Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 2021, Publication: 109th ILC session (2021)

Minimum Wage Fixing Convention, 1970 (No. 131) - Bolivia (Plurinational State of) (Ratification: 1977)

Discussion by the Committee

Government representative, Minister of Labour, Employment and Social Welfare – The Plurinational State of Bolivia has been a Member of the ILO since 1919 and is the signatory of various Conventions adopted by successive sessions of the International Labour Conference, including the eight fundamental labour Conventions.

The Government of the Plurinational State of Bolivia, respectful as it is of its commitments and also of international standards in the field of human rights, has adopted, as a recurrent practice since 2006, the application of an ambitious labour policy for the dignity and recovery of the social and labour rights of workers, the effects of which can be seen in the reduction of unemployment rates and an increase in the minimum wage of approximately 380 per cent.

The Plurinational State of Bolivia confirms that it has adopted machinery aimed at the direct participation of both employers and workers in minimum wage fixing and the formulation of development policies, enabling participation on an equal basis for both sectors.

Despite these measures, the Confederation of Private Employers of Bolivia (CEPB) makes a complaint in public every year that it is not taken into consideration in consultations, citing supposed non-observance of the Convention, but at the same time it also makes its irreconcilable position public in dismissing the Government’s proposals on minimum wage fixing, including rejecting well in advance the clear possibility of establishing a consultation round table that would ensure uniform criteria, bring positions closer and substantiate the Government’s position that it is only with work and a decent wage that better conditions can be achieved, in terms of both productivity and living standards, not only for those of us from the working class but for society as a whole.

A clear example of the fact that our State is characterized by the promotion of constant and unconditional dialogue with absolutely all the social partners, with a view to appropriate and balanced decision-making to address the needs and interests of the community as a whole, dates back to 2019, before the democratic period was abruptly interrupted. On this occasion, working round tables were established with both the employers and the workers.

It should be noted that on 25 March 2019 a meeting was held between the CEPB and ex-President Morales, accompanied by several Ministers of State, in which the discussion specifically focused on topics of national economic development, fully in line with Article 3(b) of the Convention, which provides that the elements to be taken into consideration in determining the level of minimum wages shall, so far as possible and appropriate in relation to national practice and conditions, include:

…

(b) economic factors, including the requirements of economic development, levels of productivity and the desirability of attaining and maintaining a high level of employment.

After this meeting, the CEPB president, Mr Luis Barbery, said, and I quote: “It was a positive meeting where the private business sector was able to express concerns and also our willingness to work for the Plurinational State of Bolivia.”

Another meeting was then held on 30 April 2019 with the private employers of the Plurinational State of Bolivia, at which aspects of taxation were discussed with the aim of assisting productivity levels in the sector. Under these circumstances, the complaint of the employers, who, as has been shown, are party to the Government’s consultations on minimum wage fixing, actually appears to be a complaint against social justice, which is a fundamental pillar of the Plurinational State of Bolivia and is precisely the key point of Article 3 of the Convention. However, the Government has always taken measured and responsible action in this respect, constantly taking into consideration national realities and the economic conditions of the workers’ and employers’ sectors.

In the Plurinational State of Bolivia, minimum wage fixing is not an arbitrary or discretionary measure. On the contrary, it is done strictly in accordance with the legislative provisions in force, namely:

• Article 49(II) of the Political Constitution of the State, which provides that the law shall regulate employment relations, including collective contracts and agreements, general and sectoral minimum wages and wage increases, reinstatement, paid hours of rest and public holidays, calculations of seniority, hours of work, overtime, extra pay for night and Sunday work, various types of bonus or other company profit-sharing systems, compensation and dismissal, maternity leave, vocational training and other social rights.
• Moreover, article 298(II)(31) of the Political Constitution provides that labour policies and systems are the exclusive competence of the central level of the State.
• Furthermore, section 52 of the General Labour Act provides that: remuneration or wages is what is received by employees or workers as payment for their work; wages may not be set at a level lower than the minimum wage, which, according to branches of work and areas of the country, shall be fixed by the Ministry of Labour; and wages shall be proportional to the work, without distinction as to sex or nationality.

As the Committee can see, the position adopted by the Government is not at odds with the legislation. On the contrary, it is supported by the principle of intervention which the Government must undertake in order to guarantee a fair wage to all persons. It is also backed up by the doctrine of Mr Guillermo Cabanellas, who states that the interventionism of the State preferably finds expression in the setting of maximum hours of work and minimum periods of rest, the fixing of minimum wages, and compensation for unjustified dismissal.

In addition to all these arguments, it should be noted that our social, productive and community economic model has a common factor in its four pillars (the private, state, community and cooperative social economies). What is this common factor? It is the strength of the work done by the workers, which is therefore the main driving force in growth and economic stability.

The World Bank has recognized that the Plurinational State of Bolivia is among the region’s leaders in reducing pay inequalities. According to the Gini Coefficient of Labour Income, over the last ten years the wage gap has improved from 0.53 per cent to 0.44 per cent as a result of the economic model. Extreme poverty was also reduced from 38.2 per cent to 15.2 per cent during the 2005–18 period.

Another equally significant element is that the wage increase strengthens the domestic economy, increasing working capital in the country, and this is reflected in the annual growth of legally established enterprises that observe the requirements of formality. This shows that the measures taken are appropriate.

Data from the Virtual Formalities Office, the mandatary register of employers, forming part of the portfolio of the Ministry of Labour, report that in 2018 the total number of enterprises was 143,038 and in 2021 was 151,768, representing 14 per cent growth in three years.

Economic stability is reflected in the growth and increase in the domestic consumption of products and services. Up to October 2019, restaurants achieved a turnover of US$571 million and supermarket sales amounted to US$632 million. Between October 2018 and October 2019, restaurants recorded a 2 per cent growth in sales, while supermarkets announced 10 per cent growth for the same period.

However, even more important is to point out the drop in late banking payments, which reflects the solvency of the financial system. Until 2019, the rate was one of the lowest in the South American region, standing at 1.9 per cent in 2019. In other words, 98.1 per cent of credit payment obligations were honoured on a regular basis.

