Allegations: The complainant alleges restrictions on the right of workers,
without distinction whatsoever, to establish and join organizations of their own choosing,
to strike and bargain collectively, as well as excessive State control of trade union
activities
- 814. The complaint is contained in a communication dated 28 September
2012 from the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC).
- 815. The Government forwarded its observations in a communication dated
11 September 2013. Qatar has not ratified the Freedom of Association and Protection of
the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), or the Right to Organise and Collective
Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).
A. The complainant’s allegations
A. The complainant’s allegations- 816. In its communication dated 28 September 2012, the ITUC alleges that
today, migrant workers comprise roughly 94 per cent of Qatar’s workforce, or about 1.2
million workers. That figure continues to rise as workers are recruited in vast numbers,
largely from South Asia, to build infrastructure and stadia for the 2022 World Cup. Like
many other migrant workers in the Gulf region, they face severe discriminatory policies
and practices that violate their fundamental human and labour rights, including freedom
of association. Even Qatari nationals have only limited rights in this regard.
- 817. The ITUC indicates that, together with the Building and Wood
Workers’ International Union (BWI), it has endeavoured to work with the Government of
Qatar to improve this situation. In addition to several meetings with the Embassy of
Qatar in Geneva, an ITUC delegation met with the Labour Minister in June 2012 to express
its many concerns with regard to freedom of association and forced labour/trafficking.
The ITUC indicates that while it has been informed that legal reforms that would address
the concerns were forthcoming, from the Government’s description of the reforms (and
characterizations of them in the press), it was clear that they would not come close to
affording full freedom of association to workers (whether citizens or migrants). The
complainant further states that while the Government has offered to provide a draft of
the proposed reforms to the ITUC for a review and comments, despite several requests, no
copy of the proposed reforms was ever provided. The complainant indicates that it had
since read in the press that some changes to the Labour Law have been adopted by the
Cabinet, however, it has no information as to what these changes are and whether any
reform was enacted.
- 818. According to the ITUC, the lack of freedom of association in Qatar
is ultimately responsible for the deaths of numerous migrant workers, who face punishing
working conditions, including long hours of intensely physical work in extreme heat,
construction work without proper safety equipment or safe and appropriate building
methods, and squalid living conditions in which workers are packed into sweltering
barracks with little if any ventilation. Some employers also cheat workers of their
promised wages by paying a much lower wage, by making numerous illegal deductions, or by
simply not paying at all. As a result of the lack of a collective voice, which could
empower workers to remove themselves from dangerous situations and to bargain with their
employer over working conditions, migrant workers face injuries or death.
- 819. The complainant considers that the Labour Law of Qatar of 2004
violates the principles of freedom of association and refers, in particular, to the
following issues. Numerous categories of workers are precluded from forming or joining a
union due to their exclusion from the scope of application of the Labour Law. First, the
Law stipulates that none of its provisions apply to workers in the following categories
(section 3):
- (a) government/public workers;
- (b) armed forces, police, and
workers employed “at sea”;
- (c) casual work (defined as less than four
weeks);
- (d) domestic workers (including drivers, nurses, cooks, gardeners,
and similar workers);
- (e) family members of an employer; and
- (f)
agriculture and grazing workers.
- 820. Secondly, the Law forbids non-Qatari workers from membership in a
labour organization (“workers’ committee”), thus excluding more than 90 per cent of the
total workforce in the country (section 116). In addition to the abovementioned
categories of workers, section 116, which outlines the rights of employees to join
unions, does not apply to enterprises employing less than 100 Qatari workers, and thus
prohibits any worker employed by a small or medium-sized enterprise from joining a
union.
- 821. The ITUC further indicates that pursuant to section 116 of the Law,
workers in an establishment can form only a single “workers’ organization”; multiple
organizations are expressly forbidden. Additionally, all workers’ organizations must
affiliate to the “General Union of the Workers of Qatar”.
- 822. The complainant further alleges that while the right to strike is
technically established in section 120, the small segment of the workforce that could
potentially strike (Qatari nationals) face restrictive conditions and a procedural
framework that makes exercising that right nearly impossible. For example, workers in
“vital public utilities”, defined as to include “petroleum and gas-related industries,
electricity, water, seaports, airports, hospitals and transportation” are barred from
striking. The ITUC finds troubling the requirement of the approval by three-quarters of
the general committee of the trade or industry to authorize a strike and the requirement
of the Government’s prior approval of the time and place. The complainant considers that
these requirements are excessive and are likely to impede most strike activity. Also,
requiring a strike to be carried out far from the company or during limited hours or
limited duration makes the use of the strike limited, if not useless. By referring to a
strike vote being held at the level of a trade or an industry, the Law calls into
question whether strikes at the enterprise level are even permissible (or permissible
only following a vote of the industrial-level union). Furthermore, the ITUC points out
that even in sectors deemed to be essential, workers subjected to such restrictions
should receive compensatory guarantees to safeguard their interests. By recognizing the
unique nature of their employment, essential service workers must have corresponding
benefits (such as a guarantee of not being locked out). No such provisions exist under
Qatari legislation. Furthermore, strikes are limited only to industrial disputes. The
ITUC also considers that the Law is unclear as to whether an arbitration award, which is
mandatory if the parties do not agree to a binding conciliation, is binding on the
parties (sections 128–130). If that is the case, the ITUC doubts that a strike can ever
be legal.
