Türkiye’de memurların sendikal hakları çerçevesinde grev hakkı

Devletin asli ve surekli kamu hizmetlerini yerine getiren memurlarin orgutlenmeleri ve orgutlenmeleri neticesinde dogan haklari, sahip olduklari ayricalikli statu sebebiyle bircok alanda tartismaya konu olmustur.   Yapilan calismada Turkiye’de memurlarin sendikal haklari cercevesinde grev hakki ele alinarak var olan tartismalar degerlendirilmis, memurlarin bu alandaki konumu irdelenmistir.   Memur, 1982 Anayasasi’nin 128. maddesi geregince; devletin asli ve surekli kamu hizmetlerini yerine getiren kisilerdir. Bu kisilerin Devlet ile olan iliskisi statu hukuk cercevesinde duzenlenir. Bu anlamda, bu iliski; genel, soyut, objektif hukuk kurallari ile duzenlenen “duzenleyici (kural) islemler” ile sekillenir.   Grev ise genel anlamda is birakimi olarak tanimlanmaktadir. Bagimli calisanlarin topluca is birakmasi olarak tanimlanan grev, oncelikle bir vakia olarak karsimiza cikmis, sonradan bir hak halini almistir. Sendikal haklardan biri olan grev, calisanlarin elinde isverene yonelik kullandigi bir kozdur.   Memur ve grev kavramini ayni potada erittigimizde, tezimizin tartisma konusu ortaya cikmaktadir. Memurlarin sahip olduklari ayricalikli statu ve konum, memurlarin orgutlenmesi ve grev haklarini kullanmasi yonunde karsit gorusler dogurmaktadir. Memurlarin sendikalasmasina iliskin uluslar arasi ve ulusal duzeyde gorus birligi saglanmis olsa da grev hakki ayni kaderi paylasamamaktadir.   Memurlarin grev hakkinin var oldugunu ve var olmasini ileri suren goruse gore; sendikal haklar bir butundur ve parcalanamaz. Birinin kullanimi digerinin varligina bagladir. Bu acidan grevsiz bir toplu sozlesme etkin degildir. Bu bakis acisina gore, memurlar grev hakkina sahip olmalidirlar. Hali hazirda uluslararasi sozlesmelerle de (BM ve ILO sozlesmelerinde) memurlarin grev hakki taninmistir.   Memurlarin grev hakkinin var olmadigini ve var olmamasini ileri suren goruse gore de, memurlarin gordukleri asli ve surekli gorevler kamu hizmeti niteliginde oldugundan grev yapildiginda etkilenecek kesim kamu hizmeti alan toplumdur. Ayrica, memurlarin icinde bulunduklari statusel calisma iliskisi sistemi, grev yapilmasini olanakli kilmaz. Bu bakis acisina gore de, grev yapildiginda karsiliginda lokavt olmasi gerekir ancak Devlet lokavt yapamayacagindan grev kendiliginden olanaksizdir.   Turkiye’de memurlarin grev hakkini acikca yasaklayan anayasal bir hukum yoktur. Ancak; 657 sayili kanun 27. maddesi geregince grev yasaklanmistir. Memurlarin grev hakkina iliskin tartismalar, Anayasanin 90. maddesi isiginda, ulusal ve uluslararasi mevzuata gore degerlendirilip ortak bir paydada gorus birligi saglanmalidir. Demokratik, sosyal bir hukuk devleti gereklerinin yerine getirilebilmesi icin memur sendikalari derneklestirilmemeli, sendikacilik tum sendikal haklarini kullanarak aktif hale getirilmelidir.Abstract   The organization and the rights obtained as a result of organizing of civil servants’, who are responsible for fundamental and permanent functions required by the public services, privileged status have always been led to discussions.   In this research, existent discussions about the Right of Strike of public servants due to their union rights and the role of public servants at this structure in Turkey are examined.   A public servant, according to the article 128 of 1982 Constitution, is the person who carries out the fundemental and permanent functions required by public services. The relationship between public servants and the government is regulated by Status Law. In this context, this relationship, takes form with “regulatory acts” which is arranged by general, abstract, and objective legal principles.   On the other hand, strike is generally defined as walkout of the dependent employers. From this definition strike, at first, considered as an event but after a while it has become a right. As one of the union rights, strike is a trump for workers against their employers.   As we take the public servant and strike as a concept at the same frame, the discussion of this thesis arises. The privileged status and position of public servants, generates contrary opinions about organizing and using the right of strike of public servants. Altough there is a national and international consensus about the unionization of public servants, the right of strike does not share the same destiny.   According to the opinion which asserts the right of strike shall exist, union right are whole and indivisable. The usage of one depends the other ones existance. At this point a collective bargaining without a strike is not efficient. According to this point of view public servants should have the right of strike. The right of strike for public servants is already accepted in international conventions (like UN andILO).   On the other hand, according to the opinion which asserts the right of strike of public servants shall not exist, the main task of public servants is to do the fundemantel and permanent public services, so during a strike society ,who takes the public service, will effect negatively. In addition, the statutional working relation system of public servants makes it impossible to do a strike. In this point of view, if public servants go for a strike a lock out must used, but a government cant use lock out so a strike is spontaneously impossible.   There is no constitutional law defining the right of strike of public servants clearly at Turkey. However, according to the article 27 of Government Officials Code numbered 657, strike is forbidden.   The discussion about the right of strike of public servants shall appreised according to the national and international legislation and in the light of article 90 of Constitution it shall come into a consensus at the common denominator. To meet the requirements of a democratic and social constitutional state, public servant unions should not turned into associations, unionism should activated with the usage of all of the union rights.