The Right to Collective Action – in Particular the Right to Strike – as a Fundamental Right

Keyword(s):  
2017 ◽  
Vol 6 (s2) ◽  
pp. 9-17
Author(s):  
Pir Ali Kaya ◽  
Ceyhun Güler

Abstract According to The European Social Charter, the European Convention on Human Rights, the ILO Conventions, the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights, the decisions of the European Social Rights Committee and the ILO supervisory bodies, the right to collective action is a democratic right that aims to protect and correct the economic and social interests of workers in the workplace or in another place appropriate for the purpose of action. The above-mentioned institutions accept the right to collective action as a fundamental human right. According to the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights, the right to collective action is regarded as a democratic right, including strike. In particular, the right to collective action is being used as a resistance mechanism against new working relations, which are imposed on working conditions, right to work and the right to organize. However, the tendency of this right to political field, leads to some debate about the legality of the right to collective action. In this context, In the decision of the European Court of Human Rights, the ILO's supervisory bodies and the European Committee on Social Rights, it is emphasized that collective action rights should be a basic human right. In this study, the legal basis of the right to collective action will be discussed in accordance with the decisions and requirements of the European Court of Human Rights and the decisions of the ILO supervisory bodies.


2002 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 688-700
Author(s):  
Marie-Armelle Souriac

The right to strike has been recognised in France, even as a right guaranteed by the Constitution, since 1946. Strikes in the public sector are subject to specific legal regulation, including requirements for minimum notice periods and, in some circumstances, minimum service requirements. This contribution examines these special legal features of public-sector strikes. It is necessary to clarify the respective roles and responsibilities of the management of public enterprises (or administrative authorities) and the government. The article also considers alternative (and new) forms of collective action and agreements. In the future there may well be even greater scope for the regulation of strikes to be covered by collective bargaining.


Author(s):  
Alan Patten

This chapter explores an important but understudied argument in favor of protections for vulnerable languages. The argument observes that speakers of such languages can face a collective action problem. The question is what interventions by the state to correct such a problem would be consistent with, or even required by, a broadly liberal and egalitarian conception of justice. The chapter identifies two principles that are relevant to answering this question: the unanimity principle, which places strict limits on interventions, and the principle of correction, which licenses a more extensive range of interventions on behalf of vulnerable languages. The principles are in tension with one another but derive from a common source in liberal egalitarian thought. Overall, the right approach is to forge a compromise between the two principles, thus allowing for some interventions on behalf of vulnerable languages to protect against collective action problems.


2020 ◽  
Vol 47 (4) ◽  
pp. 96-111
Author(s):  
Leandro Gamallo

An analysis of the evolution of social conflicts in Argentina between 1989 and 2017 in terms of three aspects of collective action—the actors in contention, their main demands, and their chosen forms of struggle—reveals important changes since the country’s return to democracy. Collective action has extended to multiple actors, channeled weightier demands, and expanded its forms. With the emergence of progovernment and conservative social movements, it has become apparent that not all movement participation in the state implies weakness, subordination, or co-optation and that social movement action does not necessarily mean democratization or expansion of rights. The right-wing government of 2015 opened up a new field of confrontation in which old divisions and alliances are being reconfigured. Un análisis de la evolución de los conflictos sociales en Argentina entre 1989 y 2017 realizado a partir de tres grandes dimensiones de la acción colectiva (los actores contenciosos, las demandas principales que enuncian y las formas de lucha que emplean) revela cambios importantes. La acción colectiva se ha extendido a más actores, ha canalizado demandas más amplias y se ha expresado de maneras más heterogéneas. Con el surgimiento de movimientos sociales oficialistas y opositores de índole conservador, se ha hecho evidente que la participación de las organizaciones sociales en el estado no siempre significa debilidad, subordinación o cooptación por parte del estado y que la movilización social no necesariamente implica procesos de democratización o expansión de derechos. La llegada de una alianza de derecha en 2015 abrió un nuevo campo de confrontaciones que redefinió antiguas alianzas y divisiones.