- 823. The complainant further alleges that section 127 of the Labour Law
empowers the Government to regulate the rules and procedures of collective bargaining,
the method of representation of the parties, and the content, scope, duration and means
of reaching a collective agreement. It therefore considers that under the current
legislation, there cannot be said to exist a legitimate collective bargaining
process.
- 824. The ITUC also alleges that section 119 of the Law prohibits unions
from engaging in a variety of activities and limits workers’ ability to engage in the
political sphere. The Law directly prohibits workers’ organizations from engaging in
“the exercise of any political or religious activities”. It further forbids “preparing,
printing or distributing any materials insulting to the State” or the status quo. The
Ministry of Civil Service Affairs and Housing is empowered to dissolve any organization
found to be in violation of these provisions. The ITUC points out that the defence and
promotion of the interest of workers is inextricably tied to political freedom; in terms
of economic and social policy, the right to criticize the government should be
guaranteed.
- 825. Additionally, according to the ITUC, some union activities,
including affiliations to international bodies, require the Government’s approval. It
refers, in particular, to the requirement of government approval in order to affiliate
with Arab or international organizations.
- 826. The ITUC also refers to the absence of any form of protection for
workers engaged in trade union activities.
B. The Government’s reply
B. The Government’s reply- 827. In a communication dated 11 September 2013, the Government explains
that temporary resident migrant workers and their families represent the largest segment
of the inhabitants of the State of Qatar and that it is keen to assume, within the
framework of the ILO standards, its international and regional role to establish the
foundations of justice and equality and to ensure security, stability and equal
opportunity. According to the Government, it pays great attention to its resident
workforce as the Qatar labour market draws to it about 71 per cent of the population of
the country, with migrant workers accounting for 93 per cent of its economically active
population. It recalls that a migrant workers population is an integral part of Qatari
society which cannot be overlooked in drafting development plans or future visions. The
Government further adds that in the last decades, Qatar has confronted the realities of
migrant workers, their issues and challenges through the adoption of new frameworks
dictated by the need to manage the migrant workforce and to provide comprehensive
protection for this segment of society. A comprehensive legal system protects this
workforce and preserves its rights while seeking to reconcile local practices and
international standards. In this respect, the Government refers to the Constitution of
the State of Qatar, which provides in its Article 30 that “the relation between workers
and employers is based on social justice and is regulated by law” and in its Article 52
that “every person who is a legal resident of the State shall enjoy protection of his
person and property as provided by law”.
- 828. The Government indicates that Labour Act No. 14 of 2004 was
promulgated to organize the relation between employers and workers and that this law has
recognized many of the workers’ rights and privileges, strengthened worker protection
against occupational hazards, and provided compensation for occupational injuries and
for a worker’s minimum rights to terminate his or her employment when he or she chooses
to do so and to receive compensation for the period of employment, specifying that any
measure contrary or voluntary abdication of these rights are null and void. Ministerial
Decrees have been promulgated by the competent authorities to strengthen these rights.
These Decrees deal with such issues as the work of the conciliation and arbitration
committees for collective labour disputes; hours of work in open space during
summertime; workers’ organizations; and conditions and specifications for adequate
housing.
- 829. The Government informs that it has concluded 31 bilateral agreements
with labour exporting countries. It adds that the Labour Ministry is one of the main
actors involved in following the situation of migrant workers, supervising the
application of occupational health and safety measures, issuing warnings, reporting
violations, and settling disputes arising between labour providing agencies and
employers. It assumes these tasks through its departments of employment, labour
inspection and labour relations, together with the human rights department within the
Ministry of Interior, the National Human Rights Committee and the Qatari Foundation to
Combat Human Trafficking. According to the Government, this reflects the State’s concern
and the priority given to the protection of migrant workers’ rights, which are part of
human rights.
- 830. The Government points out that the complaint submitted by the ITUC
and BWI does not contain any reference to any prior complaint or grievance by any
organization or local workers’ committee directly affected by the matter raised in the
complaint and that the claims contained therein are not founded on any grievance or
demand from a local workers’ organization, officially or unofficially, nor are based on
facts. The Government further considers that for a complaint regarding violations of
labour and union rights to be admissible it must be clearly articulated in a petition,
be well documented and be based on comprehensive and reliable information. According to
the Government, it is not sufficient to interpret the legislation in force in a country
to conclude to violations of the workers’ rights. The Government insists that the claims
submitted by the complainants are hearsay and dangerous as they fail to include any
document or list of names which could provide clear proof of the alleged facts; any
examples of cases where employers have paid workers less than the promised wages; any
document or list of names providing clear proof of cases of workers’ injuries or deaths,
including police reports or records of death or injury; and any individual grievances
from workers or members of their families which could assist in determining the truth.
