IV. Trade Unions

 

Under Bahraini law private sector workers and employees can establish trade unions without prior official approval, simply by notifying authorities. Public sector trade unions are not permitted but public sector, workers can join private sector unions. 

The Workers Trade Union Law (Law 33/2002) permits workers to form and join unions and established the General Federation of Bahrain Trade Unions (GFBTU).[287]  Until late 2011, the GFBTU served as the sole umbrella organization for trade unions in Bahrain, and the law allowed only one trade union per company.

In October 2011, King Hamad issued a decree amending Law 33/2002 to allow the establishment of more than one trade union in a company and more than one trade union federation in Bahrain. The GFBTU understood this as permitting the establishment of an explicitly pro-government trade union federation in retribution for GFBTU’s support for protesters’ calls for greater political rights and calling general strikes in February and March 2011. After the amendment became effective in March 2012, pro-government unionists established the Bahrain Free Labour Unions Federation. The new federation has accused the GFBTU of being a political tool of the opposition groups, saying that it “distorts Bahrain's reputation regionally and internationally.”[288]

Private and public sector firms fired approximately 4,500 employees after the declaration of emergency law in March 2011.[289] By November 2012, most workers had been reinstated, although in many cases not to the positions and jobs from which they had been dismissed.[290] According to the GFBTU, more than 300 were still waiting to be reinstated.[291]

Legal Standards

International

Article 22 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) guarantees individuals “the right to freedom of association with others.”[292]Bahrain. a member of the International Labour Organization (ILO), has ratified four core ILO conventions, including both conventions relating to elimination of forced and compulsory labor, and those on the elimination of discrimination in respect of employment and occupation, but not Convention 87 on Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise or Convention 98 on the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining.[293]

Article 2 of the ILO’s Convention 87 states that “workers and employers, without distinction whatsoever, shall have the right to establish and, subject only to the rules of the organization concerned, to join organizations of their own choosing without previous authorization.” The ILO requires governments to refrain from punishing workers for trying to organize unions and enforce mechanisms that deter employers from taking action against union organizers.

Bahraini Law

Article 27 of the Bahraini Constitution states that the right to form trade unions for “lawful objectives and by peaceful means is guaranteed under the rules and conditions laid down by law, provided that the fundamentals of the religion and public order are not infringed.”[294] Article 10 of Law 33/2002 states that workers of “any particular establishment or sector … can form their own trade union.”[295] The law requires only that those wishing to establish a trade union should provide the Ministry of Labor with names of the founding members and bylaws of the union.[296]

Restrictions on Trade Unions

Freedom to Form and Join Unions

Immediately after the law came into effect authorities denied public sector workers the right to establish or join unions, insisting that article 10 of the law does not cover them, although authorities later said that public sector workers can join private sector unions.[297]

In September 2004, the GFBTU and a dozen trade unions filed a lawsuit challenging the Civil Service Bureau’s interpretation of the law. In February 2005, an administrative court dismissed the case, saying it fell outside of its jurisdiction. The Court of Appeal agreed.[298]

In June and October 2005, the GFBTU filed two complaints with the ILO protesting the government’s repeated refusal to register six trade unions in the public sector.[299] Those were the Post Office Workers, Water and Electricity Workers, Public Works Workers, Healthcare Workers, Social Insurance Workers, and Retirement Fund Workers.[300]

In response to an ILO inquiry, the government said in 2006 that an amendment to the law to grant public workers the right to form trade unions was before the Chamber of Deputies.[301] In February 2013, Ministry of Labor officials told Human Rights Watch that the draft amendment was still before the Chamber of Deputies.[302] GFBTU leaders said they were not aware of such a draft amendment.[303] 

In March 2007, the Civil Service Bureau threatened to take disciplinary actions against any workers in the public sector who attempt to establish trade unions, reiterating that public sector workers do not have the right to establish their own trade unions but can join unions in the private sector.[304]

Restrictions on the Right to Strike

Law 33/2002 bans unions from “engaging in political activities” and imposes numerous restrictions on the right to strike. According to article 21, trade union members can strike only if 75 percent of the general assembly of the particular union approves the action and after they fail to resolve issues with their employer. Before going on strike they must give two weeks’ notice to the employer and also notify the Ministry of Labor.