2017 ◽  
Vol 40 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ben M. Tappin ◽  
Ryan T. McKay ◽  
Dominic Abrams

AbstractIn his 2012 book Jussim argues that the self-fulfilling prophecy and expectancy effects of descriptive stereotypes are not potent shapers of social reality. However, his conclusion that descriptive stereotypes per se do not shape social reality is premature and overly reductionist. We review evidence that suggests descriptive stereotypes do have a substantial influence on social reality, by virtue of their influence on collective action.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Claudine Lana Earley

<p>Roman democracy is in fashion. In particular, the publication of Fergus Millar's The Crowd in the Late Republic (1998) has stimulated debate on the democratic elements in Roman government during this period. In this thesis I examine the nature of popular participation in the late Roman Republic. I focus on the decision-making power of the populus Romanus and popular pressure to effect reform in the favour of citizens outside the senatorial and equestrian orders. My findings are based on analysis of ancient literary and epigraphic sources, along with a critique of modern research on the topic. The first chapter introduces the subject with a survey of current scholarly opinion and discussion of key concepts and terms. Chapter Two investigates how power was shared between senatus populusque Romanus and the distribution of power in the assemblies, concluding that participation was widespread as a result of the changing circumstances in the late Republic. As farmers and veterans moved to Rome, and slaves were freed and granted citizenship and the right to vote, the balance was tipped in the favour of the non-elite voter. Each class of the populus Romanus could participate in Roman politics, and certainly members of each did. Having concluded my analysis of the formal avenues of participation, I move onto the informal. Chapter Three is the first of three chapters of case studies focusing on demonstrations and collective action which form the heart of this work. The first set of studies cover secession, mutiny and refusal of the draft. Chapter Four continues with studies of popular pressure to gain reforms to improve the food supply, restore tribunician power, obtain relief from crippling debt and land shortage. The final chapter of analysis, Chapter Five, investigates collective action at contiones, legislative assemblies, trials, ludi et gladiatores, triumphs, funerals, and elections. The findings of these three chapters bring me to the conclusion that Rome was a democracy, if of a particular type. The nature of popular political participation in the late Republic resembled that of an emerging democracy with the non-elite gaining an increasing role in the decision-making process, albeit without constitutional definition. The citizens' right to participate in the formal assemblies was augmented by their ability to take part in less formal ways also. These informal methods ranged from popular involvement in contiones through to the application of pressure on senators through the threat of secession and mutiny. Only the rise of the principate, with formalised roles for the various sectors in society under one leader, brought these developments to an end.</p>


Author(s):  
Kirk Ludwig

Chapter 13 first lays out the problem of proxy agency. An example of a proxy agent is a spokesperson for an organization. When the spokesperson, appropriately authorized, in the right conditions, with the right intention and message, speaks, we count the group as announcing something. Thus, it appears that the group does something but only one of its members acts. Proxy agency appears then to be inconsistent with the multiple agents analysis of collective action. Chapter 13 provides an account of proxy agency, focusing on the case of a spokesperson, that draws on the notion of a status function and constitutive agency to show it can be compatible with the multiple agents account of institutional action. Then it clarifies and extends the account by defending it against objections. Finally, it discusses the systematic use of the same terms in different senses in relation to individual and institutional agency.


2012 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 5-18 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonas Malmberg

The Court of Justice of the European Union (ECJ) has made it clear that collective action taken by trade unions under certain circumstances might violate the freedom of services and the right of establishment under the Treaty (Articles 49 and 56 TFEU). However, the Court has not addressed the issue of which remedies are to be available against a trade union arranging such an ‘EU-unlawful’ collective action. This question was dealt with by the Swedish Labour Court (Arbetsdomstolen) in its final judgment in December 2009. The article discusses this judgment and presents an alternative understanding of the EU law requirements concerning remedies for EU-unlawful collective actions.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document