IOE Policy Paper on Essential Services

International Organisation of Employers Organisation Internationale des Employeurs Organización Internacional de Empleadores

July 2021

IOE POLICY PAPER ON ESSENTIAL SERVICES

Contents

INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................ 2

I. CFA PRINCIPLES AND CASES ON ESSENTIAL SERVICES AND PUBLIC SERVICES ................... 3

A. ACUTE NATIONAL EMERGENCY .................................................................................... 3

B. PUBLIC SERVICE ............................................................................................................ 4

C. ESSENTIAL SERVICE ....................................................................................................... 5

D. COMPENSATORY GUARANTEES IN THE EVENT OF THE PROHIBITION OF STRIKES IN THE PUBLIC SERVICE OR IN ESSENTIAL SERVICES ................................................................. 7

II. NATIONAL DEFINITIONS OF “ESSENTIAL SERVICES” ........................................................ 10

A. AFRICA ........................................................................................................................ 10

B. ASIA ............................................................................................................................ 11

C. EUROPE AND CENTRAL ASIA ....................................................................................... 13

D. NORTH AMERICA ........................................................................................................ 14

E. LATIN AMERICA .......................................................................................................... 14

III. STRIKE ACTIONS IN THE CONTEXT OF COVID-19 ............................................................. 17

CONCLUSION .......................................................................................................................... 20

2

INTRODUCTION

The concept of “essential services” has been a long-standing debate in cases concerning industrial

actions brought before the Committee on Freedom of Association (CFA), an International Labour

Organisation (ILO) supervisory body.

During the COVID-19 global health pandemic, the approach to essential services varied greatly among

governments as they adopted wide restriction measures to contain the widespread of the virus. A

common measure widely adopted was allowing continued activity for only “essential services” and

temporary closure of all “non-essential services”.

As of 15 June 2020, almost one third of the world’s workers (32%) were living in countries with required

workplace closures for all but essential services. An additional 42% were living in countries with

required workplace closures for some sectors or categories of workers, and a further 19% in countries

with recommended workplace closures.1

The decisions on which services were “essential” and “non-essential” have drawn wide public

confusion, as most countries do not have an absolute definition of essential services. Where it exists,

the definition is more related to the context of industrial relations and results in different regulations

concerning legitimate and illicit collective action.

Many businesses have been forced to implement various labour measures to mitigate the economic

impact. These measures may also trigger some labour disputes concerning the limitations of industrial

actions in sectors considered to be essential.

This policy paper explores the concept of “essential services” in the context of industrial relations,

especially during state of emergency. It is divided into three parts: i) the definition and concept of

“essential services” in CFA cases concerning strike actions; ii) national definitions of “essential services”

in the context of industrial relations and during COVID-19; and iii) specific examples of strike actions

during COVID-19 in different sectors and industries.

This policy paper argues that the context of COVID-19 illustrates that the Government needs more

flexibility to response to industrial context in situation where health and safety of its population or

third parties are put at risk. Furthermore, the CFA has a limited capacity in defining essential services

in cases concerning the prohibition of the right to strike cases. Its recommendations and conclusions

are non-binding and should be determined on a case-by-case basis.

3

I. CFA PRINCIPLES AND CASES ON ESSENTIAL SERVICES AND

PUBLIC SERVICES

The ILO Compilation of decisions of the CFA (Compilation) addresses in paragraphs no. 824-836, the

situations where strikes may be restricted or even prohibited. The CFA has been and continues to deal

with labour disputes, particularly concerning the right to strike in public and essential services,

including during a state of emergency. The following are some principles and related cases, where the

CFA issued conclusions and recommendations based on the specific factual contexts.

A. ACUTE NATIONAL EMERGENCY

Paragraph 825 of the Compilation deals with the concept of “acute national emergency” whereby the

“[r]esponsibility for suspending a strike on the grounds of national security or public health should not

lie with the Government, but with an independent body which has the confidence of all parties

concerned.”

In Korea Case 1865 concerning strike action in the construction sector, the Government proposed a

bill for a renewed and wider definition of “public services” category that includes what was formerly

called “essential” public services as well as suppliers of heat and steam, harbour loading and unloading,

railway, freight transport, airborne freight transport (airlines), and social insurance providers. This

expanded category of “public services” could be subject to emergency arbitration powers, which leads

to a 30-day prohibition of a strike and, if no agreement is reached, the National Labour Relations

Commission can refer the matter to compulsory arbitration to “resolve” the dispute. The new bill adds

more sectors to the “essential” public services and could subject such sectors to the possibility of

emergency arbitration (30-day prohibition of industrial action; arbitration award takes the force of a

collective bargaining agreement).

The Committee concluded that “responsibility for suspending a strike on the grounds of national

security or public health should not lie with the Government, but with an independent body which has

the confidence of all parties concerned [Digest, op. cit., para. 571.] Finally, the Committee recalls that

the hiring of workers to break a strike in a sector which cannot be regarded as an essential service in

the strict sense of the term, and hence one in which strikes might be forbidden, constitutes a serious

violation of freedom of association [Digest, op. cit., para. 632]. Considering that the recent use of these

provisions in the case of the airline services did not meet these criteria, the Committee requests the

Government to take all necessary measures to amend the emergency arbitration provisions in the

TULRAA (sections 76–80) so as to ensure that such a measure can only be imposed by an independent

body which has the confidence of all parties concerned and only in cases in which strikes can be

restricted in conformity with freedom of association principles.”2

Similarly, in Greece Case 2506, the Government has issued a “Civil Mobilization Order” (requisition of

workers’ services) of indefinite duration to put an end to a legal strike of seafarers on passenger and

cargo vessels, which do not constitute essential services. In this case, for Greece, like any other country

with a large number of inhabited islands, the security, health and survival of islanders were directly

and decisively linked to sea transport which connected islands between them and with continental

4

Greece. Therefore, it was understood that persons employed in such transport offered essential

services, the interruption of which constituted a direct risk to life, personal security and health of a

major section of the islanders.3

The Committee concluded and recommended that in view of the allegations that over the last 32 years,

the Government has resorted to civil mobilization orders in order to end strikes in various sectors. The

Committee noted that the new law still allows for the requisition of services in case of danger to public

health, which could therefore continue to be used as grounds for suspending strikes in the future,

recalls that the responsibility for suspending a strike on the grounds of national security or public

health should not lie with the Government, but with an independent body which has the confidence

of the parties concerned [Digest, op. cit., para. 571] and requests the Government to take the

necessary measures to ensure that any general suspension or termination of strike is decided in

accordance with this principle.4

Covid-19 has proven to be more than an acute national emergency, but a global health crisis with

unprecedented impact on all aspects of our lives. In response this unprecedented crisis, governments

had to make quick and timely action to react to the spread of the disease and to minimize the impact

on our lives, livelihoods and economy. Due to the urgency and severity of the impacts, governments

had to make decisive health measures such as closure of non-essential services and social-distancing

measures, before proper consultations with social partners. Global pandemic like COVID-19

demonstrated that it is necessary for Government to end strike actions where national security and

public health are at risks.