The Committee of Experts, whose work constitutes the cornerstone of the ILO supervisory system with respect to international labour standards, cites a vitally important item of data in its 2020 report, referring to various socio-economic factors taken into account in the fixing of the minimum wage, namely that, “Bolivia is the country that has increased the minimum wage the most over the present decade in Latin America, without affecting the most relevant macroeconomic variables and without inflationary consequences.”

The Government considers that this appraisal, from those who have the role of monitoring compliance with the ILO Conventions, is the clearest proof that the wage fixing system used by the Government does what is necessary to ensure economic stability, in addition to upholding one of the basic principles promoted by the ILO, namely social justice.

The establishment of a national minimum wage by the executive branch of the Plurinational State of Bolivia, in accordance with the economic and social situation in the country, does not undermine, let alone refuse, the participation of the employers, as shown by all the actions described above.

Further proof that this reiteration by the Committee is unnecessary is the position adopted by the Government in the current year (2021), having stipulated only a 2 per cent rise in the national minimum wage without affecting the “basic wage” paid to the country’s whole labour force, with the aim of preserving labour stability and reviving the country’s economy. The Government has made an effort to provide this increase in line with our policy to give support to the working class without endangering the economic revival of production.

In the current year, the parties involved stated their positions. The Bolivian Workers’ Confederation (COB) was calling for a 5 per cent increase in both the national minimum wage and the “basic wage”. The Government proposed a 0.67 per cent rise in the national minimum wage and the employers insisted on not increasing wages, on the grounds that any increase, however small, would result in lack of liquidity, possible bankruptcy and dismissals.

Under previous governments of the neoliberal period, the national minimum wage was frozen at 440 Bolivian bolivianos for three consecutive years, from 2003 to 2005. Since 2006, there has been a sustained growth in workers’ wages.

However, in 2020 this increase was paralysed owing to the COVID-19 pandemic and the improvised policies of a de facto Government. In the context of the income redistribution policy, the minimum wage rose by about 380 per cent, from 440 to 2,122 bolivianos in 2019.

The data presented indicate the in-depth analysis conducted by the Government through its various departments with a view to ultimately fixing wage levels, making use of its exclusive jurisdiction established in the Constitution, which was the result of a revolutionary constituent process with the participation of the people and approved by over 64 per cent of the votes in the 2009 referendum.

These are important elements, we believe, because they indicate that we are on the right path. This is a scenario of gradual, progressive recovery, which is important for the Bolivian economy and all its sectors, since these indicators are not concentrated in one specific sector and it has been shown that the Government is conducting an exhaustive analysis through different decision-making mechanisms, especially in the area of fixing the minimum wage, which above all provides men and women workers with a living and the capacity to obtain the minimum elements of subsistence.

Worker members – It is for the third time in succession that the Committee is examining the Plurinational State of Bolivia’s observance of the Convention. We cannot ignore the fact that since our last discussion many political and social events have occurred in the country. We welcome the fact that the country appears to be rediscovering a degree of serenity, and recall that political stability is an essential prerequisite for economic and social development.

More specifically with regard to the application of the Convention, two aspects should be distinguished.

First, as can be seen from the Committee of Experts’ report and has been discussed previously in the Committee, there would appear to be a divergence of views between the Government and the employers of the Plurinational State of Bolivia. The latter claim that they are not fully consulted regarding the determination of methods for fixing and adjusting the minimum wage.

I recall that the Committee had invited the Government to accept a direct contacts mission to rectify the situation. We note that this has been unable to take place. The Workers’ group is particularly interested to know the reasons that prevented the Government from accepting this mission.

However, we would like to reiterate that the consultation referred to in Article 4 of the Convention does not mean co-determination. It consists of enabling representative organizations to have an in-depth discussion with the Government on the minimum wage fixing machinery.

The second aspect which must be carefully emphasized relates to the purpose of the Convention. Its objective is to establish a system of minimum wages. With regard to this dimension, we are obliged to conclude that the Government of the Plurinational State of Bolivia has given full effect to the Convention. It should be emphasized that Article 4 of the Convention provides that in determining minimum wage levels, account must be taken of the needs of workers and their families and, in second place, of economic factors.

In the present case, it is not disputed that the Plurinational State of Bolivia has given effect to its commitment via an ongoing increase in the minimum wage. This has resulted in a major improvement in living standards for the workers concerned. The Government of the Plurinational State of Bolivia should therefore be congratulated on the results achieved. This is all the more justified in that these increases have not had any negative repercussions on the economy or in particular on inflation.

Even though these consultations are just one means for setting and adjusting minimum wages, it is also important that they can take place. While recalling its commitment to social dialogue during the discussion of this case, the Workers’ group wishes to emphasize that this attachment is not dictated by opportunistic considerations or short-term interests. Above all, it is a question of conviction and credibility.

Employer members – First, we would like to thank the Minister of the Plurinational State of Bolivia for appearing before the Committee today and for the information provided. Regrettably, it is clear from this information that the issue regarding the application of the Convention persists. This is a case of application of the Convention ratified by the Plurinational State of Bolivia in 1977, it is the third consecutive time that this Committee is discussing the application of the Convention by the Plurinational State of Bolivia, since it was also examined in 2018 and 2019, although the Committee has made observations noting concern since 2006. This is due to continued and systematic non-compliance by the Government of the Plurinational State of Bolivia.

We are faced with a recurrent serious situation. The Government is failing to comply with Articles 3 and 4(1) and (2) of the Convention, concerning factors for determining minimum wage levels and full consultation with the social partners. For a number of years the Committee of Experts has been asking the Government to take urgent steps to ensure full consultation with the most representative employers’ and workers’ organizations and their direct participation in the machinery for fixing wages, especially the minimum wage. The Committee of Experts has also observed that while the Government affirmed that consultations were being held with the social partners, in the way that they are occurring today, the CEPB employers’ organization and the International Organisation of Employers (IOE) claim the opposite.

