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

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

The Committee takes note of the Government’s report.

Articles 1 and 3 of the Convention. Anti-union discrimination. In its previous comments, the Committee had noted that both the Unions Act No. 2821 and the Labour Act No. 4857 provided for protection against acts of anti-union discrimination. At the same time, the Committee had noted that questions arise as to whether section 31 of Act No. 2821 concerning compensation was applicable in all cases of dismissals for anti-union reasons. The Committee notes that, in its report, the Government confirms that section 31 is applicable in all cases of dismissals for anti-union reasons. However, the Committee notes that the Government indicates that section 31(6) stipulated that, in cases where the contract of employment is terminated for reasons of union membership or union activities, provisions of sections 18, 19, 20 and 21 of the Labour Act are applicable:

–      given that the compensation afforded to a worker dismissed on anti-union grounds, fulfilling the conditions set out in section 18 of Act No. 4857, can be inferior (even if accrued wages are paid) to section 31 of Act No. 2821, the Committee requests the Government to ensure that compensation is equivalent in value in both Acts;

–      given that the sanctions provided under section 59(2) (non-reinstatement of trade union officer) and section 59(3) (anti-union discrimination at the time of recruitment) of Act No. 2821 have apparently not been reviewed for a long time and are clearly inferior to the sanctions provided under Act No. 4857, the Committee requests the Government to revise the sanctions provided under sections 59(2) and (3) of Act No. 2821 and to align them with the sanctions provided by Act No. 4857 so that they constitute sufficiently dissuasive sanctions.

The Committee requests the Government to keep it informed on these questions.

The Committee notes that the draft Bill amending section 29 of Act No. 2821 does not specify the amount of compensation afforded to a trade union officer when the employer refuses to reinstate him for anti-union reasons upon the cessation of his mandate, resulting in the termination of the trade union officer’s contract. The compensation afforded by section 29 can be in certain cases inferior to the minimum provided under section 31. The Committee requests the Government to ensure that the compensation afforded to a trade union officer who is not reinstated for anti-union reasons has a dissuasive effect and is not inferior to the minimum provided under the general provision on anti-union discrimination compensation of section 31.

Article 4. Collective bargaining. In its previous comments, the Committee had noted that, under section 34 of Act No. 4688 on public employees’ trade unions, collective consultations shall be concluded, at the latest, within 15 days. If the parties have reached an agreement within this time limit, an agreed text signed by them shall be submitted to the Board of Ministers for any appropriate measures, including legislative measures. If the parties have not reached an agreement within the required time limit, under section 35, one of them can refer the matter to the Reconciliation Committee. The Reconciliation Committee takes a decision which, if accepted by both parties, will become the agreed text to be submitted to the Board of Ministers. If the decision is not accepted by the parties, all the points of agreement, as well as those unresolved, shall be submitted to the Government in the form of an official report signed by the parties.

While the specification of a time limit within which the negotiations should be concluded is not in itself incompatible with the Convention, the Committee considers that this time limit should be reasonable so as to ensure that the parties are in a position to hold full and meaningful negotiations. The time limit of 15 days set out in section 34 seems rather short to achieve such a purpose. The Committee takes note of the Government’s indication that these comments will be taken into consideration when Act No. 4688 is amended in the future. The Committee requests once again the Government to take the necessary measures to amend this provision in order to enable the parties to negotiate for a longer period.

In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to provide practical information on the outcome of the negotiation process and, in particular, on the number of negotiations which have resulted in agreed texts and those which have resulted in a report to the Board of Ministers following the parties’ refusal of the decision of the Reconciliation Committee. In addition, the Committee requested the Government to specify whether the agreed texts automatically result in measures being taken by the Board of Ministers and, if the latter has refused to take measures, or has modified collective agreements, the number of such instances. The Committee notes the Government’s indications that four negotiations were concluded up to 31 December 2005. In 2004, negotiations resulted in agreement on all issues apart from salaries and, in 2005, agreement was reached on all issues and the Council of Ministers acted upon the agreement and carried it into effect. The Committee takes note of this information.