Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87) - Jamaica (Ratification: 1962)

Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 1987, Publication: 73rd ILC session (1987)

The Government has communicated the following information:

As regards the Committee of Experts' comments concerning Convention No. 87, it should be mentioned that the Tripartite Committee to which this matter was referred has recommended that the list of essential services should be specifically included in the revised schedule. Subsequently, the Government decided that the list of essential services should not be reduced at this time, and that, in fact, the list should be extended to include "Overseas Telecommunications Services" and "Telephone Services".

Re section 11A of the Labour Relations and Industrial Disputes Act, the Government considers that this provision does not restrict the rights of workers, trade unions or employers in the process of collective bargaining since it is a provision to be used only at the discretion of the Minister where all attempts for settlement have failed.

With reference to the Committee of Experts' comments on Convention No. 98 and related to the powers conferred on the Minister under the Labour Relations and Industrial Disputes Act as amended in 1978 concerning the imposition of compulsory arbitration the Government considers that this provision does not restrict the rights of workers, trade unions or employers in the process of collective bargaining since it is a provision to be used only at the discretion of the Minister where all attempts for settlement have failed.

In addition, the Supreme Court has ruled, inter alia:

(i) that section 11A of the Act does not give the Minister an unlimited discretion of reference but flows from considerations of the national interest; and

(ii) it must be exercised to secure industrial peace in the undertaking and not merely to satisfy some narrow personal interest.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2022, published 111st ILC session (2023)

The Committee notes the observations of the Jamaica Confederation of Trade Unions (JCTU) and the Jamaica Employers Federation (JEF), transmitted with the Government’s report, concerning issues addressed by the Committee below.

Article 3 of the Convention. Picketing. The Committee had previously noted that section 33(2) of the Trade Union Act (TUA) prohibits picketing for solidarity or sympathy reasons and had requested the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that peaceful picketing in the context of sympathy and solidarity strikes is not subject to sanctions. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the issue has not yet been reviewed and that consultations will be undertaken to determine the way forward. The Committee further notes the JCTU’s observation urging support for such peaceful picketing, and also the JEF’s observation that it is “comfortable with peaceful picketing at the business in question”. The Committee urges the Government to take the necessary measures, including revising section 33(2) of the TUA in consultation with the social partners, to ensure that peaceful picketing in the context of sympathy and solidarity strikes is not subject to Government intervention and sanctions. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on all measures undertaken in this regard.

Limitation of strike action. The Committee had encouraged the Government to continue exercising restraint in using sections 10 and 32 of the Labour Relations and Industrial Disputes Act (LRIDA), bearing in mind that other than essential services (i.e. services the interruption of which could endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population), the right to strike may only be restricted for public servants exercising authority in the name of the State, or in case of acute national crisis, but only for a limited period of time and to the extent necessary. The Committee notes with regret the Government’s indication that there have been no developments in this regard. The Committee notes the JCTU’s observations regarding its support for the amendment of the aforementioned sections. The Committee requests the Government to review these provisions in consultation with the social partners with a view to their possible amendment and to provide information on all developments in this regard.

Compulsory arbitration. The Committee had previously expressed concern at the lack of progress in amending sections 9, 10 and 11(A) of the LRIDA that confer extensive power to the Minister to refer any industrial dispute to arbitration. The Committee notes with regret the Government’s indication that there are no developments in this regard. The Committee urges the Government to take the necessary measures to amend sections 9, 10 and 11(A) of the LRIDA without delay so as to bring them into conformity with the Convention and requests the Government to indicate any developments in this regard.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2022, published 111st ILC session (2023)

The Committee notes the observations of the Jamaica Confederation of Trade Unions (JCTU) and the Jamaica Employers Federation (JEF) transmitted with the Government’s report. The Committee also notes the observations of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) received on 1 September 2022 alleging obstacles to the exercise of trade union rights in the business process outsourcing sector operating in special economic zones (SEZs). The ITUC alleges, in particular, that no trade union representation has been allowed in the more than 70 companies employing 40,000 workers in the sector.

Article 2 of the Convention. Right of workers to establish and join organizations. The Committee had previously requested the Government to take the necessary measures to amend section 6(4) of the Trade Union Act (TUA) with a view to ensuring that penalties are not imposed on workers for their membership and participation in activities of an unregistered trade union. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that steps are being taken to repeal section 6(4) of the TUA, and notes the JEF’s observation strongly supporting the repeal. The Committee also notes the JCTU’s observations supporting the possibility of workers to establish and join organizations outside of trade unions, but such organizations should not assume the rights of registered trade unions under the TUA. The Committee regrets the lack of progress and urges the Government to take the necessary measures without further delay, in consultation with the social partners, to amend its legislation. The Committee requests the Government to inform it of developments in this regard.

Article 3. Interference in the financial administration of a trade union. The Committee had previously requested the Government to take the necessary measures to restrict the Registrar’s discretionary rights to carry out inspections and request information with regard to trade union finances at any time as provided in section 16(2) of the TUA. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the matter has not yet been reviewed. The Committee further notes the JCTU’s observations to the effect that the control exercised by public authorities should not be outside of the reasonable requirements of submitting periodic reports set out in section 16(1) of the TUA. The Committee also notes the JEF’s observations regarding the need to reform section 16(2) of the TUA. Noting with regret that the Government has not undertaken any steps in this regard, the Committee urges the Government to take the necessary measures, in consultation with the social partners, to amend section 16(2) of the TUA so as to ensure that the control exercised by the public authorities over trade union finances does not exceed the obligation to submit periodic reports. The Committee requests the Government to inform it of developments in this regard.

The Committee is raising other matters in a request addressed directly to the Government.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It hopes that the next report will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous comments.

Repetition

The Committee notes the Government’s reply to the 2015 International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) observation alleging union-busting, harassment and anti-union dismissals of workers from the Bustamante Industrial Trade Union (BITU) and the National Workers’ Union (NWU).

Article 3 of the Convention. Picketing. The Committee had previously noted that section 33(2) of the Trade Union Act (TUA) prohibits picketing for solidarity or sympathy reasons and had requested the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that peaceful picketing in the context of sympathy and solidarity strikes is not subject to sanctions. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that while it does not intervene with peaceful picketing, it has a legal obligation to intervene in situations when the picketing is done in such a manner as to intimidate or create a breach of the peace. The Government further points out that pursuant to section 33(1) of the TUA an offence is committed only if persons “attend in such numbers or otherwise is such manner as to be calculated to intimidate any person in that house or place, or to obstruct the approach thereto or egress there from, or to lead to a breach of the peace”. The Committee considers that intervention by the authorities is justified only when the picketing ceases to be peaceful without regard to the intentions or calculations of persons engaged in the picketing. The Committee therefore once again requests the Government to take the necessary measures, including by revising section 33(2) of the TUA, to ensure that peaceful picketing in the context of sympathy and solidarity strikes is not subject to the Government’s intervention and sanctions. The Committee requests the Government to indicate all measures taken in this regard.

Limitation of strike action. The Committee had requested the Government to provide information on how sections 10 and 32 of the Labour Relations and Industrial Disputes Act (LRIDA) were applied in practice. The Committee had previously noted that pursuant to these provisions, if the Minister considers that an industrial action in non-essential services has or would be likely to cause an interruption in the supply of goods or in provisions of services of such a nature, or on such a scale so as to be gravely injurious to the national interest (national economy, national security, public order, life and health of a substantial number of persons), then he or she may make an order to that effect and apply to the Supreme Court ex parte for an order restraining the parties from commencing or from continuing the industrial action. The Committee notes with interest the Government’s indication that section 10 can only be used where specified conditions are met. The threshold of proof required has meant that in practice, the Minister has not utilized this provision. With regard to section 32, the Government indicates that a high standard must be met in order to satisfy the Supreme Court that the legal requirements of application of this provision are fulfilled. Those standards require that the action has to be likely to be gravely injurious to the national economy, imperil national security or create a serious risk of public disorder; or endanger the lives of a substantial number of persons or expose a substantial number of persons to serious risk of disease or personal injury. The Government further indicates that while these provisions exist, they have not been invoked in relation to any industrial dispute in recent years and the Ministry of Labour and Social Security has been able to utilize its conciliatory powers to amicably resolve matters that may potentially fall within sections 10 and 32. The Committee takes due note of this information, and encourages the Government to continue exercising restraint in using sections 10 and 32 of the LRIDA, bearing in mind that outside essential services, for example, services the interruption of which could endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population, the right to strike may only be restricted for public servants exercising authority in the name of the State, or in case of acute national crisis, but only for a limited period of time and to the extent necessary. The Committee further encourages the Government to review these provisions in consultation with the social partners with a view to their possible amendment.

