going on. It is important for the Government to establish a new regulation as soon as possible to clarify the process regarding public officials who are in this situation. Union discrimination in the public sector has been continued for many years, as the Committee of Experts has duly noted. Despite hundreds of complaints made against them, none of the public administrators who were involved in discrimination in public employee unionism were punished.

On the other hand, the issue of the 2 per cent threshold for union membership included in the Committee of Experts’ report and introduced for public employee unionism is aimed at paving the way for positive unionism. Similar thresholds are still in place in the context of labour unionism, aimed at encouraging more powerful representative unions, that is positive unionism. The threshold implemented in our country creates strong representative trade unions by the number of members, instead of distributing the power among many small and marginal unions, which are weak in that regard. So, we support the application of this threshold to create more powerful and authorized trade unions.

Taking account of the collective bargaining process, its duration, scope, authorization of representatives, signature competence, mismatch regulations of the branch and general collective bargaining systems, public workers’ trade union law has many troubles.

So as a result, I would like to propose to the Government and all our trade unions to come together under the leadership of the Government, and to reorganize and implement the public workers’ Trade Unions Law again on the basis of the Convention

Employer member, Türkiye – The Committee of Experts’ observations on Türkiye, under Articles 1, 2 and 3 of the Convention, are mainly based on massive dismissals in the public sector under the state of emergency decrees.

After the attempted coup of 15 July 2016, an Inquiry Commission was established further to applications against decisions concerning the dissolution of trade unions during the state of emergency, which may be appealed before the administrative courts of Ankara. The grounds for the dissolution of trade unions and the dismissal of trade unionists can be examined by the administrative courts when applications are made, which is a due and effective recourse by law.

The Committee of Experts’ also made observations on Article 1 of the Convention regarding adequate protection against anti-union dismissals. The provisions of the Labour Act No. 4857 on unjustified dismissals are designed along the lines of the Termination of Employment Convention, 1982 (No. 158), which similarly does not require that reinstatement be mandatory.

According to article 25 of Law No. 6356, a worker whose employment contract is terminated for a union-related reason shall have the right to file a lawsuit relating to reinstatement into a job. If, during a lawsuit for reinstatement into a job, it is determined that the employment contract was terminated for a union-related reason, union-related compensation shall be ordered, the amount of which should not be less than one year’s wages of the worker. Such an amount must be identified as a dissuasive measure for the protection of the worker against anti-union dismissal.

On the other hand, the penal sanction for anti-union dismissal is regulated in article 118 of the Penal Code. According to article 118, the use of force to block the exercise of union rights is a crime, requiring imprisonment of the perpetrator. The section provides that whoever uses force or threat against a person to force them to join or not to join a union, to participate in the activities of the union, or to leave their position in the union or union management, will be sentenced to imprisonment from six months to two years. Contrary to the observations of the Committee of Experts, this provision does in fact concern anti-union dismissals.

Moreover, according to article 78, paragraph 1 of Law No. 6356, an individual who enrols members in a union by way of force or pressure in breach of union freedom or who forces a worker to maintain or quit his or her membership shall be charged with an administrative fine for each membership.

As Turkish employers, therefore, we are considering that all these provisions contain an adequate legal protection against anti-union dismissals both in private and public sectors.

Another point regarding the Committee of Experts’ observations about Article 2 of the Convention refers to article 15 of the Civil Servants’ Unions Act. It takes into consideration the complaints filed by different workers’ organizations about the scope of Article 2 of Convention No. 98. In respect of the complaints, the Committee of Experts’ observations focus on rendering article 15 of the Civil Servants’ Unions Act compatible with the Convention.

According to a sentence added to the fifth paragraph of article 90 of the Constitution of the Republic of Türkiye in 2004, “in case of discrepancies arising from the fact that international agreements on fundamental rights and freedoms, duly put into effect, and laws contain different provisions on the same subject, the provisions of international agreements shall prevail”.

In this context, the decision of the Constitutional Court on whether civil servants working in the Presidency National Palace Directorate can be deprived of the right to unionize has been pending. Upon the appeal of the decision regarding such disputes, the Ninth Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation, disregarding the prohibition in the legislation, considered the ILO Conventions in relation to article 90(5) of the Constitution and concluded that the mentioned public officials have the right to unionize. Thus, despite the prohibition provision in article 15 of Law No. 4688, the ILO Conventions to which Türkiye is a party were taken as the basis.

These decisions demonstrate the progress made by the Turkish judicial organs towards recognizing the union rights of public officials in Türkiye. As Turkish employers, we believe that all employees, except for a few exceptions, working in the public sector should enjoy the right to organize.

Another issue regarding the Committee of Experts’ observations about Article 4 of the Convention is the promotion of collective bargaining with a view to amending article 34 of Law No. 6356 to ensure that it does not restrict the possibility of the parties in the private sector to engage in cross-sector regional or national agreements should they so desire.

Another point regarding the Committee of Experts’ observations about Article 4 of the Convention is the determination of the most representative union and rights of minority unions. The existing system is a product of a long and well-established industrial relations system in Türkiye. The lowering in 2015 of the branch representation thresholds for becoming a bargaining agent at the workplace from 3 to 1 per cent has had a positive impact on the unionization rate.

However, the Turkish employers do not consider that the removal of the branch threshold would have a similarly positive impact on the rate of unionization or on the capacity of unions, especially independent unions who are not affiliated to large confederations, to use the collective bargaining machinery.

Finally, I want to emphasize that Turkish employers give the utmost priority to the ILO’s supervisory system. In our view, the credibility and transparency of the Committee must be respected with a view to enabling a high level of compliance with the international labour standards.

Government member, Belgium – I have the honour to speak on behalf of the European Union (EU) and its Member States. The candidate countries Montenegro and North Macedonia, and the European Free Trade Association countries Iceland and Norway, members of the European Economic Area, align themselves with this statement.

The EU and its Member States are committed to the promotion, protection, respect and fulfilment of human rights, including labour rights.

We actively promote the universal ratification and implementation of fundamental international labour standards. We support the ILO in its indispensable role to develop, promote and supervise the application of international labour standards and of fundamental Conventions in particular.

