Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2025, published 114th ILC session (2026)

Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98) - Greece (Ratification: 1962)

The Committee notes the observations provided by the Hellenic Federation of Enterprises and Industries (SEV) received on 31 August 2022, 1 September 2023, 1 September 2024 and 26 August 2025, as well as by the Greek General Confederation of Labour (GSEE) received on 30 August 2022, 1 September 2023, 29 August 2024 and 28 August 2025, which refer to matters examined by the Committee below. The Committee also notes the Government’s detailed comments on the observations provided by the SEV and the GSEE received in 2021.

Legislation. The Committee notes the GSEE’s observation that several Acts, including Act No. 4808/2021 mentioned below, have been codified in the Code of Labour Law (hereinafter: the Code) by Government Decree No. PD 62/2025, published in the Government Gazette on 11 July 2025.

Articles 1 and 3 of the Convention. Adequate protection against anti-union discrimination. The Committee previously requested the Government to reply to the GSEE’s allegations that Act No. 4808/2021 (hereinafter: the Act) gives rise to a reduction in the protection afforded to trade union members and officers. The Committee notes that the GSEE expressed a particular concern over a reduction in the number of founding members and members of the unions’ Administrative Boards enjoying a special protection and the abolition of the approval procedure for the dismissal or transfer of trade union officials. The Committee notes from the Government’s reply that, as regards protection against acts of anti-union discrimination, section 88 of the Act amends section 14 of Act No. 1264/1982 (now codified in section 381 of the Code), which prohibits employers to force workers to join a particular trade union or hinder them from doing so in any way (para. 2(b)), as well as to treat workers favourably or unfavourably by reason of their participation in a particular trade union (para. 2(f)). Furthermore, section 350 of the Code (which codifies section 66 of the Act) provides that: (i) the dismissal is invalid if it is due to the worker’s lawful trade union action (para. 1(c)) or is based on discrimination against the employee, including on the grounds of his/her involvement in a trade union (para. 1(a)); (ii) if the worker provides facts to support his/her belief that the dismissal was caused by one of the reasons mentioned above, the employer must prove that it was in fact motivated by another reason (para. 3); and (iii) the worker who alleges the invalidity of his/her dismissal may choose between requesting the declaration of nullity or additional compensation (para. 5), the amount of which may range from three months’ salary to a double amount of the applicable severance pay, depending on the seriousness of the employer’s offence, as well as the worker’s and the employer’s assets and financial situation (para. 4). As regards the specific protection granted to trade union officials, the Committee notes that by virtue of sections 350 and 381 of the Code: (i) the dismissal of a trade union official is invalid if there are no important reasons; (ii) the existence of such important reasons must be proven by the employer, according to the reversal of the burden of proof mentioned above; (iii) the protection applies during the official’s term of office and for 1 year after its expiry; and (iv) the number of officials who are entitled to this protection depends on the number of the organization’s members. Observing that section 350 of the Code only applies in case of termination of open-ended contracts, the Committee requests the Government to indicate whether there are legislative provisions protecting workers under fixed-term contracts against anti-union non-renewals of their contracts. Recalling that adequate protection against acts of anti-union discrimination should cover all prejudicial acts at all stages of employment, the Committee also requests the Government to clarify whether the Code provides for protection against anti-union discrimination at the time of recruitment. The Committee further requests the Government to reply to the specific concerns of GSEE mentioned above, providing information on the practical impact of the referred changes.

The Committee further notes that section 2(6)(a) of Act No. 1264/1982, as amended by section 83 of the Act and now codified in section 369 of the Code, provides for the suspension of the specific protection of trade union officials against dismissals and transfers, with the exception of members of a temporary trade union administration and those provisionally elected when the trade union is being established if this trade union fails to register, to submit the relevant data or to keep this data up to date. The Committee takes note of the latest observations made by the GSEE in this respect, alleging that there is an increase in anti-union dismissals (for instance, of the former Hellenic Train Drivers’ Union president in 2025), often resulting from the lack of protection in case of non-registration. The Committee underlines in this respect that the protection afforded by the Convention covers all union committee members, including those of unregistered trade unions (see the 2012 General Survey on the fundamental Conventions, para. 187). The Committee therefore requests the Government to specify which protection applies to trade union officials who do not fall under the exceptions mentioned in section 369(6)(a) of the Code and to provide its comments on the concerns raised by the GSEE pointing to an increase in anti-union dismissals.

Protection against anti-union discrimination in practice. The Committee notes the statistical information provided by the Government related to anti-union discrimination: the Regional Directorates of the Labour Inspectorate received 170 complaints from 2021 to 2023, which related to the impediments to trade union activity and the protection of trade union officers (for example, dismissals of trade unionists); 54 of these complaints were resolved following recommendations from the labour inspectors, 43 led to the preparation of a complaint report, 65 were referred to civil courts as no agreement was reached, 3 were cancelled because workers failed to come to the labour dispute hearings, and 1 is still in progress. The Committee also notes that the GSEE: (i) alleges that there is a significant lack of coordinated data collection on anti-union discrimination, which is exacerbated by the fragmentation of the data collection among different entities such as the Ministry of Labour, the Labour Inspectorate (which has been detached from the Ministry) and the Organization for Mediation and Arbitration (OMED); and (ii) calls for the publication of an annual statistical report on anti-union discrimination as well as an annual publication of anonymized decisions. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments on these observations, as well as to continue to provide information and statistics relating to complaints of anti-union discrimination and any remedial action taken.