Hungary’s requirement that teachers keep providing childcare and part of their lessons during a strike amounted to an unlawful restriction of their rights, the European Court of Human Rights has ruled. The judgment, reported on 15 October 2026, says the measures introduced during the Covid-19 pandemic went beyond what a democratic state could justify.
The decision is not yet final. The Hungarian government has until 6 January 2027 to ask for the case to be referred for reconsideration, leaving the timing and precise consequences of any legal changes unresolved.
A strike that had to keep schools running
The dispute centred on a decree adopted in February 2022. It established compulsory minimum services during industrial action, including childcare and the continuation of part of the normal teaching programme.
Teachers were therefore still permitted to strike in formal terms, but the obligations attached to that right limited the disruption a strike could cause. Schools had to maintain significant elements of their ordinary work while staff were meant to be using collective action to press their demands.
The court found that this was a disproportionate interference with the rights of teachers and their trade unions. Hungary had exceeded the discretion available to states when regulating strikes, it said, because the restrictions were not sufficiently justified in a democratic society.
That reasoning focuses on the practical value of the right, not merely its existence in law. A right to strike can be weakened without being expressly abolished if workers must continue performing enough of their normal duties to leave employers under little pressure.
What the pandemic could — and could not — justify
The Hungarian government introduced the rules under the stated demands of managing the Covid-19 emergency. The ruling does not mean that governments are barred from protecting children or organising essential school services during a strike. States retain room to regulate industrial action where they are pursuing a legitimate public interest.
But that room has limits. Restrictions must be proportionate to the aim being pursued and must leave workers with a meaningful ability to defend their professional and social interests collectively. In this case, the court concluded that the balance had been lost.
The judgment concerns the legal conditions imposed on teachers’ strikes. It is not a general ruling on every aspect of the education policy of Viktor Orbán’s government. Its significance lies in the boundary it places on crisis measures: an emergency cannot automatically be used to impose obligations so extensive that a protected labour right becomes largely ineffective.
The next step rests with Budapest
Hungary can seek a review of the ruling by 6 January 2027. If no such request is made, or if it does not alter the judgment, the country will be required to bring the contested framework into line with the European Convention on Human Rights.
That could involve changes to the rules on minimum services as well as to the practical arrangements governing strikes in schools. The court has not prescribed the exact form those changes must take.
For teachers and their unions, the central issue is consequently more than whether a strike can be announced. It is whether the action can exert real pressure. Strasbourg’s answer is that Hungary crossed the line when it required schools to preserve too much of normal teaching and childcare during industrial action.
Read Telex’s report on the court’s decision.
