Political strikes face state ban

Photo: Mihkel Maripuu

Last week, a bill by Ministry of Social Affairs was sent to be ratified by Riigikogu regarding amendments to Collective Agreement Act and Collective Labour Dispute Resolution Act, forbidding interruption of work with intent to influence the activities of executive power, legislative power and judicial power.

This, Central Federation of Trade Unions interprets to mean that it will be forbidden to pressurise government and parliament to improve working conditions, collective activity to be excluded in the interests of those on state payroll. As assessed by trade unions, representatives of all walks of life must, in times to come, be careful when criticizing the government, so as not to have their legal aspirations mistaken for illegal pressure.

The federation totally accepts that courts are not to be affected by strikes; even so, bringing in the executive power i.e. government is pushing the whole thing out of balance, says its head Peep Peterson.

«In any area, basically, things may happen that have to do with the government. For all teachers, cultural workers, nurses and bus drivers, striking will then be excluded, being illegal,» explained Mr Peterson. According to him, the bill is weird, the government attempting to go it North-Korean style.

Trade unions, employers and social ministry all agree that the law, unchanged for close to 20 years, needs updating; while interest groups compliment the ministry for involving them, it still feels like the discussions spanning the entire autumn have failed to produce unity in several issues.

According to Peterson, they desired to create fewer labour laws and more agreements; this, however, the ministry did not support. «The only thing the state is striving for is to make itself criticism-free and to silence all discontent. The right to strike will be limited to those who are in no way connected to central or local government,» observed Mr Peterson. «This is muzzling to the max.»

«The government will not endure criticism, will not endure being affected, they want to take all the decisions themselves and alone,» said Mr Peterson.

As told Postimees by social minister Taavi Rõivas, they have definitely not aimed the law at banning pressure when the other party at wage negotiations or other working conditions is the government. «Strikes, as a format, exist for the very purpose of being aimed against employers such as bus or train companies, and they should not be performed to pressurise government into decisions regarding some totally other area,» explained Mr Rõivas. «Strike is a method of last resort to solve labour disputes, not a format for expressing political views,» underlined Mr Rõivas, adding that in case of desire to express views, people always have the option to hold demonstrations and pickets. 

Striking against employer when not satisfied with some decision by parliament, thinks the minister, should explicitly be banned. As assured, no one will rob doctors, for instance, from their right to strike in the name of their wages; even in the future, striking will be an option for all to improve their working conditions.

When told that the trade unions interpret the strike-regulating part of the bill totally differently, the minister replies that, during the coordination round, the text can still be adjusted as «the way the trade unions see the current wording is not quite what we meant».

The employers participating in the work with the bill will not take a stand regarding political strikes, as they were mainly interested in the support strikes issue. «In the political strike issue, it was mainly the trade unions and social ministry that clashed. Our main goals was sending the support strikes, as a machine breakers era relict, into the trashbin of history,» Toomas Tamsar, head of Estonian Employers’ Confederation.

Employers are of the opinion that a conflict must remain strictly between a definite employer and its employees; even though the term «support strike» sounds dignified, it is, in the opinion of Mr Tamsar, a cynical pretext to harm as many innocent bystanders as possible. «Regrettably, the opinion of the employers fell on deaf ears; the bill retains the option,» said the indignant Mr Tamsar.

As the next step, Central Federation of Trade Unions plans to meet both artistic associations and all other trade unions outside the central federation. Also, they intend to check and see if the bill is in line with international law and the Estonian constitution. «We will be taking this battle to the issue of whether the government is overstepping its authority,» explained Mr Peterson.