CMNT_TITLE

Termination of Employment Convention, 1982 (No. 158) - Cameroon (RATIFICATION: 1988)

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It is therefore bound to repeat its previous comments.

Repetition

The Committee notes the observations of the General Union of Workers of Cameroon (UGTC), received on 17 October 2016, and the Government’s reply, received on 15 February 2017. It also notes the observations of the Cameroon United Workers Confederation (CTUC), received on 22 November 2016. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments in this regard.

Article 2 of the Convention. Exclusions. In its previous comment, the Committee noted the Government’s indications that domestic workers and workers in the informal economy belong to the categories of workers that are subject to special regulations or a special scheme. The Government added that workers subject to special regulations are not considered as workers covered by the Labour Code of 1992. The Committee therefore asked the Government to continue to take all possible steps to ensure that domestic workers and workers in the informal economy enjoy adequate protection in the spheres covered by the Convention. The Government indicates in its report that the Convention is applied uniformly in Cameroon and that no category of wage employees is excluded from its scope. The Committee requests the Government to provide copies of the legislative texts that apply to domestic workers in relation to the Convention. The Committee also requests the Government to provide detailed information on the manner in which it ensures adequate protection in the spheres covered by the Convention to workers in the informal economy.

Article 8. Procedure of appeal. The Committee notes the observations of the CTUC, which considers that the terminations of workers in certain enterprises were not in conformity with the procedure established under national legislation, since no authorization for termination had been sought or granted by the labour inspector. The Committee requests the Government to reply to the observations of the CTUC regarding the termination of workers’ employment.

Article 11. Notice period. The Committee notes the observations of the CTUC indicating that, in practice, employers terminate the employment of workers without observing the obligation to give a notice period as established by section 34(1) of the Labour Code. The Committee notes that the Government’s report does not reply to the CTUC’s concerns. The Committee reiterates its request that the Government provide its comments on the observations of the CTUC, indicating the manner in which it is ensured that workers are provided with reasonable notice of termination.

Article 12(3). Definition of serious misconduct. The Committee previously noted that serious misconduct was not defined by the Labour Code but by case law. The Committee notes the observations of the CTUC indicating that, in national practice, the employer unilaterally defines the degree of seriousness of the misconduct, whereas under Cameroonian law only the judge is empowered to do so. The CTUC adds that a number of companies have engaged in this practice and therefore invites the Government to revise the Labour Code. The Committee requests the Government to reply to the observations of the CTUC, clarifying the definition of serious misconduct. It also requests the Government once again to provide examples of court decisions which allow an evaluation of the application of Article 12(3) of the Convention.

Articles 12–14. Severance allowance. Consultation of workers’ representatives. Terminations of employment for economic, technological, structural or similar reasons. In its previous comments, the Committee asked the Government to indicate whether the dismissed workers had been paid their severance allowance and to provide information on all measures taken to alleviate the adverse effects of dismissals, such as those envisaged in Paragraphs 25 and 26 of the Termination of Employment Recommendation, 1982 (No. 166). The Government indicates in its report that section 40 of the Labour Code of 1992 refers to this subject. Accordingly, the Committee notes that section 40(3) of the Labour Code establishes an obligation for the employer to call a meeting of staff delegates and the labour inspector to try to avoid any termination on economic grounds. It also notes that section 40(9) of the Labour Code provides that any worker whose employment has been terminated shall be given priority status, where skill levels are equal, for two years with regard to recruitment in the same enterprise. As regards consultation of workers’ representatives in the event of terminations on economic grounds, the Government indicates that Order No. 22/MTPS/SG/CJ establishing procedures governing terminations on economic grounds gives effect to Article 13(1) of the Convention. In its previous comment, the Committee noted the communication from the UGTC indicating the termination of the employment of a number of young persons at the National Social Security Fund (CNPS) without prior notification in writing or payment of damages. In its observations of 2016, the UGTC indicates that the situation of the dismissed CNPS workers has not changed and that there has been a resurgence of terminations, particularly in a number of local companies. Referring to its previous comments, the Committee requests the Government once again to indicate whether the workers dismissed from the CNPS and from the local companies referred to in the observation of the UGTC have been paid their severance allowance. It also requests the Government to send a copy of Order No. 22/MTPS/SG/CJ establishing procedures governing terminations on economic grounds. The Committee further requests the Government to continue providing information on any measures taken to alleviate the adverse effects of dismissals, such as those envisaged in Paragraphs 25 and 26 of Recommendation, No. 166.

Application of the Convention in practice. The Committee requests the Government once again to supply statistics on the activities of the appeal bodies and the number of terminations on economic grounds. It also requests the Government to provide up-to-date information on the application of the Convention in practice. Referring to its previous comments on valid and invalid grounds for termination and the defence procedure prior to termination, the Committee requests the Government to send examples of court decisions which allow an evaluation of the application of Articles 4, 5 and 7 of the Convention.

The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the near future.