B. PUBLIC SERVICE

Paragraph 827 of the Compilation states that “the right to strike can be restricted or even prohibited in

the public service or in essential services in so far as a strike there could cause serious hardship to the

national community and provided that the limitations are accompanied by certain compensatory

guarantees.” Furthermore, paragraph 828 notes that the right to strike may be restricted or prohibited

only for public servants exercising authority in the name of the State.

In Zimbabwe Case 2365, the Government allegedly was directly responsible for numerous violations,

such as attempted murders, assaults, intimidation, arbitrary arrests and detentions, as well as arbitrary

dismissals and transfers committed against members, activists and leaders of the country’s trade union

movement and members of their families.

Regarding civil servants, the Committee recalled that the right to strike may be restricted or prohibited

only for public servants exercising authority in the name of the State. It noted that a too broad

definition of the concept of public servant is likely to result in a very wide restriction or even a

prohibition of the right to strike for these workers [see Digest, op. cit., paras 574-575]. Moreover, all

public service workers other than those engaged in the administration of the State should enjoy

collective bargaining rights, and priority should be given to collective bargaining as the means to settle

disputes arising in connection with the determination of terms and conditions of employment in the

public service [see Digest, op. cit., para. 886].5

5

During the COVID-19 pandemic, public service, particularly public healthcare and hospitals, were

particularly important to respond to the pandemic. As discussed below, there were several strike

actions conducted in the healthcare due to the government’s measures on the COVID-19 response. In

the context of the global health situation, a stoppage of health services could cause serious hardship

on the national community, especially those who were infected by the virus.

C. ESSENTIAL SERVICE

Paragraph 830 of the Compilation refers to “essential services” in the strictest sense of term to mean

“services the interruption of which would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or

part of the population”.

The concept “depends to a large extent on the particular circumstances prevailing in a country.

Moreover, this concept is not absolute, in the sense that a non-essential service may become essential

if a strike lasts beyond a certain time or extends beyond a certain scope, thus endangering the life,

personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population”.6

Moreover, the CFA provides a non-exhaustive list of services considered as essential services, including

hospital, electricity, water supply, telephone, police and armed forces, firefighting, public or private

prison, food, air traffic control.7

Furthermore, the CFA decided that the following do not constitute essential services in the strict sense

of the term: radio and television, the petroleum sector and oil facilities, distribution of fuel to ensure

that flights continue to operate the gas sector, filling and selling gas canisters, ports, banking the

Central Bank, insurance services, computer services for the collection of excise duties and taxes,

department stores and pleasure parks the metal and mining sectors, transport generally, including

metropolitan transport, airline pilots, production, transport and distribution of fuel rail services,

metropolitan transport, postal services, refuse collection services, refrigeration enterprises, hotel

services, construction, car manufacturing, agricultural activities, the supply and distribution of

foodstuffs, tea, coffee and coconut plantations, the Mint, the government printing service and the

state alcohol, salt and tobacco monopolies, the education sector, mineral water bottling companies,

aircraft repairs, elevator services, export services, private security services (with the exception of

public or private prison services), airports (with the exception of air traffic control), pharmacies,

bakeries, beer production and the glass industry.8

In Bolivia Case 3285 concerning the restrictions on the right to strike in the public health sector, the

CFA underlined that the right to strike is not an absolute right and that it may be restricted or

prohibited in (1) in the public service only for public servants exercising authority in the name of the

State; or (2) in essential services in the strict sense of the term (that is, services the interruption of

which would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population

(paragraph 830 of the Compilation).9

Furthermore, the Committee recalled that what is meant by essential services in the strict sense of the

term depends to a large extent on the particular circumstances prevailing in a country. Moreover, this

concept is not absolute, in the sense that a non-essential service may become essential if a strike lasts

6

beyond a certain time or extends beyond a certain scope, thus endangering the life, personal safety or

health of the whole or part of the population and that the Committee has previously stated that the

hospital sector may be considered an essential service.10

Similarly, in Bolivia Case 2956 concerning the right to strike in the health sector, the Committee

concluded that the right to strike may be restricted or prohibited in essential services in the strict sense

of the term (that is, services the interruption of which would endanger the life, personal safety or

health of the whole or part of the population) and deemed that the health sector may be considered

as an essential service.11

In Norway Case 1763 relating to alleged violation of trade union rights of workers in the social

education and social work, the Committee concluded that teachers do not fall within the definition of

essential services, but has determined that employees engaged in the hospital sectors are engaged in

an essential service in the strict sense of the term.12

In Norway Case 3147 concerning collective bargaining in the laundry and dry-cleaning industry. The

Committee “observe[d] that neither the complainant nor the Government argue that the laundry and

dry-cleaning services are inherently essential services in the strict sense of the term, but both accept

that the consequences of the full stoppage without dispensation could give rise to a situation where

the life and personal safety or health of people might be endangered.”13

In Brazil Case 3327 concerning the imposition of fines for exercising the right to strike in the oil sector,

a sector which according to Brazil law is an essential service. The Committee recalled that the concept

of essential services is not absolute and that, a non-essential service may become essential if a strike

lasts beyond a certain time or extends beyond a certain scope.

In both first and second instances, the national courts had determined that the strike at issue was

eminently political in nature and was consequently considered it abusive. Regarding the fines imposed

on the workers, the Committee noted that these were linked to the non-compliance with a judicial

decision ordering to refrain from strike action.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, most governments decided a list of essential services that could

continue operation as normal – some of which were included the CFA non-exhaustive list, but others

were not. For example, pharmacies which are considered as non-essential by the CFA was one of the

most essential shops that remained open during the open, as it was essential for the public to access

medication and medical help. Therefore, while the CFA decisions and non-exhaustive list provide some

guidance, the definition of essential services should be assessed based on the particular national

circumstances.

7

D. COMPENSATORY GUARANTEES IN THE EVENT OF THE PROHIBITION OF

STRIKES IN THE PUBLIC SERVICE OR IN ESSENTIAL SERVICES

In addition to defining the concept of public and essential services, including during a state of

emergency, the CFA has decided on some compensatory guarantees that should be implemented for

strikes under these circumstances.

Minimum services

Para 847 of Compilation states the imposition of minimum services is permissible, such as in the sector

of refuse collection service, measures should be taken to guarantee that such minimum services avoid

danger to public health and safety of the population.

