In a ruling delivered by the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) on 11 January 2006 in the case of Sørensen and Rasmussen v Denmark, the Court ruled that it is a violation of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) for a person to be compelled to be a member of a specific trade union in order to be employed in a Danish enterprise. The question at issue was whether it is a violation of Article 11 of the ECHR to prevent people from obtaining employment if they refuse to be a member of a trade union that has concluded a closed-shop agreement with the enterprise in question.
Danish law specifically excluded employees from protection from dismissal on grounds of not being a member of an association or of a specified association in cases where the employee knew prior to employment that said membership was a condition of employment. The issue of the closed shop is not provided for specifically in Irish law.
Closed shops can be divided into two categories: pre-entry and post-entry. A pre-entry closed shop is a situation whereby persons are required to be members of a specific union before they can obtain certain jobs. A post-entry closed shop is a situation whereby existing employees are required to join a specific trade union after they have engaged in employment.
The Irish Courts have considered closed shop arrangements in a number of legal cases. The judgements suggest that employees have a right to disassociate where a closed shop arrangement is introduced and enforced against a worker already in employment (i.e. post-entry closed shop).
However, the Irish Courts have not ruled definitively on the constitutionality of either the pre-entry closed shop or the post-entry closed shop as it is applied to newly-recruited employees. In such an event, it is likely that any judgment would be informed by the Sorenson/Rasmussen case.