The Government further considers that to be examined by the Committee, a complaint must
be devoid of any apparent political connotation. The Government considers that in the
present case, in light of the above, it can only be concluded that the complaint is
malicious and seeks to undermine the reputation of the State as it prepares to host the
World Cup in 2022.
- 831. In respect of the allegations of restrictions on the establishment
of trade unions, the Government indicates that considering the importance of trade
unions, in order to enable workers to freely exercise this right, the Labour Law has
been promulgated by Act No. 14 of 2004. To allow such organizations to defend workers’
interests and rights in improving conditions of work, negotiating with the employers,
etc., this Law dedicates a special chapter to trade union organizations. These
organizations have a complete freedom of action in labour matters. The Government adds
that the proportion of migrant workers in the overall workforce, which could influence
the social demographics, must not be disregarded.
- 832. As regards the allegation of the absence of protection of trade
union activity, the Government states that section 122 of the Labour Law prohibits an
employer from compelling a worker to join – or not to join – any labour organization or
not to comply with any of its Decrees and section 145 punishes by imprisonment and a
fine any violation of this provision. Furthermore, workers have the right to publish
their rules of procedure and draft statutes. All of the above demonstrates that the
protection of trade union action is guaranteed by the legislation.
- 833. Concerning the allegation of the effective absence of the right to
strike, the Government argues that when employers and workers fail to reach an amicable
settlement, section 130 of the Labour Law guarantees the right to strike. It further
indicates that, as the right to strike is a means to fulfil workers’ demands, rules and
conditions had to be established for the exercise of this right, especially if they help
to reach the desired goals and ensure workers’ safety and protect public property.
Practical experience has demonstrated that an intervention by the relevant authorities
is always on the side of workers as it allows them to settle a dispute and to grant them
the rights before strike action is undertaken. Applying these rules and conditions does
not mean that the Ministry of Labour or the Ministry of Interior are seeking to prevent
workers from exercising their right to strike as guaranteed by the Law, rather their aim
is to enable this right. The Government considers that these rules and conditions are in
compliance with the provisions of the relevant ILO Conventions, which grant each country
the right to decide in which essential sectors strikes may be prohibited due to their
importance and potential impact on public property and persons.
- 834. Regarding the claim made by the complainant on the absence of
collective negotiations, the Government emphasizes that section 127 of the Labour Law
provides for the right of employers and workers to negotiate collectively and to
conclude collective agreements on all work-related matters, with the least interference
by the State authorities. The Government indicates that several departments and State
authorities supervise the collective bargaining process: the Labour Ministry, through
its various organs, tracks the implementation of the rules governing joint agreements
and the amicable settlement of labour disputes; the human rights department in the
Ministry of Interior is also involved in negotiations with employers and workers helping
them to reach an amicable solution between the parties; the National Committee for Human
Rights is responsible for the coordination between the parties to settle a dispute and
to enable workers to obtain their rights; and, the Qatar Foundation to Combat Human
Trafficking coordinates with the relevant authorities to enable workers to obtain,
negotiate and secure their rights. Positive endeavours in the field by these organs and
departments confirm the existence of constructive collective negotiations in the
country.
- 835. The Government further indicates that the Labour Law does not
contain any restrictions or conditions which would impede the exercise of trade unions’
duties, rather such organizations are granted full authority to draft their rules and
enjoy independence in performing their activities and mandate, namely the protection and
defence of workers’ interests and rights.
- 836. The Government adds that other guarantees are available in the
country for the protection of workers’ individual and collective rights. The Ministry of
Labour has established mechanisms providing workers with the necessary protection, such
as hotlines where qualified staff receive workers’ complaints and queries and take
prompt actions. A dedicated email account has been created to receive questions and
complaints; these are quickly responded to. The Ministry, in cooperation with the
Supreme Council of the Judiciary, has opened its office on the Court’s premises to
follow up and facilitate litigation procedures between workers and employers; it
provides free of charge services. The Ministry, in cooperation with the embassies in
Qatar of labour exporting countries, examines problems faced by their nationals with the
view to finding appropriate solutions and helping these workers to have their rights
respected. Finally, the Government indicates that the Human Rights Department in the
Ministry of Interior is responsible for the protection of the rights of migrant workers
and helps them to submit complaints. It deals with workers’ complaints and grievances
arising out of problems in the work environment between employers and migrant workers.
In doing so, it is operating against the background of the Labour Law, the Law
organizing the admission and departure of incoming workers, their residence and terms of
guarantee; Criminal Procedure Law and other pertinent legislation.
