With Law 4808/2021, several changes were made that affect the right to strike. Specifically, certain obligations were imposed on trade unions when they wish to declare a strike at a business or nationwide, and simultaneously, it was defined to what extent strike demands can reach. Similarly, Law 5053/2023 introduced changes by criminalizing the damages caused to a business during a strike. In the following text, we attempt to provide a comprehensive presentation of the right to strike as it currently stands and how it is practically applied to resolve conflicts between employers and employees.

1.What forms does a strike take?

The term generally refers to the collective right exercised jointly by employees, which includes temporary or permanent abstention from their work, with the immediate goal of exerting pressure on the employer to satisfy their labor demands. The strike, as a constitutionally and European-guaranteed collective right, can take various forms.

One type of strike is the rotating strike, meaning a strike by different sectors of personnel so that some parts of the business operate at reduced capacity, thereby inevitably reducing the overall productivity of the business. This type of strike is more common abroad and less so in Greece,however, its duration is not short, considering it does not immediately cause significant economic damage to the employer, and thus it is considered to meet the necessary measure of the strike, which will be discussed further below.

Another form of strike is the warning strike, which usually has a short duration and occurs mainly while negotiations are ongoing between employees and their trade unions with employers for the signing of a collective labor agreement. The short duration of this strike aims to demonstrate the pressure that employees are ready to exert on the employer with a potential strike in the near future, which, however, will have a longer duration and naturally greater intensity in terms of economic damage caused to the employer.

2.When is the start of a strike legally declared?

For a strike to be legally declared, the law requires certain conditions to be met to ensure some guarantees of legality, meaning it should not be declared by a small minority of employees. Specifically, for a strike to be legally declared, it is required:

• It must be declared by a trade union that has been legally established and has jurisdiction over the specific labor issues. Such an organization is one whose members are employees engaged in a specific profession (e.g., hotel workers who constitute a distinct category of employees).
• The decision must have been made within the trade union in a lawful manner, meaning the general assembly must have convened, and the union members must have voted by an absolute majority on the decision to declare a strike. In broader trade unions,this decision is made by the board of directors.
•  The conditions for the valid adoption of a decision must have been met, meaning there was a relative majority of union members present, and these members must have paid their dues to the organization, meaning they are financially settled.
• The members must have voted legally, either in person or remotely, since this is now provided by law as an option, and simultaneously, the voting for the decision to strike must have been secret to safeguard the interests of the trade union.

3.Are there general conditions that must be met?

The most crucial step before declaring a strike that employees must follow is to notify the employer that they will proceed with the strike. This notice must be given at least 24 hours before the start of the strike and must be sent via a document through a bailiff who will serve it to the employer, indicating the date of notification. For public sector/common utility businesses, this deadline is at least 4 days before the start of the strike.

At the same time, employees who proceed with a strike must first have initiated negotiations with the employer to satisfy their demands peacefully, such as through the signing of a collective labor agreement. This obligation arises from the general spirit of the law, which characterizes the strike as the last resort for employees in their efforts to have their demands met by the employer.

Moreover, the trade union that will proceed with the strike must provide the employer with so-called “security personnel,” that is, a number of employees who will be present at the business during the strike to ensure that the facilities operate at a minimal level and to prevent accidents/damage/destruction. For public sector businesses, in addition to this security personnel, there must also be service personnel, which should correspond to one-third of the total employees employed in that specific public business.

Finally, a fundamental obligation of the trade union during the strike is to allow employees who are not participating in the strike to enter the business premises and perform their work, without the trade union obstructing this right. The same right naturally applies to the security/service personnel mentioned above.

4.What demands can a strike have?

For a strike to be meaningful, it must present specific demands that it seeks to assert. Regarding these strike demands:

• The demands cannot be contrary to the provisions of laws in force under Greek law=for example, the strike cannot demand the reduction of social security contributions paid by employees  through deductions, as this issue can only be regulated by the relevant ministries and not by the employer.
• The demands must concern all employees of the business or at least a substantial part of them. Therefore, the strike’s demands cannot aim to satisfy private individual interests, and if benefits are granted by the employer to the employees due to the acceptance of the strike’s demands, they must be granted to all personnel and not only to those who participated in the strike.
• The strike demands should not involve regulating issues related to the business policies of the employer and their actions. Employment rights are a separate issue from the employer’s business moves. However, when the latter affects employee relations (e.g., wage levels), then the strike’s demands are again legitimate.
• Under no circumstances can the strike’s demands seek to amend legal rules or enact laws, as these matters are not within the employer’s discretion. However, a strike demand can involve the interpretation of legal rules set by collective labor agreements, which may create confusion for the parties involved.

5.When is a strike considered abusive?

The issue of whether a strike is abusive must be judged by several factors. First, there must be a comparison between the strikers’ demands and the (economic) damage suffered by the employer due to the strike. It is true that a prolonged strike lasting weeks, if the employees’ demands could have been met through negotiations, is very likely to be deemed abusive as it does not adhere to the so-called benefit-cost measure between the interests of employees and the employer.

A classic case of an abusive, and thus illegal, strike is when during the strike, there are incidents of violence/damage to business facilities/the strikers preventing non-striking employees from entering the business. These phenomena not only render the strike abusive but may also have legal consequences for the strikers, as all the above phenomena now constitute criminal offenses under a law issued last October.

Regarding the employees’ demands, these cannot be considered excessive from the outset and must be evaluated on a case-by-case basis=employees usually do not expect the full satisfaction of their demands through the strike, they simply set the bar high to achieve some intermediate point of satisfaction from the employer. The same naturally applies to the social disruption caused by a strike, which is to some extent given and tolerated due to the nature of the strike as a means of exerting pressure through disrupting normalcy in work and social life. Therefore, the above should not be viewed superficially when attempting to characterize a strike as abusive or not.

