Karen Curtis is a graduate of the University of Minnesota Law School and majored in Philosophy at Barnard College. She joined the ILO Standards Department in 1988 after serving a fellowship at the Minnesota Lawyers for International Human Rights. Ms Curtis, Deputy Director of the International Labour Standards Department, has specific responsibility for freedom of association matters, an area in which she has been working since 1994. In January 2004, Ms Curtis had the responsibility of chief of the Secretariat for the Commission of Inquiry established to examine trade union rights violations in Belarus.
The following speech was given at the 4th Assembly for Human Rights held in Geneva on October 9, 2006. The Assembly is an annual event sponsored by the Republic and Canton of Geneva. The theme of its 2006 session was trade union rights.
.

TRADE UNION RIGHTS ARE HUMAN RIGHTS:
A SNAPHOT OF ILO ACTION AND RESPECT FOR AND IMPACT OF FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION AROUND THE WORLD
Anyone who says that the ILO – and for that matter trade unions – have no relevance to today’s world is quite simply wrong. The concerns and preoccupations of the period immediately following the first World War were not all that different from those of today, with the possible exception that today, with the ease of travel, establishment of companies in foreign countries, minimal regulation, cross-border financing, and much more, these same concerns for the average worker have actually not only gotten bigger, but have also gotten far out of reach of any meaningful impact he or she could imagine having on them. These concerns should not be belittled. In 1919, the Constitution establishing the International Labour Organization noted that “conditions of labour exist involving such injustice, hardship and privation to large numbers of people as to produce unrest so great that the peace and harmony of the world are imperilled.” We must look around and ask ourselves whether, extraordinary gains in economic power for some notwithstanding, these words can actually be ignored today.
The ILO message was fortified in 1944 when, coming off the heels of another world war, the International Labour Conference reaffirmed the fundamental principles on which the Organisation is based. Listen to these maxims. They are as valid today as ever. Labour is not a commodity; freedom of expression and of association are essential to sustained progress; poverty anywhere constitutes a danger to prosperity everywhere. Is it possible to guarantee respect for these most basic principles, to ensure real and tangible improvement in labour conditions without, first and foremost, ensuring that those directly concerned have a conducive environment for coming together and giving form and weight to their voice?
The inclusion of the core rights of freedom of association, protection of the right to organize and collective bargaining in the International Labour Code aimed at guaranteeing the minimum conditions for workers’ organizational rights and their ability not only to improve working conditions, but also to be seen as legitimate partners in social dialogue.
The transposition of these rights in international instruments and the creation of a special complaints procedure for the examination of allegations of trade union rights violations against all member States has gone a long way in promoting respect for basic civil liberties and the fundamental principles of freedom of association that are primordial for the healthy functioning of a democratic state. Indeed, freedom of association and democracy share the same roots: liberty, independence, pluralism, and a voice in decision-making. Suppression of rights in the area of freedom of association cut at the very core of democracy.
Free and independent trade unions are often dynamic agents for change in political, social, professional and economic life. For this same reason, they are also often the targets of repression under authoritarian regimes and military dictatorships, which cannot by definition permit channels for the expression of public discontent. They also may become the objects of anti-union campaigns at workplaces where paternalism does not leave room for free expression. The basic rights of freedom of association, whether they manifest themselves at national level in relation to a government’s economic and social policy or at enterprise level with the aim of improving workers’ terms and conditions of employment, cannot be denied their place as fundamental human rights.
The impact of freedom of association: a historical perspective
Workers’ freedom of association is not innocuous. It has had an extraordinary impact on the world as we know it today and is still playing a vital role in where we will be tomorrow. When we look back at the end of the twentieth century, one of the most memorable moments, which continues to affect our lives today, was the toppling of communism that began in Poland with the unrelenting momentum of an independent trade union movement that refused to be suppressed. The voices united through Solidarinosc reflected the voice of the people for the restoration of their civil liberties and political pluralism. When the remaining resistance to a democratic, independent and pluralistic trade union movement finally yielded, the force of this act made way for democracy on a larger scale than could be imagined.
Throughout the 1980s, the ILO supported the struggles of the Polish trade union movement through a Commission of Inquiry and several high-level missions, including the direct involvement of the then Director-General, Mr. Francis Blanchard. At times, the cause seemed practically lost with dialogue between the Government and the Organization at a near standstill. The perseverance was however finally rewarded and, along with the recognition of trade union rights, an entire evolution in thinking was to take place. The introduction of trade union pluralism had a reverberating effect not only on the political life in Poland, but also all over Central and Eastern Europe.
