Alonso Radesca and Others v. Switzerland
Interpretation of legislation by national authorities created uncertainty for unions and employees as to lawfulness of strike.
In the case of Alonso Radesca and Others v. Switzerland the Court held that there had been a violation of freedom of assembly and association.
The case concerned a strike in a private hospital over its withdrawal from a collective bargaining agreement. The national authorities had found the strike to be unlawful, resulting in the hospital employees who had participated in it being dismissed and criminal sanctions being imposed on the secretaires of the unions who had been mandated to conduct the negotiations.
The Court found that neither Article 28 of the Constitution, which guaranteed the right to strike, nor the national case-law provided a clear basis for concluding that a lawful strike could become unlawful because a court, with the benefit of hindsight, considered that an employer had offered terms which meant that the continuation of the strike was unnecessary. Such an interpretation created a significant degree of uncertainty for unions and employees as to the circumstances in which they continued collective action while retaining the protection afforded under national law.