6.Can the employer react to a strike?

The employer’s response to the employees’ strike action is critical and must fall within the permissible limits of the law. First, the employer is prohibited from exercising the so-called “lockout,” which means barring employees from entering the workplace. This practice would prevent employees from performing their work and, at the same time, deny them their wages. Such a practice is illegal, even if it is in response to an already illegal strike.

Furthermore, to ensure that the strike’s objective of disrupting the business’s operations is not nullified, the employer is prohibited from hiring replacement workers during the strike to perform the work of the strikers. However, if the strike is declared illegal by a court decision, this prohibition does not apply, and the employer can validly hire other workers, provided the strike continues. The same applies if the employer simply transfers employees from another business to the business where the strike is taking place.

Finally, agreements between the employer and employees that prevent the latter from participating in or conducting strikes are significant. Typically, such “agreements” are made in exchange for benefits or allowances from the employer to the employees. However, the illegal nature of such agreements is evident and is not lifted under any circumstances because it restricts the constitutionally guaranteed right of employees to participate in strikes.

7.Does a strike have consequences on the workers’ employment contract?

Undoubtedly, a strike in which an employee participates will have consequences on their individual employment contract. These consequences can be positive, such as a wage increase if the strike demands are accepted by the employer, as well as negative consequences. More specifically, the employee:

• If participating in a legal strike, is not required to be present at their workplace, nor are they entitled to their wage from the employer.
• For this reason, they cannot be dismissed with an extraordinary termination of their employment contract, as their absence from work is not unjustified.
• Although the employee is not at their workplace, this time is considered as work time for calculating various benefits, such as tenure bonuses, vacation leave, etc.
• If participating in an illegal strike, the employee is not relieved of the obligation to be present at the workplace and perform their work.
• Consequently, since they are not there, the employer can terminate the employment contract with extraordinary termination, as participation in an illegal strike constitutes a significant reason for dismissal.
• The employer may also claim compensation from the employee for the damage caused due to their participation in the illegal strike and the corresponding financial impact on the business.
• However, for the employer to have a valid claim for compensation, the employee must have known that the strike was illegal and continued their participation in it. This knowledge generally exists once the court decision declaring the strike illegal is issued.

8.What happens to employees who cannot work due to the strike?

This is a crucial issue that has frequently occupied Greek courts. On one side, there is the interest of employees who do not strike and wish to work to receive their wages and avoid negative consequences on their employment contracts. On the other side, there is the interest of the employer who cannot accept their work due to the strike, which has economically paralyzed the business.

The decisions of Greek courts on this matter vary. Some courts accept that the employer still owes wages to those employees who come to work because they are ready to work and the reason they cannot be employed lies with the employer, as he has economic control of his business. Thus, despite the strike, the employer should be ready to employ them in his business, and since he is unable to do so, he owes at least the agreed wages and late wages for the period he remains unable to employ them.

However, there are also court judgements that emphasize that the impact of a strike on the employer’s business can be so intense that the employer does not have the interest to employ those employees who come to work. This can be due to the lack of a sufficient number of staff due to the strike, paralyzing entire sectors of the business, and generally the economic disorganization of the business. Generally, the reasons why the employer cannot employ the employees should be considered, as depending on the case, the judicial decision may vary significantly.

9.Is there judicial protection to stop a strike?

Against an illegal strike by employees and the risk of significant economic damage to the business, the employer is not left unprotected by law. Thus, the employer is entitled to:

•  File a lawsuit against the trade union that declared the illegal strike. This lawsuit is filed in the Single-Member Court of First Instance and is heard in a very expedited process to catch up with the rapid development of events.
• With the lawsuit, the employer can request the lifting/cessation of the illegal strike and the avoidance of employees participating in a similar illegal strike in the future. However, the employer cannot request the prohibition of participation in any future strike.
• The employer may also have a claim for compensation against employees for the damage suffered from the continuation of the illegal strike.
• However, for such a compensation claim to be accepted, the employees must have known they were participating in an illegal strike, which is not often the case in practice.
• The strike is declared illegal only by a court decision, i.e., after the court, assessing all the evidence, determines that it does not meet legal requirements.
• Naturally, the employer can request that the court decision be declared provisionally enforceable to avoid having to file interim measures against the trade union. If the court declares the decision provisionally enforceable, interim measures would be meaningless in this context.

10.How do Greek courts evaluate strikes today?

As mentioned earlier, the determination of whether a strike is abusive or not must pass through several legal criteria, such as whether the strike was the necessary means for employees in the specific case, etc. Greek courts tend to evaluate the nature of a strike with a more restrictive view.

Specifically, in many strikes judged illegal today, courts tend to consider that the mere cause of economic damage to the business due to the strike is sufficient to characterize the strike as illegal. Thus, they do not conduct a more specific examination of the strike demands, the progression leading up to the escalation of strike actions, etc. This results in 9 out of 10 strikes today being judged abusive, despite not typically meeting the legal conditions for a strike to be deemed as such.

However, other factors, such as political pressures due to the urgent situation created by a strike, especially for large public sector companies serving millions of citizens daily, might also contribute to the frequent characterization of strikes as abusive. This not only causes damage to the employer but also to political authority. The issue certainly calls for a deeper investigation into the criteria that lead to a strike being judged as abusive and how these criteria are applied in specific cases.

Next to the client and his needs.

Athina Kontogianni-Lawyer

The above does not constitute legal advice, and no responsibility is assumed for it. For more information, please contact us.