Furthermore, in 2018, given the divergences expressed in the Committee between the Government and the aforementioned employers’ organizations, the Committee already expressed the need for a direct contacts mission to take place without delay with a view to finding a solution to the difficulties faced in the application of the Convention. However, the Government did not respond to this request and therefore in 2019 the Committee again asked the Government to, first, carry out full consultations in good faith with the most representative employers’ and workers’ organizations – it emphasized with both, not just with the workers’ organization – with regard to minimum wage setting in the country; second, take into account when determining the level of the minimum wage the needs of workers and their families, as well as economic factors as set out in Article 3 of the Convention, namely including the requirements of economic development, levels of productivity and the desirability of attaining and maintaining a high level of employment; and, lastly, avail itself without delay of ILO technical assistance. However, once again none of this has happened. What is more, the Government has indicated in its recent report that there is no need for a direct contacts mission given that no difficulties are faced in the application of the Convention, and it does not appear to us that it is receiving ILO technical assistance in this regard.

It would appear that this rejection of the direct contacts mission disregards the conclusions of this Committee and ultimately strips the ILO supervisory system of validity and efficacy.

First, the Employer members kindly but firmly request the Government to reconsider this rejection.

Second, we point out that the COB annually presents a list of demands including a proposal for an increase in the national minimum wage. The Government therefore insists that consultations are held with this federation on account of its annual proposal and that the employers’ sector is excluded.

Third, the same does not happen with the CEPB and the Government argues that this is because section 10 of the union’s constitution provides that the CEPB shall not undertake the legal representation of its affiliated organizations for the negotiation or settlement of individual labour disputes between workers and employers.

In other words, the Government bases its argument on this element while stating in its report that the annual minimum wage increase takes into consideration the positions of workers and employers, with whom, it claims, it promotes dialogue and consultations on the basis of good faith and respect, as demonstrated by the round-table meetings established with the representatives of the CEPB and the COB. It should be clarified here that the statutory prohibition on the CEPB clearly refers to intervention in individual labour disputes of its members; that is to say, it cannot undertake the defence of those individual disputes and not in the case with which we are concerned, since it must also be borne in mind that this criterion was also analysed previously in the Committee and article 52(1) of the Political Constitution of the Plurinational State of Bolivia also recognizes and guarantees employers’ freedom of association, which is reflected precisely in the representative role exercised by the CEPB.

I would also like to reiterate that this Committee has stated that the Convention is very clear in Article 4 regarding the need for the Government to carry out full consultations in good faith with the representative organizations on the establishment, operation and modification of minimum wage fixing machinery. The Committee of Experts has noted that this is what it describes as full consultations and in 2009 it stated on this matter, and I quote: “While recalling that consultation should be kept distinct from co‑determination or mere information, the Committee considers that the Government is under the obligation to create and maintain conditions permitting the full consultation and direct participation of the most representative employers’ and workers’ organizations in all circumstances. It therefore urges the Government to take appropriate action to ensure that the requirement for meaningful consultations set forth in this Article of the Convention is effectively applied, preferably in a well-defined, commonly agreed and institutionalized form.” The mere indication of the wage that it is intended to adopt, which we understand was the closest that the Government of the Plurinational State of Bolivia came to a communication to employers, cannot in any manner, in light of the above, be considered consultation, and still less full consultation. It is clear to us that for this to be the case, consultations have to be held in good faith with a view to identifying the concerns and aspirations of each of the parties and with the objective of achieving consensus, or as a minimum of incorporating the concerns and sensibilities of the partners into the decision that is finally adopted by the Government.

Moreover, the Government has in turn stated that minimum wage fixing is based on social and economic factors, taking into account inflation, productivity and other economic indicators. What is clear is that the Government has been fixing wage increases to be applied not only in relation to the international minimum wage but at times also with respect to the “basic wage” without holding any consultations. We repeat: without any consultation of the employers’ sector and, especially, without the full consultation referred to in Article 4 of the Convention, and, on the contrary, determining the five elements referred to above as the basis for exclusive direct negotiations with the COB, ignoring the employers’ sector, which has been obliged to take measures in this regard.

In addition, with regard to the minimum wage fixing criteria – according to the Government, inflation, productivity, gross domestic product (GDP), per capita GDP, the consumer price index, economic growth, the unemployment rate, market fluctuations and the cost of living – evidence shows that this statement is inaccurate. Between 2006 and the current year 2021, on account of the increases imposed by the Government, the national minimum wage has undergone an overall increase of more than 324 per cent. In the current year, 2021, it set an increase of 2 per cent, the national minimum, as a result of negotiations that were held only with the COB. This was counter-productive for the economy, as reflected in the level of informality in the country, which stands at over 70 per cent. This situation also acts as a disincentive for investment and for the conclusion of employment contracts owing to the total uncertainty among employers, who are finding it impossible to adopt the necessary measures and take the action required to assume the cost represented by the discretionary increase in wages, which, moreover, is retroactive to the month of January each year.

In conclusion, the Government is deliberately refraining from consulting the employers’ organization in the country on minimum wage fixing. It also fails to comply with its obligations deriving from the Convention by disregarding technical criteria which should underpin wage fixing, and this goes against the culture of social dialogue which is mandatory under the most fundamental principles of the ILO. It also affects employers and workers in practice, as well as the general public, with sources of decent employment being reduced, accompanied by an incessant growth in the informal economy, where no minimum wages are guaranteed, and there is no other type of labour protection or social security. The Committee must promptly take note of all these serious circumstances and take action accordingly.

Employer member, Plurinational State of Bolivia – As is known to the members of this Committee, at both the 107th and 108th Sessions of the Conference held in 2018 and 2019 respectively, in view of the complaints made jointly by the CEPB and the IOE, the failure of the Government to apply and comply with the Convention was examined. In view of its ratification by our country, the Convention certainly forms part of the constitutional bloc envisaged in article 410 of the Political Constitution of the Plurinational State of Bolivia.

In this light, it should be recalled that the complaint made by our employers’ organization is based on the fact that the Government has been setting the wage increases to be applied, not only in relation to the national minimum wage, but also to the “basic wage”, without engaging in any consultations with the employers, and particularly not in the form of the “full” consultations required by Article 4 of the Convention. On the contrary, the Government has set such increases on the basis of direct negotiations it has held with the COB, completely disregarding the private employers, who have been required to accept the measures imposed upon them in this respect. It should also be recalled that between 2006 and this year, 2021, the national minimum wage has risen in overall terms by over 324 per cent. Such a measure has been counter-productive for the economy, as reflected in the level of informality in our country, of over 70 per cent, and the disincentive to investment and labour recruitment.

