L 13 - 2022-23 (2. samling) - Spørgsmål 13: Spm. om, at en lov, som griber ind i kollektive overenskomster, som udgangspunkt udgør et indgreb i retten til foreningsfrihed

Beskæftigelsesudvalget 2022-23 (2. samling)
L 13 Spørgsmål 13
Offentligt

Bilag til brug for besvarelse af spørgsmål 10, 13 og 14.

Af Den Europæiske Menneskerettighedsdomstol af 12. november 2008 i sagen 34503/97 (Demir og

Baykara) fremgår bl.a., at:

”153.

In the light of these developments, the Court considers that its case law to the effect that the right to

bargain collectively and to enter into collective agreements does not constitute an inherent element of

Article 11 (see Swedish Engine Drivers’ Union,

cited above, § 39, and Schmidt and Dahlström, cited above, §

34) should be reconsidered, so as to take account of the perceptible evolution in such matters, in both

international law and domestic legal systems. While it is in the interests of legal certainty, foreseeability and

equality before the law that the Court should not depart, without good reason, from precedents established

in previous cases, a failure by the Court to maintain a dynamic and evolutive approach would risk rendering

it a bar to reform or improvement (see Vilho Eskelinen and Others, cited above, § 56).

154. Consequently, the Court considers that, having regard to the developments in labour law, both

international and national, and to the practice of Contracting States in such matters, the right to bargain

collectively with the employer has, in principle, become one of the essential elements of the “right to form

and to join trade unions for the protection of [one’s] interests” set forth in Article 11 of the Convention, it

being understood that States remain free to organise their system so as, if appropriate, to grant special

status to representative trade unions. Like other workers, civil servants, except in very specific cases, should

enjoy such rights, but without prejudice to the

effects of any “lawful restrictions” that may have to be

imposed on “members of the administration of the State” within the meaning of Article 11 § 2 –

a category

to which the applicants in the present case do not, however, belong (see paragraphs 106-07 above).”