C. The Committee’s conclusions
C. The Committee’s conclusions- 837. The Committee notes that the ITUC’s allegations relate to several
provisions of the Labour Law of 2004, which the complainant considers to be in violation
of freedom of association and collective bargaining rights. While noting that the
Government of Qatar has not ratified Conventions Nos 87 or 98, the Committee
nevertheless recalls that when a State decides to become a Member of the Organization,
it accepts the fundamental principles embodied in the Constitution and the Declaration
of Philadelphia, including the principles of freedom of association [see Digest of
decisions and principles of the Freedom of Association Committee, fifth (revised)
edition, 2006, para. 15]. The Committee recalls that freedom of association is one of
the primary safeguards of peace and social justice. The Committee expresses its concern
at the seriousness of the allegations of violation of freedom of association in
Qatar.
- 838. The Committee notes that in the Government’s view, for a complaint
regarding violations of labour and union rights to be admissible it must be clearly
articulated in a petition, be well documented and be based on comprehensive and reliable
information. The Government is of the view that it is not sufficient to interpret the
legislation in force in a country to conclude to violations of the workers’ rights. The
Government refutes the complaint submitted by the ITUC which it states does not contain
any reference to any prior complaint or grievance by any organization or local workers’
committee directly affected by the matter raised in the complaint and that the claims
contained therein are not founded on any grievance or demand from a local workers’
organization, officially or unofficially, nor are they based on facts. The Government
further considers that to be examined by the Committee, a complaint must be devoid of
any apparent political connotation and considers that, in the present case, the
complaint is malicious and seeks to undermine the reputation of the State as it prepares
to host the World Cup in 2022.
- 839. The Committee recalls in this respect that it is precisely within
its mandate to examine whether, and to what extent, satisfactory evidence is presented
to support allegations of infringements of freedom of association. Furthermore, the
mandate of the Committee consists in determining whether any given legislation or
practice complies with the principles of freedom of association and collective
bargaining laid down in the relevant Convention and in promoting respect for trade union
rights in law and in fact [see Digest, op. cit., paras 9, 6 and 3]. Where national laws,
including those interpreted by the high courts, violate the principles of freedom of
association, the Committee has always considered it within its mandate to examine the
laws, provide guidelines and offer the ILO’s technical assistance to bring the laws into
compliance with the principles of freedom of association, as set out in the Constitution
of the ILO and the applicable Conventions [see Digest, op. cit., para. 11]. The
Committee will therefore proceed to examine the legislative provisions, which, according
to the complainants, violate freedom of association and collective bargaining
rights.
- 840. The Committee notes the position of the Government, according to
which the Labour Law sufficiently protects the right of workers to establish trade
unions to defend their interests and for the purpose of representation in collective
bargaining with employers. According to the Government, the Law also provides for the
right of employers and workers to negotiate collectively and to conclude collective
agreements on all work related matters, with the least interference by the State
authorities. The ITUC alleges, however, that the Law jeopardizes the right of workers,
without distinction whatsoever, to establish and join trade unions of their own
choosing. It refers, in this respect, to sections 3 and 116 of the Law, which read as
follows:
Section 3
- Except as
otherwise provided for in any other law, the provisions of this law shall not apply
to the following categories:
- 1. The employees and workers
of the ministries and other governmental organs, public institutions,
corporations and companies which are established by Qatar Petroleum by itself or
with others, and the workers whose employment affairs are regulated by special
laws.
- 2. The officers and members of the armed forces
and police and the workers employed at sea.
- 3. The
workers employed in casual work.
- 4. The persons
employed in domestic employment such as drivers, nurses, cooks, gardeners and
similar workers.
- 5. Working members of an employer’s
family. These are the wife, ascendants and descendants who are residing with and
wholly dependent on him.
- 6. The workers employed in
agriculture and grazing other than the persons employed in the agricultural
establishments processing and marketing their own products or those who are
permanently employed in the operation or repair of the necessary agricultural
mechanical appliances.
- The provisions of
this law or any part thereof may, by a resolution of the Council of Ministers upon
the recommendation of the Minister, be applied to categories 3, 4, 5 and 6 referred
to in this section.
Section 116
- Workers working in an establishment where the number of Qatari
workers is not less than one hundred workers may form a committee from amongst
themselves to be named “the workers’ committee” and more than one committee in the
establishment may not be formed.
- Workers’ committees in
the establishments engaged in one trade or industry or similar or interrelated
trades or industries are entitled to form a general committee from amongst
themselves to be named the General Committee for the Workers of Trade or
Industry.
- General committees of the workers of the various
trades and industries may form amongst themselves a general union to be named the
“General Union of the Workers of Qatar”.
- Membership in the
two committees referred to and in the General Union of the Workers of Qatar shall be
confined to the Qatari workers. The Minister shall specify the conditions and
procedures for the formation of the workers’ organizations referred to and the
membership therein and the way of carrying out their business and the interrelated
and similar trades and industries.
