Facts

On January 1, 1995, a collective bargaining agreement for workers in the garage industry of the canton of Geneva came into force. This agreement was signed, on the employer side, by the Swiss Automobile Trade Association (UPSA) and, on the union side, by the Swiss Metalworkers' and Watchmakers' Federation (FTMH) and another union. It notably provided for a maximum weekly working time of 40 hours, a thirteenth-month salary, and a fifth week of vacation.

Garages X. SA and Y. SA, which were members of UPSA until December 31, 1996, terminated the employment contracts of their employees as of December 31, 1996 and offered them new working conditions as of January 1, 1997 (replacement of the thirteenth-month salary with a year-end bonus, a weekly working time of 42 hours, four weeks of vacation instead of five).

On February 27, 1997, the FTMH filed a declaratory action and a claim for payment against these two companies, accusing them of having violated the collective agreement by unilaterally modifying the individual contracts of the employees who were subject to it.

Considerations

The Federal Tribunal upheld the appeal of the FTMH and annulled the cantonal judgment that had rejected all of its conclusions.

First, the Federal Tribunal recalled that the capacity to sue and the capacity to defend belong to the substantive conditions of the disputed claim and are determined according to the merits. With regard to professional associations, the case law has recognized their capacity to sue when they intend to defend a collective interest that includes not only the personal interest of their members, but also that of persons who, without being among their members, nevertheless practice the profession of the latter.

However, in this case, the FTMH is acting not in the interest of all workers in the profession, but only in the interest of workers bound by the collective agreement. Therefore, since the first condition set by the case law is not met, the Federal Tribunal can only reject the grievance based on the right to personality.

Nevertheless, the Federal Tribunal upholds the appeal of the FTMH on the basis of the Federal Act against Unfair Competition (LCD). Indeed, according to Article 7 LCD, anyone who does not observe the legal or contractual working conditions that…