ILCCR: Examination of individual case concerning Convention No. 98, Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining, 1949 Guatemala (ratification: 1952) Published: 2007


Description:(ILCCR Individual Observation)
Convention:C098
Country:(Guatemala)
Session of the Conference:96
Document:22
Subject classification: Freedom of Association
Subject classification: Collective Bargaining and Agreements
Subject: Freedom of Association, Collective Bargaining, and Industrial Relations
Display the document in:  French   Spanish
Document No. (ilolex): 132007GTM098

A Government representative indicated that the Committee of Experts' comments acted as guidelines for applying and complying with the commitments made in the quest for better conditions, as well as for strengthening labour relations for the socio-economic development of the population at large. He welcomed the Office's technical assistance for applying and complying with international labour standards, stressing that it was necessary to continue strengthening and boosting technical support, assistance and cooperation. The work of the technical mission that visited Guatemala between 26 February and 2 March 2007 was extremely useful in continuing or adopting the necessary measures for compliance with the Committee of Experts' comments. The members of the technical mission held meetings with various governmental institutions such as the tax authority, the National Civil Service Office, the President's Commission on Human Rights, Supreme Court judges, prosecutors belonging to the special prosecution service for offences against journalists and trade unionists of the Public Prosecutor's office, members of the Congressional Labour Committee and workers' and employers' organizations, including the Tripartite Commission on International Labour Affairs.

During those meetings, the Government submitted detailed information and responded to questions from members of the technical mission on a variety of subjects raised by the supervisory bodies. Although the technical mission's report had still not been received, the Government had already begun to take measures in compliance with the recommendations and suggestions made therein, such as measures for holding tripartite meetings on freedom of association and collective bargaining in the maquila industry. Taking into account the significance of the issue, technical and financial assistance had been requested for holding monthly tripartite meetings on that subject at the ILO Subregional Office in Costa Rica, which had received a favourable response.

A bill was being drafted concerning legal reforms to the Labour Code to comply with the provisions of the Conventions on freedom of association. The bill was in the discussion and negotiation phase with the various sectors. Therefore, he requested that technical assistance continued. The Government representative indicated that, since the Ministry of Labour and Social Security wished to continue dialogue and respond to the various concerns put forward by the Guatemalan trade union and employer representatives, it would begin to hold permanent meetings in order to improve labour relations. The labour issue was central to the successful application of the Free Trade Agreement between Central America, the Dominican Republic and the United States, meaning that the commitments arising from the Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work should be made effective. The Government was receiving cooperation on various projects, some of which were undertaken with the Subregional Office for Central America. One example was the project to strengthen justice at work in Central America and the Dominican Republic. Its immediate goal was to bring about effective compliance with international labour standards through a range of highly significant activities such as courses and workshops to help improve compliance with labour legislation.

With regard to the comments made by the former International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (now the International Trade Union Federation), the Government representative indicated that the relevant investigations had been undertaken and their observations had been sent to the Office.

With regard to the cases heard before the Committee on Freedom of Association, the Government representative indicated that the allegations made were being investigated and that they would send the corresponding observations in each case. He expressed a willingness to continue all efforts, as was shown by the regular information sent and in the establishment of a tripartite commission to undertake independent investigations.

With regard to the initiative to amend the Civil Service Bill, the Government representative said that broad consultations had taken place, that contradictory proposals had been made in Congress and that he would keep the Committee informed of developments. In January 2007, technical assistance was requested from the Committee on Freedom of Association in order to analyse and implement recommendations and suggestions needed to make the initiative compatible with Conventions Nos 87 and 98, but a response had yet to be received.

With regard to the complaints made concerning the non-existence of sufficient safeguards on the dismissal of civil servants, the speaker said that the provisions governing labour infractions or offences could be found in Guatemala's Constitution, Labour Code, Civil Service Act and its regulations, and the Unionization and Regulation of Strikes by State Workers Act. For those provisions to be applied, the facts must be examined to decide on which punishment was merited, ranging from a verbal warning to dismissal. There were in fact sufficient safeguards in the procedures concerning the dismissal of civil servants, in terms of both the right to defence and the appeal remedies available. The Government representative added that the Government had continued and strengthened tripartism and social dialogue, spurred on by the ILO, through the National Occupational Health and Safety Council, the National Salary Commission and the Tripartite Commission on International Labour Affairs. He stressed the work undertaken by the latter body, which carried out effective consultations on all issues covered by the Tripartite Consultation (International Labour Standards) Convention, 1976 (No. 144), and examined issues relating to freedom of association and collective bargaining. Significant tripartite agreements had been reached. Conciliatory dialogue had been introduced in 15 cases through the rapid response mechanism, bipartite meetings were being held between workers and employers to draft procedures for trying labour and social security offences in order to expedite the process. Those draft procedures would be then sent to the Supreme Court for the judges to give their opinion. The tripartite subcommissions and councils had begun to meet and priority was given to those cases presented by the Trade Union of Workers of Guatemala (UNSITRAGUA), independent investigations recommended in some cases by the Committee on Freedom of Association and legal reforms proposed by the Committee of Experts. All that was left was for the sectors to nominate the members of those commissions.