- 841. The Committee recalls that Article 2 of Convention No. 87 is
designed to give expression to the principle of non-discrimination in trade union
matters, and the words “without distinction whatsoever” used in this Article mean that
freedom of association should be guaranteed without discrimination of any kind based on
occupation, sex, colour, race, beliefs, nationality, political opinion, etc., not only
to workers in the private sector of the economy, but also to civil servants and public
service employees in general [see Digest, op. cit., para. 209]. To illustrate the above
general principle, the Committee draws the Government’s attention to the following
paragraphs of the above-cited Digest:
- 216. All workers, without
distinction whatsoever, including without discrimination in regard to occupation,
should have the right to establish and join organizations of their own
choosing.
- ...
- 219. Public
servants, like all other workers, without distinction whatsoever, have the right to
establish and join organizations of their own choosing, without previous
authorization, for the promotion and defence of their occupational
interests.
- 220. Public employees (with the sole possible
exception of the armed forces and the police, by virtue of Article 9 of Convention
No. 87) should, like workers in the private sector, be able to establish
organizations of their own choosing to further and defend the interests of their
members.
- ...
- 229. Civilians
working in the services of the army should have the right to form trade
unions.
- ...
- 241. Agricultural
workers should enjoy the right to organize.
- ...
- 255. All workers, without distinction whatsoever, whether they are
employed on a permanent basis, for a fixed term or as contract employees, should
have the right to establish and join organizations of their own choosing.
- ...
- 267. Domestic workers are not
excluded from the application of Convention No. 87 and should therefore be governed
by the guarantees it affords and have the right to establish and join occupational
organizations.
- 842. With regard to the restriction on the right to organize based on
nationality, as it appears to be the case pursuant to the first sentence of paragraph 4
of section 116 of the Law, the Committee considers that such restriction prevents
migrant workers from playing an active role in the defence of their interests,
especially in sectors where they are the main source of labour. The right of workers,
without distinction whatsoever, to establish and join organizations implies that anyone
legally residing in the country benefits from trade union rights without any distinction
based on nationality. The Committee further recalls the resolution concerning a fair
deal for migrant workers in a global economy adopted by the ILO Conference at its 92nd
Session (2004) according to which “[a]ll migrant workers also benefit from the
protection offered by the ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work
and its Follow-up (1998). In addition, the eight core ILO Conventions regarding freedom
of association and the right to bargain collectively, non-discrimination in employment
and occupation, the prohibition of forced labour and the elimination of child labour,
cover all migrant workers, regardless of status” [para. 12].
- 843. With regard to collective bargaining rights, the Committee recalls
that only armed forces, the police and public servants engaged in the administration of
the State may be excluded from their application.
- 844. In light of the above, the Committee requests the Government to take
the necessary measures in order to ensure that, with the only possible abovementioned
exceptions, all workers, without distinction whatsoever, may enjoy freedom of
association and collective bargaining rights. In particular, the Committee requests the
Government to consider amending section 3, or, with regard to the categories of workers
mentioned under subsections 3–6, taking the necessary measures for the adoption of a
Council of Minister’s resolution as referred to in the last paragraph of that section.
The Committee further urges the Government to eliminate the restriction placed on the
organizing rights of migrant workers by repealing the first sentence of paragraph 4 of
section 116 of the Labour Law, which limits organizing rights to Qatari workers.
- 845. The Committee also notes that according to section 116, paragraph 1,
a workers’ committee can only be established at enterprises employing not less than 100
Qatari workers. Recalling that the workers’ right to organize should not be dependent on
the size of the enterprise, or the number of workers employed by it, and understanding
that with the predominantly migrant labour force, the number of enterprises where over
100 Qataris are employed may be very few, especially as regards small and medium-sized
enterprises, the Committee urges the Government to take the necessary measures to repeal
this provision without delay.
- 846. The Committee further notes that, as per the ITUC’s allegation,
according to section 116, only one workers’ committee can be formed in an establishment,
which can create general committees at the level of trade or industry, which, in turn
can form a general union under the name of the General Union of the Workers of Qatar.
The Committee recalls in this respect that the right of workers to establish
organizations of their own choosing implies, in particular, the effective possibility to
create – if the workers so choose – more than one workers’ organization per enterprise.
Furthermore, unity within the trade union movement should not be imposed by the State
through legislation because this would be contrary to the principles of freedom of
association [see Digest, op. cit., paras 315 and 321]. The Committee therefore urges the
Government to take the necessary measures without delay to amend section 116 so as to
bring it into conformity with the abovementioned principle.
- 847. The Committee also requests the Government to provide a copy of the
procedures regulating the formation, membership and activities of workers’
organizations, adopted pursuant to the last sentence of section 116 of the Law.
