罢工的权利是公民应享有的一项基本权利,但我国现行宪法对此未作出明确的规定.长期以来,由于受传统观念的影响,我们一直较为忽视这一问题.随着我国改革开放的深入及市场经济体制的确立,罢工作为职工争取自己的物质利益和改善工作、生活条件的手段,作用越来越显著.因此,探讨罢工应否作为公民的一项宪法权利,已为实践所需.笔者认为,似应考虑在我国宪法中明确公民的罢工权利,而且目前时机也较为成熟.理由是:一、传统观念认为我国是公有制的社会主义国家,企业职工作为人民的一部分是国家的主人,是企业的主人,罢工实质上就是罢自己的工,最终受损害的还是自己.但现在这一情况已发生了较大的变化,改革开放使我国经济领域出现了多种所有制和经济成分并存的局面,“三资”企业、私营企业大量涌现,公有制企业已越来越多地采取承包、租赁的形式,且股份制改造使得很多公有企业成为混合所有制企业,在这些企业内罢工事件时有发生,尤其是在“三资”企业和私营企业内.现实生活中罢工的客观存在,使这一问题成为我们必须面对而不能回避、不能抑制的社会问题.但一些人包括某些领导干部认为罢工不是宪法规定的公民权利,从而将其视为非法加以“弹压”,甚至粗暴地拒绝罢工中职工提出的一些合理主张,使得许多问题无法及时得? The right to strike is a basic right that citizens should enjoy, but the current constitution of our country does not make any explicit stipulations on this. For a long time, we have been neglecting this issue because of the influence of traditional concepts. With the deepening of China’s reform and opening up And the establishment of a market economy system, the strike has become more and more significant as a means by which workers struggle for their own material interests and improve their working and living conditions. Therefore, it is already necessary for them to explore whether strikes should be taken as a constitutional right of citizens. The author believes that it may be considered in our constitution to clarify the right of citizens to strike, but the current timing is relatively mature for the following reasons: First, the traditional view that our country is a public-owned socialist country, enterprise workers as part of the people is the masters of the country, Is the owner of the enterprise, and the strike is essentially a strike by one’s own work and ultimately the one that has been harmed or damaged. However, this situation has undergone major changes. The reform and opening up have brought about the coexistence of various kinds of ownership and economic components in the economic field of our country As a result, “three-funded” enterprises and private-owned enterprises have emerged in large numbers. Public-owned enterprises have increasingly adopted contracts and leased And the joint-stock reform made many public-owned enterprises become mixed-ownership enterprises, and strikes were frequent in these enterprises, especially in “three-capital” enterprises and private enterprises. The objective existence of strikes in real life turned this problem into We must face the social problems that we can not evade and can not contain, but some people, including some leading cadres who think that strikes are not civil rights prescribed by the Constitution can be treated as illegally “suppressed” or even rudely rejected by striking workers Some reasonable suggestions that many problems can not be timely?