LO-Denmark’s
comments on the government’s report regarding ILO
Conventions 87 and 98
The following are LO’s comments to the government’s report
on Conventions 87 and 98
regarding the right to organise and the right to collective bargaining.
By way of introduction, LO refers to earlier contributions to reports on the DIS-Act - most
recently in September 2013 and the subsequent comments/updates regarding the
government’s comments to the ILO to this date.
It is important to underline, once more, a few fundamental viewpoints.
LO still finds it deeply regrettable that the Danish government has, for more than 25 years
now, on the basis of varying arguments, refrained from taking seriously the criticism of the
Committee of Experts and the call to bring article 10 of the DIS-Act in accordance with the
ILO’s conventions.
The case regarding the Danish International Ships' Register (DIS) has, as everyone
knows, been ongoing since 1988, at which time LO brought the legislative intervention to
the attention of the ILO, and in 1989, when the Committee of Experts decided that article
10, 2 and 3 of the Act is not in accordance with ILO-Conventions 87, 98 and 111.
The LO-led Danish trade union movement maintains this view, regardless of the
government’s comments
and calls to attention the ILO Declaration from 1998 on
Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work (FPRW)
which” commits
(all) Member States
to respect and promote principles and rights”. A fundamental commitment which has not
been met by the Danish side on this matter.
On the contrary, as earlier mentioned, multiple governments have declared that the DIS-
Act has come to stay and serves “a decent purpose” which has also been reiterated in this
years’ report.
The Danish trade union movement once more rejects the Danish government’s reference
to the DIS-general agreement between certain parties in the shipping industry as a
foundation for a national dialogue.
Regarding the report on Convention 87, LO-Denmark reiterates that the Danish
government’s reference to the fact that a seafarer may, in accordance with the DIS-
general agreement, but as an employee in accordance with article 10,3 of the Act, choose
to be a member of a Danish trade union is insufficient and must therefore repeat the
following:
In accordance with article 7 of the DIS-general agreement, only the trade union
organisations who are parties to the general agreement may assist seafarers cf. article
10,3 of the DIS-Act in matters that originate from Danish legislation. Such a membership of
a Danish trade union organisation is therefore immaterial to the collective agreement
coverage which is the fundamental precondition to a membership.
The DIS-general
agreement is therefore not of importance to LO’s
criticism of article 10 of
the DIS-Act because it clearly appears from the DIS-General agreement, article 1, that the
parties’ participation to the agreement generally presupposes that they “observe the right