Turning up the Heat

Workers around the world have already suffered from the impacts of climate change, and this will only worsen as global temperatures continue to rise. Notably, the 1.5 degree Celsius warming limit set by the Paris Agreement, the legally binding international treaty on climate change, was confirmed to have been surpassed in 2024.  Looking at just one of the impacts of global warming, namely heat, the ILO has estimated conservatively that in 2030, 2.2 per cent of total working hours worldwide will be lost to higher temperatures – a productivity loss equivalent to ​80 million full-time jobs. New research by Cornell University's Global Labor Institute and Schroders on the garment industry found that extreme heat and flooding are ​threatening key apparel production hubs. Four countries vital for fashion production, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Cambodia and Vietnam, risk losing $65 billion in export earnings and one million potential jobs by 2030 as a result of global warming. 

Further, without workplace democracy, there is no guarantee that the new jobs in the “green economy” will be decent jobs. This is particularly true in “green” supply chains, where miners of minerals such as lithium, a necessary element in electric vehicle batteries, work in absolutely brutal conditions. Indeed, much of the green economy continues to rely on racialized labor exploitation in the Global South. 

Securing a Just Transition for workers 

In order to address the impacts of climate change through mitigation and adaptation measures, trade unions have promoted the concept of a “just transition.” Through consistent union pressure, the concept was later embedded in the preamble to the Paris Agreement. In 2015, the ILO’s tripartite constituents (i.e., governments, employers, workers) unanimously endorsed the Guidelines for a just transition towards environmentally sustainable economies and societies. The promotion and realization of fundamental principles and rights at work, which includes the principle of freedom of association (and by extension the right to strike), is at the heart of the guidelines. The UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Peaceful Assembly and Association also echoed the ILO, specifically calling on the recognition of the right to strike over climate related issues.  

The Right to Strike in the climate context

In our article, we note that the regulation of the right to strike at the national level as it pertains to questions of climate change is uneven and limiting. In many jurisdictions, the right to strike can be exercised only in the context of collective bargaining and/or a trade dispute. As such, unions operating in such jurisdictions will find it difficult to engage in climate-related strikes as the purpose of the action ostensibly falls outside the strict scope of collective bargaining or a trade dispute. In countries where strikes in furtherance of socio-economic aims are permitted, unions will still need to prove that climate change is a socio-economic issue and not just an environmental or a political one. Further, the right to the collective withdrawal of labor over occupational safety and health risks is insufficiently protected to protect workers from climate harms. As such, workers currently do not have the tools necessary to meaningfully engage employers or governments over climate policy, in particular as it relates to the rights and interests of workers and their communities. 

We posit that international law should be read to already protect a right to strike in the climate context. The ILO’s authoritative supervisory mechanisms, including the tripartite Committee on Freedom of Association (CFA), has for over 70 years defined the scope of the right to freedom of association, including the right to strike. The ILO has explained that, “organizations responsible for defending workers’ socio-economic and occupational interests should be able to use strike action to support their position in the search for solutions to problems posed by major social and economic policy trends which have a direct impact on their members and all workers in general, in particular as regards employment, social protection and standards of living.” In light of their previous conclusions and recommendations on the right to strike, we have no doubt that the ILO would similarly find climate strikes to be protected under its standards once presented with such a case. 

Recent developments in international and regional human rights law also serve as a foundation for protecting the right to freedom of association, and thereby the right to strike, in the climate context. In 2022, the UN General Assembly resolved that all people have a right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment and, in doing so, implicitly recognized the critical importance of workers being able to associate freely in order to help give full effect to the Resolution. As we describe in our article, the Inter-American and European Human Rights systems have also recently addressed the issue of climate change in a way which we argue supports the right to strike over climate change. It remains to be seen if or how the International Court of Justice (ICJ) will address the issue in its forthcoming advisory opinion on climate change and human rights. The International Trade Union Confederation and the International Transport Workers’ Federation filed an amicus brief with the ICJ with respect to climate change, including the importance of recognizing the right to freedom of association and the right to strike. We argue that governments worldwide should amend their national laws to recognize a robust right to strike in the context of the climate crisis. This change would allow workers and unions to exercise this right in practice, while also aligning with the recent developments at the ILO and regional human rights bodies described above.  

No time to waste