Compulsory arbitration. The Committee had previously expressed concern at the lack of progress in amending sections 9, 10 and 11(A) of the LRIDA that confer extensive power to the Minister to refer any industrial dispute to arbitration. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the Ministry will examine the Committee’s concerns in consultation with social partners and the Labour Advisory Council with a view to making recommendations for legislative reform. The Committee once again expresses its concern at the lack of progress in this regard and expects that sections 9, 10 and 11(A) of the LRIDA will be amended in the near future so as to bring them into conformity with the Convention in line with the Committee’s previous comments, and requests the Government to indicate any developments in this regard.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It is therefore bound to repeat its previous comments.

Repetition

Article 2 of the Convention. Right of workers to establish and join organizations. The Committee had previously requested the Government to take the necessary measures to amend section 6(4) of the Trade Union Act (TUA) in order to ensure that penalties were not imposed on workers for their membership and participation in activities of an unregistered trade union. The Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that this issue is being examined and will be discussed with the social partners at the Labour Advisory Council. The Committee expresses the firm hope that the law will be amended in the near future and requests the Government to inform of the developments in this regard.

Article 3. Interference in the financial administration of a trade union. The Committee had previously requested the Government to take the necessary measures to restrict the Registrar’s discretionary rights to carry out inspections and request information with regard to trade union finances at any time as provided in section 16(2) of the TUA. Noting with regret that the Government has not provided any information in this regard, the Committee reiterates its previous request. It expects that the Government’s next report will contain information on the measures taken to amend section 16(2) of the TUA so as to ensure that the control exercised by the public authorities over trade union finances does not exceed the obligation to submit periodic reports.

The Committee is raising other matters in a request addressed directly to the Government.

The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the near future.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2018, published 108th ILC session (2019)

The Committee notes the Government’s reply to the 2015 International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) observation alleging union-busting, harassment and anti-union dismissals of workers from the Bustamante Industrial Trade Union (BITU) and the National Workers’ Union (NWU).

Article 3 of the Convention. Picketing. The Committee had previously noted that section 33(2) of the Trade Union Act (TUA) prohibits picketing for solidarity or sympathy reasons and had requested the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that peaceful picketing in the context of sympathy and solidarity strikes is not subject to sanctions. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that while it does not intervene with peaceful picketing, it has a legal obligation to intervene in situations when the picketing is done in such a manner as to intimidate or create a breach of the peace. The Government further points out that pursuant to section 33(1) of the TUA an offence is committed only if persons “attend in such numbers or otherwise is such manner as to be calculated to intimidate any person in that house or place, or to obstruct the approach thereto or egress there from, or to lead to a breach of the peace”. The Committee considers that intervention by the authorities is justified only when the picketing ceases to be peaceful without regard to the intentions or calculations of persons engaged in the picketing. The Committee therefore once again requests the Government to take the necessary measures, including by revising section 33(2) of the TUA, to ensure that peaceful picketing in the context of sympathy and solidarity strikes is not subject to the Government’s intervention and sanctions. The Committee requests the Government to indicate all measures taken in this regard.

Limitation of strike action. The Committee had requested the Government to provide information on how sections 10 and 32 of the Labour Relations and Industrial Disputes Act (LRIDA) were applied in practice. The Committee had previously noted that pursuant to these provisions, if the Minister considers that an industrial action in non-essential services has or would be likely to cause an interruption in the supply of goods or in provisions of services of such a nature, or on such a scale so as to be gravely injurious to the national interest (national economy, national security, public order, life and health of a substantial number of persons), then he or she may make an order to that effect and apply to the Supreme Court ex parte for an order restraining the parties from commencing or from continuing the industrial action. The Committee notes with interest the Government’s indication that section 10 can only be used where specified conditions are met. The threshold of proof required has meant that in practice, the Minister has not utilized this provision. With regard to section 32, the Government indicates that a high standard must be met in order to satisfy the Supreme Court that the legal requirements of application of this provision are fulfilled. Those standards require that the action has to be likely to be gravely injurious to the national economy, imperil national security or create a serious risk of public disorder; or endanger the lives of a substantial number of persons or expose a substantial number of persons to serious risk of disease or personal injury. The Government further indicates that while these provisions exist, they have not been invoked in relation to any industrial dispute in recent years and the Ministry of Labour and Social Security has been able to utilize its conciliatory powers to amicably resolve matters that may potentially fall within sections 10 and 32. The Committee takes due note of this information, and encourages the Government to continue exercising restraint in using sections 10 and 32 of the LRIDA, bearing in mind that outside essential services, for example, services the interruption of which could endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population, the right to strike may only be restricted for public servants exercising authority in the name of the State, or in case of acute national crisis, but only for a limited period of time and to the extent necessary. The Committee further encourages the Government to review these provisions in consultation with the social partners with a view to their possible amendment.

Compulsory arbitration. The Committee had previously expressed concern at the lack of progress in amending sections 9, 10 and 11(A) of the LRIDA that confer extensive power to the Minister to refer any industrial dispute to arbitration. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the Ministry will examine the Committee’s concerns in consultation with social partners and the Labour Advisory Council with a view to making recommendations for legislative reform. The Committee once again expresses its concern at the lack of progress in this regard and expects that sections 9, 10 and 11(A) of the LRIDA will be amended in the near future so as to bring them into conformity with the Convention in line with the Committee’s previous comments, and requests the Government to indicate any developments in this regard.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2018, published 108th ILC session (2019)

Article 2 of the Convention. Right of workers to establish and join organizations. The Committee had previously requested the Government to take the necessary measures to amend section 6(4) of the Trade Union Act (TUA) in order to ensure that penalties were not imposed on workers for their membership and participation in activities of an unregistered trade union. The Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that this issue is being examined and will be discussed with the social partners at the Labour Advisory Council. The Committee expresses the firm hope that the law will be amended in the near future and requests the Government to inform of the developments in this regard.

Article 3. Interference in the financial administration of a trade union. The Committee had previously requested the Government to take the necessary measures to restrict the Registrar’s discretionary rights to carry out inspections and request information with regard to trade union finances at any time as provided in section 16(2) of the TUA. Noting with regret that the Government has not provided any information in this regard, the Committee reiterates its previous request. It expects that the Government’s next report will contain information on the measures taken to amend section 16(2) of the TUA so as to ensure that the control exercised by the public authorities over trade union finances does not exceed the obligation to submit periodic reports.

The Committee is raising other matters in a request addressed directly to the Government.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2017, published 107th ILC session (2018)

The Committee notes with regret that the Government’s report has not been received. It hopes that the next report will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous comments initially made in 2015.

Repetition

The Committee notes with concern the ITUC observations received on 1 September 2015 alleging union busting, harassment and anti-union dismissals of workers from the Bustamante Industrial Trade Union (BITU) and the National Workers’ Union (NWU). The Committee requests the Government to take all necessary measures to ensure that members of the BITU and the NWU can effectively benefit from the rights guaranteed by the Convention and to provide information on any measures taken in this regard.

Article 3 of the Convention. Picketing. The Committee notes the ITUC’s observations that: (i) according to section 33(1) of the Trade Union Act (TUA), picketing is unlawful if it is attended in such numbers or otherwise in such manner as to be calculated to intimidate any person in a house or place, to obstruct the approach thereto or egress therefrom or to lead to a breach of peace; (ii) in line with section 33(2) of the TUA, picketing is prohibited for sympathy or solidarity reasons (it is unlawful for a person to participate in a picket unless the person is the employer or a member of the company with which the industrial dispute is contemplated, a current or former (up to 12 months before the picketing) worker of the company or an officer of a registered trade union (maximum eight officers can be present); and (iii) sections 32 and 33 of the TUA impose excessive civil and penal sanctions for non-authorized picketing. In this regard, the Committee recalls that while workers should be able to participate in sympathy picketing and sympathy strikes if the initial strike they are supporting is itself lawful, the exercise of the right to strike should respect the freedom to work of non-strikers as well as the right of the management to enter the premises of the enterprise, and therefore legal provisions prohibiting picketing from disturbing public order, creating violence and threatening, intimidating or coercing non-strikers are legitimate (sections 32 and 33(1) of the TUA). The Committee further notes that participation in a peaceful and non-threatening solidarity strike is a legitimate measure and should not be subject to any penalties (section 33(2) of the TUA). The Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that peaceful picketing in the context of sympathy and solidarity strikes is allowed and is not subject to sanctions.