In Canada Case 3107 concerning the right to strike for workers in the public transit sector, the

Committed considered that metropolitan transport does not constitute an essential service in the strict

sense of the term. It recalled that the transportation of passengers and commercial goods is not an

essential service in the strict sense of the term, but “this is a public service of primary importance where

the requirement of a minimum service in the event of a strike can be justified.”14

In Peru Case 3096 relating to the right to strike by nurses in the State Health Service, the Committee

concluded that “[a]s regards the legal requirement that a minimum service must be maintained in the

event of a strike in essential public services, and that any disagreement as to the number of duties of

the workers concerned shall be settled by the labour authority, the Committee is of the opinion that

legislation should provide for any such disagreement to be settled by an independent body and not by

the ministry of labour or the ministry or public enterprise concerned.”15

Furthermore, the Committee also noted that “[a] definitive ruling on whether the level of minimum

services was indispensable or not – made in full knowledge of the facts – can be pronounced only by

the judicial authorities, in so far as it depends, in particular, upon a thorough knowledge of the structure

and functioning of the enterprises and establishments concerned and of the real impact of the strike

action.”16

It also recommended that disagreements between the parties as to the number and duties of the

public service workers in a minimum service should be settled by an independent body, such as the

judicial authority for example.17

Third parties

Paragraph 851 of Compilation states that “Although it has always been sensitive to the fact that a

prolonged interruption in postal services can affect third parties who have no connection with the

dispute and that it may, for example, have serious repercussions for companies and directly affects

individuals (in particular recipients of unemployment benefits or social assistance and elderly people

who depend on their pension payments), the Committee nevertheless considered that, whatever the

case may be, and however unfortunate such consequences are, they do not justify a restriction of the

8

fundamental rights of freedom of association and collective bargaining, unless they become so serious

as to endanger the life, safety or health of part or all of the population.”

In Canada Case 2894 involving a legislative bill providing for the resumption and continuation of postal

services, the Committee noted that postal services do not constitute as essential services in the strict

sense of the term.18 However, it noted that “[w]hile it has always been sensitive to the fact that a

prolonged interruption in postal services can affect third parties who have no connection with the

dispute, for instance it may have serious repercussions for companies or directly affect individuals

(especially recipients of unemployment benefits or social assistance and elderly people who depend on

their pension payments), the Committee has nonetheless considered that whatever the case may be,

and however unfortunate such consequences are, they do not justify a restriction of the fundamental

rights of freedom of association, unless they become so serious as to endanger the life, safety or health

of part or all of the population [see Case No. 1985 (Canada), 316th Report, para. 322].”19

Independent Impartial Body

Paragraph 858 of the Compilation states that “[i]n mediation and arbitration proceedings it is essential

that all the members of the bodies entrusted with such functions should not only be strictly impartial

but, if the confidence of both sides, on which the successful outcome even of compulsory arbitration

really depends, is to be gained and maintained, they should also appear to be impartial both to the

employers and to the workers concerned.”

In Bolivia Case 2956 concerning the right to strike in the health sector, the Committee recalled that

“where the right to strike is restricted or prohibited in certain essential undertakings or services,

adequate protection should be given to the workers to compensate for the limitation thereby placed

on their freedom of action with regards to disputes affecting such undertakings and services” and that

“as regards the nature of ‘appropriate guarantees’ in where restrictions are placed on the right to strike

in essential services and the public service, restrictions on the right to strike should be accompanied by

adequate, impartial and speedy conciliation and arbitration proceedings in which the parties concerned

can take part at every stage and in which the awards, once made, are fully and promptly implemented.”

(paras 595 and 596 of Compilation) 20

The Committee concluded that in cases where restrictions are placed on the right to strike in essential

services and the public service, these restrictions should be accompanied by adequate, impartial and

speedy conciliation and arbitration proceedings.

Compulsory conciliation and arbitration

Paragraph 856 of the Compilation states that “[a]s regards the nature of appropriate guarantees in

cases where restrictions are placed on the right to strike in essential services and the public service,

restrictions on the right to strike should be accompanied by adequate, impartial and speedy conciliation

and arbitration proceedings in which the parties concerned can take part at every stage and in which

the awards, once made, are fully and promptly implemented.”

Argentina Case 3320 concerned allegations of violations of freedom of association and the right to collective bargaining in the public education sector. The Committee observed that prolonged

9

stoppages of activities of the complainant organization affected children’s access to education and food in schools. Therefore, in such circumstances, the Committee considered that education service was essential and that the call made by the administrative authority to put forward a limited period for compulsory conciliation between the parties before the strike was reasonable.

In Norway Case 3147 concerning collective bargaining in the laundry and dry-cleaning industry through

the imposition of compulsory arbitration to end a collective labour dispute, the Committee’s

recommendations noted that it “encourages the Government to discuss with the social partners

possible ways of ensuring that basic services are maintained in the event of a strike, the consequences

of which might endanger the life or health of the population”.

10

II. NATIONAL DEFINITIONS OF “ESSENTIAL SERVICES”

By its very definition, “essential” means something necessary, indispensable or important. The

common understanding of what is essential and what is not, does not necessarily fall within the

definition of “essential services” in the context of industrial strikes.

When it comes to dealing with the COVID-19 pandemic, there is no uniformed definition or pre-

determined list in place on what is an essential service. Instead, “essential” seems to change depending

on national context and can be quite confusing. For example, most countries considered essential

services as healthcare, hospital, electricity, supermarkets, water supply and postal services, based on

an approach of what was needed to safeguard the health, life and livelihood of people. On the other

hand, other countries went beyond and deemed essential other services that played an important role

in the development of their economies, such as the automotive industry in Mexico and gun stores in

the US.

The following are some definitions of essential services in the context of industrial actions and during

the COVID-19 pandemic in different countries.

A. AFRICA

In Malawi, the Labour Relations Act 1996 provides in section 2 ‘essential services’ means “services, by

whomsoever rendered, and whether rendered to the Government or to any other person, the

interruption of which would endanger the life, health or personal safety of the whole or part of the

population”. Furthermore, Section 47 prohibits strike or lockout in any essential services and states

that the Minister “may at any time apply to the Industrial Relations Court for a determination as to

whether a threatened or actual strike or lockout involves an essential service.”

On 1 April 2020, the Government declared coronavirus as “formidable disease” under the Public Health

Act (PHC) and gave authority to the Minister of Health to issue the Public Health (Corona Virus

Prevention, Containment and Management) Rules, 2020, one week later. The Public Health Rules

stated that during a lockdown all persons other than those excepted by the Minister must be confined

to their place of residence, except to perform an essential service; obtain essential goods or services;

seek medical attention; visit pharmacies, food supply stores, courts or banks; or get physical exercise,

as long as no more than three persons exercise together. The rules also prohibit anyone from entering

or leaving a restricted area, traveling from one restricted area to another restricted area, or selling or

purchasing alcoholic beverages. In addition, all shops and businesses not classified as essential, all open

markets and informal trading activities, and all entertainment businesses (including bars, nightclubs

and cinemas) must remain closed. Restaurants, fast food vendors, and coffee shops must remain

closed with the exception of providing takeaway services.

On 17 April 2020, the High Court of Malawi temporarily suspended implementation of a proposed 21-

day lockdown issued in response to COVID-19, pending judicial review. (S v. President of Malawi and

Others; Ex Parte: Kathumba and Others (Judicial Review Cause No. 22 of 2020) [2020] MWHC 7 (17

Apr. 2020).) Minister of Health had ordered the three-week national lockdown from 18 April through

9 May 2020.21

11

In South Africa, section 70 of the Labour Relations Act 1995 (amended by the Labour Relations

Amendment Act 2002), allows for the Minister to establish an essential service committee to

determine whether or not the whole or a part of any service is an essential service. Furthermore,

section 72 provides that the essential services committee may ratify any collective agreement that

provides for the maintenance of minimum services in a service designated as an essential service.