Meetings had been held with the congressional working committee on legal reforms. Meetings also took place with Supreme Court judges in order to improve the application of labour legislation in labour courts. That had expedited trials for labour and social security offences, with the respective fines being imposed. The tripartite proposal to appoint an official dedicated specifically to processing labour and social security offences was being considered, as was the tripartite proposal to hold courses and workshops for judges in order to unify criteria.

With regard to the complaints made concerning breaches of collective agreements, the Government representative indicated that, according to a joint investigation undertaken by the Ministry of Labour and Social Security and the labour courts, complaints were few. He stressed that, when a complaint had been made, the parties in conflict were asked to use the Joint Board to reach agreements through mediation and by complying with the collective agreements. Concerning anti-union dismissals, he indicated that, in accordance with an investigation undertaken by the labour courts, complaints were few, in spite of the existing legal measures.

The Ministry of Labour and the Supreme Court judges had begun an investigation into all complaints of non-compliance with the reinstatement of dismissed unionists, as part of the cases heard by the Committee on Freedom of Association. Information was sent concerning the cases in which reinstatement had been made effective. In those cases in which it had not been made effective, the offence of disobeying private sector employers that did not comply with judicial rulings was noted, with a criminal case being launched. When that involved mayors or State Ministers, the matter should be resolved before pre-trial in order to begin criminal proceedings. Other cases remained to be heard by other courts owing to applications for the protection of constitutional rights (amparo) or appeals.

With regard to the recommendation by the Committee of Experts on revising the procedures provided for in legislation since the structure of labour trials and the number of courts able to hear a case meant that they lasted for years, the Government representative indicated that the Special Congressional Commission for reforms in the justice sector had drafted a bill to approve reforms to the Act on Amparo, Habeas Corpus and Constitutionality which had been passed and then approved in second reading by Congress. That proposal was the result of support from Supreme Court judges, the National Commission for Monitoring and Supporting the Strengthening of Justice, officials from the Public Prosecutor's Office, lawyers from the national legal aid system, representatives of the Colegio de Abogados and civil society representatives. The reforms sought to improve and expedite the amparo process, turning it into an extraordinary, short and effective system in terms of its status as the guardian of fundamental rights. The Government representative recognized that the current system had caused delays, overloaded the courts and generated abuses. He felt that it was unnecessary to reform the Code of Labour Procedure, although there had been meetings in that respect and Supreme Court judges maintained a continuous dialogue with all the country's judges in order to expedite labour trials, being entirely oral.

With regard to the project concerning the national policy on free advice for workers who wished to form trade unions, he indicated that it was moving forward and that didactic material had been distributed throughout the country as part of a national policy to protect and develop trade unionism. The Government representative stressed that the Ministry of Labour was endeavouring to comply with and effectively apply international labour standards and reiterated his willingness to investigate and resolve all cases of anti-union violence. In that respect, updated information had been sent concerning the investigations by the special prosecution service for offences against journalists and trade unionists of the Public Prosecutor's office, as part of cases heard before the Committee on Freedom of Association. He stressed that some cases had been thrown out and in others, it was impossible to take the investigations forward owing to the lack of cooperation by the complainants themselves, particularly in the case of threats, which were independent offences to be heard by a different authority. Lastly, the Government representative indicated that the Government continued to work and take significant steps forward, although he recognized that there were pending issues. Those would require more time, assistance and cooperation, but efforts were being made to achieve decent work for all with sustainable development.