It is important to emphasize that this is confirmed by ILO documents, including the various reports of the Committee of Experts in 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009 and 2010, in which it indicated that the authorities of the Government should engage objectively in full consultations and that it was essential to draw a distinction between the concepts of “consultation”, “co-determination” and mere “information”, on which clear guidance is contained in Paragraphs 1, 4 and 5 of the Consultation (Industrial and National Levels) Recommendation, 1960 (No. 113). Nevertheless, the Government has failed to give effect to the full consultation process which it was specifically required to implement with private sector employers.

Regrettably, it would appear that in the view of the government authorities, social dialogue, which has always been promoted by this Organization, is not a component of the Convention. We therefore assume that this misconception explains the reason why employers’ representatives are excluded from any consideration in relation to the determination of the national minimum wage, and the failure to take into consideration aspects, which, according to Article 3 of the Convention, include economic development, levels of productivity and the desirability of attaining and maintaining a high level of employment.

In addition, notwithstanding the proactive approach always taken by the Bolivian employers and despite undergoing, from early 2020, the pandemic and all its devastating economic fallout, this year, in 2021, as our Minister has acknowledged, in view of the direct negotiations the Government held solely with the COB, by Supreme Decree No. 4501 of 1 May 2021, it once again increased the national minimum wage by 2 per cent. It did so without calling for, let alone requiring, the participation of or consultation with the employers’ sector, regardless of the letters dated 13 and 16 April 2021 from the CEPB to the President of the Plurinational State of Bolivia, or our willingness to engage in dialogue with the COB's executive secretary expressed in a letter dated 16 April 2021.

However, as a result of the foregoing facts, in its conclusions at the 2018 and 2019 sessions of the Conference, the Committee, while expressing its concern about the dysfunctional operation of social dialogue and calling on the Government of the Plurinational State of Bolivia to comply with the Convention, urged the Government to take a number of measures, including availing itself of ILO technical assistance and accepting a direct contacts mission. The government authorities not only ignored these suggestions, they refused to accept them. Consequently, in its 2019 conclusions, the Committee expressed regret at this refusal, reminding the Government that these missions constitute an effective form of dialogue designed to find a positive solution to the problems.

Lastly, I have to say that our organization is convinced that the basis for any rule of law is faithful and in-depth compliance with the law and the standards by which each society chooses to be governed. Therefore, we once again call on the Government to understand the gravity of this lack of compliance in view of the need for all ILO Member States to be subject to the supervisory bodies of this Organization to ensure compliance with the Conventions ratified by each country, and the Plurinational State of Bolivia cannot be an exception in relation to the supervisory bodies.

Worker member, Plurinational State of Bolivia – As workers at the national level of the Plurinational State of Bolivia, and also as representatives of all the workers of the Plurinational State of Bolivia at the meetings that we have attended and participated in past years, together with the commissioners and with our state authorities, we have always raised awareness among the international community of the defence of workers’ labour rights. Therefore we, as workers and on the basis of the responsibility that we have assumed, have raised awareness of the Convention, which has been discussed year after year, so that all the demands of workers across the country may be addressed publicly and openly. We have therefore engaged in ongoing coordination with the Government in recent years, given that it is a popular Government, a Government of the people. In our view, I think that all of the coordination and consensus that exists currently is highly important with regard to the standards, laws and decrees that benefit workers.

With that in mind, today more than ever, after having gone through perhaps difficult moments in 2019 and 2020 when it was not possible to coordinate or work with the de facto Government at the time, we are resuming that coordinated work, which we have been undertaking for more than 14 years.

This year, under the leadership of President Luis Arce Catacora, the current President of our Plurinational State, with the Ministry of Labour, and today with our Minister of Labour, we are carrying out new projects to benefit and defend workers’ rights. I think that we have always adopted this approach: openly, beyond the employers, in other words with the private sector, and the workers’ position will therefore always be to maintain our independence with respect to the topic under discussion so that we may raise our social demands directly with the central Government. It is therefore undoubtedly the Ministry of Labour that deals with these matters to defend labour rights in some way.

Beyond the problems that the Plurinational State of Bolivia experienced, I repeat, in the previous year, during which coordination was not possible and representation at the international level did not take place, today more than ever we once again have the opportunity, we are working together, sharing things beyond work and what our Government offers us under the leadership of the Ministry of Labour, which today is the representative at the international level at this event, and I think that consensus is important.

We are sharing a forum because we are working on the same matters that affect the workers in our country.

On the other hand, I think that it is important to mention the large number of workers who were dismissed as a result of the pandemic and because of the coup d’état. These are two factors that have combined in recent years; although the pandemic is global, we have seen extra dismissals thanks to the de facto Government when it assumed power and gained a footing in all the ministries, and ultimately in the whole Plurinational State of Bolivia.

A number of dismissed workers have yet to be reintegrated, legal proceedings are ongoing, and, at the same time, there are outstanding wages that have yet to be paid. In some sectors, including among entrepreneurs, the pandemic has seen businesses closed and workers unjustly dismissed. On the other hand, I also think that it is important, today in particular, that workers are mobilized in judicial institutions, including the Constitutional Court, to identify some of the judges who handed down sentences against workers during the past year. I repeat, they violated workers’ rights. This is about more than making our position known. We are also working to examine how we will initiate court proceedings to determine the responsibility of those judges who ruled against the country’s workers.

One sector was hit hard: the manufacturing sector. But to this we can add the mining sector, the construction sector, municipal and administrative workers, and others.

The task today is to examine, jointly, how this high number of workers across the country can be reintegrated, under the leadership of the Ministry of Labour.

With regard to joint action, and the sentences of some judges, coordination is under way, not only at the executive level but also at the legislative level, with the Legislative Assembly of our State to initiate these court proceedings to determine the responsibility of some judges who ruled against the workers.

We are working on that, and there are a few more projects that we are negotiating. I think that it is very important for us to make known these coordination efforts in our State with the democratically elected popular Government as a whole, today led by, I repeat, President Luis Arce Catacora.

There is full coordination with all State ministers and therefore, as I said, with the legislative authorities, which is very important because they are the operating branch that produces laws that benefit the workers in our State.