The law bans strikes in “vital and important facilities” such as “security, civil defense, airports, ports, hospitals, transportations, telecommunications, electricity, and water facilities.”[305] In November 2006, the prime minister issued an edict prohibiting strikes in additional sectors on the grounds that strikes in those facilities would “endanger national security and disrupt daily life of people.” The added facilities included “bakeries, all means of transporting people and goods, educational establishments and oil and gas installations.”[306] 

In 2007, the GFBTU filed complaints with the ILO protesting the prime minister’s edict. The government responded that the ILO’s Committee on Freedom of Association allows governments to regulate and prohibit strikes, saying it exercised its authority to ban strikes in facilities deemed essentials and that their interruption “would lead to the disruption of everyday life.”[307]

In 2008, the ILO’s Committee on Freedom of Association called on the government to amend its trade union law and the prime minister’s ruling by providing a more limited definition of “essential services.” The existing list was “broader than the definition of essential services in the strict sense of the term,” the committee concluded.[308]  The committee said that the government can only ban strikes in essential services -- “that is, services the interruption of which would endanger the life, personal safety, or health of the whole or part of the population.” The committee further said that in order to prohibit a strike authorities need to establish “the existence of a clear and imminent threat to the life, personal safety, or health of the whole or part of the population.”[309]  As of February 2013 the government had not responded to the ILO communication.

Retribution after the 2011 Demonstrations

In the wake of the government's suppression of demonstrations in March 2011, the federation called for a general strike on March 13, claiming the situation on the streets made it too dangerous for employees to go to their jobs. Private and public sector businesses subsequently dismissed thousands of workers suspected of participating in or otherwise supporting the demonstrations. Employers frequently claimed that they fired workers because they did not show up for work.

A Human Rights Watch investigation in July 2011 found that private and public sector companies had violated Bahraini labor laws as well as international standards, “in particular those prohibiting discrimination on the basis of political opinion.” [310]  The summary dismissals of workers appeared to be “punishment for having participated in or otherwise supported pro-democracy demonstrations.” [311]

The BICI investigation reported that according to government officials, 2,462 private sector and 1,945 public sector employees were fired following the March 2011 clampdown on protesters and concluded that many workers were fired despite being absent for periods that were shorter than “the periods proscribed as punishable” by the law. [312] The commission also concluded that in some sectors dismissals were “motivated by retaliation against employees suspected of being involved in the demonstrations.” [313]

The BICI called on authorities to ensure that workers had not been dismissed because of the exercise of their right to freedom of expression, opinion, association or peaceful assembly.[314]In response to the government’s claim that the strikes called for by the GFBTU were unlawful because they were not related to labor issues, the commission said it appeared those strikes “occurred…within the permissible bounds of the law.”[315]

In August 2011, King Hamad ordered the reinstatement of dismissed employees. [316] Many private and public sector employers did not comply with the call.  In November 2011, the government agreed to form a tripartite labor committee (comprising representatives of the ILO, the GFBTU, and the Ministry of Labor) under the auspice of ILO to address the issues. Under the terms of the agreement announced on March 11, 2012, all workers in the public and private sectors would be reinstated by no later than May 30, 2012. [317]

On December 31, 2011, the government announced that it would reinstate all public sector employees who had been dismissed for exercising their right to freedom of expression. The same announcement also said that authorities “negotiated with the private companies” and that the cases of dismissed workers would be resolved “soon.”[318] However, as of June 10 2013 the GFBTU estimated that more than 300 employees in both the public and private sectors have not been reinstated in their jobs.[319] 

In April 2011, the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL/CIO) filed a complaint with the US Department of Labor alleging that Bahrain had violated provisions of the US-Bahrain Free Trade Agreement.  The US Labor Department December 2012 report found that Bahrain had “acted inconsistently with its commitments to … ensure that its laws recognize and protect freedom of association and the elimination of employment discrimination [and are] consistent with internationally recognized labor rights.”[320] In May 2013, the US government requested talks with the Bahraini government to discuss the steps Bahrain has taken to address the issues raised in the Labor Department report.[321]

The 2011 Amendment Affecting Trade Union Rights

On October 9, 2011, King Hamad issued Royal Decree No. 35, amending some provisions of the Workers Trade Union Law. Labor Minister Jameel Humaidan said the amendment would enable more federations “to defend the interests [of workers] and it will prevent union monopoly that could be exercised if there is only one union in the establishment.”[322]  The Chamber of Deputies approved the amendment on January 31, 2012, and the Shura Council passed it on March 26, 2012. Under the new provisions, two or more trade unions in similar industry can establish a trade union federation if the majority members of general assemblies of the two unions approve. The decree prohibits establishing unions on religious and ethnic bases.