The Employer members appreciated the positive attitude of the Government. They recalled that the Committee had discussed the case of Guatemala every year between 1991 and 2005 under Convention No. 87, and, more recently, for the last two years under Convention No. 98. While the Committee had been able to note progress on several occasions, the Committee of Experts' observation described a number of remaining problems. Convention No. 98 was quite different to Convention No. 87, dealing with two specific matters: the protection of the right to organize, and protection of workers' and employers' organizations from interference by each other. The Convention also promotes collective bargaining, stressing the autonomy of the social partners and voluntariness. The Committee of Experts had identified at least eight issues where the legislation could be insufficient, on all of which the Government had provided information. With regard to the recent technical assistance mission, the Employer members noted that its report was not yet available, which would have given the Committee an updated picture of the situation. The Employer members requested that the Government bring law and practice into line with the Convention.

The Worker members pointed out that the case of Guatemala had unfortunately become a so-called chronic case characterized by persistent violations of the right to organize and collective bargaining. In 2006, the Committee had expressed its deep concern as regards the climate of continuous violence, the inertia of the legal system, the inactivity of the Government when it came to bringing national legislation and practice into line with the Convention and taking the specific measures required in the export processing zones.

The Worker members noted that the consecutive reports of the Committee of Experts did not reveal any real progress. Violence and dismissals still affected workers seeking to undertake union-related activities; the practice of blacklists persisted; trade unionists in enterprises were still intimidated; the legal system continued to work with an intolerable slowness; the number of collective agreements signed in the export processing zones remained ludicrous. In 2007, three trade unionists had already been murdered, and others had been imprisoned. Undeniably, that picture did not demonstrate an improvement in the situation. In its report, the Committee of Experts confirmed that no progress had been recorded concerning the reinstatement of dismissed trade unionists, the tardiness of procedures, trade union rights in the export processing zones, arbitrary dismissals and the violation of collective agreements, guarantees for the dismissal of civil servants, consultation of social partners, revision of the Code of Labour Procedures and reform of the Civil Service Bill. Regrettably, the reality experienced by the workers of Guatemala confirmed that bleak picture. As regards the statistics provided by the Government, the Worker members treated them with scepticism and requested more precise information regarding the specific results of the technical mission. Lastly, they requested that the conclusions concerning the case be very clear and very firm.

The Worker member of Guatemala paid tribute to Pedro Zamora, Secretary General of the Sindicato de Trabajadores de la Empresa Portuaria Quetzal (STEPQ), who was murdered on 15 January 2007 for reasons linked to his role as a labour activist. The speaker welcomed the support of the International Trade Union Confederation, which had immediately sent a mission to the country. The ongoing impunity in Guatemala for those who committed anti-union acts should be brought to an end.

The speaker criticized the strategies that sought to silence and discredit trade unions and their leaders through intimidation campaigns in the press and unlawful entries and searches of trade union premises. While there were consultations under the tripartite committee established to comply with Convention No. 144, it remained necessary to recognize, abide by and monitor the strict application of the Conventions on freedom of association. The strategy to violate those Conventions included promoting activities by solidarity associations, cooperativism and anything that encouraged a neo-liberal economic project.

The speaker cited particular cases in which union workers had been dismissed and examples of labour law proceedings that had come to a standstill, in addition to a lack of willingness to enter into collective bargaining. Recalling other murders of union leaders in February 2007 in Guatemala City, the speaker stressed the need for the ILO to ensure that freedom of association and collective bargaining were protected in Guatemala.

The Employer member of Guatemala stressed that the ILO supervisory bodies were being used persistently and indiscriminately, even when national circumstances did not warrant it. A direct contact mission had proposed establishing a system to postpone cases to avoid that bad practice, but it had been entirely unsuccessful. The situation in Guatemala was far from being that in which there was a general climate of anti-union acts in the public sector and in private enterprise, even if the existence of some isolated acts had to be recognized. They would be heard by the courts and, if proven, severely punished. Those circumstances had been noted by the direct contact missions and the technical mission that visited Guatemala. There were hidden interests involved in the examination of the case, as was the situation some years earlier when the region was negotiating a free trade treaty and most countries involved were invited to supply explanations to the Committee. The current interest was identified by the Tripartite Commission on International Labour Affairs which argued that the case in question, like those examined by the Committee on Freedom of Association, should be taken into consideration in the report to be presented to the United States Congress as part of the examination of the free trade treaty. The supervisory bodies were being used as instruments, and therefore belittled and called into question. In Guatemala, the informal economy encompassed 75 per cent of the working population. Formal employment should therefore be generated as a priority. He indicated that in many cases, the bargaining that took place between workers and employers for the benefit of all workers in a company was carried out through mechanisms that, while recognized in law and in doctrine, did not include trade unions, but groups of workers represented in ad hoc committees or permanent committees, when the quorum for forming a union was not met. It amounted to good faith negotiations, held in accordance with the law and for the benefit of all the workers in the company. In the specific case of the export processing zones, the Employer member stated that one week earlier, negotiation of a tripartite agreement in a textile company had taken place, fully respecting and ensuring the union rights of all workers. He recalled that garment and textile companies accounted for 12 per cent of formal labour, encompassing some 120,000 jobs, of which over half were taken by women. Moreover, the collective agreements in force in the textile sector covered more than 10 per cent of the workers, demonstrating the progress made by Guatemala in promoting collective bargaining.