The EU and its Member States have a strategic interest in the development of a cooperative and mutually beneficial relationship with Türkiye, a candidate country and a key partner of the EU. This relationship is long-standing, with an Association Agreement concluded in 1963, and a Customs Union agreed in 1995.

We note with deep concern the Committee of Experts’ observations that, following the massive dismissals after the 2016 coup attempt, public officials alleging that their dismissals under the state of emergency laws were motivated by anti-union reasons did not have access to an effective, rapid and fair procedure that would protect them against anti-union dismissals. Given the end of the mandate of the Commission of Inquiry on the State of Emergency Measures, we encourage the Government of Türkiye to put in place appropriate measures that will ensure independent, expeditious and in-depth investigations of these allegations through effective and rapid procedures with the necessary guarantees of due process and to report on measures taken. In the context of the absence of an effective and rapid remedy system against state of emergency dismissals, we echo the concern of the Committee of Experts regarding the lack of information on the perpetuation of state of emergency powers. We encourage the Government to comply with the Committee of Experts’ request to provide its observations to the ILO on this matter.

Anti-union dismissals remain a concerning issue in the private sector as well. We note the absence of minimum compensation and of administrative or penal sanctions for anti-union dismissal, and that a reinstatement judicial order can be refused by the employer, opting for financial compensation. We join the call of the Committee of Experts on the Government to adopt effective and sufficiently dissuasive sanctions against anti-union dismissal in the private sector and to provide information on the judicial practice in the determination of compensation awarded to dismissed workers.

In line with the Committee of Experts, we call on the Government to ensure adequate protection against anti-union discrimination in the public sector. We echo the Committee’s call to take legislative measures ensuring full compensation of the prejudice suffered in both occupational and financial terms and to put in place effective and sufficiently dissuasive sanctions.

Measures taken by the Government to protect public order should not deprive workers’ organizations of their right to hold peaceful demonstrations and public meetings to defend their interests. In this regard, we reiterate the Committee of Experts’ call on the Government to refrain from arresting, detaining and prosecuting workers and trade unionists for participation in peaceful public meetings.

We regret the Government’s observation that significant difficulties persist in the collection and recording of data on anti-union discrimination in the public and private sectors. We recall that the Conference Committee extended this request to the Government in 2013 and encourage the Government to improve data collection systems and institutional databases.

We encourage the Government of Türkiye to address the concerns of the Committee of Experts to ensure that more, including minority, workers’ organizations can engage in collective bargaining and to report to the ILO on this matter.

We echo the call of the Committee of Experts and encourage Türkiye to bring its national legislation in line with the requirements of the fundamental Convention No.98 to ensure that senior public employees, magistrates, prison staff, locum workers, public servants working without a contract of employment and retirees can enjoy and exercise their right to establish and join organizations.

We regret the information provided by the Committee of Experts that existing legal provisions do not make it possible to negotiate collective agreements at all levels and encourage the Government to follow up on the recommendations of the Committee of experts to ensure that parties in the private sector wishing to engage in cross-sector regional or national agreements can do so.

We encourage the Government to ensure the full application of the Convention in full consultation with the social partners.

The EU and its Member States remain committed to a joint constructive engagement with Türkiye and welcome the recent engagement of the Government with the ILO. We encourage further exchanges between the Government and the ILO with a view to implementing the recommendations of the Committee of Experts.

Government member, Kazakhstan – My delegation thanks the Government representative of Türkiye for the report. We note the commitment on the part of the Government of Türkiye to observe the ILO Conventions and welcome the progress made by the Government in responding to the recommendations of the Committee of experts.

In the past years the Government of Türkiye has demonstrated efforts to strengthen and adapt its current legislative framework to bring it into line with ILO standards and in particular, through amending trade union laws and improving working conditions. Recent amendments concerning the settlement of collective labour disputes regulating competent mediation procedures, expanding the powers of the Human Rights Compensation Commission and aligning trade union rights with ILO standards should be acknowledged.

We welcome the willingness of the Government to enter into an open discussion on how to further improve the situation with trade unions. We encourage the Government to continue these efforts. We believe that Türkiye, which fulfils its obligations in the submission of reports related to the ratified ILO Conventions, will continue to work closely with the ILO and social partners.

Worker member, Netherlands – This intervention is also on behalf of the Korean, Nordic and Belgian Workers. Convention No. 98 is about the right to organize and collective bargaining. The first Article states that “Workers shall enjoy adequate protection against acts of anti-union discrimination in respect of their employment.”

Although the Turkish Constitution and the Trade Unions Law provide that every worker has a right to choose his or her trade union, the reality is different. The exercise of freedom of association is related to the Government’s approach to this right, which in practice means there is anti-union discrimination.

The Government has policies and practices, for instance, the Anti-Terrorism Law and the Penal Code, as a tool to silence trade unions when, for instance, KESK carries out its usual trade union activities distributing trade union materials, organizing actions, which are not in line with government policies.

The Committee of Experts has noted the observations of KESK, which state that, in total, 4,267 KESK members were dismissed from all public sectors under the state of emergency decree laws. According to KESK, the dismissals were arbitrary and non-transparent, and no effective remedy was provided. Public employees were unable to see the accusations and defend themselves. KESK alleges that the Commission of Inquiry did not provide an effective remedy against anti-union dismissals and was instead used to punish trade unionists with no due process and proper court decision.

As KESK testified before the Commission of Inquiry, there was no transparent mechanism allowing the public officers to challenge any of the evidence against them. KESK finally states that, now that the work of the Commission of Inquiry is completed, the dismissed KESK members and executives must apply to administrative courts, a process that may take up to ten years to come to a conclusion. In practice, Article 1 of the Convention is violated in many ways. The Government and public institution managers facilitate some confederations while they put extra pressure on the members and leaders of independent and democratic unions. This is why they face forced relocations. The public authorities act in quite an arbitrary way and independent unions face discrimination. There are no dissuasive sanctions when public managers violate their rights.

Interpretation from Arabic: Government member, Tunisia – My delegation welcomes the delegation of the Government of Türkiye and expresses its thanks for the information provided on the country’s efforts to implement the provisions of the Convention.