Another major development in the world following on the heels of the collapse of the communist regime as it was then known was the abolition of apartheid. Here, again, the trade union movement was ever-present in the fight and a front-line player. The Congress of South African Trade Unions, COSATU, played all cards available to it; even going so far as to use, in 1988, the truly unique ILO procedure that enables complaints concerning violations of freedom of association to be brought against non-member States (for the Government of South Africa had already withdrawn from the International Labour Organization in the early 1960s, tired of the constant vigilance that had been kept over the apartheid situation).
The basic freedoms of association and collective bargaining lost under the apartheid regime were no more nor less than the vital attributes of a free society. Despite the formidable state machinery for maintaining the apartheid system and for the suppression of opposition, particularly by movements representing Blacks, a number of organizations and institutions became the focus of resistance. The development of a non-racial trade union movement and the increasing extent to which it was composed of Black workers were noteworthy aspects of the social developments in the country. In default of other outlets for attention to urgent social and economic concern, it was inevitable that the trade union movement would fill the institutional void. During the reign of apartheid, the union movement played a vital function in preserving the hope of freedom and of basic rights. The South African trade union movement’s continuing focus on these rights was an important factor in the gradual change of public opinion leading to the Convention for a Democratic South Africa in December 1991 and ultimately to Nelson Mandela’s election.
During the Suharto dictatorship in the 1990s, the independent trade union movement in Indonesia suffered numerous attacks on their basic rights. These workers however did not turn from their objective and despite arrests and detentions, the workers’ struggle for freedom continued. In June 1998, just following the collapse of the regime, the leader of the SBSI independent trade union told the delegates of the International Labour Conference that they had tried to exercise their right to organize within the difficult context of dictatorial rule and a single official union so that the plight of the workers could truly be defended. Because of this they were put into prison, tortured, meetings were disrupted, members were dismissed from their jobs, their offices were ransacked, documents seized. At the end of the dictatorial rule changes occurred at a breathtaking pace with the reformation movement in Indonesia demanding deeper changes in society: the reform of the political bill, a speedy transition towards democracy through free and fair elections, and clean government. The trade union movement in Indonesia now represents an important force and an active player in the future of the country, bringing to bear independent views and ideas that have broken away from the state-controlled monopoly of thought.
In all of these cases, ILO action was incessant.
Where we are today
Regrettably, the happy-ending to these momentous events cannot belie the continuing global struggles of a trade union movement often dismissed as irrelevant in a free market society. In addition, far too many workers and unions around the world are longing to throw off the shackles of suppression in countries where the most basic rights of freedom of association and expression have no recognized value.
After the military coup of 1989 in Sudan, special measures had been taken which had extremely serious repercussions on the exercise of trade union rights and civil liberties, including the dissolution of all trade union organizations in the country, the imprisonment of trade union leaders and members without charge and without trial, and the confiscation of union assets and property by the military. Work stoppages were even rendered punishable by death. The 1992 Trade Union Act that repealed these military decrees nevertheless imposed a state-controlled trade union monopoly. Numerous reports have been made of deaths, torture and imprisonment of independent trade unionists in Sudan. This situation has forced any free trade union movement underground, while the Legitimate Sudan Workers’ Trade Union Federation has no choice but to work out of exile, thus being deprived of the most minimal right to carry out their struggle within their own country. Exiled voices continue to defend the cause by relaying information abroad and alerting the international community to the plight of these workers.
Military rule in Burma also gave rise to trade unions working in exile. In 1988, the people expressed their desire to abandon the socialist, single-party system and advance towards democratic elections within a multi-party context that would also pave the way to trade union pluralism. Martial law unfortunately rapidly followed and, the government representatives of Myanmar, as it then became officially known, has ever since referred to the priority of drafting a new Constitution that would be the basis for a multi-party democratic system, a free-market economy and a modern and developed State in which all segments of society would enjoy justice and human rights. Yet, trade union leaders were forced into exile following military rule. They established the Federation of Trade Unions of Burma (FTUB), banned inside the country as a terrorist organization. The ILO has repeatedly expressed its great concern over information concerning individuals convicted of high treason for having been affiliated to the FTUB and has insisted that respect for civil liberties is essential to the exercise of freedom of association. It is crucial that, regardless of the progress made in elaborating the long-awaited Constitution, that respect is understood as a necessary prerequisite for advances towards the Government’s oft-repeated pledge to create appropriate conditions for a multi-party democratic system and the basic principles of freedom of association.
