trade union activists = understand

Introduction to this Section

On 21 May 2026, the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the highest judicial body of the United Nations, delivered a historic advisory opinion concerning the right to strike and Convention No. 87 of the International Labour Organization (ILO).

This decision brings to an end a legal and political dispute that had opposed international trade unions, employers’ organizations and several governments for more than ten years over a fundamental question:

Is the right to strike part of the freedom of association protected by international law?

The Court’s answer was clear:

Yes.

However, this answer also raises many additional questions.

Why did Switzerland oppose this interpretation?

Why do employers nevertheless believe that they obtained certain safeguards?

What is the actual role of the International Labour Organization?

Who interprets international labour conventions?

What powers do the Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations and the Committee on Freedom of Association possess?

What will be the consequences for workers, trade unions, employers and governments?

The purpose of this section is to answer these questions in an accessible, documented and critical manner.

Why this Decision Matters

For decades, the supervisory bodies of the International Labour Organization have considered that the right to strike forms an integral part of freedom of association.

Employers challenged this interpretation.

They argued that Convention No. 87 of 1948 never explicitly mentions the word “strike” and that no right to strike can automatically be inferred from the text.

Trade unions, on the other hand, maintained that freedom of association without the possibility of collective action would have only theoretical value.

The International Court of Justice ultimately agreed with the trade unions on this fundamental issue.

What You Will Find in this Section

This series of articles aims to explain:

  • the origins of the conflict between trade unions and employers;
  • the referral of the matter to the International Court of Justice;
  • the official position of Switzerland;
  • the position of the World Federation of Trade Unions;
  • the position of the International Trade Union Confederation;
  • the position of the International Organisation of Employers;
  • the role of the Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations;
  • the role of the Committee on Freedom of Association;
  • the legal arguments used by each side;
  • the consequences of the advisory opinion of 21 May 2026;
  • future issues concerning the limits of the right to strike.

A Critical Approach

The purpose of this section is not to defend a partisan position.

Each article analyses the arguments put forward by the various actors:

  • trade unions;
  • employers’ organizations;
  • governments;
  • experts of the International Labour Organization;
  • International Court of Justice.

Some analyses explain why trade unions achieved a major victory.

Others explain why employers believe they succeeded in limiting some of the consequences of that victory.

The objective is to enable readers to understand the real issues behind debates that are often presented in an overly simplified manner.

A Decision that Also Concerns Young People

The right to strike may appear distant from everyday concerns.

Yet it directly affects concrete issues such as:

  • wages;
  • working hours;
  • holidays and paid leave;
  • remote work;
  • workplace safety;
  • protection against dismissal;
  • working conditions.

The decision of 21 May 2026 will influence social and labour debates for many years to come.

Understanding this decision also means understanding how workers’ rights are built and protected in democratic societies.

The Common Thread of this Section

The central question running through all the articles is:

Can freedom of association without the right to strike still be considered genuine freedom of association?

The International Court of Justice answered:

No.

However, it also left another question open:

How far may the right to strike be restricted without depriving it of its essential meaning?

This is the new legal, social and political struggle that begins today.

Useful Links to the Main Organizations Involved

International Labour Organization (ILO)
https://www.ilo.org

Convention No. 87 on Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise
https://normlex.ilo.org/dyn/normlex/fr/f?p=NORMLEXPUB:12100:0::NO::P12100_ILO_CODE:C087

International Court of Justice (ICJ)
https://www.icj-cij.org

Swiss Trade Union Federation (SGB/USS)
https://www.uss.ch

Travail.Suisse
https://www.travailsuisse.ch

International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC)
https://www.ituc-csi.org

World Federation of Trade Unions (WFTU)
https://www.wftucentral.org

English version:
https://www.wftucentral.org/?language=en

International Organisation of Employers (IOE)
https://www.ioe-emp.org

Official IOE Reaction to the ICJ Advisory Opinion of 21 May 2026
https://www.ioe-emp.org/fr/nouvelle/details/loie-reagit-a-lavis-consultatif-de-la-cij-sur-le-droit-de-greve

Swiss Written Submission to the International Court of Justice
https://www.icj-cij.org/sites/default/files/case-related/191/191-20240516-wri-02-00-fr.pdf

International Trade Union Confederation Submission to the International Court of Justice
https://www.icj-cij.org/sites/default/files/case-related/191/191-20240913-wri-01-00-fr.pdf

ILO Presentation of the Case
https://www.ilo.org/fr/themes-et-secteurs/liberte-dassociation/interpretation-de-la-convention-no-87-en-rapport-avec-le-droit-de-greve

Article by the Swiss Trade Union Federation on the Decision of 21 May 2026
https://www.uss.ch/en/work/detail/the-international-court-of-justice-confirms-that-the-right-to-strike-is-part-of-freedom-of-association

Further Reading

In this section you will successively find:

  • an analysis of Switzerland’s position;
  • an analysis of the position of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC);
  • an analysis of the position of the World Federation of Trade Unions (WFTU);
  • an analysis of the position of the International Organisation of Employers (IOE);
  • an analysis of the consequences for Swiss trade unions (USS/SGB, Travail.Suisse, Unia, Syndicom, SSP/VPOD, SEV, SIT);
  • an analysis of the role of the Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations (CEACR);
  • an analysis of the role of the Committee on Freedom of Association (CFA);
  • the practical consequences of the advisory opinion of 21 May 2026 for the right to strike in Switzerland and internationally.

It is also recommended to add a standardized concluding block to each article:

Articles in this Series

  • General introduction to the decision of 21 May 2026
  • Analysis of Switzerland’s position
  • Analysis of the position of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC)
  • Analysis of the position of the World Federation of Trade Unions (WFTU)
  • Analysis of the position of the International Organisation of Employers (IOE)
  • CEACR: role and limits
  • CFA: role and limits
  • Consequences for Switzerland
  • Consequences for trade unions
  • Consequences for employers
  • The next battles surrounding the right to strike
Back to top