Limitation on strike action. The Committee notes the ITUC’s observations that in accordance with sections 10 and 32 of the Labour Relations and Industrial Disputes Act (LRIDA), the authorities can unilaterally prohibit, limit, suspend or cease strike action. The Committee observes that according to these provisions, if the Minister considers that an industrial action in non-essential services has or would be likely to cause an interruption in the supply of goods or in provisions of services of such a nature, or on such a scale so as to be gravely injurious to the national interest (national economy, national security, public order, life and health of a substantial number of persons), then the Minister may make an order to that effect and apply to the Supreme Court ex parte for an order restraining the parties from commencing or from continuing the industrial action. Recalling that outside essential services, the right to strike may only be restricted for public servants exercising authority in the name of the State, or in case of acute national crisis but only for a limited period of time and to the extent necessary, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on how sections 10 and 32 of the LRIDA are applied in practice, including examples of services in which industrial action has been restricted pursuant to these provisions.

Compulsory arbitration. The Committee had previously referred to the extensive power of the Minister to refer an industrial dispute to arbitration (sections 9, 10 and 11(A) of the LRIDA) and had noted the Government’s indication that it was considering the Committee’s request to amend these sections. The Committee notes that in its report the Government indicates that the legislation on the issue currently remains unchanged. The Committee expresses concern at the lack of progress and firmly hopes that sections 9, 10 and 11(A) of the LRIDA will be amended in the near future, taking into account that compulsory arbitration to end a collective labour dispute is acceptable only in instances where a strike may be restricted or even banned, that is, in the event of a dispute in the public service involving public servants exercising authority in the name of the State, or in essential services in the strict sense of the term, namely services the interruption of which could endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population, or in case of acute national crisis. The Committee requests the Government to indicate any developments in this regard.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2017, published 107th ILC session (2018)

The Committee notes with regret that the Government’s report has not been received. It is therefore bound to repeat its previous comments initially made in 2015.

Repetition

The Committee notes the observations of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) received on 1 September 2015. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments in this regard.

Article 2 of the Convention. Right of workers to establish and join organizations. The Committee notes the indications of the ITUC that section 6(4) of the Trade Union Act (TUA) provides that, if an application for registration of a trade union has not been made in line with the Act, or if registration of a trade union has been refused or cancelled, every member of the trade union who continues to be a member thereof, and every person who participates in any meetings or proceedings of the trade union, knowing that it is not registered under the Act, shall be guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to a penalty of up to 500 Jamaican dollars. Acknowledging that the official recognition of an organization through its registration constitutes a relevant aspect of the right to organize, as it is the first measure to be taken so that organizations can fulfil their role effectively, but also recalling that the exercise of legitimate trade union activities should not be dependent upon registration and that, therefore, penalties should not be imposed upon workers for their membership and participation in an unregistered trade union, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to amend the legislation in this respect.

Article 3. Interference in the financial administration of a trade union. The Committee notes that the ITUC denounces that, in addition to the obligation on the treasurer to submit to the Registrar annual statements of account, audit certificates, membership lists and changes to the rules and officers of the trade union, the Registrar may, in line with section 16(2) of the TUA, at any time, request the treasurer or any trade union member to provide detailed accounts of the revenue, expenditures, assets, liabilities and funds of the trade union in respect of any specified period. Recalling that the control exercised by the public authorities over trade union finances should not normally exceed the obligation to submit periodic reports, and that the discretionary rights of the authorities to carry out inspections and request information at any time entails a danger of interference in the internal administration of trade unions, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to restrict the Registrar’s powers in this regard.

The Committee is raising other matters in a request addressed directly to the Government.

The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the near future.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2016, published 106th ILC session (2017)

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It hopes that the next report will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous comments.

Repetition

The Committee notes with concern the ITUC observations received on 1 September 2015 alleging union busting, harassment and anti-union dismissals of workers from the Bustamante Industrial Trade Union (BITU) and the National Workers’ Union (NWU). The Committee requests the Government to take all necessary measures to ensure that members of the BITU and the NWU can effectively benefit from the rights guaranteed by the Convention and to provide information on any measures taken in this regard.

Article 3 of the Convention. Picketing. The Committee notes the ITUC’s observations that: (i) according to section 33(1) of the Trade Union Act (TUA), picketing is unlawful if it is attended in such numbers or otherwise in such manner as to be calculated to intimidate any person in a house or place, to obstruct the approach thereto or egress therefrom or to lead to a breach of peace; (ii) in line with section 33(2) of the TUA, picketing is prohibited for sympathy or solidarity reasons (it is unlawful for a person to participate in a picket unless the person is the employer or a member of the company with which the industrial dispute is contemplated, a current or former (up to 12 months before the picketing) worker of the company or an officer of a registered trade union (maximum eight officers can be present); and (iii) sections 32 and 33 of the TUA impose excessive civil and penal sanctions for non-authorized picketing. In this regard, the Committee recalls that while workers should be able to participate in sympathy picketing and sympathy strikes if the initial strike they are supporting is itself lawful, the exercise of the right to strike should respect the freedom to work of non-strikers as well as the right of the management to enter the premises of the enterprise, and therefore legal provisions prohibiting picketing from disturbing public order, creating violence and threatening, intimidating or coercing non-strikers are legitimate (sections 32 and 33(1) of the TUA). The Committee further notes that participation in a peaceful and non-threatening solidarity strike is a legitimate measure and should not be subject to any penalties (section 33(2) of the TUA). The Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that peaceful picketing in the context of sympathy and solidarity strikes is allowed and is not subject to sanctions.

Limitation on strike action. The Committee notes the ITUC’s observations that in accordance with sections 10 and 32 of the Labour Relations and Industrial Disputes Act (LRIDA), the authorities can unilaterally prohibit, limit, suspend or cease strike action. The Committee observes that according to these provisions, if the Minister considers that an industrial action in non-essential services has or would be likely to cause an interruption in the supply of goods or in provisions of services of such a nature, or on such a scale so as to be gravely injurious to the national interest (national economy, national security, public order, life and health of a substantial number of persons), then the Minister may make an order to that effect and apply to the Supreme Court ex parte for an order restraining the parties from commencing or from continuing the industrial action. Recalling that outside essential services, the right to strike may only be restricted for public servants exercising authority in the name of the State, or in case of acute national crisis but only for a limited period of time and to the extent necessary, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on how sections 10 and 32 of the LRIDA are applied in practice, including examples of services in which industrial action has been restricted pursuant to these provisions.

Compulsory arbitration. The Committee had previously referred to the extensive power of the Minister to refer an industrial dispute to arbitration (sections 9, 10 and 11(A) of the LRIDA) and had noted the Government’s indication that it was considering the Committee’s request to amend these sections. The Committee notes that in its report the Government indicates that the legislation on the issue currently remains unchanged. The Committee expresses concern at the lack of progress and firmly hopes that sections 9, 10 and 11(A) of the LRIDA will be amended in the near future, taking into account that compulsory arbitration to end a collective labour dispute is acceptable only in instances where a strike may be restricted or even banned, that is, in the event of a dispute in the public service involving public servants exercising authority in the name of the State, or in essential services in the strict sense of the term, namely services the interruption of which could endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population, or in case of acute national crisis. The Committee requests the Government to indicate any developments in this regard.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2016, published 106th ILC session (2017)

The Committee notes the observations of the International Organisation of Employers (IOE) received on 1 September 2016 which are of a general nature.

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It is therefore bound to repeat its previous comments.

The Committee notes the observations of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) received on 1 September 2015. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments in this regard.

Article 2 of the Convention. Right of workers to establish and join organizations. The Committee notes the indications of the ITUC that section 6(4) of the Trade Union Act (TUA) provides that, if an application for registration of a trade union has not been made in line with the Act, or if registration of a trade union has been refused or cancelled, every member of the trade union who continues to be a member thereof, and every person who participates in any meetings or proceedings of the trade union, knowing that it is not registered under the Act, shall be guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to a penalty of up to 500 Jamaican dollars. Acknowledging that the official recognition of an organization through its registration constitutes a relevant aspect of the right to organize, as it is the first measure to be taken so that organizations can fulfil their role effectively, but also recalling that the exercise of legitimate trade union activities should not be dependent upon registration and that, therefore, penalties should not be imposed upon workers for their membership and participation in an unregistered trade union, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to amend the legislation in this respect.