During COVID-19 period, the Government of South Africa ordered clinics, pharmacies, food-stores and

hospitals to remain open. Those exempted from the lockdown include health workers in the public and

private sectors, emergency personnel, those in security services such as the police, traffic officers,

military medical personnel, soldiers, and other persons necessary for the country’s response to the

pandemic. This also includes those involved in the production, distribution, and supply of food and

basic goods, essential banking services, the maintenance of power, water and telecommunication

services, laboratory services and the provision of medical and hygiene products.22

B. ASIA

In Australia, article 2 of the Essential Services Act 1981 provides that essential service “means a service

(whether provided by a public or private undertaking) without which the safety, health or welfare of

the community or a section of the community would be endangered or seriously prejudiced.” During

the pandemic, the Australian Government declared that there was a broad agreement that

supermarkets, service stations, health services (pharmacy, chiropractic, physiotherapy, psychology,

dental) and banks) are essential services.

In Bangladesh, essential services are referred to as “public utility service” and defined in section 2(viii)

of the Bangladesh Labour Act, 2006 (XLII of 2006)17 to mean the generation, production, manufacture,

or supply of electricity, gas, oil or water to the public; any system of public conservancy of sanitation;

hospitals and ambulance service; fire-fighting service; postal, telegraph or telephone service; railways,

airways, road and river transport; ports; watch and ward staff and security services maintained in any

establishment; oxygen acetylene; and banking. Furthermore, members of the defence force (section

1(4)(a)(j) of the Bangladesh Labour Act, 2006) and workers in industrial establishments owned and

directly managed by the government (section 1(4)(a)(i) of the Bangladesh Labour Act, 20062.4.2) are

excluded from its scope.

During the initial period of 15 days lockdown (24 March to 8 April 2020), the Government decided that

the following essential services would remain open: health services, food distribution, water and

sanitation, site management. All types of shops including tea stalls and street food shops were

temporarily closed except markets for vegetables, fish and meat.23

In China, essential services are not defined. The only reference is under section 66 of the Emergency

Response Law of the People's Republic of China (Order No. 69 of President of the People's Republic of

China), which states that “[w]here any unit or individual, in violation of the provisions of this Law, fails

to follow the decisions or orders of the local people’s government and its relevant departments or

refuses to act in coordination with the measures taken thereby according to law, which constitutes a

violation of the regulations for administration of public security, a penalty shall be imposed on it/him

by the public security organ according to law."

12

On 23 January 2020, the Government of China placed a quarantine on 15 cities inside the Hubei

Province. People were ordered to stay inside their homes, private vehicle use was banned, and food

and other essentials services such as military, police, medical staff, delivery drivers, constructive

workers and site management staff were allowed to remain open. Other related enterprises that

involve important parts of the national economy or critical influence people’s livelihood, were also

required to arrange for operations to carry on as normal.24

In India, at the federal level, section 2(n)(i) of the Industrial Disputes Act 1947 (No. 14 of 1946) defines

essential service, referred to as “public utility service” to include any railway service or any transport

service for passengers or goods; any service in connection with any major port or dock; any section of

industrial establishment; any postal, telegraph or telephone service; any industry which supplies

power, light or water to the public; and any system of public conservancy or sanitation.

To ensure physical distancing the country, the Government of India imposed lockdown measures from

25 March till 14 April 2020 with all industries, services, units and public transport facilities closed. Only

government staff engaged in essential services and private staff engaged at grocery shops, banks,

medical, media, telecommunication, petrol pumps, private security services are permitted to attend

work.

In relation to strikes, the State has the power to restrict strikes across all sectors under the Disaster

Management Act 2005.25 In response to the pandemic, an Industrial Relations Code was enacted in

October 2020,26 requiring any party to give 14 days mandatory notice before a strike. This requirement

covers all sectors and industries. Once the notice is serviced, the conciliation proceedings commence.

In New Zealand, the Employment Relations Act 2020 provides a list of essential services whose right

to strike is regulated by Part 8 of the Act requiring 14 days notice period.27 Under COVID-19, many

sectors were considered essential. For example, in the public sector, essential services included border

control agencies, courts, tribunals and the justice system, critical crown entities such as the Electoral

Commission, civil defence, foreign affairs, emergency and security services. For the private sector, it

included accommodation, fast-moving community goods, financial services, manufacturing and retail.

Furthermore, cross sectors industries such as building and construction, education, health, science,

social services, transport and logistics, utilities and communications were also considered as essential

services.

In Singapore, the COVID (Temporary Measures) Act was passed by Parliament on 7 April 2020,28 Under

Sections 34(1) of the Act, the Minister may make regulations for the purpose of preventing, protecting

against, delaying or otherwise controlling the incidence or transmission of COVID-19 in Singapore.

Essential services included supermarket, delivery services and entities that are part of global supply

chain. These services required business to work with minimum staff on premises, implement strict safe

distancing, avoid social interactions between workers and suspend operations if staff becomes

infected.

13

C. EUROPE AND CENTRAL ASIA

In the European Union (EU), the Council of Europe defines essential services as such services of general

interest covering both market and non-market services which the public authorities class as being of

general interest and which are subject to specific public-service obligations. The term "services of

general economic interest" refers to services of an economic nature which EU countries or the Union

have subjected to specific public-service obligations by virtue of a general-interest criterion. The

concept covers in particular certain services provided by the big network industries such as transport,

postal services, energy and communications.29 Furthermore, the European Commission issued

guidelines for a list of mobile workers within the EU, in particular those in “critical occupations” to fight

the pandemic, can reach their workplace. The list provided was not exhaustive, but it includes services

like childcare, elderly care, and critical staff for utilities.30 In Europe, services generally considered

essential include transport, public broadcasting, water, gas and electricity supply, prison

administration, justice system, national security services, medical care and emergency services.

In France, there is no definition of essential services and no general restrictions for essential services

to engage in strike action. During the COVID-19 pandemic, article 8 of Decree N. 2020-293 of 23 March

2020 list the type of services that can and cannot remained to be open to the public.

In Spain, the Constitutional Court determined that the classification of a service as essential must

prioritize the protection of persons rather than enterprises. The Government must evaluate each

situation on its merits, taking into account the territorial and personal scope, the expected duration of

the strike and other concurrent circumstances, which allow the government to know “the specific

needs of the service and the nature of the constitutionally protected rights or goods which it affects.”31

The basic principle is that a strike must respect a reasonably proportionate sacrifice for the strikers

and the users, allowing for minimum services but not the normal levels.

The Spanish Government declared that all security and law enforcement bodies, carers, transport

workers, energy and water suppliers and drink services, and post offices were essential services. All

workers in the non-essential services must stay at home during the initial lockdown period from 30

March to 9 April 2020.32 Minimum services must be guaranteed in sectors considered to provide

essential services.

