Soldiers are workers like everybody else, so why do so many countries refuse them the right to association?

When we broach the subject of military personnel and trade union rights, one often looks strangely, as if we are talking about an unlikely combination. However, soldiers, at least in the context of armed forces in a democratic state, are workers just like everyone else. What distinguishes them from other workers is their specific task and wearing a uniform. But isn’t that the case for countless other workers or state employees?

But before we go deeper into this subject, allow me to briefly introduce the European Organisation of Military Associations and Trade Unions (EUROMIL). Founded in September 1972 as an umbrella organisation for military associations in Europe, today we count 33 member and observer associations from 20 European countries. The first and most important goal of EUROMIL is the respect for, and application of, human rights and fundamental freedoms in, but also by, European armed forces. The second goal is the improvement of living and working conditions of military personnel, and the third is the application and the correct implementation of social legislation, in particular EU social legislation for military personnel.

It is EUROMIL’s essential consideration that a soldier is to be treated as a ‘citizen in uniform’ with the same rights and obligations as everyone else. However, by fully understanding the role of the military and the role that soldiers may have to play, you can say that restrictions to that right should only be allowed in time of operations and in wartime.

Without going into all the legal aspects, I want to focus on the Council of Europe with the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) from 1950, the European Social Charter (ESC) of 1961 and the revised ESC of 1996. Articles 5 and 6 of the ESC, for example, deal with the right to organise, the right to collective bargaining and even the right to have collective actions. Furthermore, we have the ECHR which is a keystone document of the Council of Europe. Article 11 of the ECHR basically says that everyone has the right of association, including the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his or her interests. This shall not prevent lawful restrictions – mark the word ‘restrictions’ – for members of the armed forces. But a restriction is something entirely different to the exclusions practised in many countries where the right of association is prohibited for military personnel. In EUROMIL’s view, this is not legal, nor is it the correct implementation of national law.

The reality of trade union rights in European armed forces

Now let’s look how the right of association in European armed forces is organised in practice. About half of Council of Europe member states exclude their military personnel from the right of association and collective bargaining as intended in Article 11 of the ECHR and Articles 5 and 6 of the ESC.

We must reiterate that if we want to implement and respect human rights and fundamental freedoms, and if we want to respect social rights for military personnel, associations and trade unions have an essential role to play. So why do so many political and military leaders refuse the right of association? Are they afraid of transparency? Are they afraid to lose authority? Are they afraid of having trade unions in the armed forces? Maybe. But you can regulate it, as is the case in several countries.

In the Netherlands, for example, a military association was founded as early as 1898, and several decades later it became a trade union. Next door in Belgium, the first signs of a military association can be found in the late 19th century. However, a legal basis to transform these associations in trade unions was only decided in 1978 and it took almost 17 years to execute this legislation. Looking to the northern part of Europe, we see that Norway, Sweden, Denmark and Finland all grant full trade union rights to their military personnel.

Another example is Ireland where the right of association was denied to military personnel up until 1992. It took a two-year fight with politicians and the military leadership before Ireland introduced the right of association for military personnel (albeit with a certain number of restrictions, including no trade union rights or collective bargaining on social and labour issues).

As these rules strongly limited the possibility to fully represent Irish military personnel, especially concerning collective bargaining for salaries, EUROMIL introduced a collective complaint at the European Committee of Social Rights against Ireland in 2014. In February 2018, the Committee of Ministers confirmed among others that it does not consider that a complete ban on affiliation with a national umbrella organisation, such as the Irish Congress of Trade Unions (ICTU) in the Irish context, is necessary or proportionate. Still, the Irish government blocked for many years the affiliation of two Irish military associations, PDFORRA and RACO, to the ICTU. It was only in spring 2022 that the two aforementioned associations joined the ICTU. Even though this is a huge step forward for EUROMIL’s Irish member associations, full trade union rights have not yet been granted.

Comparable situations exist, for example, in France, Portugal, Spain, Italy, Cyprus and Greece where military personnel can join professional associations, but trade union rights, collective bargaining, or joining trade union federations is not permitted. As a result, EUROMIL decided, in agreement with its Portuguese members, to lodge a collective complaint against Portugal. A result of this complaint can be expected early 2023.

While Hungary, North Macedonia, Serbia and Montenegro grant trade union rights to their military personnel, other countries such as Bulgaria, Poland and Romania only accept military associations with limited competences. The latter is also the case in the Baltic states.

The situation with the German armed forces is rather unique. The German Armed Forces Association – the Deutscher Bundeswehr-Verband or DBwV – was founded in 1956. Built on the foundations of the new post-war German armed forces in which democratic conduct and principles such as citizen in uniform were applied. The DBwV is viewed as the only representative partner for German military personnel but is not part of a trade union federation.

Military representation: wanted and needed?

Of course, you can ask yourself, why should we have military representation? The reality is that all workers, including those in uniform, need associations and by preference trade unions to help improve their terms of employment, their legal position, their salary, to improve career possibilities, their education, their housing, as well as their medical and psychosocial care. The increase of defence spending, common EU defence projects such as the Permanent Structured Cooperation, the adoption of the Strategic Compass and the creation of a Rapid Deployment Capacity are just a few examples of the changing situation in European armed forces cooperation; it is evident from past and present developments that you need strong military representation through associations or trade unions to organise against the impact of any upheavals.

This brings me to my conclusion, that human rights in the armed forces are not always fully or correctly implemented. Therefore, we must continue to repeat that soldiers are citizens in uniform with the same rights and freedoms as their fellow citizens. When implementing human rights, exclusions are not allowed, and limitations must be proportionate and substantiated. Only in this way can the right balance between the mission and the working and living conditions of those in the armed forces be guaranteed.