In the aftermath of the 1980 military coup in Turkey, labor activism has been institutionally disempowered to such a degree that today, the unionized workers comprise only about eight percent of the workforce. In this repressive context, what does using human rights frameworks offer for activists in Turkey, in terms of providing remedies for labor rights violations and transforming labor activism on the ground? And what explains which groups within organized labor in Turkey use human rights law and discourse? In recent years, similar trends have arisen around the world, as labor activists have used human rights frameworks to draw attention to the precarious working conditions and restrictions on labor activism. While some scholars are enthusiastic about the prospects of this new alliance between human rights advocates and labor activists to renew focus on labor issues, others are skeptical of turning away from the traditional class-based strategies to individual rights-claiming before the courts. Yet, we lack a comparative study that carefully examines the effects of these rulings on the ground. Analyzing legal mobilization of labor activists at the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), this research employs multiple methods to suggest that (a) the legal advocacy networks play a fundamental role in successfully using international frameworks and vernacularizing human rights law for local activists, (b) legal mobilization at the ECtHR has opened new discursive and strategic avenues that can be explored in other forms of labor activism, despite the limits of formal judicial remedies, (c) the strength of the organized labor and the ability to engage in mobilization efforts in multiple fronts determines the extent to which litigation efforts can be used as leverage at the domestic level by labor activists. The results of this research provides important information on strategies for labor activists and the remedies human rights courts provides for protecting the rights of aggrieved workers.