Government member, Portugal – I have the honour to speak on behalf of the European Union (EU) and its Member States. The Candidate Country Montenegro and the EFTA country Norway, member of the European Economic Area, as well as Georgia, align themselves with this statement.

The EU and its Member States attach great importance to human rights, including labour rights, and recognize the important role played by the ILO in developing, promoting and supervising international labour standards.

We firmly believe that compliance with ILO Conventions is essential for social and economic stability in any country and that an environment conducive to dialogue and trust between employers, workers and governments contributes to the creation of a basis for solid and sustainable growth and inclusive societies.

The EU and its Member States also remain committed to sustainable development and good governance. In this context, we have granted the Plurinational State of Bolivia preferential access to the EU market’s Generalized Scheme of Preferences Plus (GSP+). It is specifically premised upon the ratification and effective implementation of the ILO fundamental Conventions and on good cooperation with the ILO on these issues. While the EU is encouraged by its recent positive exchanges with the Plurinational State of Bolivia, we note that no report has yet been received from the Government in response to the Committee’s conclusions from 2018 and 2019 on the Convention. To our knowledge, no follow-up measures have been implemented either.

The Committee’s invitation to the Government to accept a direct contacts mission to the country may, in our view, help in finding a solution to the difficulties faced in the application of the Convention. Recalling that these missions constitute an effective form of dialogue designed to find a positive outcome to the issues in question, the EU and its Member States join the Committee’s firm expression of hope that the Government will welcome a direct contacts mission in the near future.

We stand ready to support the Government in its effective engagement with the ILO in implementing and enforcing labour standards and organizing meaningful tripartite consultations. The EU and its Member States will continue to support the Government of the Plurinational State of Bolivia in this endeavour.

Government member, Barbados – I am making this statement of behalf of the group of Latin American and Caribbean countries (GRULAC). We appreciate the information provided by the Minister of Labour, Employment and Social Welfare of the Plurinational State of Bolivia, regarding compliance with the Convention.

GRULAC takes note of the 2020 report of the Committee of Experts. Furthermore, we take note of the response of the Government of the Plurinational State of Bolivia regarding its efforts to promote permanent, open and transparent dialogue with all social sectors within the framework of a democratic and participatory political system in accordance with its Constitution.

We highlight the vision of the Government, stressed by the Minister of Labour, regarding the consultation with the various sectors and search for consensus with them.

In addition, we emphasize that the decision to set the minimum wage in that country is not a discretionary measure of the Government but rather takes into account the need for prior dialogue and consideration of Article 3 of the Convention, the needs of workers and their families and economic factors, including the requirements of economic development, productivity levels and the desirability of attaining and maintaining a high level of employment.

In this regard, GRULAC is aware that, in the 2020 report of the Committee of Experts, mention is made of an important fact which has been highlighted by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), referring to the various social and economic factors, taken into account in fixing the minimum wage, noting that Bolivia is the country that has increased the minimum wage the most over the present decade in Latin America, without affecting the most relevant macroeconomic variables and without inflationary consequences. This information indicates that the system used by the Government in fixing the minimum wage brings together the necessary efforts to take care of economic stability in the country and the demands of the sectors. This balance is often very difficult to achieve.

The COVID-19 pandemic affected the entire world, but the Latin American and Caribbean region was one of the most affected. Each country in our region has very complex challenges that require the participation and commitment of the different sectors, mainly aimed at overcoming the health crisis and moving towards an economic recovery.

In the case of the Plurinational State of Bolivia, in addition to the health crisis, the country was facing a social and political crisis resulting from the interruption of the constitutional order in 2019. To overcome this situation, we call on the Government, workers and employers, to reach the necessary consensus to protect political stability and improve the social and economic situation of the country, taking into account especially those sectors most disadvantaged by the pandemic.

Likewise, we note that this discussion is recurrent in this Committee, so we request that technical conclusions be adopted that clearly explain the specific provisions of the Convention with which the Government of the Plurinational State of Bolivia is not in compliance and that show a balance between the needs of the workers and the employers.

Taking into consideration all of the above, we encourage the Government of the Plurinational State of Bolivia to continue its commitment to the application of the Convention and we encourage the ILO to continue cooperation with the Government.

Government member, Cuba – Cuba believes that the Government of the Plurinational State of Bolivia has duly provided the information requested by the Committee of Experts. Since 2006, the Plurinational State of Bolivia has developed economic and social policies that protect the sectors that have historically suffered exclusion and discrimination. Through the Ministry of Labour, Employment and Social Welfare, the Government has stated that it fulfils its role of protecting decent work, fair remuneration and efforts to eliminate pay gaps. When fixing the minimum wage, it takes into consideration economic growth indicators, unemployment rates, market fluctuations, the cost of living and other analyses that provide a specific approximation of the country’s socio-economic reality. Additionally, since 2006 the Government has increased the minimum wage four times. It also has legislation on dialogue round tables, proposals, development and government policies.

With that in mind, the fixing of the minimum wage is the result of dialogue with the sectors, as set out in the Convention. The wage increases therefore were the result of consideration of the social partners’ positions thanks to the work of highest-level round tables with their representatives. This is without forgetting the needs of workers and their families, taking into account general wage levels in the country, the cost of living, social security benefits, economic factors, productivity levels and the benefits of reaching and maintaining high rates of employment.

For these reasons, Cuba hopes that this Committee’s conclusions, resulting from this debate, will be objective, technical, balanced and based on the information provided by the Bolivian Government.

Employer member, Argentina – We agree with our Employer colleagues that it is regrettable that the Government of the Plurinational State of Bolivia continues to fail to acknowledge the recommendations adopted by this Committee in 2018 and 2019.

As recalled by the Employer members’ spokesperson, for several years the Committee of Experts has been requesting the adoption of urgent measures to ensure full consultation with the most representative employers’ and workers’ organizations and their direct participation in the minimum wage fixing process. In this same spirit, in 2018 this Committee expressed the need for a direct contacts mission, which was not undertaken.

The employers’ sector expects ILO Members to comply in good faith with the Conventions that they have ratified and to pay close attention to the recommendations made by the supervisory bodies. In this case, the Government has failed to acknowledge the recommendations and continues to fix minimum wage increases without any consultation whatsoever with the employers, much less the full consultation stipulated in Article 4 of the Convention. It is our understanding that failing to acknowledge in this way the obligations arising from ratified international standards is a prejudicial act for all constituents.