The Worker member of Norway recalled that the Committee had discussed the case for many consecutive years under Conventions Nos 87 and 98. Each year, the Government had asked for more time to rectify breaches of the Conventions, which raised doubts as to its political will. Workers in Guatemala continued to be victims of flagrant violations of labour rights. One of the three trade union leaders who had been murdered since the beginning of 2007 was Pedro Zamora, in Puerto Quetzal, who was in conflict with the management over privatization plans. Five of his colleagues and also the leader of the teachers' union had received death threats. Guatemalan workers were among the lowest paid in Latin America with only some 2 per cent represented by unions. Even fewer enjoyed the benefits of collective bargaining. The two new unions in the export processing zones referred to by the Government representative, represented only a tiny proportion of the workers in that sector, and they did not enjoy the right to strike or bargain collectively. Blacklists of union activists existed and court decisions ordering the reinstatement of dismissed trade unionists were not respected. She urged the Government representative to bring the murderers of trade union leaders to justice and to bring national legislation into line with the Convention without further delay.

The Government member of Norway speaking on behalf of the Governments of Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden, noted with regret that the Congressional Labour Committee had issued an unfavourable decision regarding the reform of the Civil Service Bill. At the same time, the speaker welcomed the Government's recent acceptance of a technical mission to the country and expressed the firm hope that it would help the Government to take the necessary measures to bring the national legislation into conformity with the requirements of the Convention. The Nordic Governments further expressed grave concern at the acts of violence against trade union leaders and members that continued to be reported. Those acts included murder, death threats, the circulation of blacklists of trade union representatives and the persecution of workers because of the establishment of a trade union. The speaker pointed out that acts of violence against trade unionists were seldom investigated and even more seldom clarified. Although labour courts had often recognized unjustified dismissals of trade unionists, remedies were rarely granted. The Nordic Governments observed that those issues were also being examined by the Committee on Freedom of Association and noted with great interest that the Government had emphasized the importance of the dimension of work for the successful application of the Free Trade Agreement between Central America, the Dominican Republic and the United States, which entered into force in April 2005. The Government had pointed out that through the "Comply and Win" plan approved by the United States Government and the Ministry of Labour and Social Security, it had committed itself to publicizing and disseminating the Labour Code and the ILO fundamental Conventions, and to establishing the office of alternative dispute resolution. In that framework, and with the financial support of the United States Department of Labor, the ILO Subregional Office for Central America would undertake a project on strengthening of justice at work in Central America and the Dominican Republic. The speaker expressed the hope that that project would result in significant accomplishments as regards the effective protection of fundamental trade union rights. Lastly, the Nordic Governments expressed the hope that the Government would introduce policies aimed at ensuring full respect for the human rights of trade unionists and that the protection mechanism would become operational in the near future. They again welcomed the Government's request for ILO technical assistance.

The Worker member of Nicaragua expressed his solidarity with the Guatemalan workers who lived in constant danger and criticized the anti-union attitudes and environment of impunity surrounding those who threatened and murdered workers. He referred to raids on trade union offices, as was the case with the Guatemalan Education Workers' Trade Union (STEG). He criticized the abduction of union leaders, such as Mr Nery Barrios, a member of the Unified Trade Union Popular Action Group (UASP), as well as practices seeking to thwart the free development of union activities and the fact that union leaders were forced to ask permission to leave the country and to be able to participate in international or regional organizational activities. The speaker also referred to the case of Mr Joviel Acevedo, leader of the education union, who was dismissed from his post and beaten. Judicial proceedings were slow and the legal authorities were generally ineffective, when it was their role to act as a watchdog of union rights and to prevent systematic violations of collective conventions. Lastly, the speaker urged the authorities to take the measures necessary to ensure public safety and the observance of collective conventions and freedom of association.