Article 3. Interference in the financial administration of a trade union. The Committee notes that the ITUC denounces that, in addition to the obligation on the treasurer to submit to the Registrar annual statements of account, audit certificates, membership lists and changes to the rules and officers of the trade union, the Registrar may, in line with section 16(2) of the TUA, at any time, request the treasurer or any trade union member to provide detailed accounts of the revenue, expenditures, assets, liabilities and funds of the trade union in respect of any specified period. Recalling that the control exercised by the public authorities over trade union finances should not normally exceed the obligation to submit periodic reports, and that the discretionary rights of the authorities to carry out inspections and request information at any time entails a danger of interference in the internal administration of trade unions, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to restrict the Registrar’s powers in this regard.

The Committee is raising other matters in a request addressed directly to the Government.

The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the near future.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2015, published 105th ILC session (2016)

The Committee notes with concern the ITUC observations received on 1 September 2015 alleging union busting, harassment and anti-union dismissals of workers from the Bustamante Industrial Trade Union (BITU) and the National Workers’ Union (NWU). The Committee requests the Government to take all necessary measures to ensure that members of the BITU and the NWU can effectively benefit from the rights guaranteed by the Convention and to provide information on any measures taken in this regard.

Article 3 of the Convention. Picketing. The Committee notes the ITUC’s observations that: (i) according to section 33(1) of the Trade Union Act (TUA), picketing is unlawful if it is attended in such numbers or otherwise in such manner as to be calculated to intimidate any person in a house or place, to obstruct the approach thereto or egress therefrom or to lead to a breach of peace; (ii) in line with section 33(2) of the TUA, picketing is prohibited for sympathy or solidarity reasons (it is unlawful for a person to participate in a picket unless the person is the employer or a member of the company with which the industrial dispute is contemplated, a current or former (up to 12 months before the picketing) worker of the company or an officer of a registered trade union (maximum eight officers can be present); and (iii) sections 32 and 33 of the TUA impose excessive civil and penal sanctions for non-authorized picketing. In this regard, the Committee recalls that while workers should be able to participate in sympathy picketing and sympathy strikes if the initial strike they are supporting is itself lawful, the exercise of the right to strike should respect the freedom to work of non-strikers as well as the right of the management to enter the premises of the enterprise, and therefore legal provisions prohibiting picketing from disturbing public order, creating violence and threatening, intimidating or coercing non-strikers are legitimate (sections 32 and 33(1) of the TUA). The Committee further notes that participation in a peaceful and non-threatening solidarity strike is a legitimate measure and should not be subject to any penalties (section 33(2) of the TUA). The Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that peaceful picketing in the context of sympathy and solidarity strikes is allowed and is not subject to sanctions.

Limitation on strike action. The Committee notes the ITUC’s observations that in accordance with sections 10 and 32 of the Labour Relations and Industrial Disputes Act (LRIDA), the authorities can unilaterally prohibit, limit, suspend or cease strike action. The Committee observes that according to these provisions, if the Minister considers that an industrial action in non-essential services has or would be likely to cause an interruption in the supply of goods or in provisions of services of such a nature, or on such a scale so as to be gravely injurious to the national interest (national economy, national security, public order, life and health of a substantial number of persons), then the Minister may make an order to that effect and apply to the Supreme Court ex parte for an order restraining the parties from commencing or from continuing the industrial action. Recalling that outside essential services, the right to strike may only be restricted for public servants exercising authority in the name of the State, or in case of acute national crisis but only for a limited period of time and to the extent necessary, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on how sections 10 and 32 of the LRIDA are applied in practice, including examples of services in which industrial action has been restricted pursuant to these provisions.

Compulsory arbitration. The Committee had previously referred to the extensive power of the Minister to refer an industrial dispute to arbitration (sections 9, 10 and 11(A) of the LRIDA) and had noted the Government’s indication that it was considering the Committee’s request to amend these sections. The Committee notes that in its report the Government indicates that the legislation on the issue currently remains unchanged. The Committee expresses concern at the lack of progress and firmly hopes that sections 9, 10 and 11(A) of the LRIDA will be amended in the near future, taking into account that compulsory arbitration to end a collective labour dispute is acceptable only in instances where a strike may be restricted or even banned, that is, in the event of a dispute in the public service involving public servants exercising authority in the name of the State, or in essential services in the strict sense of the term, namely services the interruption of which could endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population, or in case of acute national crisis. The Committee requests the Government to indicate any developments in this regard.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2015, published 105th ILC session (2016)

The Committee notes the observations of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) received on 1 September 2015. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments in this regard.

The Committee takes note of the observations received from the International Organisation of Employers (IOE) on 1 September 2015, which are of a general nature.

Article 2 of the Convention. Right of workers to establish and join organizations. The Committee notes the indications of the ITUC that section 6(4) of the Trade Union Act (TUA) provides that, if an application for registration of a trade union has not been made in line with the Act, or if registration of a trade union has been refused or cancelled, every member of the trade union who continues to be a member thereof, and every person who participates in any meetings or proceedings of the trade union, knowing that it is not registered under the Act, shall be guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to a penalty of up to 500 Jamaican dollars. Acknowledging that the official recognition of an organization through its registration constitutes a relevant aspect of the right to organize, as it is the first measure to be taken so that organizations can fulfil their role effectively, but also recalling that the exercise of legitimate trade union activities should not be dependent upon registration and that, therefore, penalties should not be imposed upon workers for their membership and participation in an unregistered trade union, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to amend the legislation in this respect.

Article 3. Interference in the financial administration of a trade union. The Committee notes that the ITUC denounces that, in addition to the obligation on the treasurer to submit to the Registrar annual statements of account, audit certificates, membership lists and changes to the rules and officers of the trade union, the Registrar may, in line with section 16(2) of the TUA, at any time, request the treasurer or any trade union member to provide detailed accounts of the revenue, expenditures, assets, liabilities and funds of the trade union in respect of any specified period. Recalling that the control exercised by the public authorities over trade union finances should not normally exceed the obligation to submit periodic reports, and that the discretionary rights of the authorities to carry out inspections and request information at any time entails a danger of interference in the internal administration of trade unions, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to restrict the Registrar’s powers in this regard.

The Committee is raising other matters in a request addressed directly to the Government.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2014, published 104th ILC session (2015)

The Committee notes the observations provided by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) in a communication received on 1 September 2014 alleging a series of inconsistencies between the domestic legislation and the Convention: (i) penalties for organizing or joining an organization not officially recognized; (ii) restrictions on the right of unions to self-administration; and (iii) excessive restrictions and sanctions with respect to strike actions. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments in this respect.

The Committee takes note of the observations provided by the International Organisation of Employers (IOE) in a communication received on 1 September 2014.

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It must therefore repeat its previous comments.

Article 3 of the Convention. The right of organizations to organize freely their activities and to formulate their programmes. The Committee recalls that in its previous observations it referred to the extensive power of the minister to refer an industrial dispute to arbitration (sections 9, 10 and 11(A) of the Labour Relations and Industrial Disputes Act). The Committee notes that the Government reiterates in its report that it is seriously considering the ILO’s request to amend these sections and that it hopes that a positive response can be given in its next report. In these circumstances, the Committee reiterates its hope that sections 9, 10 and 11(A) of the Labour Relations and Industrial Disputes Act will be amended, taking into account that compulsory arbitration to end a collective labour dispute is acceptable only at the request of both parties or in instances where a strike may be restricted or even banned, i.e. in the event of a dispute in the public service involving public servants exercising authority in the name of the State, or in essential services in the strict sense of the term, namely services the interruption of which could endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population. The Committee requests the Government to indicate any developments in this regard.

The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the near future.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2011, published 101st ILC session (2012)

The Committee notes the comments submitted by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), in two communications dated 30 September 2009 and 4 August 2011, which mainly refer to matters already raised by the Committee.

Article 3 of the Convention. The right of organizations freely to organize their activities and to formulate their programmes. The Committee recalls that in its previous observations it referred to the extensive power of the minister to refer an industrial dispute to arbitration (sections 9, 10, and 11(A) of the Labour Relations and Industrial Disputes Act). The Committee notes that the Government reiterates in its report that it is seriously considering the ILO’s request to amend these sections and that it hopes that a positive response can be given in its next report. In these circumstances, the Committee reiterates its hope that sections 9, 10 and 11(A) of the Labour Relations and Industrial Disputes Act will be amended, taking into account that compulsory arbitration to end a collective labour dispute is acceptable only at the request of both parties or in instances where a strike may be restricted or even banned, i.e. in the event of a dispute in the public service involving public servants exercising authority in the name of the State, or in essential services in the strict sense of the term, namely services the interruption of which could endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population. The Committee requests the Government to indicate any developments in this regard.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2009, published 99th ILC session (2010)

The Committee notes the comments of 29 August 2008 by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) which refer to matters already raised by the Committee, as well as allegations concerning acts of anti-union discrimination. These allegations are examined under the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).