We hope that this Committee recognizes the gravity of the situation in its conclusions and will urgently request the Government to undertake full consultation with the social partners within the meaning of the Convention and to accept a direct contacts mission and technical assistance from the Office to assist in resolving the difficulties faced in the application of the Convention.

Government member, Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela – My Government aligns itself with the statement by GRULAC. We have noted that the Committee of Experts’ 2021 report indicates, as stated by the Government of the Plurinational State of Bolivia, that consultations to determine the minimum wage take place within the framework of the Convention, and that consensus is sought through dialogue with the social partners representing Bolivian workers and employers.

We recall that, for the purpose of minimum wage fixing, the Government takes into consideration the needs of workers and their families, observing socio-economic factors and levels of productivity, with a view to maintaining a high level of employment, without affecting macroeconomic variables and without inflationary consequences.

Let us remember that the Convention does not provide for a model specifying how such consultations should be conducted, and in this regard the Government of the Plurinational State of Bolivia has emphasized that it conducts such consultations in good faith, thereby seeking to close wage gaps and protecting workers with fair remuneration.

Lastly, my country's Government trusts that the conclusions of this Committee will be objective and balanced, so that the Government of the Plurinational State of Bolivia continues to progress in its compliance with the Convention.

Worker member, Nicaragua – The observations made in relation to the Plurinational State of Bolivia and submitted for the Committee's consideration are not dissimilar to those made about other Latin American countries whose governments have promoted minimum wage increases as a social policy to improve the working population’s quality of life.

In the Plurinational State of Bolivia's case, the 2 per cent increase announced in May, equivalent to some US$311, does not heed the original stance of the workers, who sought a higher increase.

Business organizations, whose political stance contrasts with that of the Government, maintain without any economic or statistical evidence that the fixed amount will have an impact on enterprises and will push more people into informal labour. To demonstrate the falsity of this argument, we need only recall that there were no minimum wage increases throughout 2020, a period in which the country endured a coup d’état and disruption to its democracy.

Furthermore, we can easily show on the basis of official statistics that increases in previous years did not affect enterprises’ performance, nor did they increase inflation, let alone informality. This is the case because the impact of wages on enterprises’ cost structure is minimal, and because the quality of life of workers and their families can be improved by balancing this objective with enterprises' sustained profitability.

We reiterate that what must be safeguarded here is a minimum wage policy that is conducive to improving the quality of life for working people, as opposed to a view that essentially rejects any minimum wage policy, with or without consultation, if we look to other cases in which such matters have recently been discussed.

Government member, China – We thank the representative of the Government of the Plurinational State of Bolivia for the presentation. We have read carefully the report of the Committee of Experts. We commend the Government for its commitment to sustained, open and transparent social dialogue with the social partners within the framework of the democratic political system in accordance with the Constitution. Since 2006, thanks to various economic and social policies adopted by the Government, we see improved living standards for the people and protection for the development of sectors that were once excluded and discriminated against.

Private entrepreneurs of the Plurinational State of Bolivia have also benefited greatly from economic, political and social stability and legal security offered by the Government. The important role played by the Ministry of Labour, Employment and Social Welfare in promoting decent work, equal pay and the elimination of wage gaps is worthy of our recognition.

It should be stressed that the Government of the Plurinational State of Bolivia engaged, as the Convention provides for, in exhaustive consultation, discussion and dialogue with employers and workers in all social sectors and fixed minimum wages on the basis of consensus reached.

In the process, the country considered fully such factors as economic growth, the unemployment rate, market volatility and the cost of living, and took concrete measures tailored to social and economic development in the country.

In the past 15 years, the minimum wage in the country has quadrupled. We note that the Plurinational State of Bolivia is identified by the World Bank as one of the leading countries in its region with regard to reducing inequalities in wages. The proportion of people living in extreme poverty in the Plurinational State of Bolivia decreased from 38.2 per cent in 2005 to 15.2 per cent in 2018. More than 3 million people have been lifted out of poverty. We speak highly of this result. At present, 60 per cent of the country’s labour force could receive an average level of wage and enjoy a stable life, which are in line with the Sustainable Development Goals of the United Nations.

We hope that the Committee’s conclusions on the case could reflect objectively and fairly the evident progress made by the Government of the Plurinational State of Bolivia in fixing minimum wages and promoting economic and social development, so as to encourage the country to continue its implementation of the Convention.

Employer member, El Salvador – The Government has violated Articles 3 and 4 of the Convention in relation to two matters: firstly, the factors for determining the level of the minimum wage and, secondly, full consultation with the social partners.

As has been mentioned in the Committee’s conclusions, in 2019 the Government was requested, firstly, to carry out full consultations in good faith with the most representative employers’ and workers’ organizations with regard to minimum wage setting. Allow me to highlight that when the Committee refers to consultations, it refers to consultations with both sectors, not only with the workers. Secondly, the Government was requested to take into account when determining the level of the minimum wage the needs of workers and their families as well as economic factors as set out in Article 3 of the Convention, and, thirdly, to avail itself without delay of ILO technical assistance. However, the Government has not complied with any of the conclusions adopted by this Committee, and in its report it has continued to assert, falsely, that the annual increase in minimum wages takes into account the positions of workers and employers.

In reality, it has not undertaken any consultations with the most representative employers’ organization in the Plurinational State of Bolivia, and much less “full consultation” as stipulated by Article 4 of the Convention.

Minimum wages not only involve those who receive them and the enterprises that pay them. Minimum wages impact the entire economy of any country because they are one of the three most important markers of macroprices, together with exchange rates and interest rates. Fixing minimum wages with the participation of both social partners, as provided for in the Convention, is beneficial for the entire country.

For that reason, we request that the Committee adopt conclusions that will allow this situation to be overcome.

Worker member, Zimbabwe – Once again, the Employers bring this case to the Committee under the same argument: that a pay rise for workers will cause unemployment. The sky will fall on businesses across the Plurinational State of Bolivia. But, just like last time around, the sky will not fall in and Bolivian businesses will continue to flourish.