The clustering of independent voices in the defence of workers’ interests is becoming ever more common, even in countries which have traditionally ensured the link between the prescribed guardians of workers’ rights and the single-party in power. The legislation in China prevents workers from organizing outside of the All-China Federation of Trade Unions, which itself has been strictly controlled by the Chinese Communist Party, with ideological links explicit in the law. In 1989, serious allegations were made of violations of freedom of association committed against the Workers’ Autonomous Federation, including the banning of the organization, the death of a number of its leaders following an attack by the armed forces, the sentencing to death and execution of workers, arrests. While the Government maintained that the Workers’ Autonomous Federation was illegal and its aim merely to overthrow the socialist system, the main thrust of the statutes of the Workers’ Autonomous Federation was that the organization should be autonomous, independent and democratic with the purpose of defending workers’ interests. Their grievances concerned the lack of workplace democracy, the lack of genuine workers’ representation, the poor working conditions and the deterioration of the workers’ living standards.
The timing of the creation of this workers’ federation and the events in Tiananmen was no coincidence. This independent workers’ movement played an essential role in the democracy movement launched in April 1989 by Beijing students. Many of the federation’s founders and members literally gave their lives to the democracy movement, others their freedom. Some are still believed to be in prison.
More recently, however, complaints have been examined by the ILO Committee on Freedom of Association that concern the spontaneous organization of disillusioned workers faced with perceived injustices resulting from the government’s labour market policy and alleged rampant corruption. A feeling by some workers that there is an increasingly unequal distribution of the wealth brought by globalisation has apparently resulted in some choosing to set aside the self-constraint previously accepted within the established order. The most recent of such complaints concerned violent police oppression, arrests and detention in response to mass demonstrations against large-scale retrenchments and unsatisfactory compensation packages. When examining this case, the Committee on Freedom of Association, while giving full consideration to the context of transition described by the Government and its determination to achieve simultaneous development in economic and social fields, emphasized that it is precisely within this context that the only durable solution to the apparently increasing social conflict experienced in the country is through full respect for the right of workers to establish organizations of their own choosing by ensuring, in particular, the effective possibility of forming, in a climate of full security, organizations independent both of those which exist already and of any political party. The Committee felt it important to reiterate in this regard that the development of free and independent organizations and negotiation with all those involved is indispensable to a government’s ability to confront its social and economic problems and resolve them in the best interests of the workers and the nation. Balanced economic and social development requires the existence of strong and independent organizations that can participate in the process.
In Belarus, the interference on the part of the government has rendered the voices of an independent trade union movement virtually inexistent. Initially the harassment was aimed at the new non-traditional trade unions created in the mid 1990’s during the transition following the collapse of the Soviet Union. Ultimately, the attacks spread to the entire trade union movement, both traditional and new, leading to a joint complaint against the Government, unprecedented in the region. Faced with this massive opposition, the Government reverted to traditional methods of state control over the trade union movement, bringing the major trade union back into the State line. In light of the grave, persistent and all-encompassing nature of the allegations, the ILO Governing Body decided to appoint a Commission of Inquiry to examine the trade union rights situation. In 2004, the Commission concluded that the trade union movement in Belarus has been and continues to be the subject of significant government interference undermining one of the most essential prerequisites of freedom of association: trade union independence. A subsequent mission to collect information on the measures taken to implement the Commission’s recommendations concluded its report by expressing its fear that the Government is on a path to eliminate all remnants of an independent trade union movement in Belarus, hoping that in this way there, in effect, will be no further sources of complaint.
The ever-increasing acceptance of, and importance given to, the role of workers’ organizations as a social partner in their own right, not only at the level of the workplace, but also in consultations on national policy concerned with stakeholder buy-in, inevitably implies that workers’ organizations must be able to express their opinions on political issues in the broad sense of the term that affect their members and, in particular, that they may publicly express their views on government economic and social policy.
Moreover, the right to express opinions freely, to hold assemblies and public meetings, to exercise these rights in full freedom and security of person, are nothing less than the basic civil liberties, without which the exercise of trade union rights is rendered meaningless. In Zimbabwe, trade unionists have been arrested and detained following mass demonstrations and serious allegations are made of harassment, intimidation and beatings. The violation of trade union rights and civil liberties cannot be justified with arguments that there may be elements within the trade union movement that oppose Government policy choices. Freedom of association in its holistic definition means that everyone has the right to think differently, to hope for other policy options, and to make those hopes known in a peaceful manner. For workers’ organizations, this principle is reflected in the right to express concerns over the particular impact such options may have on workers. If the forces of order apply the law in such a way as to unduly restrict this right and effectively obstruct any free and democratic expression, then it is not surprising that those oppressed will protest that freedom of association has lost its meaning.