We welcome the administrative measures taken by the Government to comply with international standards through the revision of its Labour Code and to respect the right to organize, in order to ensure the effectiveness of social dialogue and collective bargaining procedures. My delegation welcomes the efforts made to strengthen consultation mechanisms. Decisions have been adopted to improve workers’ and employers’ rights. These measures demonstrate the country’s commitment to defending international standards. In view of the commitments made, my delegation congratulates the Turkish Government for the results achieved and encourages it to continue its efforts to ensure that its legislation is aligned with international standards, while taking into account the comments of the Conference Committee and the Committee of Experts.

Interpretation from German: Worker member, Germany – It is with great concern that we have learned that many colleagues are still being held in Turkish prisons following their activities on 1 May 2024 and we urge the Government to release these and other prisoners.

The report of the Committee of Experts refers to a protection gap in Turkish law. If an employer dismisses a worker because of trade union activity, the worker can take legal action against this, but the legal consequence is not reinstatement, only the payment of compensation. The amount of compensation is not specified by law and, in practice, we have seen that these compensation payments are far too low to serve as any kind of a deterrent. In addition, the legal proceedings take far too long for the affected workers – up to four years.

The fact that colleagues in Türkiye are not adequately protected against dismissal due to their trade union activities was already established by the ECHR in 2017 in the Tek Gıda İş Sendikası case, but we still find ourselves in the same legal situation now. Resorting to dismissal to prevent unionization is the most widespread form of union busting.

Effective protection against dismissal is of the utmost importance, especially in the initial phase of trade union organizing in a company. Otherwise it is too easy for employers to dismiss union members in return for just small payments.

This is also impressively demonstrated by a study by the Turkish Metalworkers’ Union. In a period of one and a half years, 875 of its members were dismissed in the first phase of organizing.

The protection against unlawful dismissal on the grounds of trade union organization laid down in Article 1 of the Convention is an essential basis for exercising the right to organize. If this is lacking, the right to collective bargaining cannot be exercised. Employers can simply buy their way out cheaply. The minimum requirement for such protection is a right to reinstatement, as is stated in the report of the Committee of Experts and as is common practice in Germany.

Against this background, we call on the Government to standardize a statutory right to continued employment in the event of dismissal due to trade union activity.

Government member, Pakistan – We recognize and note the ongoing engagement by the Republic of Türkiye with the ILO supervisory system. We reiterate that dialogue and engagement remain the best vehicles to address any concerns and promote labour rights and standards. Pakistan acknowledges the positive steps taken by the Republic of Türkiye towards the implementation of the Convention within the ILO’s tripartite framework. We welcome Türkiye’s ongoing efforts in labour law and judicial reforms, social dialogue and international cooperation. These initiatives reflect a strong commitment to enhancing workers’ rights and aligning them with ILO standards. Pakistan commends Türkiye’s efforts and strongly encourages the ILO to take Türkiye’s achievements and the challenges it faced into due consideration.

Worker member, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland – I speak on behalf of the workers of the United Kingdom, and the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO) of the United States associates itself with these remarks.

Many of the workers of Türkiye, suffering the after-effects of dismissal during the state of emergency, are years later trapped in an interminable cycle of delayed justice. Those workers, dismissed without any court case, are only able to return to their working lives with the assistance of a slow-moving, under-resourced series of court interventions.

In one example, the Government started this process with an act of gross and arbitrary unfairness, retrospectively applying the provisions of a state of emergency to the issuing of a joint statement – the peaceful exercise of freedom of expression – at a time before the emergency took place, arresting a seemingly random subsection of those involved in making the statement, and then letting an under-resourced legal system slowly crush their hopes of restitution. Seventeen per cent of those persons were eventually cleared but, of those, almost half then lost an appeal launched by the Government, and again lost their jobs, meaning only 10 per cent of those originally unfairly arrested and, essentially blacklisted, regained any kind of normal life.

Victims of the mass dismissals must first apply to the administrative courts – there are 100,000 such victims still awaiting justice. There are, however, no more than ten administrative courts. Unions in Türkiye have estimated that, without additional resources, it will take these courts ten years to clear the backlog, ten years in which these workers cannot exercise their skills and experience in their chosen field, often forced into low-paid jobs. And, at the end of that long wait, should the administrative court clear them, they need to progress to the higher court, and finally the constitutional court, taking several more years. Even then, a successful win in the courts might win them the right to have their remedy implemented within two further years, something that very rarely happens far ahead of that deadline.

A public servant at the height of their career at the time of their original dismissal will retire, possibly destitute, having been unable to work at their full potential for half their working life.

As long ago as 2018, the Committee of Experts expressed its deep concern at the situation as it had developed, given the high numbers of suspensions and dismissals that still affected trade union officials and members, and hoped the courts would reinstate any trade unionists dismissed for anti-union or interference motives.

Six years later, the lives of trade unionists caught up in this snail’s pace sham of justice are still waiting for remedy. The Government of Türkiye’s failure to act shows a callous disregard for their lives and, frankly, for the ILO supervisory system.

The wait has been long enough. At least 60 members of trade unions have killed themselves while waiting for this process to be completed, though, in a grim twist, many of them were later cleared. The sluggishness of the Government’s approach is not only ruining lives, it is costing them.

Government member, Azerbaijan – At the outset, we would like to highlight that Türkiye has a long-standing and close relationship with the ILO and was among the first countries to sign the Convention.

In the past 11 years, Türkiye has enacted significant changes in its labour legislation, particularly in trade union laws. These reforms have largely improved social dialogue, trade union rights and collective bargaining procedures, making them more accessible and efficient.

We see it as an important advancement for Türkiye to expand the duties and powers of the Human Rights Compensation Commission, which aims to expedite litigation processes with recent judiciary reforms. This might ensure quicker resolutions, especially regarding union issues, with shorter trial periods. Also, we welcome and commend that Türkiye has revitalized the tripartite consultation mechanisms.

Türkiye’s ongoing efforts in labour law and judiciary reforms, social dialogue and international cooperation, demonstrates its commitment to enhancing workers’ rights and aligning with ILO standards.

Worker member, Sri Lanka – First of all, I would like to note that Türkiye has a long and close relationship with the ILO and the relevant workers’ and employers’ organizations on the promotion of labour standards and workers’ rights and is committed to strengthening these rights.