Adequate living wages do not cost jobs in theory, and evidence suggests they do not cost jobs in practice. The most serious academic studies conducted in the past 30 years have shown that there is no unemployment effect from minimum wage rises. So, if there is no scientific evidence, we are led to believe that the employers are not really concerned with unemployment or with informality. They just do not want the State to be able to carry out public policies to the benefit of workers and their families.

Raising incomes and reducing poverty is a moral duty for any government, and especially for a country like the Plurinational State of Bolivia, one of the poorest in South America. The national minimum wage of the Plurinational State of Bolivia is now about US$311 a month. In fact, I challenge anyone in this meeting to attempt to bring healthy food to the table and cover the costs of transport, clothing, utility bills and healthcare with this amount in the Plurinational State of Bolivia or anywhere.

Let me try to understand what the employers are saying. Are they suggesting that their existence as businesses relies on the impoverishment of the majority in society? If so, I urge them to change their business model immediately.

Here we should be urging the Plurinational State of Bolivia to raise wages much further than a meagre 2 per cent. This amount does not meet the test of the Convention that clearly states that wages must fulfil the needs of workers and their families. This is the real purpose of the Convention.

Government member, Russian Federation – The Russian Federation fully shares the assessment given by the representative of the Plurinational State of Bolivia with regard to the application of the Convention, particularly taking into account the situation of developing countries.

We would note that, recently, there have been significant challenges caused by the COVID-19 pandemic for the Plurinational State of Bolivia. Despite that, the Government has continued to make efforts and develop and implement socio-economic policies which respond to the interests of all Bolivians: protecting the sectors of the economy which were in a difficult situation; ensuring fair wages; and trying to do away with significant inequalities in wages.

Overall, the Government of the Plurinational State of Bolivia has been carrying out an open and sincere dialogue with all social partners within the context of a democratic and inclusive system of state structure. The basis for this has been the country’s Constitution, where social fairness is identified as one of the main objectives of state development.

In light of all this, we believe that complaints against the Plurinational State of Bolivia for not observing the provisions of the Convention do not have any foundation. We believe that the Committee should note with satisfaction the information in the detailed report which the representative of the Plurinational State of Bolivia has given to us today, and conclude consideration of this question.

Employer member, Mexico – We regret that this case is continuing in the same, or worse, conditions as in previous years.

How much longer will we have to wait for the Government to comply with its obligations under the Convention and with the recommendations of this Committee? How many more times will we have to listen in this room to baseless and unjustified excuses for behaviour that damages the country as a whole, given that informality is growing in the face of these arbitrary increases and has reached more than 70 per cent of the population?

This is not a minor point. Everyone here knows that informality does not bring decent work or sustainable employment and, far from improving a country’s economic conditions, it creates a decline that is increasingly difficult to reverse.

We hope that the Government avails itself of the technical assistance provided by the Office and accepts the direct contacts mission as soon as possible in order to resolve the problem with willingness and commitment, strengthening social dialogue through full consultation with the most representative employers’ and workers’ organizations in accordance with the Convention.

Another Employer member, Mexico – The explanations and reports received by this Committee confirm that the Government of the Plurinational State of Bolivia has repeatedly and constantly failed to comply with the obligations set out in the Convention.

It is a serious matter that the Government fails to comply with Articles 3 and 4 of the Convention by failing to hold consultations with the most representative employers’ and workers’ organizations so that they may participate in wage fixing; by refusing to accept technical assistance from the ILO; and by fixing wage increases after negotiating only with the COB, without allowing the employers to participate.

The simple fact that between 2006 and 2021 the minimum wage rose by more than 324 per cent and that informality is in excess of 70 per cent demonstrates that when the Government imposes wage adjustments, it not only infringes the Convention but also discourages investment and the generation of formal employment owing to the uncertainty caused in the employers’ sector.

This Committee must therefore consider the background to the case and deem serious the deliberate failure of the Government of the Plurinational State of Bolivia to comply with the Convention.

Government member, Argentina – The Government of Argentina supports the statement by GRULAC on the importance of the minimum wage increase in the Plurinational State of Bolivia. This notwithstanding, we should like to make a few additional points that will serve to further underline the significance of Convention No. 131 for the social and labour policy of the Government of the Plurinational State of Bolivia.

The effect of the minimum wage increase in the Plurinational State of Bolivia must be viewed in the context of a much broader policy, as described by the Bolivian State in its defence. In this regard, it is worth recalling that the entire international community, including the ILO, has channelled all its efforts into its commitment to eradicate poverty by 2030 under the Sustainable Development Goals, principally Goal 8: “Promote inclusive and sustainable economic growth, employment and decent work for all”. It is the responsibility of the ILO to implement this goal vis-à-vis the international community. This is the thrust of the overall policy of the Government of the Plurinational State of Bolivia, and this Organization ought to support it.

Furthermore, the Government of the Plurinational State of Bolivia has provided evidence of sufficient compliance with Article 3 of the Convention, through the implementation of consultations. The difficulties it reports as regards their implementation do not exactly derive from the Government. Therefore, we also consider that the direct contacts mission, reserved for serious situations, would not appear to be the appropriate remedy in this case. In the Argentine Government’s view, if there were any reason to bring the Government of the Plurinational State of Bolivia before this Committee, it would be precisely to acknowledge a case of progress in the application of the Convention, in the context of the international community's commitment to eradicate poverty under the 2030 Agenda.

Government member, Nicaragua – The Government of Reconciliation and National Unity of Nicaragua warmly greets the Plurinational State of Bolivia, which has demonstrated its commitment to working with international labour standards.

We acknowledge the efforts of the Government of the Plurinational State of Bolivia to promote ongoing, open and transparent dialogue with all sectors of society, fulfilling its role in the framework of a democratic and participatory political system that aims to build social justice.

The Government has reported that, through the Ministry of Labour, it continues to fulfil its role of protecting decent work and fair remuneration and is fighting to eliminate wage gaps, with the aim of achieving the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.

The Government of Nicaragua emphasizes that the information presented by the State indicates that the Plurinational State of Bolivia does not fail to comply with the Convention. This has also been stated by the World Bank, which agrees with the progress made regarding the minimum wage policies of the State, which, using multidimensional analysis, endeavours to understand the country’s social and economic reality in defence of workers through fair wages for their work and the elimination of inequality.