In Switzerland, there is no definition of essential services and no general restrictions for essential

services to engage in strike action. During the pandemic, the Swiss authorities announced that shops,

markets, restaurants, bars, museums, libraries, cinemas, concert halls, theatres, sports centres,

swimming pools, hairdressers, beauty salons and ski resorts, all such businesses and facilities were to

be closed in Switzerland from 17 March to 19 April 2020. Only businesses providing essential goods to

the population – such as grocery stores, bakeries, pharmacies, banks and post offices – are to remain

open. Private businesses can also continue their activities, but they must take measures to protect

employees and customers (hygiene measures and social distancing).33

14

D. NORTH AMERICA

In Canada, essential service is defined as a “service, facility or activity of the Government of Canada

that is or will be at any time, necessary for the safety and security of the public or a segment of the

public.”34 Some examples that are considered essential include income and social security, border

safety and security, national security, correctional services, accident safety investigations, marine

safety and search and rescue. Although government services are generally considered essential, they

are determined on a case by case basis as to whether or not the duties are essential in practice.

During COVID-19 period, the authorities of the British Colombia declared a state of emergency and

allowed the following list of essential services to continue health services, law enforcement, critical

infrastructure, food and agriculture service, transportation, industry and manufacturing, sanitation,

communications and financial institutions.35

In the United States of America, section 176 of the Labour Management Relations Act 1947, provides

that an essential service is “an entire industry or a substantial part thereof engaged in trade,

commerce, transportation, transmission, or communication among the several States or with foreign

nations, or engaged in the production of goods for commerce, where a strike will imperil the national

health or safety, if permitted to occur or to continue.”

During COVID-19 pandemic, 42 states issued some guidance on which sectors and industries they

consider “essential” despite pandemic-related closures. According to the U.S Department of

Homeland Security, essential workers are those who conduct a range of operations and services that

are typically essential to continue critical infrastructure operations. Critical infrastructure is a large,

umbrella term encompassing sectors from energy to defense to agriculture. The remaining 22 states

who have issued essential worker orders have developed their own lists of who needs to be continuing

to work under stay-at-home orders. Between the federal guidelines and state essential worker orders,

a number of major sectors overlap including, but not limited to energy, childcare, water and

wastewater, agriculture and food production, critical retail, critical trades, transportation and

nonprofits and social service organisations.36

E. LATIN AMERICA

In Brazil, Section 10 of Law No. 7.783 of 28 June 1989 “Regulating the Exercise of the Right to Strike,

Defining Essential Services, and Setting Out Minimum Services and Other Issues”, establishes the

following activities as essential services: water supply and treatment; production and distribution of

electricity, gas and fuels; medical and hospital care; distribution and marketing of pharmaceuticals and

foods; funeral services; public transportation; collection and treatment of sewage and garbage;

telecommunications; guard, use and control of radioactive, nuclear equipment and materials; data

processing linked to essential services; air traffic control; and bank clearing. Furthermore, section 11

of Law No. 7.783 defines essential services as those providing urgent needs of the community, and

those which if detained, put the survival, health or safety of the population in imminent danger.

On 20 March 2020, the Government of Brazil issued a Decree No. 10.282 which regulates Law No.

13,979, of February 6, 2020, to define public services and essential activities, as health care, social

15

assistance, public and private security activities, national defense and civil defense activities,

telecommunication and transportations. The list has been regularly repealed by subsequent decrees.

In Colombia, the Constitution provides that the right to strike shall be guaranteed, except for the case

of essential public services. Nonetheless, the definition of essential services was left to the Congress

to decide and as of now, there is no statutory definition of this concept. While the Labour Code

enumerates a list of services that are deemed public, there is no provision on essential services.

However, specific regulations on certain topics have implied that some services are essential, For

example: services provided by the central bank (L. 31/92) services relating to social security system in

health and pensions in regards to its recognition and payments (L. 100/93); domiciliary public services

(i.e. water, sewerage, cleaning, electric power, gas and fuel distribution and telephone) (L. 142/94);

transport services in all its modalities: air, maritime, fluvial, rail, mass road and to its operation in the

national territory (L. 336/96) and services for administration of justice (L. 270/96).

On 6 April 2020, the Colombian government announced that the ongoing nationwide quarantine due

to the coronavirus pandemic, which was due to be extended for 14 days until 26 April 2020. A total of

24 exceptions was officially listed, which included medical care, medication, food, bank services, for

childcare and care of elderly people. Under the measures, only one person per family was allowed to

shop for essential items or to carry out financial transactions. Individuals was required to wear masks

in stores, banks, and on public transport, while restaurants were only allowed to provide deliveries.

Transportation service was allowed to continue, but limited in service and exclusively for those who

require healthcare.37

In Costa Rica, Article 376 of the Labour Code defines public essential services as the ones “whose

suspension, discontinuity or paralysis can cause significant damage to the rights to life, health and

public safety” and for which strike action is forbidden.38 They include health services; air traffic

controllers and immigration control services at airports, ports and border posts; rail, maritime

transport and public transport services; firefighters and emergency services; the services necessary to

guarantee the supply of drinking water, sanitary sewerage and wastewater treatment; the services

necessary to ensure the supply of electrical energy to consumers, and those necessary for the provision

of telecommunications services; the essential services for the import, transport, distribution and

supply of fuel; school canteen service, as well as protection, care and / or shelter services for children

and adolescents and the elderly, people with disabilities or in a state of vulnerability.

Furthermore, the Labour code provides definition of services of “transcendental importance” as those

that, “due to their strategic nature for the socioeconomic development of the country, their paralysis

or suspension imply a sensible damage to the living conditions of all or part of the population” and

where a minimum service must be guaranteed. Such services are, for instance, the collection and

treatment of waste and residues, banking services, justice administration services, custom services.

The Code foresees the conditions under which the judge must declare the legality of the strike action

within 24 hours. It also details the procedure for compulsory conciliation and the cases for arbitration.

for public services, after a suspension of work of 8 days and no conciliation reached, the employer may

request the judge to suspend the strike when it is harming the population. For education services,

strike action cannot continue after 21 days.39

16

In Guatemala, there is no general statutory definition of essential services. However, the Congress

issued Decree No. 71-86 on unionization and regulation of strike for public workers. It provides for

some restrictions and outlines services deemed as essential, such as i) hospitals and health centres, as

well as public hygiene and cleaning services; ii) telephone, air navigation, telegraph and mail service;

iii) administration of justice and its auxiliary institutions; iv) State or municipal urban and extra-urban

public transport of all kinds; v) water supply services to the population and the production, generation,

transportation and distribution of electricity and of fuels in general; and vi) public security services.

The Decree provides compulsory arbitration for labour disputes in these services mentioned and

mandates that these services shall not be affected.

On 14 May 2020, the Government of Guatemala announced that additional restrictions would be put

in place on 18 May 2020, in an effort to curb the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic. Except for the

transportation of food, water, medicine, gas, and permitted essential services, nothing else may be

transported during the specified dates. Food stores were only permitted to open between the hours

of 08:00-11:00 from Friday to Sunday. Additionally, individuals could only travel by foot, as the use of

private vehicles was prohibited.40

In Mexico, there is no formal definition of essential services in the context of the right to strike. The

Federal Labour Law (LFT) regulates the right to strike. For strikes in public services, the LFT indicates

that there is an additional condition to inform the labour tribunals ten days in advance of the strike,

instead of six days applicable for other activities. However, article 466 provides for the temporary

continuation of services in specific cases, such as: i). ships, aircraft, trains, buses and other transport

vehicles that are on route, where these must be driven to their destination; and ii). hospitals,

sanatoriums, clinics and other similar establishments, where the care of patients at the time of

suspension of work, until they can be transferred to another establishment.