Over the past ten years, Türkiye has made significant changes, such as the determination of the branch of activity, the regulation of competence, the establishment of an e-membership service for trade union membership, and introduction of mediation procedures in its labour legislation, in consultation with social partners.

The Committee should take into account the significant efforts and advancements that the country has realized in the world of work, despite the challenging times encountered at the same time. I am very proud to be a member of the International Labour Conference with regard to the White Flag certification, which was introduced to encourage unionization and increase registered employment, and which is a very positive and significant development, and we support it.

We commend the Government for being a member of the Global Coalition for Social Justice Coordinating Group. As a worker side, we are pleased to be part of this process.

Türkiye has revitalized one of the most crucial social dialogue mechanisms, the tripartite consultation mechanism. We also believe that the sub-working committees established within the framework of tripartite consultation mechanisms will produce concrete results in the revising and reviewing of legislation in terms of working life.

We are 25 countries, 33 confederations and 30 million workers in the International Labour Conference, so on behalf of the Conference and on behalf of Sri Lanka workers, the plantation workers, I am making this statement.

Interpretation from Arabic: Government member, Sudan – We align ourselves with the statements delivered by the Government of Türkiye. We support the amendments and reforms implemented by Türkiye to bring its legislation into conformity with international labour standards and the ratified Conventions, in particular the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).

Sudan considers that the Government has adopted fundamental measures and legislation that improve workers’ rights, as well as other measures that enable workers to enjoy their trade union rights, in accordance with the articles of the Constitution and international labour standards, and in line with social justice, social dialogue and collective bargaining.

Sudan believes in what Türkiye has done, which is why it requests that the country be removed from the list of individual cases, due to the efforts made.

Government member, Algeria – The Algerian delegation has followed very carefully the statement delivered by the distinguished delegate of Türkiye, in which she demonstrated the Government’s will and commitment to continue to collaborate with the International Labour Organization and to enhance labour standards and workers’ rights. We emphasize that Türkiye was among the first countries to sign the Convention.

Algeria welcomes the positive and significant steps taken by Türkiye and its notable successes in improving working conditions, despite the challenges faced by the Government. In this regard, this delegation has taken note of the Government’s efforts in changing its labour legislation, particularly in trade union laws. These reforms have largely improved social dialogue, trade union rights, and collective bargaining procedures, making them more accessible and efficient, especially for workers.

Furthermore, we note that Türkiye has demonstrated its commitment to aligning trade union rights and collective bargaining procedures with ILO standards, in consultation with social partners. This includes provisions and improvements on: determination of the branch of activity; protection of shop stewards; regulation of competence; settlement of collective labour disputes; regulation of the prohibition and postponement of strikes and lockouts; establishment of emembership service for trade unions; and revitalization of the tripartite consultation mechanisms.

The National Employment Strategy for 2024–28 focuses on building partnerships with social organizations to combat discrimination and improve civil liberties in the workplace.

Finally, this delegation remains convinced that this mutual collaboration promotes a consolidation of current good practices to strengthen the measures already implemented by the Government of Türkiye to guarantee compliance with international labour standards.

Government member, Philippines – This representation would like to express our support for Türkiye’s continuous collaboration with the ILO and its dedication to advancing labour standards and workers’ rights. Türkiye’s long-standing partnership with the ILO, beginning as one of the first signatories of the Convention, underscores its commitment to these fundamental principles.

Türkiye’s efforts in labour law and judiciary reforms, social dialogue, and international cooperation reflect its dedication to enhancing workers’ rights and aligning with ILO standards. Its efforts are evident in the key reforms in trade union law. With its current role as a Pathfinder Country in Alliance 8.7, dedicated to eliminating child labour, and its active participation in the Global Coalition for Social Justice, Türkiye showed its commitment to ensuring that social justice is upheld and advanced at both national and international levels.

These efforts to align with the ILO standards and to advance workers’ rights should be encouraged and supported with continuous technical assistance from the ILO and its Member States.

Government member, Indonesia – Indonesia commends Türkiye on its long-standing and robust relationship with the ILO and its full commitment to the Convention. Türkiye’s continued collaboration with the International Labour Organization underscores its dedication to enhancing labour standards and protecting workers’ rights. The Committee of Experts should recognize both the significant challenges Türkiye has faced and the remarkable progress it has achieved in improving working conditions. Over the past 11 years, Türkiye has made substantial reforms in its labour legislation, particularly in its trade union laws which have significantly enhanced social dialogue, trade union rights and collective bargaining procedures. This reform is aligning with ILO standards which have been developed in close consultation with social partners, and which include improvement in the determination of activity branches, protection of shop stewards and the scope and level of collective labour agreements. Türkiye’s pioneering efforts suggest that the implementation of membership services of the trade union and White Flag certification for businesses meeting ILO standards are effective approaches to fostering labour rights. As a Pathfinder Country in Alliance 8.7, Türkiye’s commitment to eliminating child labour and its active participation in the Global Coalition for Social Justice further reflects its dedication to promoting social justice on a global scale. The recent reform that expands the role and powers of Human Rights Compensation Commission is noteworthy for ensuring the quick resolution of union-related issues. Additionally, Türkiye’s National Employment Strategy for 2024–28, which focuses on combating workplace discrimination and improving civil liberties, adopts a forward-looking approach. The revitalization of the tripartite consultation mechanism and the productive outcome of more than ten meetings with social partners demonstrate Türkiye’s commitment to social dialogue. The establishment of the subcommittee within this framework will help concretize initial legislative professional reviews. In light of this comprehensive and ongoing effort in labour law, law reform, judiciary improvement and international cooperation, Indonesia fully supports Türkiye’s efforts in aligning with ILO standards. We encourage the Committee of Experts to consider Türkiye’s notable successes and sustained commitment to enhancing workers’ rights as a testament to its dedication to social justice and labour rights advancement.

