A recent criminal investigation in which ReLex is acting on behalf of the independent trade union G1PS has drawn significant attention, highlighting the need for strengthening of the role of independent unions in safeguarding labor rights. The claim challenges the actions of the employer’s representatives, who have consistently obstructed the activities of the trade union (Article 177 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Lithuania).
Evidence indicates that a member of G1PS tried to establish an independent trade union; however, the employer’s representative suspended the worker to withdraw from work and advised to leave the company. Subsequently an investigation was initiated regarding his behavior and questioning his activity in the union.
Following G1PS appeal to the public prosecutor’s office about potential obstruction of its activities, the employer’s representative established a competing trade union. In many jurisdictions, yellow unions are viewed as a tactic to preempt genuine collective bargaining, creating a façade of worker representation. The International Labour Organization (ILO) recognizes the dangers posed by such unions, explicitly prohibiting their establishment under ILO Convention 98, Article 2, while company unions infringe upon Directive 2002/14/EC.
This case raises essential questions regarding the right of company leadership to establish trade unions, right of company managers to chair such unions and the questions of financial independence of such structures.
“According to the Law on Trade Unions, employers and their representatives are not permitted to join trade unions. This raises a significant debate about whether an individual with the power to hire and fire workers can genuinely represent them by establishing a trade union,” states Emilija Švobaitė, a union representative and senior lawyer at ReLex.
In this regard, the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) dated 2 June 2022 in the case of Straume v. Latvia (Application No. 59402/14) is particularly pertinent. The dispute originated when the applicant, a member of a trade union, notified the employer of employees’ complaints regarding working conditions. In response, the employer undertook several actions against the applicant. The ECtHR determined that even minimal sanctions can deter trade union members from freely exercising their activities. The Court found that the Latvian national courts had unjustifiably failed to consider the significance of the applicant’s trade union membership, thereby neglecting to assess the employer’s intent to intimidate both the applicant and other trade union members. Consequently, the case revealed a violation of Article 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).
Labor rights ensure that workers can operate in safe, fair, and just conditions, which are essential for human dignity. Trade union activity remains a constitutional value. Key international regulations regarding labor rights include the International Labour Organization (ILO) conventions, such as Convention No. 87 on Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise, which safeguards the rights of workers to form and join trade unions. Additionally, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights emphasizes the right to form trade unions as part of the broader framework of civil and political rights. This right is also enshrined in Article 11 of The Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, which underscores the importance of freedom of assembly and association.
To date, only one criminal case ended in conviction of an employer representative for hindering trade union activities in Lithuania. A ruling could possibly set a significant precedent, reinforcing the necessity of autonomous trade unions in protecting workers’ rights.
ReLex