- 848. With regard to the allegation that the Labour Law effectively denies
the right to strike, the Committee notes that according to the Government, the Law
guarantees the right to strike. The Government adds, however, that as the right to
strike is a means to fulfil workers’ demands, rules and condition must be established
for the exercise of this right to assist in reaching the desired goals, to ensure
workers’ safety and to protect public property. It further indicates that the
authorities are always on the side of workers as such interventions allow settling of
disputes before resorting to a strike action. Applying these rules and conditions does
not mean that the Ministry of Labour or the Ministry of Interior are seeking to prevent
workers from exercising their right to strike as guaranteed by the Law, rather it seeks
to enable this right. The Government considers that these rules and conditions are in
compliance with the provisions of the relevant ILO Conventions, which grant each country
the right to decide in which essential sectors strikes may be prohibited due to their
importance and potential impact on public property and persons
- 849. The Committee notes the following sections of the
legislation:
Section 120
- The
workers may go on strike if amicable settlement of the dispute between them and the
employer becomes impossible in accordance with the following measures:
- 1. Approval by three-quarters of the General Committee of the
workers of the trade or industry.
- 2. Giving to the
employer a period of not less than two weeks before commencing the strike and
securing approval of the Ministry [Ministry of Civil Service Affairs and
Housing] after coordination with the Minister of Interior Affairs in respect of
the time and place of the strike.
- 3. Provided that
there is no detriment to the property of the State and of the individual and
their security and safety.
- 4. Prohibition of the
strike in vital public utilities such as petroleum and gas-related industries,
electricity, water, seaports, airports, hospitals and transportation.
- 5. Non-resort to strike before the amicable settlement between
the workers and employer by conciliation or arbitration in accordance with the
provisions of this law becomes impossible.
Section 129
- If any dispute arises between
the employer and some or all of his workers, the two parties to the dispute shall
try to settle it between themselves and if there is a joint committee in the
establishment, the dispute shall be referred to it for settlement.
- If the two parties fail to settle the dispute the following steps
shall be taken:
- 1. The workers shall submit their complaint
or claim in writing to the employer with a copy thereof to the
department.
- 2. The employer shall reply in writing to
the complaint or claim of the workers within a week from his receiving the same
and shall send a copy of the reply to the department.
- 3. If the reply of the employer does not lead to the settlement of the dispute,
the department shall try to settle the dispute through its
mediation.
Section 130
- If the mediation of the department does not lead to the settlement
of the dispute within 15 days from the date of the employer’s reply, the department
shall submit the dispute to a conciliation committee for its decision
thereon.
- The conciliation committee shall be formed
of:
- 1. A chairperson to be appointed by a decision of
the Minister.
- 2. A member to be nominated by the
employer.
- 3. A representative member of the workers to
be nominated in accordance with the provisions of the second paragraph of the
section.
- The committee may be assisted by
consultation with any of the specialists before deciding on the dispute and shall
issue its decision on the dispute within a week from the date of its submission
thereto.
- The decision of the committee shall be binding on
the two parties to the dispute if the parties had agreed in writing to referring the
dispute to the committee before its meeting to decide on the dispute and if there is
no such an agreement in this respect the dispute shall be referred to an arbitration
committee within 15 days and the arbitration shall be mandatory for the two
parties.
- 850. As concerns section 120 of the Law, the Committee recalls that the
conditions that have to be fulfilled under the Law in order to render a strike lawful
should be reasonable and in any event not such as to place a substantial limitation on
the means of action open to trade union organizations [see Digest, op. cit., para. 547].
With regard to the majority vote required for the calling of a legal strike, the
Committee considers that generally, the requirement of a decision by over half of all
the workers involved in order to declare a strike is excessive and could excessively
hinder the possibility of carrying out a strike, particularly in large enterprises [see
Digest, op. cit., para. 556]. In addition, the right of the Ministry of Civil Service
Affairs and Housing to determine the time and the place of the strike could further
excessively hinder the exercise of the right to strike.
- 851. With regard to the prohibition of strike action in “vital public
utilities”, such as petroleum and gas-related industries, electricity, water, seaports,
airports, hospitals and transportation, the Committee recalls that the right to strike
may be restricted or prohibited: (1) in the public service only for public servants
exercising authority in the name of the State; or (2) in essential services in the
strict sense of the term (that is, services the interruption of which would endanger the
life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population) [see Digest, op.
cit., para. 576]. It further recalls that it has previously considered that the
following do not constitute essential services: the petroleum sector, ports, transport
generally, airline pilots, production, transport and distribution of fuel [see Digest,
op. cit., para. 587]. Moreover, even within essential services, certain categories of
employees, such as hospital labourers and gardeners, should not be deprived of the right
to strike [see Digest, op. cit., para. 593]. However, a minimum service could be
appropriate as a possible alternative in situations in which a substantial restriction
or total prohibition of strike action would not appear to be justified and where,
without calling into question the right to strike of the large majority of workers, one
might consider ensuring that users’ basic needs are met or that facilities operate
safely or without interruption. A minimum service may be set up in the event of a
strike, the extent and duration of which might be such as to result in an acute national
crisis endangering the normal living conditions of the population. Such a minimum
service should be confined to operations that are strictly necessary to avoid
endangering the life or normal living conditions of the whole or part of the population;
in addition, workers’ organizations should be able to participate in defining such a
service in the same way as employers and the public authorities [see Digest, op. cit.,
paras 607 and 610]. The Committee therefore uges the Government to take the necessary
measures without delay to amend section 120 so as to ensure respect for the principles
enunciated above.