Interpretation from Russian: Government member, Russian Federation – We are grateful to the Government of Türkiye for providing clarifications on the measures taken at the national level regarding compliance with the Convention. We note the significant progress in the social and labour sphere, which has been achieved thanks to the efforts of the Government, especially over the last 11 years, following comprehensive labour law reform in the country. This has contributed to strengthening social dialogue, enhancing union rights and improving the effectiveness of collective bargaining. Among other achievements, we would highlight the judicial reform that increased the efficiency of the Human Rights Compensation Commission, as well as the resumption of the tripartite consultation mechanisms. Overall, measures taken by the Government indicate that Türkiye has established deep, systematic work to strengthen labour standards aimed at enhancing tripartite dialogue mechanisms and ensuring workers’ rights in particular.

Against this background we see no grounds for including the situation in Türkiye in this list of individual cases before the Committee, and even less reason for assigning a double-footnote status for this case. So, we count on the Committee’s constructive approach to this matter.

Observer, International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) – I am speaking on behalf of the ITUC, but I am also coming from a metalworkers’ union in Türkiye. That is why before starting my words, I have to say that, right now and since 1 May, around 60 workers are in prison just for joining the May Day demonstration. This example itself gives an idea of freedom of association in Türkiye currently. So, as many of you already know, collective bargaining coverage in Türkiye is quite low and this is not just a result of coincidence, there are structural problems behind it and these structural problems are quite well-defined in the Committee of Experts’ report.

First, there is a national sectoral threshold. According to the Ministry of Labour’s own statistics, more than 120,000 union members in 171 different unions cannot enjoy their right to organize or their right to collective bargaining because of this sectoral threshold. The Government says, in the Committee’s report, that they can change this threshold, but the social partners do not agree on that. That is why they do not change it. You cannot just take away 100,000 people’s rights just because some other people do not want them to use this right.

Let us say that a union is above this threshold, then that union needs 50 per cent membership in that workplace to start collective bargaining negotiations. This is one of the highest thresholds in the world, and it makes it almost impossible for many workers to enjoy their right to collective bargaining.

Also, union members can be dismissed just for joining a union, without any real protection at all. Courts cannot even order reinstatement of the dismissed union members. Contrary to what our colleague from the Employers’ side just said at the start of this meeting, this is also highlighted by the ECHR, and which says in its decision that there is no real protection against anti-union dismissal in Türkiye.

Dismissals are not a problem only in the private sector, as the Committee of Experts’ report underlines, since more than 100,000 public employees were dismissed by the emergency decree laws under the state of emergency. These members suffer from a lack of effective legal remedy.

The Committee’s report also mentions judicial challenges by employers against unions’ certificates. The Government’s response says that that these court cases end in three months, including the appeal. This is factually incorrect. There has not been even one case in the entire history which ended in three months. I am not claiming the Government intentionally gave wrong information to the Committee, but probably there has been a misunderstanding. My own union has experience of court cases which lasted 7 years, on average, it is 1,100 days in our case.

So, in this regard, we think it is of the utmost importance to organize an ILO high-level mission to handle these outstanding problems in a constructive and productive manner.

Observer, Public Service International (PSI) – I am speaking also on behalf of KESK in Türkiye. The Committee of Experts’ report covers the issues related to the Convention, and it is not the first time that it covers this issue. I will focus on the dismissals in the public sector in this intervention. When we look at the dismissals, we see that massive numbers of dismissals violated the right to work and had a negative impact on trade union rights in Türkiye. And the reasoning for these dismissals was not objective or justified, but quite subjective and arbitrary. The generic justification was vague and broadly applied to 4,267 KESK members who were critical of the Government, and the use of generic and vague justification is related to the Government’s policies that amount to trade union discrimination. And when we look at the Inquiry Commission on State of Emergency Actions which completed its mandate, we see that the presumption of innocence was violated as well because the Inquiry Commission, as the Committee of Experts’ report states, was not providing an effective remedy against anti-union dismissals, instead it was used as a tool to punish trade unionists. And in fact, “arbitrary” was the prevalent characteristic of these unjust dismissals. It is still a fact that KESK members are suffering from these dismissals even though eight years have passed since 2016, since the failed coup attempt. And the judicial process that the dismissed KESK members undertake will take several more years. There is no indication that the Government plans to accelerate this appeal process through other mechanisms. Thus, it can be inferred that there is no effective remedy for the dismissed public employees as the report states.

It also needs to be noted that the trade union members carry out their daily activities to raise awareness about this issue, but most of these daily activities are banned by the public authorities or interfered with by the security officers. The recent example is the May Day demonstrations in Istanbul. Last week, the leader of the education union was arrested just because he organized a solidarity action with some other trade unions. All these policies and practices aim to create and maintain a climate of fear, and this means that there is a need for more active monitoring from the ILO side and, in this respect, a high-level mission to Türkiye is necessary to discuss all these issues from various perspectives in the country.

Observer, IndustriALL Global Union (IndustriALL) – My organization represents 20 sectoral unions in the main export industries of Türkiye. As mentioned in the report of the Committee of Experts, there has unfortunately been no progress in Türkiye in the implementation of the Conventions Nos 87 and 98. Although article 51 of the Constitution rules that workers have the right to form unions freely, and the right to become a member of a union, in reality, this right cannot be exercised because of a series of obstacles in practice.

I want to share the ground reality with you in the manufacturing, energy and mining industries.

Article 17 of Law No. 6356 on Trade Unions and Collective Labour Agreements rules that trade union membership is acquired via the e-state system. Nevertheless, workers are forced to share their e-state passwords with employers, so their union membership is checked by employers, which is illegal. IndustriALL receives reports every single day about cases where workers join trade unions, but they are exposed to anti-union discrimination. Union members face aggressive acts of punishment and retaliation, including intimidation, threats and dismissals for joining our affiliated trade unions.

Thousands of workers are dismissed just because they use their constitutionally and internationally protected and guaranteed right to freedom of association.

Terminated workers and their unions take the cases to the judiciary system, and an overwhelming majority of the cases end in favour of workers with clear verdicts that they were terminated because of their union membership.

This demonstrates clearly that there is systemic and widespread anti-union discrimination against union members and a clear failure to provide the necessary protections to guarantee freedom of association.