Nonetheless, on 31 March 2020, Mexico issued a decision posted in the Federal Registrar, establishing

extraordinary measures to deal with the health emergency triggered by COVID-19, where the

suspension of non-essential activities was mandated. The Federal government established a list of

essential activities that could continue performing activities, namely:

a) Those that are directly necessary to attend the health emergency, such as the work

activities of the medical, paramedical, administrative and support branches throughout the

National Health System. Also those who participate in its supply, services and supply, among

which the pharmaceutical sector stands out, both in its production and in its distribution

(pharmacies); the manufacture of supplies, medical equipment and technologies for health

care; those involved in the proper disposal of hazardous biological-infectious waste (RPBI), as

well as cleaning and sanitizing medical units at different levels of care;

b) Those involved in public security and citizen protection; in the defense of national integrity

and sovereignty; the administration and administration of justice; as well as legislative activity

at the federal and state levels;

c) Those of the fundamental sectors of the economy: financial, tax collection, distribution and

sale of energy, gas and gas stations, generation and distribution of drinking water, food

industry and non-alcoholic beverages, food markets, supermarkets, self-service stores,

groceries and sale of prepared foods; passenger and cargo transportation services;

17

agricultural, fishing and livestock production, agro-industry, chemical industry, cleaning

products; hardware stores, courier services, guards in private security work; nurseries and

childcare centers, nursing homes and homes for the elderly, shelters and care centers for

women victims of violence, their daughters and sons; telecommunications and information

media; private emergency services, funeral and burial services, storage and cold chain services

for essential supplies; logistics (airports, ports and railways), as well as activities whose

suspension may have irreversible effects for their continuation;

d) Those directly related to the operation of government social programs, and

e) Those necessary for the conservation, maintenance and repair of the critical infrastructure

that ensures the production and distribution of essential services; namely: drinking water,

electricity, gas, oil, gasoline, jet fuel, basic sanitation, public transport, hospital and medical

infrastructure, among others that could be listed in this category.

On 21 April 2020, Mexico’s Ministry of Health extended the emergency decree suspending all non-

essential activities in the country to 30 May 2020, in order to prevent the outbreak of COVID-19. The

original order had been set to terminate on 30 April 2020. Under the decree, essential companies that

continue to operate and render services must continue to: (1) apply safe distancing measures in

production and facilities; (2) implement sanitary contingency protocols (i.e., cleaning and sanitizing

workplaces); (3) prohibit congregations of more than 50 people; (4) ensure that individuals practice

proper hygiene when sneezing, and avoid shaking hands, hugging, and kissing.41

On 12 May 2020, the Mexican Health General Council also issued a decision providing that the

construction, mining and manufacturing of transport equipment, shall be considered as essential.

The examples above illustrate how some countries have existing laws defining essential services in the

context of strike actions. Others have issued emergency measures to redefine and outline the list of

essential services specific to the pandemic situation. Many also had to revise these lists multiple times

to adapt to the changing development of the global pandemic.

III. STRIKE ACTIONS IN THE CONTEXT OF COVID-19

During the first half of 2020, workers from different sectors and industries called for strike actions

relating to the measures taken in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Some of these were considered

in the public and essential services, which were allowed to continued service during the lockdown.

In the transport industry, the bus drives in Detroit Michigan went on a one-day wildcat strike on 17

March 2020 over the lack of health and safety items like masks to protect against COVID-19.42 Bus

services were cancelled throughout the city due to the shortage of drivers. The driver’s union backed

the drivers and their brief work stoppage. Within less than 24 hours, the transportations officials agree

to their demands and increased cleaning, provided masks for passengers and made the buses free to

reduce interactions between bus drivers and passengers over fares.

18

In the distribution and logistics, 80 shift workers at Coles distribution centre in Victoria, Australia

demanded more safety measure over COVID-19. They demanded proper provision and enforcement

of social distancing measures and additional supplies of antibacterial wipes. The strike lasted only

several hours and ended when the management promised to improve social distancing practices and

sanitizing.43

In the food industry, 60 food packages workers for Linden Foods in Dungannon, North Ireland

temporary walked out of work due to lack of safety conditions. Linden Foods agreed to double the

size of the canteens, have erected multiple handwashing units at the entrance to all the sites, increased

sanitizing units, staggered breaks, erected new temporary changing facilities, carried out temperature

checks on all employees twice daily, reviewed social distancing and installed protective screens and

respaced work areas, increased PPE and undertaken additional training for the teams.44

Similarly, Whole Foods workers in the United States walked out or called for a sickout in March 2020

over the number of confirmed coronavirus infections at the supermarket chain. At least two Whole

Foods employees have died from coronavirus, and over 200 workers have tested positive around the

country.45 The workers demanded for increased hazard pay, paid sick leave for workers who choose to

isolate or self-quarantine, and the closure of stores in response to confirmed coronavirus cases among

workers. Whole Foods Market responded by implementing safety measures including enhanced deep

cleaning, crowd control and daily temperature screenings for Whole Foods employees who are in the

store to fill Prime Now orders. The company has also temporarily boosted base pay by $2 per hour,

increased overtime pay, and offered an additional two weeks of paid sick time for those who are in

quarantine or have tested positive for the virus.46

In the medical sector, hundreds of doctors and nurses working public hospitals in United Kingdom held

a strike due to a lack of protective equipment.47 NHS England and the Government had several

meetings to address concerns about protective gear. The Government called the army to help deliver

millions of pieces of personal protective equipment (PPE) to 200 hospitals. The Minister of Health also

ordered 7 million pieces of PPE and set up a helpline for healthcare works to contact when they are

short of masks or other necessary equipment. 48

In France, tens of thousands of doctors, nurses and healthcare workers went on strike since May to

demand the Government for a hiring scheme and a general salary review of €300 to €400.49 After seven

weeks of protests, the Government of France approved pay rises worth €8 billion for health workers.

The deal was signed with trade unions on 13 July 2020 after weeks of negotiations and the wages will

raise by €183 a month on average.50

In the restaurant industry, workers from McDonalds went on strike in several states in Unites States

over paid sick days and lack of soap to clean hands.51 The strikes went on for more than two months

in several locations. In March, McDonalds workers in Tampa walked out of work after being told not

to wear masks and gloves in their states because it would make customers uncomfortable. Similarly,

workers in St. Louis and Memphis walked out when their working hours were dramatically cut. In April,

cooks and cashiers at a Crenshaw Boulevard McDonald’s in Los Angeles announced a strike after a co-

worker was tested positive for COVID-19. In response to the strike actions, McDonalds offered two

19

weeks of paid sick leave for employees who need to quarantine but only for those in their corporate

franchises, as they were not able to enforce sick leave policies at independently owned locations.52

In the retail industry, 500 workers walked out of work at ASOS site in the United Kingdom due to lack

of enforcement of social distancing measures.53 ASOS refuted the claims and stated that they have

introduced a wide range of health and safety measures since the lockdown took place on 24 March

2020.54

In the shipping sector, 60 wharf workers were stood down in the Port of Melbourne, Australia for

refusing to unload cargo from a Chinese ship due to fears about coronavirus safety.55 The dock workers,

who are members of the Maritime Union of Australia (MUA)—a division of the Construction Forestry

Maritime Mining and Energy Union—claimed that the vessel had visited another port in Asia on 19

March 2020, so it was still in quarantine and refused to board the vessel. The MUA and the Port officials

negotiated that the workers would unload the vessel once the 14-day quarantine period was

reached.56 There is no information whether the workers were reinstated.