- 852. The Committee notes that, as per the complainant’s allegation, the
objective of a strike is limited to disputes between an employer and his/her employees.
It recalls in this respect that the occupational and economic interests which workers
defend through the exercise of the right to strike do not only concern better working
conditions or collective claims of an occupational nature, but also the seeking of
solutions to economic and social policy questions and problems facing the undertaking
which are of direct concern to the workers. Furthermore, organizations responsible for
defending workers’ socio-economic and occupational interests should be able to use
strike action to support their position in the search for solutions to problems posed by
major social and economic policy trends which have a direct impact on their members and
on workers in general, in particular as regards employment, social protection and
standards of living. A ban on strike action not linked to a collective dispute to which
the employee or union is a party is contrary to the principles of freedom of association
[see Digest, op. cit., paras 526, 527 and 538]. The Committee therefore requests the
Government to take the necessary measures in order to ensure that workers’ organizations
are able to express, if necessary, through strikes or protest actions, in a broader
context than currently provided for in section 120, their views as regards economic and
social matters affecting their members’ interests.
- 853. With regard to the ultimate recourse, in section 130, to a procedure
of compulsory arbitration, the Committee recalls that the legislation which provides for
voluntary conciliation and arbitration in industrial disputes before a strike may be
called cannot be regarded as an infringement of freedom of association, provided
recourse to arbitration is not compulsory and does not, in practice, prevent the calling
of the strike. In as far as compulsory arbitration prevents strike action, it is
contrary to the right of trade unions to organize freely their activities and could only
be justified in the public service or in essential services in the strict sense of the
term [see Digest, op. cit., paras 549 and 565]. The Committee requests the Government to
take the necessary measures to amend section 130 so as to ensure that compulsory
arbitration to end a collective labour dispute and a strike is possible only if it is at
the request of both parties involved in a dispute, or if the strike in question may be
restricted, even banned, that is, in the case of disputes 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 those services whose interruption would
endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population [see
Digest, op. cit., para. 564].
- 854. The Committee notes the complainant’s allegation that in the case of
essential services, workers whose right to strike is restricted have no corresponding
compensatory benefits such as a guarantee of not being locked out. The Committee recalls
that employees deprived of the right to strike because they perform essential services
must have appropriate guarantees to safeguard their interests, including a corresponding
denial of the right of lockout, provision of joint conciliation procedures and where,
and only where, conciliation fails, the provision of joint arbitration machinery [see
Digest, op. cit., para. 600]. The Committee therefore expects that, where restrictions
are placed on the right to strike in essential services and the industrial dispute is
being dealt with through conciliation and arbitration, the employer is also restricted
with respect to lockout.
- 855. With regard to the prohibition of certain activities to be carried
out by workers’ organizations, the Committee notes section 119 of the Labour Law,
according to which,
- Workers’ Organizations are prohibited from
the following:
- 1. The exercise of any political or
religious activities.
- 2. Preparation, printing or
distributing any materials insulting to the State or the Government or the
status quo thereof.
- 3. Entering into any financial
speculations of whatsoever nature.
- 4. Accepting of
gifts or endowments except with the approval of the Ministry.
- The Minister may dissolve any organization if it commits any of
the foregoing prohibited matters or works outside the purpose.
- 856. As to the political activities, the Committee recalls that while
trade union organizations should not engage in political activities in an abusive manner
and go beyond their true functions by promoting essentially political interests,
provisions imposing a general prohibition on political activities by trade unions for
the promotion of their specific objectives are contrary to the principles of freedom of
association. Furthermore, a general prohibition on trade unions from engaging in any
political activities would not only be incompatible with the principles of freedom of
association, but also unrealistic in practice. Trade union organizations may wish, for
example, to express publicly their opinion regarding the Government’s economic and
social policy [see Digest, op. cit., paras 500, 502 and 503]. The Committee further
recalls that the right to express opinions without previous authorization through the
press is one of the essential elements of the rights of occupational organizations and
that the freedom of expression which should be enjoyed by trade unions and their leaders
should also be guaranteed when they wish to criticize the Government’s economic and
social policy [see Digest, op. cit., paras 156 and 157]. With regard to the need to seek
the Ministry’s approval before accepting gifts or endowments, the Committee considers
that trade unions should not be required to obtain prior authorization to receive
international financial assistance in their trade union activities [see Digest, op.
cit., para. 743]. Finally, with regard to the right of the Minister to dissolve a
workers’ organization, the Committee emphasizes that measures of suspension or
dissolution by the administrative authority constitute serious infringements of the
principles of freedom of association and that cancellation of a trade union’s
registration should only be possible through judicial channels [see Digest, op. cit.,
paras 683 and 687]. The Committee therefore urges the Government to take the necessary
measures without delay in order to amend section 119 so as to bring it into conformity
with the principles above.