Furthermore, I wish to draw your attention to the obstacles the Government mounts to prevent unions from obtaining collective bargaining certification. Even if a Turkish union manages to recruit more than 50 per cent of workers in one single workplace or 40 per cent in an enterprise with more than one workplace, both thresholds are extremely high and there is widespread misuse of the judiciary process to block collective bargaining certification.

Once the Ministry of Labour and Social Security issues an official document certifying that the union has a sufficient majority membership in a workplace to be eligible for collective bargaining negotiations, then the employer disputes the Ministry’s document of competence claiming that the union concerned does not have the required majority. This is done through a simple petition without having to provide any evidence to support the claim.

As a result of these delaying tactics by employers and lack of enforcement of the labour laws, cases drag on for years, on average for three years. This is unacceptable.

Legislative rules cannot protect malicious behaviour. Labour law must have as its main goal the protection of workers. However, in this case, malicious employers are protected, and workers who exercise their fundamental rights are punished.

Seeing that the Government of Türkiye, despite the support and technical assistance provided by the ILO, has not made any progress in protecting the right of workers to collective bargaining, IndustriALL calls on the ILO to take further measures, including a high-level mission to the country, to address Türkiye’s violations of the Convention.

Observer, International Transport Workers’ Federation (ITF) – Adequate protections against anti-union dismissals are not only necessary to protect workers’ rights and their livelihoods, but also are essential to ensure the very existence of trade unions.

Sadly, the ITF has had to come before this Committee on several occasions over the past decade to lament anti-union discrimination, including dismissals and attacks on the right to organize in several sectors of the Turkish economy, most notably in civil aviation, logistics and rail transport.

Today, we want to highlight a case of anti-union discrimination taking place right now in a port in the Bursa province of northwestern Türkiye.

On 2 March 2024, just three months ago, the Liman-İş union began organizing at the port. Eighty-five per cent of the workers at the facility decided to join the union. On 20 March, six workers were dismissed for no other reason than their union membership. After their colleagues engaged in a four-day work stoppage to protest these dismissals in the face of police intimidation, Members of Parliament intervened and mediated the dispute, following which the workers were reinstated. The company vowed to no longer block union organizing.

This is when things deteriorated. Almost immediately, the employer began to threaten workers and demand that they relinquish their union membership.

Starting on 13 May, 37 workers were placed on leave, initially with no pay. Then, on 21 May, all 37 workers were dismissed – via SMS – simply because they refused to relinquish their union membership. All 37 workers were either lead organizers or union contacts. Two weeks on, the situation persists and the ITF has coordinated global solidarity action in support of these dismissed workers.

Our discussion here in Geneva is not taking place in a vacuum. These 37 workers and their families are only a fraction of the people affected by Türkiye’s long-standing failure to protect workers against anti-union dismissals in the private sector. This simply cannot continue.

Despite the right to freedom of association being protected under Türkiye’s Constitution and domestic law, Türkiye has repeatedly failed to uphold its domestic and international legal obligations, including those under Convention No. 98.

Türkiye must, as a matter of urgency, adopt effective and sufficiently dissuasive sanctions against anti-union dismissals and ensure that workers who have suffered such prejudice, including these 37 workers, are entitled to reinstatement to employment and full compensation in financial terms. These measures would bring Türkiye closer into line with the Convention.

Finally, I would like to say that, if these safeguards against anti-union dismissals are not put in place, this will lead to the actual disappearance of trade unions at the level of the undertaking and this is not something that this Committee can allow to stand.

Chairperson – I can see no more requests for the floor. So I would like to invite the representative of the Government of Türkiye to take the floor for her concluding remarks.

Government representative – We have listened attentively to the remarks of esteemed Worker and Employer representatives, as well as the distinguished representatives of Member countries. There is a mismatch between the realities of Türkiye and the content of the discussion taking place at the ILO. Türkiye is one of the countries which has been on the agenda of the Conference Committee many times for many years. An approach only concentrating on the deficiencies and not seeing any positive developments should not be the right approach to encourage compliance with international standards. I would like to bring to the attention of the Committee the following most significant developments and progress that have been made in the realm of labour life since 2013, especially within the scope of Convention No. 98, in line with the demands of the ILO in our current Trade Unions Law. Important progress in legislation has been achieved through a decision by the Constitutional Court. Rulings in 2013 and 2014 removed barriers preventing civil servants in the Ministry of National Defence and the Turkish Army Force and the General Directorate of Security from joining trade unions. This narrowed the scope of article 15 of the Public Servants’ Law. The introduction of e-membership services for trade union membership and withdrawal in November 2013 of the long-standing requirement for notary requirement, simplifying the process and reducing financial burdens on both workers and their organizations. An amendment of article 50 of the current Trade Unions Law introduced a mediation procedure allowing bargaining parties to peacefully resolve disputes before resorting to strikes by selecting a mediator from the official list. In 2014, the Constitutional Court abolished the distinction between workplaces based on employee numbers. Provisional article 6 of the current Trade Unions Law was amended to provide the right to bargain collectively without meeting the branch activity threshold. In 2019, the Constitutional Court took a decision stating that banking and public transport services were not considered essential services by the ILO, leading to a further narrowing of the strike ban. The implementation of the current Trade Unions Law and significant amendments of the Public Servants Law have led to a consistent increase in trade union membership rates. Since January 2013, the rate of unionization has steadily risen from 9.2 per cent to 15.2 per cent by January 2024. This trend is also evident among public sector employees with unionization rates increasing from 47.9 per cent in 2002 to 74.5 per cent by January 2024. These statistics highlight the positive progress made in Türkiye over the years against a trend of declining unionization rates around the world. Furthermore, the White Flag certification has been launched to promote registration, employment and trade union membership in Türkiye. It involves granting the White Flag certification with the slogan “Decent work, organized workplace” to businesses that adhere to registered working conditions, occupational safety and health standards in line with ILO guidelines. I want to reiterate that, alongside the positive change, the momentum gained since last year through the participation of the social partners in a tripartite consultation mechanism will drive further new regulation and amendments.