These examples illustrate the type of strike actions that occurred around the world and the measures

that Government took to resolve the industrial disputes. In serious and unresolved cases where there

might be infringement on the right to freedom of association and collective bargaining, some of these

cases may appear before the CFA. For example, the CFA recently examined Hungary Case 3381 where

the complainant argued the special measures introduced during the COVID-19 pandemic infringed the

right to collective bargaining. In this case, the Committee concluded that the Government should

engage in social dialogue with employers’ and workers’ organisations to limit the duration and the

impact of the measures, and to ensure the full use of collective bargaining as a means of achieving

balanced and sustainable solutions in times of crisis. More cases like this concerning urgent measures

taken in the context of the pandemic will likely appear before the CFA in the near future. It is important

for the Committee to examine them carefully on a case-by-case basis.

20

CONCLUSION

The COVID-19 global health pandemic stresses the importance of the non-absolute nature of the

definition and qualification of “essential service”. Restrictions to the exercise of the right of strike in

labour disputes should be assessed on a case-by-case basis, based on the national context and specific

circumstances, which may evolve very quickly.

National examples illustrate how the list of essential services may vary over time and services may be

deemed essential depending on the prevailing circumstances. A service that is normally not considered

essential, can become essential when other circumstances result in an imminent necessity for a certain

service to be provided, especially when its disruption endangers the life and personal safety or health

of people.

Industrial actions and dispute can affect third parties who are not involved in the industrial dispute in

a disproportionate manner, resulting in a justified restriction for a strike to take place such as the

Canada Case 2894 concerning postal services. The impact on third parties became especially relevant

in the context of the pandemic, since it can cause a serious and irreversible harm on the economy and

livelihoods of third parties in a very fragile economic situation. In such situations, compulsory

conciliation like in Argentina Case 3320 or compulsory arbitration in Norway 3147 may be imposed to

minimise the impact of the strike on people’s lives.

Strike actions that took place during the pandemic illustrate that the legality of each strike should be

based on the national laws and specific circumstances at that particular time. In the context of the

pandemic, it was important to consider that governments had to make quick and decisive actions to

respond to the national emergency. In some cases, this meant that some government measures were

imposed prior to consultations with social partners, which were followed shortly after for proper

implementation of the health measures. For example, social distancing, restriction on the number of

people in stores and the use of protective equipment.

However, times of crisis should not be an excuse for Governments to elude their international

obligations including the right of freedom of association and effective recognition of collective

bargaining. In Hungary Case 3381, the Committee concluded that Governments should continue to

make their utmost effort to respect this principle and to resolve industrial disputes through social

dialogue with employers’ and workers’ organisations. Measures leading to the restriction of the right

to organize in the context of an emergency shall always be of a temporary measure, and both

governments and social partners shall contribute to the activation of the machinery of social dialogue

to overcome a situation of crisis, while securing the respect of fundamental principles and rights at

work.

Policies and measures to secure the provision of minimum services are key to navigate through

industrial action in the context of an emergency, however, these shall also be used for a defined and

reasonable period, aiming at finding quick solutions that can allow the full provision of services where

its relevance has been recognized.

21

However, some services would not be fit for a minimum provision and shall continue to be provided in

full, such as Argentina Case 3320 where the rights of children were involved or Bolivia Case 3285

where the health services are in need to be provided at its full capacity. Transportation can in some

cases like Canada Case 3107 will have to be secured at is full extent, whether to transport people

during a catastrophe or whether to secure the timely distribution of goods, especially when it comes

to inland or remote territories like in Greece Case 2506.

Moreover, the acknowledgment of the right to strike not been absolute, takes special relevance in

context where laws and judicial decisions providing for any given restrictions shall be observed in full,

such as in Brazil Case 3327 regarding imposition of fines for abusive strikes.

Finally, it is important to highlight that there is no one size fits all solution for labour disputes, industrial

relations are developed over time based on the historical, cultural and national contexts. These can

also be impacted by prevailing circumstances at any given moment. In this regard, a restrictive or

narrow interpretation in connection with cases concerning strike actions in essential services would

not be appropriate. While CFA conclusions and recommendations can provide some guidance, these

should be considered as ad-hoc decisions rather than as legal precedents.

1 ILO Monitor: COVID-19 and the world of work, 5th edition, 30 June 2020, p 2-3. 2 Korea Case 1865, Report No. 346, June 2007, para 757. 3 Greece Case 2506, Report No. 346, June 2007, para 1054. 4 Greece Case 2506, Report No. 346, June 2007, para 1079. 5 Zimbabwe Case 2365, Report No. 344, March 2007, para 1446. 6 Compilation, para 837. 7 Compilation, para 840. 8 Compilation, para 842. 9 Bolivia Case 3285, Report No. 388, March 2019, para 224. 10 Bolivia Case 3285, Report No. 388, March 2019, para 224. 11 Bolivia Case 2956, Report No. 370, October 2013, para 142. 12 Norway Case 1763, Report No. 295, November 1994, para 445. 13 Norway Case 3147, Report No. 378, June 2016, para 567. 14 Canada Case 3107, Report No. 377, March 2016, para 240. 15 Peru Case 3096, Report no. 376, October 2015, para 890. 16 Peru Case 3096, Report no. 376, October 2015, para 891. 17 Peru Case 3096, Report no. 376, October 2015, para 896. 18 Canada Case 2894, Report No. 367, March 2013, para. 335. 19 Canada Case 2894, Report No. 367, March 2013, para. 336. 20 Bolivia Case 2956, Report No. 370, October 2013, para 142. 21 Global Legal Monitor, “High Court Temporarily Blocks COVID-19 Lockdown”, 29 April 2020, available at https://www.loc.gov/law/foreign-news/article/malawi-high-court-temporarily-blocks-covid-19-lockdown/. 22 South African Government, “Essential Services – Coronavirus COVID-19”, available at https://www.gov.za/Coronavirus/essential-services. 23 Relief Web, “Community Facing Key Messages on Essential Services and Assistance”, 29 March 2020, available at https://reliefweb.int/report/bangladesh/community-facing-key-messages-essential-services-and-assistance. 24 CBI, “COVID-19: lessons learnt from China”, 26 March 2020, available at https://www.cbi.org.uk/articles/covid-19-lessons-learnt-from-china/. 25 India, Disaster Management Act 2005, available at https://www.indiacode.nic.in/handle/123456789/2045?locale=en. 26 India, Industrial Relations Code¸ October 2020, available at https://labour.gov.in/whatsnew/industrial-relations-code-2020-no-35-2020.

