Missing from <i>Right to Strike</i>? The ILO’s Committee of Experts in Controversy

Abstract In late 2023, the ILO’s Governing Body referred to the ICJ for an advisory opinion on whether the right to strike is protected under ILO Convention No. 87. However, a more fundamental issue concerning the Experts Committee, which derived the right to strike from ILO Convention No. 87 since the 1950s, was removed from the referral list almost at the last minute. It risks reducing Right to Strike to a formalistic exercise, allowing the Employers to continually downplay the ILO jurisprudence on the right to strike as construed by the Experts. In response to the Employers’ assertion that the Committee has been a purely technical body for the past century, this article adopts a historical lens to elaborate on the Experts’ evolution to be a primary supervisory body facilitated by ILO tripartite constituents. It further argues that the Employers should be estopped from overturning their previous acceptance of the Experts’ evolution, accumulation of powers and interpretations of the right to strike.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Industrial Law Journal
Published
2025-07-14
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/indlaw/dwaf023
Primary Topic
International Labor and Employment Law
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Missing from Right to Strike? The ILO’s Committee of Experts in Controversy

Yuqi Zhou
Industrial Law Journal
International Labor and Employment Law
article

Missing from Right to Strike? The ILO’s Committee of Experts in Controversy

Yuqi Zhou
article en

Abstract

Abstract In late 2023, the ILO’s Governing Body referred to the ICJ for an advisory opinion on whether the right to strike is protected under ILO Convention No. 87. However, a more fundamental issue concerning the Experts Committee, which derived the right to strike from ILO Convention No. 87 since the 1950s, was removed from the referral list almost at the last minute. It risks reducing Right to Strike to a formalistic exercise, allowing the Employers to continually downplay the ILO jurisprudence on the right to strike as construed by the Experts. In response to the Employers’ assertion that the Committee has been a purely technical body for the past century, this article adopts a historical lens to elaborate on the Experts’ evolution to be a primary supervisory body facilitated by ILO tripartite constituents. It further argues that the Employers should be estopped from overturning their previous acceptance of the Experts’ evolution, accumulation of powers and interpretations of the right to strike.

Industrial Law JournalVol. 54(3)
King's College London (GB)
Openalex Percentile: Top 79%
International Labor and Employment Law
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.