Observación (CEACR) - Adopción: 2008, Publicación: 98ª reunión CIT (2009)

Convenio sobre la libertad sindical y la protección del derecho de sindicación, 1948 (núm. 87) - Noruega (Ratificación : 1949)

Articles 3 and 10 of the Convention. The Committee recalls that over the years, it has referred to the need to limit the possibility of imposing compulsory arbitration to the essential services in the strict sense of the term or to public servants exercising authority in the name of the State.

The Committee takes note of the Government’s observations that governmental intervention in strikes can only take place if the Norwegian Parliament (Stortinget) adopts a law and that this does not happen with regard to any collective labour dispute at the discretion of the public authorities, but rather after a careful evaluation of the impact of a strike on the life, health or personal safety of the population. The health surveillance authorities monitor the situation closely and only when it is reported from them that life and health is endangered, is a proposal of compulsory arbitration is put before Parliament. An exception from this has been the oil conflict which would cause a full stop in all Norwegian oil production which would have a devastating impact on volatile and already extremely high oil prices. As for the strike in the elevator service which ended through compulsory arbitration in 2006, the Government indicates that it had lasted for nearly six months and had given rise to safety concerns due to the lack of repairs and maintenance. The Government adds that in 2006, acts imposing compulsory arbitration have been adopted in conflicts in the insurance and financial services sector (Acts Nos 10 and 18 of 16 June 2006). Another intervention took place in the public sector involving the police, Food Safety Authority and Institute of Public Health. With regard to the issue of minimum services, the Government indicates that responsibility for minimum services agreements first of all rests with the conflicting parties which are responsible for the consequences of the industrial action. According to many basic agreements, industrial parties before a conflict breaks out enter into the agreements which are necessary to see to it that the conflict is handled and develops in a secure manner. The Government considers it to be the responsibility of the parties to handle these matters and this is done in most cases.

The Committee takes note of the conclusions and recommendations reached by the Committee on Freedom of Association in Case No. 2545 concerning the imposition of compulsory arbitration in 2006 in the insurance and financial services sectors which are not essential in the strict sense of the term (349th Report, paragraphs 1111–1156). It notes that the Committee on Freedom of Association requested the Government to avoid, in the future, enacting legislation which has the effect of bringing to an end all industrial action in a dispute, especially where it relates to a sector that cannot be considered essential in the strict sense of the term and take into account the possibility of a negotiated minimum service.

The Committee invites the Government once again to ensure that compulsory arbitration through legislative intervention is imposed only in cases where the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population is threatened or where the strike concerns public servants exercising authority in the name of the State, and requests the Government to continue to provide information on any decisions by Parliament imposing compulsory arbitration.