(C) Common Dreams
This story was originally published by Common Dreams and is unaltered.
. . . . . . . . . .
The government’s anti-strike bill violates international law [1]
[]
Date: 2023-01-16 13:21:12+00:00
Earlier in January, Prime Minister Rishi Sunak told Parliament “the International Labour Organisation (ILO) supports minimum service levels… they’re present in France, in Italy, in Spain”. Grant Shapps added Germany to this list, and claimed the ILO “says that minimum service levels are a proportionate way of balancing the right to strike with the need to protect the wider public.” This is not true. In France, the so called “minimum service” laws simply require 48 hours’ notice for transport unions to strike (eg, Transport Code article L1324-7), or five days for health workers (Labour Code article L-2512-2). This is purely so that employers can find other staff to cover. In the UK, the law already requires two weeks’ notice, plus an extra week to tell the employer before a strike ballot, and the ballot must be by post – often taking four weeks. The French right to strike is individual. There is no sacking or suing. Collective agreements cover 98 per cent of French workers, who enjoy 10 per cent higher disposable incomes, and a shorter working week.
In Italy, minimum service levels are agreed in collective agreements with unions, based on Law No. 146 of 1990, which unions effectively drafted. There is no right of the government, let alone an employer, to force people to work or sack them, or sue the union. In Spain, the Constitutional Court tightly controls all limits on the right to strike, for strict safety or security reasons. In Germany, unions make collective agreements for minimum services, and only when an agreement cannot be reached may a court step in; it is not a government minister, let alone an employer who has the power to decide. Germany has no requirement for arcane postal ballots before strikes, it enables workers to take solidarity action, and it protects the right of workers to elect company directors, like most rich countries.
Finally, the ILO does not “support” minimum service levels. It has never said a plan like the Shapps Bill is a “proportionate” balance. It requires that for any minimum service levels at all, unions “must be able to participate” in setting them. Only if that is not possible it should be settled by “an independent body having the confidence of the parties”, not a minister or employer (ILO 2018, §§882-3).
[END]
---
[1] Url:
https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/the-governments-anti-strike-bill-violates-international-law/
Published and (C) by Common Dreams
Content appears here under this condition or license: Creative Commons CC BY-NC-ND 3.0..
via Magical.Fish Gopher News Feeds:
gopher://magical.fish/1/feeds/news/commondreams/