22

27 New Zealand, Employment Relations Act 2020, available at https://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2000/0024/112.0/DLM58317.html. 28 Singapore, COVID-19 (Temporary Measures) Act 2020, 9 April 2020, available at https://sso.agc.gov.sg/Act/COVID19TMA2020. 29 Council of Europe, The Right to Strike in Essential Services: Economic Implications, Report of the Committee on Economic Affairs and Development Doc. 10546, 11 May 2005, para. 41, available at http://www.assembly.coe.int/nw/xml/XRef/X2H-Xref-ViewHTML.asp?FileID=10894&lang=EN. 30 European Commission, “Coronavirus: Commission presents practical guidance to ensure the free movement of critical workers”, 30 March 2020, available at https://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=89&furtherNews=yes&langId=en&newsId=9630. 31 Spain, Constitutional Court, Decision 43/119, 25 March 1990, available at http://hj.tribunalconstitucional.es/HJ/esES/Resolucion/Show/SENTENCIA/1990/43. 32 Pepi Sappal, “Spain’s PM clarifies which ‘essential services’ are exempt from tomorrow’s toughened lockdown rules”, 29 March 2020, available at https://www.euroweeklynews.com/2020/03/29/spains-pm-clarifies-which-essential-services-are-exempt-from-tomorrows-toughened-lockdown-rules/#.XwxUnSgzaUk. 33 SwissInfo, “Coronavirus: what is ‘essential’ in Switzerland?”, 25 March 2020, available at https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/covid-19_coronavirus--what-is--essential--in-switzerland-/45642390. 34 Government of Canada, Essential services - Frequently Asked Questions (2015), available at https://www.canada.ca/en/treasury-board-secretariat/services/labour-management/essentialservices.html. 35 British Columbia, “List of COVID-19 Essential Services”, 12 June 2020, available at https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/safety/emergency-preparedness-response-recovery/covid-19-provincial-support/essential-services-covid-19. 36 NCSL, “COVID-19: Essential Workers in the States”, 21 May 2020, available at https://www.ncsl.org/research/labor-and-employment/covid-19-essential-workers-in-the-states.aspx. 37 Garda, “Colombia: Nationwide quarantine extended for 14 days until April 26/ update 7”, 7 April 2020, available at https://www.garda.com/crisis24/news-alerts/329831/colombia-nationwide-quarantine-extended-for-14-days-until-april-26-update-7. 38 Costa Rica, Ley núm. 2, por la cual se sanciona el Código de Trabajo, adopted 23 August 1943, available at https://www.ilo.org/dyn/natlex/natlex4.detail?p_isn=44102&p_lang=en. 39 Id., articles 661, 664, 666, 667, 668 and 707. 40 Garda, “Guatemala: Authorities announce additional restrictions between May 14-18 amid COVID-19 pandemic/update 12”, 15 May 2020, available at https://www.garda.com/crisis24/news-alerts/342686/guatemala-authorities-announce-additional-restrictions-between-may-14-18-amid-covid-19-pandemic-update-12. 41 Ogletree Deakins, “Mexico Extends Suspension of Non-essential Activities to May 31 2020, Due to COVID-19”, 5 May 2020, available at https://ogletree.com/insights/mexico-extends-suspension-of-non-essential-activities-to-may-31-2020-due-to-covid-19/. 42 Jacobin, “Detroit Bus Drivers Went on Strike to Win Protections Against Coronavirus – and Won”, 20 March 2020, available at https://www.jacobinmag.com/2020/03/coronavirus-detroit-bus-drivers-strike. 43Patrick O’Connor, “Australian warehouse workers strike over COVID-19 safety demands”, 31 March 2020, available at https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2020/03/31/cole-m31.html. 44 Rachel Martin, “Linden workers refuse to start shirt in row over Covid-19 control measures”, 27 March 2020, available at https://www.agriland.co.uk/farming-news/linden-workers-refuse-to-start-shift-in-row-over-covid-19-control-measures/. 45 Michael Sainato, “Retail workers at Amazon and Whole Foods coordinate sick out to protest Covid-19 conditions”, 1 May 2020, available at https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/01/retail-workers-at-amazon-and-whole-foods-coordinate-sick-out-to-protest-covid-19-conditions; Lois Beckett, “Whole Food workers hold ‘sick out’ to demand hazard pay during pandemic”, 1 April 2020, available at https://www.theguardian.com/business/2020/mar/31/whole-foods-coronavirus-outbreak-us-health. 46 Suhauna Hussain, “Sick-out at Wholte Foods seeks better coronavirus protections”, 31 March 2020, available at https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/01/retail-workers-at-amazon-and-whole-foods-coordinate-sick-out-to-protest-covid-19-conditions. 47 Denish Campbell, “NHS staff ‘gagged’ over coronavirus shortage”,31 March 2020, available at https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/mar/31/nhs-staff-gagged-over-coronavirus-protective-equipment-shortages. 48 Denis Campbell and Heather Stewart, “Doctors threaten to quite NHS over shortage of protective kit”, 24 March 2020, available at https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/24/doctors-threaten-to-quit-over-protective-equipment-shortage. 49 France 24, “Enough applause: French health workers rally anew for substantive reform”, 16 June 2020, available at https://www.france24.com/en/20200616-enough-applause-french-health-workers-rally-anew-for-post-coronavirus-reforms. 50 BBC News, “Historic pay rises for French health workers”, 14 July 2020, available at https://www.bbc.com/news/live/world-53399539.

23

51 Brent Schrotenboer, “Hundreds of McDonald’s workers plan Wednesday strike over COVID-19 protections”, 19 May 2020, available at https://eu.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2020/05/19/coronavirus-mcdonalds-employees-national-strike-over-safety/5218729002/. 52 Jaya Saxena, ”A Running List of the Chains Providing and Not Providing – Paid Sick Leave”, 16 March 2020, available at https://www.eater.com/2020/3/16/21181862/are-mcdonalds-starbucks-and-other-chains-offering-paid-sick-leave-for-coronavirus. 53 Barbara Santamaria, “Asos workers walk out over lack of Covid-19 protection, firm denies it’s unsafe”, 30 March 2020, available at https://us.fashionnetwork.com/news/Asos-workers-walk-out-over-lack-of-covid-19-protection-firm-denies-it-s-unsafe,1203006.html. 54 Celestina Olulode and Rick Kelsey “Coronavirus: ASOS denies claims staff are unsafe at work during outbreak”, 1 April 2020, available at https://www.bbc.com/news/newsbeat-52110105. 55 7news, “Melbourne wharf workers refuse to unload container feared to be coronavirus contaminated and are stood down”, 31 March 2020, available at https://7news.com.au/news/health/melbourne-wharf-workers-refuse-to-unload-container-feared-to-be-coronavirus-contaminated-and-are-stood-down-c-945162. 56 World Maritime News, “Wharfies Refuse to Unload Boxship in Melbourne amid COVID-19 Concerns”, 1 April 2020, available at https://www.offshore-energy.biz/wharfies-refuse-to-unload-boxship-in-melbourne-amid-covid-19-concerns/.