Bahraini authorities had a different position prior to the events of February and March 2011. In its Universal Periodic Submission to the UN Human Rights Council in 2008, the governmentargued that “trade union pluralism can weaken and split the trade union movement,” and that “all States tend to place restrictions on pluralism and limit the number of trade unions and federations, placing them under the umbrella of a single entity so they can address economic challenges.”[323]

In the context of government accusations that the GFBTU was effectively a wing of the opposition, it appeared that the authorities intended the new decree to weaken the GFTBU. A union leader put it this way:  

In principle trade union pluralism is welcome and it is good when it is for the interest of the workers. However I fear that the purpose of this amendment is to serve a blow to the [GFBTU] by paving the way to create a trade union federation that is pro-government.[324]

The Brussels-based International Trade Union Confederation expressed concern that the new amendment might be used to cancel registrations of “existing trade unions by falsely claiming that they were formed on sectarian lines.”[325]

In a letter to the Shura Council on February 16, 2012, the GFBTU urged rejection of the amendment:

In terms of timing this amendment came in the wake of targeting the trade unions  and [aims] to fragment the unity between the trade unions.…This [amendment] should have been a subject of consultation between the government, represented by the Ministry of Labor, and workers, represented by the GFBTU.[326]

The new amendment also grants the minister of labor the power to decide which trade union confederation will represent Bahrain in international meetings and events, and engage in collective bargaining at the national level.[327] The GFBTU also rejected these provisions, saying that the federation representing the majority of workers should represent the country and engage in collective bargaining.

The amendment bans anyone found guilty of violating any law from holding trade union office for five years. The GFBTU considered this an “explicit intervention” in the affairs of trade unions and argued that only the unions’ general assembly should have the right to discipline its members.[328]

In a June 2011 complaint filed with the ILO, the GFTBU said it feared that authorities might use the amendment to oust trade union leaders who participated in the protests of February and March 2011. [329] According to the GFTBU, 65 unionists were among those fired by private and public firms following the February and March demonstrations. [330] As of June 10, 2013, the private and public companies had not reinstated 17 of the dismissed unionists. [331] Some trade union leaders told Human Rights Watch that in the wake of crushing the demonstrations, authorities did not bring charges against them for “inciting illegal demonstrations.” One union leader told Human Rights Watch that authorities have told him that his case has been “shelved,” but that “they can revisit the case at any time.” [332]

In June 2012, the ILO’s Committee on Freedom of Association called on Bahrain to amend this provision of the king’s decree which bans anyone found guilty of violating any law from holding trade union office for five years and “in the meantime, confirm that this provision cannot be used for convictions relating to the exercise of legitimate trade union activity or the exercise of the right to peaceably demonstrate.”[333]

Soon after the amendment became effective in March 2012, at least 10 new trade unions and one new trade union federation quickly emerged.[334] On July 18, six trade unions that had withdrawn from the GFBTU, accusing it of becoming a political tool of the opposition, established the Bahrain Free Labour Unions Federation (BFLUF). The six trade unions were from Aluminum Bahrain (Alba), Bahrain Petroleum Company (Bapco), Bahrain Airport Services (BAS), Bankers Union, Gramco, and the Gulf Petrochemical IndustriesCo. (GPIC).[335] All are large firms in which the government holds substantial or even controlling interest.[336] 

On July 31, 2012 the BFLUF accused the Ministry of Labor of “procrastination” for refusing to accept the documents that would officially establish the new trade federation. The same day, the prime minister issued a directive calling for “speeding up” measures to register the BFLUF.[337] One week later, the minister of labor met with the BFLUF board members to congratulate them on the establishment of the new federation.[338]