Article 3 of the Convention. The right of organizations freely to organize their activities and to formulate their programmes. The Committee recalls that in its previous observations it referred to the extensive power of the minister to refer an industrial dispute to arbitration (sections 9, 10, and 11(A) of the Labour Relations and Industrial Disputes Act). The Committee notes that the Government indicates in its report that the amendments to the Labour Relations and Industrial Disputes Act only permit the minister to exercise the powers vested in his office to require compulsory arbitration in specific essential circumstances and only after all efforts to come to an amicable settlement through dialogue and negotiations have failed. The Committee further notes that the Government indicates that the Labour Relations and Industrial Disputes Act and its corresponding regulations are constantly under review by the ministry and that the ministry will examine concerns raised with a view to making any amendments necessary to make it more compliant with the Convention. In these circumstances, the Committee hopes that sections 9, 10 and 11(A) of the Act will be amended, taking into account that compulsory arbitration to end a collective labour dispute is acceptable only at the request of both parties or in instances where a strike may be restricted or even banned, i.e. in the event of a dispute in the public service involving public servants exercising authority in the name of the State, or in essential services in the strict sense of the term, namely services the interruption of which could endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population. The Committee requests the Government to indicate any developments in this regard.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2008, published 98th ILC session (2009)

The Committee notes the comments of 29 August 2008 by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), which are being translated and will be considered at the next examination of Jamaica’s application of the Convention. The Committee takes note of the Government’s reply to the ITUC’s comments of 2006 and 2007, and notes in particular that: (1) with regard to the non-deduction of the trade union dues of members of the National Workers’ Union (NWU) in the oil sector, the parties have resolved the matter by agreement; and (2) regarding the obstacles faced by trade unions in the export processing zones, these zones have been virtually depleted; and the trade unions of Jamaica support the Labour Relations and Industrial Disputes Act, including the provisions on representation.

Article 3 of the Convention. The Committee recalls that in its previous observation it referred to the extensive power of the Minister to refer an industrial dispute to arbitration (sections 9, 10, and 11(A) of the Labour Relations and Industrial Disputes Act). The Committee notes that according to the Government: (1) the Committee’s observations have been noted; (2) the Minister exercises the power in question only where the public interest is being jeopardized or where the dispute requires urgent or expeditious settlement; and (3) the Labour Relations and Industrial Disputes Act is under constant review. The Committee recalls that compulsory arbitration to end a collective labour dispute is acceptable only at the request of both parties or in instances where a strike may be restricted or even banned, i.e. in the event of a dispute in the public service involving public servants exercising authority in the name of the State, or in essential services in the strict sense of the term, namely services the interruption of which could endanger the life or personal safety of the whole or part of the population. The Committee again asks the Government to provide information in its next report on all progress made in amending the abovementioned Act.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2007, published 97th ILC session (2008)

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received.

It also notes the comments on the application of the Convention submitted by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) on 28 August 2007 which refer to issues already raised and the non-deduction of union dues from the affiliates of the National Workers Union (NWU) in the oil sector. The Committee requests the Government to send its observations on the ITUC’s comments as well as on those submitted by the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) in 2006 which largely concerned legislative issues still outstanding and obstacles to the exercise of trade union rights in the export processing zones.

The Committee underlines that it previously commented on the extensive power of the Minister to refer an industrial dispute to arbitration (sections 9, 10 and 11(A) of the Labour Relations and Industrial Disputes Act). The Committee recalls that compulsory arbitration should be limited to essential services in the strict sense of the term or situations of acute national crisis and that, otherwise, recourse to compulsory arbitration should only be possible at the request of both parties to the dispute. The Committee once again requests the Government to indicate in its next report any progress made in amending the legislation.

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

The Committee notes the comments of 10 August 2006 by the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU), which largely concern legislative issues still outstanding that are already being examined. The ICFTU draws attention to obstacles to the exercise of trade union rights in the export processing zones, where no unions exist. The Committee requests the Government to send its observations on the ICFTU’s comments.

The Committee also requests the Government, in the context of the regular reporting cycle, to send for examination at its next session, to be held in November‑December 2007, comments on all the questions raised in the direct request of 2005 (see 2005 direct request, 76th Session).

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2005, published 95th ILC session (2006)

The Committee takes note of the information contained in the Government’s report.

With reference to its previous request to transmit the list of essential services, the Committee takes due note that the only services remaining on this list are the following: water services, electricity services, health and hospital services, sanitary services, fire-fighting services, correctional services and overseas telecommunications.

As regards the extensive power of the Minister to refer an industrial dispute to arbitration, the Committee notes the Government’s statement that the concern of the ILO in this respect has been duly noted and that the relevant sections of the Labour Relations and Industrial Disputes Act are still under review. Recalling that compulsory arbitration should be limited to essential services or situations of acute national crisis and that otherwise, recourse to compulsory arbitration should only be possible at the request of both parties to the dispute, the Committee requests that the Government indicate in its next report any progress made in amending sections 9, 10 and 11(A) of the Act and provide copies of the draft legislation in this respect.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2003, published 92nd ILC session (2004)

The Committee takes note of the information contained in the Government’s report and notes with interest the adoption of Act No. 13 of 2002 entitled "An Act to amend the Labour Relations and Industrial Disputes Act".

With reference to its previous comments, the Committee notes with interest that Act No. 13 of 2002 amended the First Schedule of the Labour and Industrial Disputes Act No. 14 of 1975, as amended (hereinafter "the Act") by deleting from the list of services deemed to be essential the following services: public passenger transport services; telephone services; any business whose main functions consisted in the issue and redemption of currency, the issue and redemption of Government Securities and the trading in such securities, management of the official reserves of the country, administration of exchange control and providing banking services to the Government; air transport services for the carriage of passengers, baggage, mail or cargo destined to or from Jamaica or within Jamaica. The Committee requests the Government to transmit, with its next report, the list of essential services remaining on the first schedule following this recent amendment.

As regards the power of the Minister to refer an industrial dispute to arbitration, the Committee recalls its previous observation concerning the need to amend sections 9 (in the case services not considered as essential in the strict sense of the term are still included on the list), 10 and 11A of the Act, which empower the Minister to submit an industrial dispute to the Industrial Disputes Tribunal and hence to terminate any strike. The Committee has commented for a number of years that the Minister’s powers to refer an industrial dispute to compulsory arbitration are too broad and that the notion "a strike which is likely to be gravely injurious to the national interest" (section 10) can be interpreted very widely. In its latest report, the Government reiterates its previous comment, stating that the Committee’s concern has been noted and that this section is still in process of revision.

The Committee once again recalls the need to amend sections 9, 10 and 11A of the Act which provide the Minister with extensive power to refer an industrial dispute to the Tribunal and reiterates that compulsory arbitration should be limited to essential services or situations of acute national crisis; otherwise, recourse to compulsory arbitration should only be possible at the request of both parties to the dispute. The Committee requests that the Government indicate in its next report any progress made in this regard and provide copies of any draft texts proposed to amend the legislation on the abovementioned points.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2002, published 91st ILC session (2003)

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It must repeat its previous observation, which read as follows:

The Committee recalls that for a number of years it has been commenting on the need to amend sections 9, 10 and 11A of the Labour Relations and Industrial Disputes Act No. 14 of 1975, as amended ("the Act"), which empower the Minister to submit an industrial dispute to compulsory arbitration and hence to terminate any strike. The Committee has noted in the past that the Minister’s powers to refer an industrial dispute to the Industrial Dispute Tribunal are too broad, the list of essential services contained in the first schedule to the Act is too extensive, and the notion of a strike which is likely to be "gravely injurious to the national interests" can be interpreted overly broadly. In previous reports, the Government had stated that it was making significant progress in reforming the Act through the Labour Advisory Committee. It once again informed the Committee that an amendment to the first schedule of the Act had been proposed, which would result in the deletion of the following services from the list of those deemed to be essential: public passenger transport services; telephone services; any business whose main functions consist of the issue and redemption of security, government securities and the trading in such securities; management of the official reserves of the country, providing banking services to the Government; and air transport services for the carriage of passengers, baggage, mail or cargo destined to or from Jamaica or within Jamaica. With respect to the power of the Minister to refer an industrial dispute to compulsory arbitration, in its previous reports, the Government stated that the Committee’s concern had been noted and that this section was still in the process of revision.