Striving for recognition of trade union rights, and the importance of respect for these rights, is not however limited to situations of outright government repression of conflicting voices. Recalling the ILO Constitution, one can still see that unacceptable and unbearable labour conditions persist in too many parts of the world, giving rise to massive revolts and chaos. In Bangladesh this past Spring, hundreds of thousands of workers in the garment sector protested against such intolerable conditions fumed by wage levels over a decade old and working hours in violation of any decent standard. The protests turned violent, killing and injuring hundreds of workers and damaging property. Conditions of labour exist involving such injustice as to produce unrest so great that the peace and harmony of the world will be imperilled. This crisis could have been avoided had the workers over the years been able to freely form their organizations, defending workers’ interests and entering into collective bargaining, with a true sense that their condition was not ignored and that they themselves could actually have not only a say, but even an impact on their own lives. It is crucial to the stability of the country and the dignity of the workers that these rights be recognized and fully respected for social dialogue to permit the redressing of injustices and to rebuild the confidence of the people in the established order.
Hope for the future?
This is not a rosy picture of the world. But, as I noted earlier, unquestionable strides have been made in greater recognition of the elemental nature of workers’ organizational rights. Further changes are being seen in other regions where trade unions have been little heard of. Up until the twenty-first century, no bona fide trade unions were permitted in Bahrain. Any attempts at independent trade union action were repressed by means of imprisonment, banishment and the loss of Bahraini nationality. The Bahrain Workers’ Union carried out its activities in exile. In 2002, however, the General Committee of Bahraini Workers proceeded to a historic vote to establish a free trade union in the Gulf. While initially opposed by the Government, the General Federation of Workers Trade Unions of Bahrain was finally recognized and a new law on trade unions adopted that introduced steps towards freedom of association in a number of economic sectors and lifted the ban on strikes. These changes followed on the heels of certain steps towards political democracy in the country including a vote in 2001 for a National Charter of Action, which provided for the establishment of a bicameral parliament and the full separation of the legislative, judicial and executive branches of the State. While the trade union legislation is not perfect, further measures are being proposed by the Government to guarantee the right to organize for government employees and ensure the possibility of trade union pluralism at the enterprise. Such changes are slowly, but steadily, finding their resonance in other countries in the region.
In Nepal, the trade union movement played a major role in the demonstrations in the early spring leading to critical changes in the country’s budding democracy. This is nothing new for the workers of Nepal as going as far back as 1947 we can see how the first workers’ movement in Nepal called for the establishment of democracy, which first came to light in 1950. In the pursuing decades, freedom of association waxed and waned and the workers’ organizations once again played a key role in the restoration of multi-party democracy in 1990. And then again the workers and the people were brought to the streets in April 2006 to oppose the King’s assumption of full powers earlier the previous year and to insist upon the return of democratic institutions. Regrettably, trade unionists, who were on the front line of these actions, suffered numerous attacks, arrests, detention and mistreatment. The ILO Director-General, Mr. Juan Somavia, intervened on several occasions directly with the King to call for their immediate release and the necessary safeguards for their personal safety. Fortunately, the demonstrations were successful, detainees were released and power was peacefully turned over to the reassembled Parliament pending the adoption of an interim Constitution and the election of an interim constituent assembly. There is little doubt that the Nepalese trade unions will continue to play a major role in this process and for the defence of workers’ rights.
With the impact of globalization over the last decade, however, action at the national level is likely to be insufficient for the promotion of decent work in the face of larger and more powerful market forces, financial powers, institutions and organizations that bank on a credo that harks back to the notion that labour, after all, might just be a commodity. This is why concerted engagement at the international level is indispensable to ensuring that the maxims of the Declaration of Philadelphia are not only empty words. The tripartite International Labour Organization, a strong and unified international trade union movement and other players at the international level need to come together to ensure that the rules of the game are respected so that the workers of the world do not pay an unjust price for the benefit of some.
As demonstrated by the cases I have mentioned, and which have only served as a snapshot given that there are many more examples to be found in all the regions of the world, organized representation is essential not only to fill the place that might otherwise be taken up by totalitarian means, but also to avert a nation ruled by the law of the jungle or anarchy, and the instability that looms behind it. We have a duty to protect workers’ freedom of association, which must be seen not as an anomaly with no place in a free market economy, but rather as a necessary stabilizer in a world too easily out of control, where human rights and the dignity of the person far too often lose their meaning.