Balancing between public sector workers’ rights and state continuity

Lebanese public employees have, for years, operated under a restrictive legal framework limiting their ability to organize professionally, express certain positions publicly, and participate in collective actions such as strikes. However, the economic collapse that began in 2019 has transformed this debate from a question of administrative discipline into a broader discussion about workers’ rights, state functionality, and the survival of public institutions.

As salaries lost most of their purchasing power, public administrations faced increasing absenteeism, resignations, and repeated strikes. In response, a debate has emerged over whether existing restrictions remain compatible with constitutional principles and international labor standards, or whether they remain necessary safeguards to prevent the paralysis of state institutions.

A proposed reform to redefine public employees’ rights

In an attempt to expand constitutional guarantees for civil servants while preserving the functioning of public administration, Lebanese Member of Parliament (MP) Bilal Abdallah, member of the Democratic Gathering bloc, submitted a proposal to amend Articles 14 and 15 of the Civil Servants’ Regulations. The proposal focuses on redefining the relationship between public employees and the state by expanding professional freedom while maintaining obligations linked to public service.

Speaking to The Beiruter, Abdallah argued that the current regulations no longer reflect contemporary realities, noting that the Civil Servants’ Regulations date back to 1959 and require a broader modernization process rather than isolated amendments. “The proposal I submitted focuses on the right of public employees to establish unions,” Abdallah said, arguing that such rights exist “in all developed countries” and should not be denied to government employees while being available to private-sector workers.

This right exists in all developed countries. Denying it to public employees is not compatible with constitutional principles.

The reform includes three main pillars:

First, it seeks to remove the prohibition preventing public employees from joining professional organizations and unions, allowing them to establish functional unions under legal supervision. Currently, public employees rely mainly on professional associations and representative bodies, such as teachers’ leagues and university employee associations, rather than legally recognized unions under the supervision of the Ministry of Labor.

Second, the proposal addresses restrictions on strikes. Instead of maintaining an absolute prohibition, it would remove the ban on exercising a strike while preserving restrictions against unlawful incitement to strike. The objective is to distinguish between collective expression of grievances and actions that intentionally disrupt public services.

Third, the proposal revises limitations on freedom of expression, seeking to ensure that public employees retain their rights as citizens while maintaining restrictions related to professional confidentiality and the proper functioning of public institutions.

The constitutional dilemma between rights and state continuity

The debate over public sector strikes reflects a wider constitutional question: how can a state recognize workers’ rights while guaranteeing that public institutions continue operating?

Under the current Civil Servants’ Regulations, public employees are prohibited from striking or encouraging others to strike. Supporters of maintaining this restriction argue that public administration differs from private employment because state employees provide essential services directly linked to citizens’ rights. Therefore, the complete paralysis of state institutions cannot be accepted under any constitutional system, in order to ensure the continuity of public services.

However, Lebanon’s current circumstances have gone beyond the assumptions behind existing legislation. The 2019 economic collapse has created conditions where traditional complaint mechanisms have become insufficient to address employees’ deteriorating living standards.

The proposed reform attempts to create a middle ground: recognizing the right of public employees to organize and defend their interests while preventing actions that could permanently disrupt essential services.

The objective is not to encourage strikes, but to prevent the complete denial of employees’ rights while maintaining the regular functioning of public institutions.

Under Abdallah’s proposal, employees would still face obligations regarding administrative discipline. For example, if a direct superior issues clearly illegal instructions, the employee would be required to formally notify the administration and the Inspection Board, creating stronger accountability mechanisms within public institutions.

The 2019 economic collapse and the rise of public sector protests

Lebanon’s financial crisis has significantly challenged the traditional legal framework governing public employment. Since 2019, the collapse of the Lebanese pound has drastically reduced public-sector salaries, pushing thousands of employees into severe financial hardship.

Before the crisis, public sector salaries were largely based on the Lebanese pound’s official exchange rate ($1 = LBP 1,515). However, with inflation reaching record levels and the currency losing more than 90% of its value, many employees found their wages insufficient to cover transportation costs, healthcare expenses, and basic living needs.

The deterioration of working conditions contributed to a wave of strikes across ministries, public administrations, schools, and state institutions. Employees increasingly viewed collective action as their only effective tool to pressure authorities after years of unsuccessful demands for salary adjustments and social protections.

The current reality has exceeded existing legal assumptions, explaining that while public employees remain legally responsible for attending work and performing their duties, the socioeconomic crisis has changed the circumstances surrounding public-sector strikes. In this context, MP Abdallah contended that

The situation in Lebanon has changed, and many provisions that were appropriate decades ago no longer correspond to today’s realities.

Finding a balance between labor rights and an effective state

Lebanon’s debate over public sector strikes reflects a broader challenge facing many states: balancing employees’ collective rights with the need to preserve essential public services.

Completely restricting public employees’ ability to organize risks weakening their representation and deepening frustration within state institutions. Conversely, allowing unrestricted strikes without safeguards could threaten administrative continuity and citizens’ access to essential services. This is why MP Abdallah believed that he has suggested a balanced approach.

The goal is to guarantee employees’ constitutional rights while preserving the continuity and proper functioning of public administration.

The challenge is not choosing between workers’ rights and state stability, but creating a system where both can coexist.