The Committee once again recalls that the provisions of the Act can be broadly interpreted in such a way as to permit the use of compulsory arbitration in situations other than those involving essential services or acute national crises. It therefore expresses the firm hope that the list of essential services will be amended in the near future so as to refer only to essential services in the strict sense of the term; namely, those services, the interruption of which would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population (see General Survey on freedom of association and collective bargaining, 1994, paragraph 159). The discretion of the Minister to amend the first schedule should also be limited by such criteria. Furthermore, the Committee recalls the need to amend sections 9, 10, and 11A of the Act which provide the Minister with extensive powers to refer an industrial dispute to the Tribunal. It once again recalls that the imposition of compulsory arbitration should be limited to essential services or situations of acute national crises; otherwise, recourse to compulsory arbitration should only be possible at the request of both parties to the dispute. The Committee requests that the Government indicate in its next report any progress made in this regard and provide copies of any draft texts proposed to amend the legislation on the abovementioned points.

The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the very near future.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2001, published 90th ILC session (2002)

The Committee notes the information provided in the Government’s report.

The Committee recalls that for a number of years it has been commenting on the need to amend sections 9, 10 and 11A of the Labour Relations and Industrial Disputes Act No. 14 of 1975, as amended ("the Act"), which empower the Minister to submit an industrial dispute to compulsory arbitration and hence to terminate any strike. The Committee has noted in the past that the Minister’s powers to refer an industrial dispute to the Industrial Dispute Tribunal are too broad, the list of essential services contained in the first schedule to the Act is too extensive, and the notion of a strike which is likely to be "gravely injurious to the national interests" can be interpreted overly broadly. As in previous reports, the Government states that it is making significant progress in reforming the Act through the Labour Advisory Committee. It once again informs the Committee that an amendment to the first schedule of the Act has been proposed, which would result in the deletion of the following services from the list of those deemed to be essential: public passenger transport services; telephone services; any business whose main functions consist of the issue and redemption of security, government securities and the trading in such securities; management of the official reserves of the country, providing banking services to the Government; and air transport services for the carriage of passengers, baggage, mail or cargo destined to or from Jamaica or within Jamaica. With respect to the power of the Minister to refer an industrial dispute to compulsory arbitration, as in its previous reports, the Government states that the Committee’s concern has been noted and that this section is still in the process of revision.

The Committee once again recalls that the provisions of the Act can be broadly interpreted in such a way as to permit the use of compulsory arbitration in situations other than those involving essential services or acute national crises. It therefore expresses the firm hope that the list of essential services will be amended in the near future so as to refer only to essential services in the strict sense of the term; namely, those services, the interruption of which would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population (see General Survey on freedom of association and collective bargaining, 1994, paragraph 159). The discretion of the Minister to amend the first schedule should also be limited by such criteria. Furthermore, the Committee recalls the need to amend sections 9, 10, and 11A of the Act which provide the Minister with extensive powers to refer an industrial dispute to the Tribunal. It once again recalls that the imposition of compulsory arbitration should be limited to essential services or situations of acute national crises; otherwise, recourse to compulsory arbitration should only be possible at the request of both parties to the dispute. The Committee requests that the Government indicate in its next report any progress made in this regard and provide copies of any draft texts proposed to amend the legislation on the abovementioned points.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2000, published 89th ILC session (2001)

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received.

The Committee recalls that for over 20 years, it has been commenting on the need to amend provisions of the Labour Relations and Industrial Disputes Act No. 14 of 1975, as amended ("the Act"), which empower the Minister to submit an industrial dispute to the Industrial Disputes Tribunal and hence to terminate any strike. The Committee has noted in the past that the Minister’s powers to refer an industrial dispute to the Tribunal are too broad, the list of essential services contained in the first schedule to the Act is also too extensive and the notion of a strike which is likely to be "gravely injurious to the national interest" can be interpreted very widely.

The Committee noted that in its most recent report, the Government had stated that it was making significant progress in reforming the Act through the Labour Advisory Committee. It had informed the Committee that an amendment to the first schedule of the Act had been proposed, which would result in the deletion of the following services from the list of those deemed to be essential: public passenger transport service; telephone services; any business the main functions of which consist of the issue and redemption of securities, government securities and the trading in such securities, management of the official reserves of the country, administration of exchange control, providing banking services to the Government; and air transport services for the carriage of passengers, baggage, mail or cargo destined to or from Jamaica or within Jamaica. With respect to the power of the Minister to refer an industrial dispute to compulsory arbitration, the Government had stated that "the ILO’s concern has been noted. This section of the Act is still in the process of revision. Any revised decision on this particular section of the Act will be communicated to the ILO as soon as possible". It noted further that the amendments that had been proposed thus far had emanated from the Labour Market Reform Committee, which considered the amendments necessary in the light of changes that have taken place over the years.

The Committee once again recalls that the provisions of the Act can be broadly interpreted in such a way as to permit the use of compulsory arbitration in situations other than those involving essential services or an acute national crisis. It therefore expresses the firm hope that the proposals of the Labour Market Reform Committee to amend the list of essential services will be adopted at an early date, and that the list will be further restricted to limit it to essential services in the strict sense of the term, namely those services, the interruption of which would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population. The discretion of the Minister to amend the first schedule should also be limited by such criteria. Furthermore, the Committee hopes that serious attention will be given to amending the other provisions of the Act providing the Minister with extensive powers to refer an industrial dispute to the Tribunal (sections 9, 10 and 11A). The Committee again recalls that the imposition of compulsory arbitration should be clearly limited to essential services or situations of acute national crisis; otherwise, recourse to compulsory arbitration may only occur at the joint request of the parties concerned in the dispute. The Committee requests the Government to indicate in its next report any progress made in this regard.

[The Government is asked to report in detail in 2001.]

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1998, published 87th ILC session (1999)

The Committee notes the information provided in the Government's report. The Committee recalls that for over 20 years, it has been commenting on the need to amend provisions of the Labour Relations and Industrial Disputes Act No. 14 of 1975, as amended ("the Act"), which empower the Minister to submit an industrial dispute to the Industrial Disputes Tribunal and hence to terminate any strike. The Committee has noted in the past that the Minister's powers to refer an industrial dispute to the Tribunal are too broad, the list of essential services contained in the first schedule to the Act is also too extensive and the notion of a strike which is likely to be "gravely injurious to the national interest" can be interpreted very widely.

The Committee notes with interest that in its most recent report, the Government states that it is making significant progress in reforming the Act through the Labour Advisory Committee. It informs the Committee that an amendment to the first schedule of the Act has been proposed, which would result in the deletion of the following services from the list of those deemed to be essential: public passenger transport service; telephone services; any business the main functions of which consist of -- the issue and redemption of security, government securities and the trading in such securities, management of the official reserves of the country, administration of exchange control, providing banking services to the Government; and air transport services for the carriage of passengers, baggage, mail or cargo destined to or from Jamaica or within Jamaica. With respect to the power of the Minister to refer an industrial dispute to compulsory arbitration, the Government states that "the ILO's concern has been noted. This section of the Act is still in the process of revision. Any revised decision on this particular section of the Act will be communicated to the ILO as soon as possible". It notes further that the amendments that have been proposed thus far have emanated from the Labour Market Reform Committee, which considered the amendments necessary in the light of changes that have taken place over the years.

The Committee once again recalls that the provisions of the Act can be broadly interpreted in such a way as to permit the use of compulsory arbitration in situations other than those involving essential services or an acute national crisis. It therefore expresses the firm hope that the proposals of the Labour Market Reform Committee to amend the list of essential services will be adopted at an early date, and that the list will be further restricted to limit the list to essential services in the strict sense of the term, namely those services, the interruption of which would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population. The discretion of the Minister to amend the first schedule should also be limited by such criteria. Furthermore, the Committee hopes that serious attention will be given to amending the other provisions of the Act providing the Minister with extensive powers to refer an industrial dispute to the Tribunal (sections 9, 10 and 11A). The Committee again recalls that the imposition of compulsory arbitration should be clearly limited to essential services or situations of acute national crisis; otherwise, recourse to compulsory arbitration may only occur at the joint request of the parties concerned in the dispute. The Committee requests the Government to indicate in its next report any progress made in this regard.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1997, published 86th ILC session (1998)

The Committee notes the information contained in the Government's report. It recalls that it has been commenting for several years now on the necessity to amend sections 9 and 10, paragraphs 1, 2, 4, 5 and 8 of the Labour Relations and Industrial Disputes Act No. 14 of 1975, as amended in 1978, which empower the Minister to submit industrial disputes to compulsory arbitration and hence to terminate any strike in cases of essential services which, in the Committee's view, are too broadly defined in the legislation and where a dispute is likely to be "gravely injurious to the national interest".

