Judicial intervention and the right to strike: a comparative analysis

The right to strike is an internationally recognized fundamental right and a crucial instrument for workers to defend their interests. However, this right is at crossroads. In today's globalized economies and 'liquid' societies, strikes have a different impact than in traditional industrial societies: strikes generate broader economic side effects, often remain local while decisions are made internationally and must adapt to diverse worker attitudes and societal perceptions. At the same time, the legal framework surrounding the right to strike is becoming increasingly unclear. Many legal systems lack legislation on the exercise of the right to strike. Against this background, judicial intervention in collective disputes becomes more pronounced and more relevant. Although research on the right to strike exists, the role of the courts remains underexplored, and discussions are often confined to national contexts. This study addresses this gap through a comparative legal analysis of supranational and selected national frameworks. It maps judicial intervention in strike-related disputes and examines to what extent these interventions align with international and European legal standards. The hypothesis is that a more general judicial dynamic exists regarding the right to strike and that the debate on this issue takes place at a more supranational level than currently perceived within national contexts.