The Worker member of Spain indicated that experts in Latin American trade unionism usually cited the policies that had been implemented in Guatemala over many years as examples of systematic policies seeking to weed out the trade union movement. The Government purported that there were no reinstatement orders for illegally dismissed trade unionists pending before the labour courts, and that there were no complaints regarding the slowness of procedures relating to penalties for violating labour laws. The Government further purported that in spite of the numerous complaints concerning violations of collective agreements, acts of employer interference, acts of anti-union discrimination, particularly in the context of trade union formation and anti-union dismissals, most were resolved through mediation or the withdrawal of the complaint, meaning that, as a consequence, penalties were issued in only one case. Some 250 enterprises employed an average of 200 staff in the Guatemalan maquila industry. The Government purported that in March 2006, there were eight registered trade unions, including the two most recently established, with 51 members. By extrapolating those figures, the speaker calculated that the membership rate in the maquila industry would be 0.005 per cent - clear proof that the labour and salary conditions in the Guatemala maquila industry were unacceptable.

The Worker member of India expressed his solidarity with the cause of the Guatemalan trade unions and workers. Law and administration of justice in Guatemala had to be fully brought into conformity with the letter, spirit and requirements of the Convention. The Government had to make further efforts to guarantee the right to organize and collective bargaining. The speaker requested the Committee to call on the Government to expedite its efforts to give effect to basic trade union rights.

The Worker member of the United States welcomed the promotional measures taken by the Government referred to in the Committee of Experts' observation, as well as the establishment of the office of alternative dispute resolution. However, two fundamental shortcomings remained. Firstly, the labour rights dispute resolution mechanism in the Free Trade Agreement between Central America, the Dominican Republic and the United States only required the United States' trading partners, including Guatemala, to comply with the existing labour law, rather than bringing it into conformity with the ILO Conventions. Secondly, the promotional measures taken did not mean that non-conformity of the legislation with Convention No. 98 had been remedied. The 2003 United States State Department's Human Rights Report on Guatemala recognized the existence of anti-union discrimination, and the Committee of Experts' observation confirmed that the situation continued. The information provided by the Government to the Committee of Experts on the measures taken to advance trade union rights in the export processing zones was questioned, since only one collective agreement applied in that sector. Employer intimidation of workers, reinforced by dismissals or violence, when necessary, as well as direct restrictions on union access to workplaces had resulted in a union rate of less than 3 per cent and in a handful of collective agreements. Moreover, the Labour Code still required over 50 per cent authorization in an entire industry to form a union with the right to negotiate a sector-wide agreement, which was further undermining the integrity of collective bargaining. Finally, concern was expressed at the follow-up given to the direct contacts mission to Guatemala in 2004, which had asked the Government to take all necessary legal and practical measures to end violence against unionists. However, since then, an attempt to murder municipal worker leader Leonel Garci´a Acuņa, death threats against workers in export processing zones, bank workers and food and beverage workers' leaders, attempted burglaries of union premises, raids on union offices, armed attacks on the rural workers' union, and the murder of Pedro Zamora had occurred. Given the ongoing non-compliance with Convention No. 98, a special paragraph concerning the case was required.

The Worker member of Colombia indicated that the information, explanations and successive pledges by the Government of Guatemala had been heard repeatedly, but without any specific or positive results. The Committee of Experts' report and the constant complaints made by the Guatemalan trade union movement demonstrated that the situation in terms of freedom of association, human rights, collective bargaining, the right to strike and the right to organize had deteriorated significantly owing to the increase in anti-union practices in Guatemala. It was unacceptable for the Government to explain and make commitments without genuine change taking place and without any respect for the Committee's endeavours. The extensive report by the Committee of Experts was an invitation to the Government and employers to comply with the scant legal rulings that ordered unfairly dismissed workers to be reinstated, to expedite proceedings to punish breaches of freedom of association, to promote collective bargaining, to bring forward consultations on a new Labour Code and in general, to bring about an atmosphere of respect for freedom of association. He considered it unacceptable for the Government to publicly indicate that workers did not join unions because they did not believe in trade unionism and that they preferred other organizational activities such as cooperativism or solidarity movements. In reality, workers did not form unions because they were afraid of reprisals, being dismissed or even losing their lives.

The Government member of Mexico speaking on behalf of the Government members of the Group of Latin American and Caribbean countries (GRULAC), indicated that Guatemala had shown signs of receptiveness and cooperation with ILO supervisory bodies. It had received technical assistance missions and had requested cooperation with the Office in order to apply and comply with international labour standards. With that assistance, it had implemented measures seeking to address its problems and had institutionalized tripartite dialogue. GRULAC asked the Committee to take that into account when giving its conclusions. It further indicated that it reserved the right to give its opinion during the Conference plenary when the Committee's report was adopted and to express its opinion on the working methods and the establishment of the list of cases to be examined by the Committee.