- 857. The Committee further notes that pursuant to section 123 of the Law,
“the General Union of the Workers of Qatar may, after approval of the Ministry, join any
Arab or international organizations working in the field of workers organizations”. The
Committee recalls that a workers’ organization should have the right to join the
federation and confederation of its own choosing, subject to the rules of the
organizations concerned, and without any previous authorization. It is for the
federations and confederations themselves to decide whether or not to accept the
affiliation of a trade union, in accordance with their own constitutions and rules [see
Digest, op. cit., para. 722]. The Committee therefore urges the Government to take the
necessary measures without delay to amend section 123 of the Law accordingly.
- 858. The Committee also notes the complainant’s allegation that the
Labour Law does not provide for any form of protection for workers engaged in trade
union activities. While taking due note of the Government’s opinion to the contrary, the
Committee regrets to note that with the exception of section 122, which provides that an
“employer shall not compel the worker to join or not to join any of the workers’
organizations or to refrain from implementing their decisions”, and section 144 setting
out the penalties for the violation of section 122 consisting of imprisonment for a
period not exceeding one month and/or a fine of not less than 2,000 Qatari riyals (QAR)
and not exceed QAR6,000, there appears to be no other provisions referring to the rapid
and effective protection against acts of anti-union discrimination and interference in
trade union activities, which are necessary to ensure freedom of association in
practice. The Committee is thus bound to emphasize the need to adopt specific
legislative provisions in relation to anti-union discrimination and interference. The
Committee would refer, in particular, to the need to ensure protection against the
following acts: (1) making the employment of a worker subject to the conditions that he
or she shall not join a union or shall relinquish trade union membership; or (2) causing
the dismissal of, or otherwise prejudicing workers, by reason of union membership or
because of participation in union activities outside working hours or, with the consent
of the employer, within working hours. The Committee considers that respect for the
principles of freedom of association clearly requires that workers who consider that
they have been prejudiced because of their trade union activities should have access to
means of redress which are expeditious, inexpensive and fully impartial. Furthermore,
where legislation does not contain specific provisions for the protection of workers’
organizations from acts of interference by employers and their organizations, it would
be appropriate for the Government to examine the possibility of adopting clear and
precise provisions ensuring the adequate protection of workers’ organizations against
these acts of interference [see Digest, op. cit., paras 820 and 860]. The Committee
urges the Government to take the necessary measures without delay to adopt specific
legislative provisions to that end.
- 859. In light of the above, the Committee requests the Government to
initiate without delay a labour reform, and expects that this process will include the
full participation of the social partners and that any new legislative provisions will
be based on the principles enunciated above. It requests the Government to keep it
informed of all measures taken or envisaged in this respect and reminds it that it may
avail itself of the technical assistance of the Office.
- 860. Finally, the Committee notes the complainant’s allegation that
section 127 of the Labour Law empowers the Government to regulate the rules and
procedures of collective bargaining, the method of representation of the parties, and
the content, scope, duration and means of reaching a collective agreement and thus
undermines the existence of a collective bargaining process. The Committee notes that
the text of this provision reads as follows:
- The employers and
workers have the right to conduct collective negotiations and conclude joint
agreements on all matters related to the work.
- The
Minister shall issue a Decision on the regulation of the rules and procedures of
collective negotiation and the method of representation of the parties therein and
the rules regulating the joint agreements, so as to [provide for the] contents,
scope, the means of acceding them, the duration and interpretation thereof and the
disputes which may arise from its implementation.
- 861. The Committee requests the Government to provide a copy of the
Decision to which reference is made in section 127 of the Labour Law and to indicate the
manner in which this is applied in practice.
The Committee’s recommendations
The Committee’s recommendations- 862. In the light of its foregoing conclusions, the Committee invites the
Governing Body to approve the following recommendations:
- (a) The Committee urges
the Government to take the necessary measures without delay in order to amend the
Labour Law (in particular through the revision of sections 3, 116, 119, 120, 123 and
130 and adoption of further enabling provisions) in accordance with the principles
enunciated in its conclusions so as to give effect to the fundamental principles of
freedom of association and collective bargaining. It expects that this labour reform
process will include the full participation of the social partners. The Committee
requests the Government to keep it informed of all measures taken or envisaged in
this respect and reminds it that it may avail itself of the technical assistance of
the Office.
- (b) Observing the Government’s indication that migrant workers
account for 93 per cent of Qatar’s economically active population, the Committee
urges the Government to eliminate any restrictions placed on the freedom of
association rights of migrant workers.
- (c) The Committee requests the
Government to provide:
- – a copy of the procedures regulating the formation,
membership and activities of workers’ organizations, adopted pursuant to the
last sentence of section 116 of the Law; and
- – a copy of the Decision to
which reference is made in section 127 of the Labour Law and to indicate the
manner in which this is applied in practice.