During this process, Türkiye shifted focus from reforms to tackling internal and external challenges, notably the 15 July coup attempt, while maintaining commitment to democracy and the rule of law. Unfortunately, we must highlight that the Committee of Experts’ report did not adequately consider the Government’s effort in restoring democracy, upholding the rule of law, and involving social partners and safeguarding the Republic and individual rights amidst significant terrorist threats. Over five years, the Inquiry Commission processed approximately 130,000 procedures resolving nearly 127,000 decisions, including dismissals from public service and other measures based on criteria related to connection to terrorist organizations and financial support. Applicants, including detainees and convicts could apply from penitentiary institutions electronically, with decisions overseen by the National Judiciary Informatics System (UYAP) and subject to appeal in nine specialized administrative courts in Ankara. I would like to boldly emphasize that, as a legal remedy for dismissals from public service, after the Inquiry Commission on State of Emergency Actions completed its duties, relevant units were formed in the relevant ministries in order to effectively follow up and finalize the administrative case files in accordance with provisional article 5 of Law No. 7075. However, as we have reiterated many times, it would be inappropriate to treat security-related issues as if they were a part of the world of work. Moreover, we also think that the ILO should approach such issues in a manner that prevents abuse. Besides, no trade unionist is immune from prosecution for unlawful acts, within affiliations or involvement in terrorism. Following the COVID-19 pandemic, Türkiye faced two major earthquakes in February 2023, impacting 11 provinces in the southeastern region and affecting 14 million people, representing 16 per cent of the population and 9 per cent of the economy. We express here our heartfelt thanks to international organizations and Member countries, particularly the ILO, for their support during these challenging times. Over the past seven years, Türkiye has actively participated in ILO initiatives, collaborating with the Ministry of Labour and Social Security and other stakeholders on events and programmes such as the Tenth European Regional Meeting and efforts to combat child labour. Recognized as a leading example in this regard, Türkiye has earned the status of an Alliance 8.7 Pathfinder Country and serves as a Coordinating Country in the ILO Global Coalition for Social Justice, alongside Belgium and Switzerland in the region.

In the framework of this importance and trust shown to us by the ILO and our own deep history of dialogue with the social partners, the Government is willing to negotiate within the framework of the existing Trade Unions Law and the Public Servants Law, if desired by the involved parties, in particular with regard to the level of collective bargaining, trade union thresholds and the authorization process for collective bargaining agreements.

I would like to point out that the Government is prepared to consider proposed amendments to the current collective bargaining system, specifically regarding articles 34 and 41(1) of the current Trade Unions Law. These amendments would be considered, if jointly proposed by social partners and if consensus is reached.

The Government is open to considering proposed amendments jointly made by social partners regarding various paragraphs in articles 46, 47, 49, 51, 60, 61 and 63 of the current Trade Unions Law. However, it is worth noting that the implementation of these articles is collaboratively carried out by employers’ and workers’ organizations. The collective bargaining process regulated by these articles proceeds smoothly without hesitation.

Türkiye has recently demonstrated its commitment to making changes and regulations on these issues in cooperation with the social partners by convening the Labour Assembly, the Tripartite Consultation Board, the Public Personnel Advisory Board and their sub-working committees.

Regarding the allegations on the restriction of freedom of peaceful assembly and May Day demonstrations, in Türkiye, all forms of peaceful gatherings and demonstrations take place within secure and unrestricted areas. The principle of the rule of law is upheld and limitations are only imposed as specified by legislation. In addition, 227 actions or events were organized with the participation of nearly 245,000 people in 78 provinces across Türkiye in 2024, regarding the 1 May Labour and Solidarity Day, and legal action was initiated against 269 people who acted illegally in these actions or events.

In Istanbul, an event organized by the Confederation of Progressive Unions (DISK) and KESK was held in Saraçhane Park, one of the most important demonstration and meeting areas, with the participation of 10,000 people. This event was held peacefully without any intervention.

On the other hand, Taksim Square is not included among the areas where meetings and demonstrations can be organized due to the high density of vehicles and pedestrians, the difficulty in taking security measures and protecting personal rights and freedoms, but more importantly, because it will have irreparable consequences for ensuring the security of life and property of the public. I would like to emphasize that there is no such situation as a ban on Taksim Square only for May Day. Therefore, the allegation that there is a Government ban on May Day celebrations does not reflect the truth.

In addition, I would like to bring to your attention that, similar to our approach under Convention No. 98, we have initiated the adoption of the Protocol of 2014 to the Forced Labour Convention, 1930. Moreover, the ratification process for the Maritime Labour Convention, 2006, as amended, will be concluded soon.

Finally, it is our expectation that the Committee’s conclusions will duly take into account my above explanations. As it is requested by the Committee of Experts, we will submit our report in 2024 with detailed information on the latest developments and with the copies of the documents requested for further examination by the Committee.

Employer members – The Employer members have taken due note of the information provided, but some information given this evening on the ECHR does not seem quite right.

One of the ILO’s main missions is to promote collective bargaining throughout the world. This mission was afforded it in 1944 in the Declaration of Philadelphia, which is part of the ILO Constitution. Collective bargaining contributes to the establishment of equitable and balanced working conditions and thereby to social peace.

As indicated in the 2012 General Survey, paragraph 198, “Under the terms of the ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work, 1998, collective bargaining is a fundamental right accepted by Member States from the very fact of their membership in the ILO, and which they have an obligation to respect, to promote and to realize in good faith.”

Paragraph 168 sets out that “Convention No. 98 covers all workers and employers, and their respective organizations, in both the private and the public sectors, regardless of whether the service is essential. The only exceptions authorized concern the armed forces and the police, as well as public servants engaged in the administration of the State.”

The excluded categories must therefore be interpreted narrowly. We consider that prison staff should not be excluded but that specific terms of collective bargaining could be set for this category, as mentioned in paragraph 213 of the General Survey.

Lastly, paragraph 200 states that “under the terms of Article 4 of the Convention, collective bargaining must be free and voluntary and respect the principle of the autonomy of the parties. However, the public authorities are under the obligation to ensure its promotion.”

We consider that the social partners themselves rather than the law are best placed to decide the level at which they wish to collectively bargain and conclude collective agreements. They should therefore conclude collective agreements at intersectoral, sectoral, regional and enterprise level.