The Government representative reiterated his Government's commitment to applying the Convention and to continuing to cooperate with the supervisory bodies. He indicated his interest in cooperating with the workers and employers in order to make headway in social dialogue as well as in submitting the information requested as part of the assistance mission and by the Subregional Office. He stressed that the Government did not deny the problems, but that it wished to share the efforts that it had made to date with the assistance of the ILO. He expressed the hope that that assistance would continue and stressed that the current situation was better than that of ten years earlier.

The Worker members stated that the discussion had allowed a review of the serious problems arising in Guatemala concerning the application of Convention No. 98. They believed that the facts presented by the Government were unconvincing and underlined that the information had been contradicted by the Worker member of Guatemala and other Worker members from the region, as well as by the Nordic Governments. The Worker members therefore reiterated the same requests that they had made to the Government over a lengthy period: to recognize the reality and magnitude of the problems set out by the Committee of Experts; to establish a legislative framework permitting the true exercise of the right to strike and the right to bargain collectively, both in the public and in the private sector, as well as in the export processing zones; and to guarantee the protection of trade unionists against anti-union acts. In the light of the picture painted by the Conference Committee, the Worker members stated that they envisaged requesting, at the subsequent reading of the conclusions, that the case be mentioned in a special paragraph of the Committee's report.

The Employer members observed that much of the discussion had related to matters concerning Convention No. 87. However, the Committee's conclusions could only address issues relevant to the Committee of Experts' observation and to Convention No. 98. They hoped that the report of the technical advisory mission would be available shortly. The Government should then prepare the necessary legislative draft amendments, in cooperation with employers' and workers' organizations, and report on them in time to the Committee of Experts, as a basis for examination by the Conference Committee.

Conclusions

The Committee noted the statements made by the Government representative and the discussion that followed, as well as the cases presented to the Committee on Freedom of Association. The Committee noted with concern that the pending problems had persisted for many years, involving cases of non-enforcement of reinstatement orders of dismissed trade unionists; the slow procedure related to sanctions for violations of labour and trade union legislation; the need to promote trade union rights in export processing zones (maquila enterprises); the large number of anti-union dismissals in both the private and public sectors; inadequate guarantees against procedures for the termination of civil servants; the low number of collective agreements and the violation of a large percentage thereof. The Committee took note with great concern of the acts of violence and intimidation against trade unionists contained in the comments by the International Trade Union Confederation. The Committee noted that a mission of technical assistance had visited the country in February-March 2007, and that it had formulated a number of recommendations for the Government.

The Committee noted the Government's statements including: (1) a request for ILO technical assistance on the different matters raised by the Committee of Experts; (2) the highlighting of the results of the work undertaken by the National Tripartite Committee in relation to such matters and the results of the rapid intervention mechanism in cases of violation of trade union rights in practice; and (3) information on different bills, legislative initiatives, and first drafts under discussion, as well as information on the organization of tripartite seminars in the maquila.

The Committee expected that the Committee of Experts would examine the report of the technical assistance mission and transmit to the present Committee the most important information on the application of the Convention. The Committee also expected that, in light of the mission's conclusions, the Government, in consultation with the employers' and workers' organizations, would rapidly take the necessary measures to make the required changes in law and practice, so as to overcome the problems related to the excessively slow procedures in cases of anti-union discrimination (in particular through the amendment of the Code of Labour Procedures), the reduced number of collective agreements and the remainder of the pending issues, including the situation of maquila enterprises (export processing zones).

The Committee reminded the Government of the imperative need to put an end to acts of violence against trade unionists and to ensure the security of all unionists who were victims of threats.

The Committee expressed the hope that it would be in a position, in the very near future, to note that progress had been made in law and practice, especially in the light of the Government's request for ILO technical assistance once again. The Committee requested the Government to take rapid action and to send a complete report to the Committee of Experts. Finally, the Committee requested the Government to accept the visit of a high-level mission before the next meeting of the Committee of Experts.
ILO Home NORMES home ILOLEX home Universal Query NATLEX

For further information, please contact the International Labour Standards Department (NORMES) by email:
Copyright © 2006 International Labour Organization (ILO)
Disclaimer
webinfo@ilo.org