Social dialogue & conflict resolution mechanisms

Social dialogue and conflict resolution mechanisms in the acceding countries: Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Latvia, Lithuania and Slovakia

Prague, 14-16 January 2004

Speech abstract - Shauna Olney

Senior Social Dialogue Specialist
InFocus Programme on Social Dialogue, Labour Law and Labour Administration
International Labour Office, Geneva

Dispute prevention and resolution: An ILO perspective

Decent work, social dialogue and dispute resolution

ILO’s policy response is grounded in the concept of “decent work”, the pillars of which are productive and remunerative employment, social protection, respect for fundamental principles and rights at work and genuine social dialogue. Social dialogue is an integral component of decent work and an essential channel for achieving it. Similarly, the prompt and equitable settlement of labour disputes is a key component of social dialogue, and also a means of ensuring further social dialogue. The ILO, and in particular the InFocus Programme on Social Dialogue, Labour Law and Labour Administration (IFP/Dialogue), is mandated to assist member States to establish or strengthen dispute prevention or resolution mechanisms so that disputes are dealt with more efficiently, effectively and equitably.

Best practice benchmarks

No single dispute resolution model will be appropriate to all situations and countries; however, guided by principles arising out of International Labour Standards, and drawing on the valuable experience of ILO specialists and projects, a series of benchmarks for dispute resolution systems can be enumerated. A system must firstly be legitimate, and thus credible. Respect for freedom of association is a necessary prerequisite for legitimate and sustainable dispute resolution. Credibility also rests on the system being fair, independent, transparent and gender sensitive. Another key benchmark is accessibility: geographically, financially and procedurally accessible, and it should be available to all groups of workers. Other important benchmarks are that the system be provided with adequate resources, there is a supportive legal environment, the roles of various bodies/procedures are clear, there is tripartite involvement in the establishment of the system and adequate capacity of the social partners to make use of the system, consistency of awards, respect for voluntary agreements and adequate enforcement mechanisms for mandatory awards/judgements. Disputes should also be dealt with as close to the source as possible, and there should be a focus on prevention.

Dispute resolution and International Labour Standards

The International Labour Standards addressing the issue of dispute prevention and settlement are general in nature, in deference to the need for systems to be adapted to national conditions. The Voluntary Conciliation and Arbitration Recommendation, 1951 (No. 92) recommends that voluntary conciliation machinery, which is free of charge and expeditious, be made available to assist in the prevention and settlement of industrial disputes. International Labour Standards also link dispute prevention and settlement to the promotion of collective bargaining (the Right to Organize and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98); the Collective Bargaining Convention, 1981 (No. 154)). With respect to the public service, the settlement of disputes regarding terms and conditions of employment is to be sought through negotiation or independent and impartial machinery, such as mediation, conciliation or arbitration (the Labour Relations (Public Service) Convention, 1978 (No. 151)). The Examination of Grievances Recommendation, 1967 (No. 130) deals with a particular category of disputes, namely grievances at the level of the undertaking, and specifically excludes collective claims aimed at the modification of terms and conditions of employment. In addition to these Conventions and Recommendations, there is a rich body of jurisprudence of the ILO Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations, as well as the Governing Body Committee on Freedom of Association, regarding the right to strike, including the role of dispute settlement procedures in affecting that right.

Methodology for reforming dispute resolution systems

The InFocus Programme on Social Dialogue, Labour Law and Labour Administration, working with various projects and ILO specialists, has developed a common methodology for reviewing and revising dispute prevention and settlement systems, which emphasizes social dialogue as the key means of delivery to promote ownership of outcomes and build legitimacy of the changes. The methodology is comprised of a number of steps: assess support of the constituents for work in this area/heighten awareness of dispute prevention and resolution; undertake a needs analysis/national studies; ensure clear agreement regarding the means of intervention and scope of engagement; identify best practice benchmarks (“visioning”); facilitate constituents reflecting on/critiquing their existing system in light of the benchmarks; design new system/amend existing system; develop detailed implementation plan; assist with implementation; review progress.

Critical success factors in the implementation of the common methodology have been identified as the following: respect for tripartism and commitment of tripartite structures/task force to process; composition and functioning of task force (high-level, manageable size, gender responsive, regular meetings, adequate administrative support); recognition of credentials and of the outcome; political will; appropriate resource allocation; good leadership; sufficient time to build up the system; clear strategies for sustainability; dissemination of success stories; promotion of wider understanding and acceptance; treat dispute resolution reform in the context of other areas of reform (labour administration, labour law, industrial relations); ensure appropriate training; promote systems that build upon what already works, are independent, impartial, simple, cost-effective, gender-responsive, realistic, comply with core International Labour Standards, and distinguish between prevention and resolution and emphasize both.

ILO responses

The ILO has a number of technical cooperation projects that assist member States in the review and revision of their dispute prevention and settlement systems. Advisory services and promotional activities are also undertaken by ILO headquarters and the field offices, including providing a diagnosis of the existing system, building the capacity of the users and providers, reviewing and revising the legislative framework, developing guidelines/codes of conduct, establishing conciliation/mediation/arbitration services, strengthening labour administration systems, strengthening labour-management cooperation, and promoting the ratification and implementation of relevant International Labour Standards. All of these are components of the ILO’s mission to promote opportunities for women and men to obtain decent and productive work, in conditions of freedom, equity, security and human dignity.