Observación (CEACR) - Adopción: 1991, Publicación: 78ª reunión CIT (1991)

The Committee notes the Government's reports, the comments submitted by the Japanese Trade Union Confederation (JTUC-RENGO) and the discussions in the Conference Committee in 1989.

1. Denial of the right to organise of fire-fighting personnel. The Government refers to its previous reports in which it clearly indicated its position: the refusal to recognise the right to organise of fire-fighting personnel cannot be considered to be a violation of the Convention, in view of the opinion issued by the Committee on Freedom of Association (Case No. 60 of 1954 and Case No. 179 of 1961) and the unanimous opinion of the tripartite Subcommittee of the National Round Table on Labour Problems (1958), according to which this personnel belongs to the category of police personnel. For the Government, this matter is therefore an issue to which a solution must be found at the national level, in accordance with Article 9 of the Convention. It is for this reason that on several occasions the Inter-Ministerial Conference has heard the representatives of the organisations concerned, and in particular workers' organisations of fire-fighting personnel and of the members of volunteer corps. In accordance with the promise made to the Conference Committee in 1989, new hearings were held from May to October 1990, which were attended by the All-Japan Prefectual Municipal Workers' Union (JICHIRO), the Congress of Public Employees' Unions (KOMUIN-KYOTO) and the JTUC-RENGO. Furthermore, in order to respond to the demand made by the trade union representatives, the Government, in agreement with the Inter-Ministerial Conference, decided that meetings would take place periodically between the Ministry of Home Affairs and JICHIRO, the first of which will be held soon.

In its most recent comments, received on 21 January 1991, the JTUC-RENGO notes that, during a hearing held on 15 October 1990 by the Inter-Ministerial Conference on Public Employees' Problems, it put forward its point of view in support of the right to organise of fire-fighting personnel and requested the establishment of a permanent consultation body with the trade unions concerned. The JTUC-RENGO indicates that on 27 November 1990 consultations were held between the Government and the trade union concerned (JICHIRO) on the substance of the question and should be continued in order to find a solution to this problem which is in conformity with Convention No. 87 and the interpretation of it by the ILO supervisory bodies.

The Committee notes that the dialogue is continuing between the parties concerned and trusts that these discussions will take account of the comments that it has been making for several years, namely that the functions exercised by fire-fighters are not of such a nature as to warrant their exclusion from the right to organise under Article 9 of the Convention and that it would not be in conformity with the Convention to deny the right to organise to any category of worker other than the armed forces and the police. However, the right to organise does not necessarily imply the right to strike and the fire-fighting services must be considered to be an essential service in the strict sense of the term in which the right to strike may be subject to prohibition.

The Committee requests the Government to supply information on any developments in the situation, and in particular on measures that are envisaged following the current consultations to resolve the issue of the right to organise of fire-fighters at the national level.

2. Prohibition of the right to strike of public servants. The Committee notes the Government's statement to the Conference Committee in 1989 to the effect that it is normal for sanctions to be applied in the event of strikes which, under the terms of the national legislation, are illegal, as is the case in the public services. However, the Government is fully aware of the position of the ILO that disproportionate sanctions do not favour the development of harmonious industrial relations. The Government is continuing to examine the matter closely.

In these circumstances, the Committee trusts that, following this examination, it will be possible to amend the legislation in order to confine the prohibition on strikes to public servants acting in their capacity as agents of the public authority or to essential services in the strict sense of the term, that is those whose interruption would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population. As regards penal sanctions, the Committee points out that they should only be imposed where there are violations of strike prohibitions which are in conformity with the principles of freedom of association and that they should be proportional to the offences committed; penalties of imprisonment should not be imposed in the case of peaceful strikes. The Committee requests the Government to supply information on the progress achieved following the examination of this matter by the Government.