Strike law adopted: Overbid still on
The draft law on strikes has been approved by a majority in the House of Representatives, marking a significant legislative milestone. This adoption takes place against the backdrop of increasing social tensions. The UMT has called for a strike on February 5 and remains mobilized for February 6, reflecting continued union opposition. At the time of printing, the union reported an 84.9% participation rate. The impact looks more pronounced in the public sector than in the private sector.
The adoption of this law could be a turning point in labor relations by providing greater clarity on the legal framework surrounding strikes. However, its implementation remains uncertain amid ongoing social tensions.
While the law introduces substantial improvements in the protection of striking workers and aims to balance union rights with the need for public service continuity, its real-world application may face challenges. The already strained social climate, characterized by persistent union demands, may become even tenser depending on future reforms.
The draft law also paves the way for other sensitive reforms, including pension system restructuring, labor code amendments, and union law modifications. These delicate reforms risk exacerbating existing social tensions. The future of labor legislation will largely depend on the government’s ability to maintain constructive dialogue with unions, manage opposition, and raise public awareness about the stakes involved.
The strike law redefines the concept of a strike, expanding its scope beyond purely material demands to include broader interests such as moral and solidarity-based concerns. It explicitly authorizes solidarity and political strikes, directly addressing union demands. Additionally, the legislation integrates union freedoms, dignity, and all forms of moral interests as legitimate grounds for striking, in alignment with International Labour Organization (ILO) principles. This revision represents a significant step forward for union rights, though its effective implementation will require close monitoring to ensure adherence to these new principles.
Notice and negotiation periods revised
The legal notice periods for organizing strikes have been revised downward. A five-day notice is now required, except in the case of national strikes, where the notice period is extended to seven days.
For strikes related to labor disputes, negotiation periods have been set at seven days in the private sector. However, in cases of immediate danger, this period is reduced to three days, with the employer required to have the situation assessed by labor inspectors, in accordance with the Labor Code.
For salary-related demands or improvements in working conditions, the negotiation period is set at 15 days, with a possible extension of an additional 15 days. This timeframe is justified by the need for employers to convene a board meeting to make salary-related decisions. The employer must adhere to this minimum 15-day period to organize such discussions. In the public sector, salary-related demands require a negotiation period of 45 days, extendable by 15 additional days. This extended period is necessary due to the involvement of multiple government entities, including the Ministry of Finance, the public administration sector, and the Prime Minister’s office, particularly when arbitration is needed.
Easier Procedures for Unions
The new legislation simplifies the process of organizing strikes. Representative unions, even if they are not dominant, can now initiate national or sectoral strikes. The minimum proportion of workers required to call a strike in the absence of a union has been reduced from 75% to 25%, making it easier to organize industrial action. Moreover, in cases where multiple laws apply, the one most favorable to workers and unions will take precedence.
Enhanced Protections for Strikers
New provisions have been introduced to strengthen protections for striking workers. Employers are now prohibited from dismissing, isolating, retaliating against, or replacing strikers. Any violation of these rules will result in fines ranging from 20,000 to 200,000 dirhams. Meanwhile, penalties for strikers who violate the law have been reduced from the previous range of 5,000–10,000 dirhams to a lower range of 1,200–8,000 dirhams. This measure aims to limit the use of physical coercion against strikers. Additionally, a new provision prohibits the enforcement of coercive measures against individuals facing financial hardship, introducing a more socially considerate dimension to the legislation.
Minimum Service and Strike Suspension
The draft law introduces the concept of a minimum service level, defined as essential services whose disruption would endanger lives, security, health, or public well-being. Any party wishing to enforce a minimum service requirement must provide clear justification based on these criteria; otherwise, the measure can be annulled by a court. In times of severe national crisis or natural disaster, the law allows for the suspension of strikes in accordance with ILO recommendations. This provision ensures that the state can intervene in exceptional situations while maintaining a balance between worker rights and public interest.
Khadija MASMOUDI