We note that there are encouraging developments for the future of Türkiye. All trade union confederations and employers’ organizations have met since last April 2024 to set a new social agenda to respond to the daily challenges related to industrial relations. In addition, a significant project has been set up by ILO Türkiye with the participation of the social partners, which will cover freedom of association and the right to bargain collectively as pillars of the agenda of fundamental rights. This project will strengthen the understanding and implementation of international labour standards in Türkiye.

The Employer members encourage the governmental authorities to strengthen these consultations with the representative employers’ and workers’ organizations to promote collective bargaining at all levels. The promotion of collective bargaining concerns both the private and the public sector, even if certain exceptions are justifiable in the public sector based on their particular role in guaranteeing national security.

The Employer members also invite the Government to provide the ILO with all the information requested by the Committee of Experts. I conclude by highlighting that, above all, incentives should be strengthened so that social partners organize in full freedom and bargain freely and independently.

Worker members – We thank the Government of Türkiye for its remarks. We also thank all the speakers who took the floor and all the people who are still in the room.

Despite the additional information provided by the Government, our concerns regarding the many violations of the right to organize and the right to collective bargaining in the country have not been eased.

Anti-union discrimination and union busting are rampant both in the private and the public sectors. The national legal framework for the exercise of trade union rights is highly restrictive. Trade unionism is heavily impaired by excessive representativity thresholds. And we disagree with the characterization used by the Employer members to describe minority unions as “mere lobbying groups” with no rights or protections under the Convention. We firmly recall that, under Convention No. 98, the granting of exclusive rights to the most representative organization should not mean that the existence of other unions to which certain involved workers might wish to belong is prohibited. Minority organizations should be permitted to carry out their activities and at least to have the right to speak on behalf of their members and to represent them.

We are deeply concerned about the hostile stance taken by the Government against trade unions and their members since 2016, as demonstrated by the bouts of police violence occurring on May Day almost each year. On 1 May this year for example, KESK members and leaders were prevented from accessing the Taksim Square. Police forces violently broke up the demonstration, using tear gas and rubber bullets against workers and 215 workers were arrested that day.

We urge the Government to stop interfering in legitimate trade union activities and to refrain from using violence against trade union members and workers. We call on the Government to urgently take measures to lift all the legal barriers to the full enjoyment of the rights guaranteed by the Convention, including by reviewing, in full consultation with the social partners, legislative provisions regarding: the thresholds for becoming a collective bargaining agent; the rights of minority unions to collectively bargain; the restrictions of collective bargaining at all levels in the private sector; and the restrictions applying to prison staff, locum workers and public servants without a written contract.

Furthermore, we urge the Government to take meaningful and effective action to address anti-union discrimination both in the private and public sectors, including by: establishing an independent, expeditious and in-depth process for investigation and remedy of cases brought against anti-union dismissals in the public sector, in the framework of the emergency laws; but also repealing any remaining provisions which enable authorities to exercise state of emergency powers and to summarily dismiss union members; also adopting, in full consultation with the social partners, effective and sufficiently dissuasive sanctions against anti-union dismissals, as well as effective and expeditious mechanisms accessible to workers to seek redress; and, finally, elaborating and implementing, together with the social partners and with the technical assistance of the ILO, awareness-raising campaigns and programmes to educate the police and security forces, the judiciary and the administration on trade union rights.

We also call on the Government to engage in a broader review, in consultation with the social partners and with ILO technical assistance, of judicial and non-judicial mechanisms for the effective and timely investigation and redress of cases of anti-union discrimination.

Given the seriousness and the persistence of the violations in the country, we call on the Government to accept a high-level mission.

Conclusions of the Committee

The Committee took note of the oral information provided by the Government and the discussion that followed.

The Committee noted with concern the high number of cases of anti-union discrimination in the country and the lack of sufficiently dissuasive sanctions to combat this phenomenon in law and in practice. The Committee noted with concern the significant gaps in law and practice regarding the scope of collective bargaining.

Taking into account the discussion, the Committee called on the Government, in consultation with the social partners, to take appropriate and effective measures to:

• ensure the independent, expeditious and in-depth investigation into the alleged anti-union dismissals under the state of emergency decrees in the framework of procedures presenting all the guarantees of due process;
• adopt effective and dissuasive sanctions against anti-union discrimination, including anti-union dismissals, in both the public and private sectors, and ensure that workers who have suffered such prejudice are entitled to appropriate remedies (including reinstatement, financial compensation, etc.);
• engage in a comprehensive review of judicial and non-judicial mechanisms for the effective and timely investigation and redress of cases of anti-union discrimination;
• establish a robust system for collecting data on anti-union discrimination in both the public and private sectors;
• prevent interference in legitimate trade union activities and use of violence against trade union members and workers;
• amend section 34 of Act No. 6356 with a view to enabling parties in the private sector wishing to engage in cross-sector regional or national agreements to do so;
• ensure that minority trade unions are able to exercise their rights protected under the Convention;
• ensure that court proceedings on the legal validity of trade union majority certificates are concluded within a reasonable time;
• amend section 28 of Act No. 4688 with a view to removing restrictions on the material scope of collective bargaining in the public sector and to ensure that the parties concerned can autonomously decide the subjects for negotiation;
• amend existing legislation to ensure that prison staff, locum workers and public servants without a written contract can effectively exercise their right to organize and bargain collectively under the Convention;
• provide efficient and rapid remedies against the dismissal of trade union members based on state of emergency powers;
• review the method of appointment of members of the public employee arbitration board so as to ensure its independence and impartiality;
• elaborate and implement awareness-raising campaigns and programmes to educate the police and security forces, the judiciary and the administration on trade union rights; and
• provide any outstanding information requested by the Committee of Experts before its next session together with detailed information on the measures taken to implement these recommendations, and on the results achieved.

The Committee invited the Government to avail itself of ILO technical assistance to effectively implement all of the Committee’s recommendations.

Government representative – First of all, I would like to state that this decision of the Committee is a regrettable one, which is against the will of our Government which has been put forward by our country and which is expected to issue concrete results in a short period of time with the efforts of the social partners. In any case, it would have been appropriate for the Committee to give us a reasonable time for the arrangements that will be realized by our Government together with the social partners. We hope that this process will have a positive outcome for the relations between the ILO and our country together with the social partners.