In its latest report, the Government indicates that it is in the process of re-examining the legislation and that instructions have already been given to eliminate those services on the list of essential services which cannot be defined as essential in the strictest sense of the term. A tripartite Labour Advisory Committee has been established and a number of amendments to the Act have been proposed, submitted to Cabinet and further referred to the Chief Parliamentary Counsel with drafting instructions.

With regard to the power of the Minister to refer an industrial dispute to compulsory arbitration, the Government indicates that there is scope in the Act for such a decision being overturned in Parliament and that section 10, which provides for such referral where a dispute is likely to be gravely injurious to the national interest, has not been used in the last two decades and, prior to 1978, was only used twice. It adds that the rationale for this section flows entirely from considerations of national interest and is not intended to deprive workers and employers of their rights to freedom of association.

The Committee would once again recall that the wording of section 10 can be broadly interpreted in such a way as to permit the use of compulsory arbitration in situations other than those involving essential services or in acute national crises. It therefore hopes that, along with the proposals made to restrict the sectors covered by the term "essential services", measures will be taken to amend this section so that the imposition of compulsory arbitration be clearly limited to essential services or acute national crises; otherwise, recourse to compulsory arbitration may only occur at the request of the two parties concerned in the dispute. Given that the Government has been indicating for several years now that the Labour Relations and Industrial Disputes Act is undergoing review, the Committee trusts that the Government will be able to indicate in its next report the progress made in bringing this Act into conformity with the principles of freedom of association and requests the Government to furnish a copy of any proposed or adopted amending text in this regard. Furthermore, the Government is requested to continue to indicate whether section 10 is used in the future and, if so, under what circumstances.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1996, published 85th ILC session (1997)

The Committee notes that the Government's report has not been received. It hopes that a report will be supplied for examination by the Committee at its next session and that it will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous direct request, which read as follows:

The Government indicated in a previous report that a number of disputes were referred to compulsory arbitration to put an end to strikes respectively in the mining (bauxite) and the education sectors.

While considering that the mining and the education sectors are in no way essential services in the strict sense of the term, the Committee considers that non-essential services may become essential if the strike affecting them exceeds a certain duration or extent so that the life, personal safety or health of the population are endangered. In the opinion of the Committee, account must be taken of the special circumstances existing in the various States and in order to avoid damages which are irreversible or out of proportion to the occupational interests of the parties to the dispute, the authorities could establish a system of minimum services that are not essential but of public utility, rather than impose an outright ban on strikes. These services must be minimum, that is to say, limited to the operations strictly necessary to meet the basic needs of the population or the minimum requirements of the service, and workers' organizations should be able, if they so wish, to participate in defining such services along with employers and the public authorities (see 1994 General Survey on freedom of association and collective bargaining, paragraphs 160 and 161).

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1996, published 85th ILC session (1997)

The Committee notes that the Government's report has not been received. It must therefore repeat its previous observation which read as follows:

The Committee recalls that for several years its previous comments concerned the necessity to amend sections 9 and 10, paragraphs 1, 2, 4, 5 and 8 of the Labour Relations and Industrial Disputes Act No. 14 of 1975, as amended in 1978, which empower the Minister to submit an industrial dispute to compulsory arbitration and hence to terminate any strike. The Committee has noted in the past that the list of essential services contained in the legislation is too broadly defined and that the notion of a strike which is liable seriously to jeopardize the interests of the nation can be interpreted very widely. The Government indicates that the Labour Relations and Industrial Disputes Act is being revised and that the right to strike is one of the key areas examined. The Government adds that before deciding what sectors should be regarded as essential services, it has to carefully examine the dependence on the economy of these services. The Committee reiterates that the right to strike is one of the essential means which should be available to workers and their organizations to promote and defend their economic and social interests. The Minister of Labour should therefore only be able to have recourse to the courts in the following circumstances: (1) in the event of strikes in essential services in the strict sense of the term, namely those, the interruption of which would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population; or (2) in the event of total and prolonged stoppage of work which might constitute an acute national crisis; or (3) at the request of the two parties concerned (see 1994 General Survey on freedom of association and collective bargaining, paragraphs 152, 154, 159 and 160). The Committee urges the Government to provide information in its next report on the outcome of the reviewing process of the Labour Relations and Industrial Disputes Act and to indicate the measures taken to amend its legislation in order to bring it into conformity with the principles of freedom of association. The Committee is also addressing a request directly to the Government concerning some other points.

The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the very near future.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1995, published 82nd ILC session (1995)

The Committee notes that the Government's report has not been received. It hopes that a report will be supplied for examination by the Committee at its next session and that it will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous direct request, which read as follows:

1. Referring to the adoption, in 1988, of the Fire Brigade Act, which prevents this category of public servants from joining a trade union or an association which does not recruit only firemen, the Committee again requests the Government to provide the text of the said Act, so that it can examine its scope in relation with the union rights of the employees concerned.

2. Further to its previous comments, the Committee takes due note of the Government's explanation as to the meaning of the "freedom to strike" in Jamaican common law, and particularly that - in the event of workers withdrawing their labour in furtherance of a trade dispute - although there is nothing to prevent an employer from considering the contract of employment as breached and thus terminating it, in practice this does not occur. However, the Committee stresses that a genuine protection should exist in this respect, otherwise the right to strike may be devoid of content (see 1994 General Survey on Freedom of Association and Collective Bargaining, paragraph 139).

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1995, published 83rd ILC session (1996)

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its report.

The Government indicates that a number of disputes were referred to compulsory arbitration to put an end to strikes respectively in the mining (bauxite) and the education sectors.

While considering that the mining and the education sectors are in no way essential services in the strict sense of the term, the Committee considers that non-essential services may become essential if the strike affecting them exceeds a certain duration or extent so that the life, personal safety or health of the population are endangered. In the opinion of the Committee, account must be taken of the special circumstances existing in the various States and in order to avoid damages which are irreversible or out of proportion to the occupational interests of the parties to the dispute, the authorities could establish a system of minimum services that are not essential but of public utility, rather than impose an outright ban on strikes. These services must be minimum, that is to say, limited to the operations strictly necessary to meet the basic needs of the population or the minimum requirements of the service, and workers' organizations should be able, if they so wish, to participate in defining such services along with employers and the public authorities (see 1994 General Survey on freedom of association and collective bargaining, paragraphs 160 and 161).

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1995, published 83rd ILC session (1996)

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its report.

The Committee recalls that for several years its previous comments concerned the necessity to amend sections 9 and 10, paragraphs 1, 2, 4, 5 and 8 of the Labour Relations and Industrial Disputes Act No. 14 of 1975, as amended in 1978, which empower the Minister to submit an industrial dispute to compulsory arbitration and hence to terminate any strike. The Committee has noted in the past that the list of essential services contained in the legislation is too broadly defined and that the notion of a strike which is liable seriously to jeopardize the interests of the nation can be interpreted very widely.

The Government indicates that the Labour Relations and Industrial Disputes Act is being revised and that the right to strike is one of the key areas examined. The Government adds that before deciding what sectors should be regarded as essential services, it has to carefully examine the dependence on the economy of these services.

The Committee reiterates that the right to strike is one of the essential means which should be available to workers and their organizations to promote and defend their economic and social interests. The Minister of Labour should therefore only be able to have recourse to the courts in the following circumstances: (1) in the event of strikes in essential services in the strict sense of the term, namely those the interruption of which would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population; or (2) in the event of total and prolonged stoppage of work which might constitute an acute national crisis; or (3) at the request of the two parties concerned (see 1994 General Survey on freedom of association and collective bargaining, paragraphs 152, 154, 159 and 160).

The Committee urges the Government to provide information in its next report on the outcome of the reviewing process of the Labour Relations and Industrial Disputes Act and to indicate the measures taken to amend its legislation in order to bring it into conformity with the principles of freedom of association.

The Committee is also addressing a request directly to the Government concerning some other points.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1995, published 82nd ILC session (1995)

The Committee notes that the Government's report has not been received. It must therefore repeat its previous observation which read as follows:

For several years, the Committee has requested the Government to amend sections 9 and 10, paragraphs 1, 2, 4, 5 and 8 of the Labour Relations and Industrial Disputes Act No. 14 of 1975, as amended in 1978, which empower the Minister to submit an industrial dispute to compulsory arbitration and hence to terminate any strike. The Committee has noted in the past that the list of essential services contained in the legislation is too broadly defined and that the notion of a strike which is liable seriously to jeopardize the interests of the nation can be interpreted very widely. In the Committee's opinion, the right to strike is one of the essential means which should be available to workers and their organizations to promote and defend their economic and social interests. The Minister of Labour should therefore only be able to have recourse to the courts in the following circumstances: (1) in the event of strikes in essential services in the strict sense of the term, namely those in which the strike would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population; or (2) in the event of total and prolonged stoppage of work which might constitute an acute national crisis (see 1994 General Survey on Freedom of Association and Collective Bargaining, paragraphs 152, 154, 159 and 160). The Committee notes from the Government's report for the period ending in June 1990 that its comments in regard to the definition of essential services are being examined at the level of the Labour Legislative Subcommittee of the Labour Advisory Committee. The Committee would ask the Government to indicate in its next report if the Minister of Labour has referred any dispute to compulsory arbitration to put an end to a strike and, if so, in what circumstances and in which sector, and to indicate the measures taken to amend its legislation in order to bring it into conformity with the principles of freedom of association.

The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the very near future.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1994, published 81st ILC session (1994)

The Committee notes the Government's report.

1. Referring to the adoption, in 1988, of the Fire Brigade Act, which prevents this category of public servants from joining a trade union or an association which does not recruit only firemen, the Committee again requests the Government to provide the text of the said Act, so that it can examine its scope in relation with the union rights of the employees concerned.

2. Further to its previous comments, the Committee takes due note of the Government's explanation as to the meaning of the "freedom to strike" in Jamaican common law, and particularly that - in the event of workers withdrawing their labour in furtherance of a trade dispute - although there is nothing to prevent an employer from considering the contract of employment as breached and thus terminating it, in practice this does not occur. However, the Committee stresses that a genuine protection should exist in this respect, otherwise the right to strike may be devoid of content (see 1994 General Survey on Freedom of Association and Collective Bargaining, paragraph 139).

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1994, published 81st ILC session (1994)

For several years, the Committee has requested the Government to amend sections 9 and 10, paragraphs 1, 2, 4, 5 and 8 of the Labour Relations and Industrial Disputes Act No. 14 of 1975, as amended in 1978, which empower the Minister to submit an industrial dispute to compulsory arbitration and hence to terminate any strike. The Committee has noted in the past that the list of essential services contained in the legislation is too broadly defined and that the notion of a strike which is liable seriously to jeopardize the interests of the nation can be interpreted very widely.

In the Committee's opinion, the right to strike is one of the essential means which should be available to workers and their organizations to promote and defend their economic and social interests. The Minister of Labour should therefore only be able to have recourse to the courts in the following circumstances: (1) in the event of strikes in essential services in the strict sense of the term, namely those in which the strike would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population; or (2) in the event of total and prolonged stoppage of work which might constitute an acute national crisis (1994 General Survey on Freedom of Association and Collective Bargaining, see paras. 152, 154, 159 and 160).

The Committee notes from the Government's report for the period ending in June 1990 that its comments in regard to the definition of essential services are being examined at the level of the Labour Legislative Subcommittee of the Labour Advisory Committee.

The Committee would ask the Government to indicate in its next report if the Minister of Labour has referred any dispute to compulsory arbitration to put an end to a strike and, if so, in what circumstances and in which sector, and to indicate the measures taken to amend its legislation in order to bring it into conformity with the principles of freedom of association.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1991, published 78th ILC session (1991)

The Committee notes with regret that the Government's report has not been received. It hopes that a report will be supplied for examination by the Committee at its next session and that it will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous direct request, which read as follows:

1. The Committee notes the Government's report mentioning the adoption, in 1988, of the Fire Brigade Act, which prevents this category of public servants from joining a union or an association which does not recruit only firemen.

The Committee requests the Government to provide the text of the said Act, so that it can examine its scope in relation with the union rights of the employees concerned.

2. According to available information, the Committee understands that the Supreme Court has recently held, on the basis of common law principles, that strikes are not a right but rather a freedom, whose exercise can lead to the termination of the employment contract.

The Committee wishes to draw the Government's attention to the fact that workers' organisations should have the right freely to organise their activities and to formulate their programmes (Article 3 of the Convention); to that end, they must be able to call strikes without subjecting the workers to sanctions, such as a termination of the employment contract when a strike is held, in conformity with freedom of association principles (see in that respect, paragraph 223 of the 1983 General Survey on Freedom of Association and Collective Bargaining).

The Committee requests the Government to provide the text of that judgement and to supply information on its practical effects.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1991, published 78th ILC session (1991)

The Committee notes that the Government's report has not been received. It must therefore repeat its previous observation:

The Committee recalls that, for several years, it has requested the Government to amend sections 9 and 10, paragraphs 1, 2, 4, 5 and 8, of the Labour Relations and Industrial Disputes Act No. 14 of 1975, as amended in 1978 (sections 11A and 15(iii)), which empower the Minister to submit an industrial dispute to compulsory arbitration and to terminate any strike in the so-called essential services (which are too broadly defined) and in other services if the strike is liable seriously to jeopardise the interests of the nation. Since, in the Committee's opinion, the right to strike is one of the essential means which should be available to workers and their organisations to promote and defend their economic and social interests, the Minister of Labour should only be able to have recourse to the courts in order to end a strike in the following circumstances: (1) in the event of strikes in essential services in the strict sense of the term, namely those in which the strike would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population; or (2) in the event of an acute national crisis (see paragraphs 214 and 215 of the 1983 General Survey on Freedom of Association and Collective Bargaining). Therefore, the Committee urges once again the Government to indicate in its next report the measures taken to amend its legislation in order to bring it into conformity with the Convention, in view of the fact that these matters have been the subject of its comments for many years.

TEXT

The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the very near future.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1990, published 77th ILC session (1990)

1. The Committee notes the Government's report mentioning the adoption, in 1988, of the Fire Brigade Act, which prevents this category of public servants from joining a union or an association which does not recruit only firemen.

The Committee requests the Government to provide the text of the said Act, so that it can examine its scope in relation with the union rights of the employees concerned.

2. According to available information, the Committee understands that the Supreme Court has recently held, on the basis of common law principles, that strikes are not a right but rather a freedom, whose exercise can lead to the termination of the employment contract.

The Committee wishes to draw the Government's attention to the fact that workers' organisations should have the right freely to organise their activities and to formulate their programmes (Article 3 of the Convention); to that end, they must be able to call strikes without subjecting the workers to sanctions, such as a termination of the employment contract when a strike is held, in conformity with freedom of association principles (see in that respect, paragraph 223 of the 1983 General Survey on Freedom of Association and Collective Bargaining).

The Committee requests the Government to provide the text of that judgement and to supply information on its practical effects.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1990, published 77th ILC session (1990)

The Committee notes that the Government's report does not provide new information on the points raised in its previous observation.

The Committee recalls that, for several years, it has requested the Government to amend sections 9 and 10, paragraphs 1, 2, 4, 5 and 8, of the Labour Relations and Industrial Disputes Act No. 14 of 1975, as amended in 1978 (sections 11A and 15 (iii)), which empower the Minister to submit an industrial dispute to compulsory arbitration and to terminate any strike in the so-called essential services (which are too broadly defined) and in other services if the strike is liable seriously to jeopardise the interests of the nation.

Since, in the Committee's opinion, the right to strike is one of the essential means which should be available to workers and their organisations to promote and defend their economic and social interests, the Minister of Labour should only be able to have recourse to the courts in order to end a strike in the following circumstances: (1) in the event of strikes in essential services in the strict sense of the term, namely those in which the strike would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population; or (2) in the event of an acute national crisis (see paragraphs 214 and 215 of the 1983 General Survey on Freedom of Association and Collective Bargaining).

Therefore, the Committee urges once again the Government to indicate in its next report the measures taken to amend its legislation in order to bring it into conformity with the Convention, in view of the fact that these matters have been the subject of its comments for many years.

The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the very near future.