We encourage this Committee to adopt conclusions, resulting from this debate, that are objective, technical, balanced and based on the information provided by the Government of the Plurinational State of Bolivia.

Worker member, Uruguay – Once again we have a case such as that of the Plurinational State of Bolivia in which it is clear that the employers’ sector is engaging in something that it always criticizes: the use of political motives to bring cases before our Committee. Clearly, the Plurinational State of Bolivia is once again on the list for a political motive because the employers’ sector does not approve of the political views of the current Government.

We wish to welcome the minimum wage policy of the Plurinational State of Bolivia. Recalling that the Plurinational State of Bolivia is part of our region here in Latin America, the most unequal in the world, it is a false comparison to seek to pit the minimum wage against the generation of employment, formality and so on. In fact, the opposite is true: a good minimum wage policy such as that of the Plurinational State of Bolivia creates greater consumption and a stronger domestic economy in general, and that is subsequently corroborated by improvements to investment, formality and the living conditions of the people.

Therefore, this basis of the trickle-down theory that the employers wish to implement once more, while it has been shown empirically that everything left over trickles down, that is not the reality in the Plurinational State of Bolivia.

We are sure that the employers in the Plurinational State of Bolivia will have proposals, but until now the employers have not proposed policies that will improve the lives of the people.

Government member, Sri Lanka – The Government of Sri Lanka welcomes the efforts of the Government of the Plurinational State of Bolivia in ensuring effective implementation of the provisions of the Convention.

We note the important steps taken by the Government of the Plurinational State of Bolivia in fixing the minimum wage, including inclusive dialogue with the employers as well as with the workers, by establishing working groups with high-level government representation and adopting a holistic approach through consideration of a broad range of indicators, such as economic growth, unemployment rates, market fluctuations and the cost of living, in fixing the minimum wage in accordance with Article 3 of the Convention.

Since 2006, the Government of the Plurinational State of Bolivia has quadrupled the minimum wage. Moreover, the 2020 report of the Committee of Experts notes the ITUC’s acknowledgement of Bolivia as the country that has increased the minimum wage the most over the present decade in Latin America, without affecting the most relevant macroeconomic variables and without inflationary consequences.

We support the continuous efforts of the Government of the Plurinational State of Bolivia to reduce the economic gap and wage inequalities, in consultation with employers as well as workers, and believe that the Committee will adopt a balanced and objective approach to the situation in the Plurinational State of Bolivia.

Government member, Egypt – We take note of the measures and efforts by the Government of the Plurinational State of Bolivia to achieve harmony between the national legislation and the provisions of the Convention with regard to the minimum wage.

The Government has promoted a sustainable and constructive social dialogue with the social partners in the framework of a democratic and participatory political process, according to the provisions of the 2009 Bolivian Constitution, which instituted social justice as a basic state pillar, in addition to the Government’s efforts to develop socio-economic policies in the best interests of the citizens and to protect all sectors which have been discriminated against and excluded in the past. In addition to the Government’s efforts, through its Ministry of Labour, with regard to promoting decent work, providing fair wages and striving to close wage gaps, the Government of the Plurinational State of Bolivia has taken also consecutive steps to increase the minimum wage amounting to four times the initial level. The Government of the Plurinational State of Bolivia was keen to adopt a minimum wage policy aimed at closing the enormous economic gaps, thus benefiting excluded sectors while safeguarding the sustainability of the private and public sectors.

In conclusion, we highly value the efforts and measures taken by the Government of the Plurinational State of Bolivia to achieve harmonization with Convention No. 131 and trust that the Committee’s conclusions will reflect these efforts.

Government representative – I would like to begin by clarifying to the representative of the Employer members that on this occasion, as Minister of the Plurinational State of Bolivia, I did not on any account mention the supposed statutory impossibility of participation of the employers’ sector in any negotiation or dialogue. This may have been the case in previous years but the gentleman is repeating old speeches.

Furthermore, and this is fundamental, I would like to mention that our theoretical framework, our legal framework and our political framework for action is precisely our Political Constitution, article 9(1) of which provides as follows: “The essential purposes and functions of the State are to construct a fair and harmonious society, grounded in decolonization, without discrimination or exploitation, with full social justice, in order to consolidate plurinational identities.” And I also refer, precisely because I am reading out a principal function of the State, to article 410(2) concerning the primacy of our Constitution: “The Constitution is the supreme instrument of the Bolivian legal order and enjoys primacy over any other normative provision. The constitutional bloc comprises international human rights treaties and conventions and standards of community law, ratified by the country.”

In our Plurinational State of Bolivia we have a legal framework which is the protector and guarantor of the rights of all sectors. Since we consider ourselves a plurinational State with a social, community and productive economic model, we therefore protect not only all economic models but also all nations that make up this Plurinational State.

I would therefore like to use my statement as a servant of the State to express gratitude for the positions of support for the Plurinational State of Bolivia and repudiate the calls to attention, since, like the narrative on fraud and the coup d’état under discussion in Bolivia, there is a presumption of fraud without a shred of evidence. There is also a presumption of a possible violation of Articles 3 and 4 of the Convention without a shred of evidence.

The Workers who have made statements have praised our State, our wage policy, precisely because it gives priority to the needs of workers and their families. Because let us not forget that the workers for any State in the world must not be just another number, they must signify a family that forms an important part of the people. That is why our wage policies protect the social well-being of the families of Bolivian workers. But they also protect growth and economic stability.

It comes as no surprise, precisely, to hear our representative from private enterprise putting forward arguments about a pandemic attack in 2020, which has endangered the continuity of many enterprises. But he forgets to mention that there was also an abysmal state administration, which is why I remind him that it was precisely during this year that the wage increase was frozen at zero and yet it was the year when unemployment peaked and unjustified dismissals went up to almost 12 per cent.

Hence there is no connection whatsoever between the economic policies of the neoliberal periods and supposed economic stabilization.

We have shown in the course of 14 years of government by President Evo Morales that it is rather we who have made use of our constitutional right, our interventionist constitutional power that is the guarantor of human rights and fundamental rights established in the Constitution for the whole Bolivian population. We have protected the social stability of the workers and we have also protected the economic stability of enterprises.

It is our sovereign right as the Bolivian State to use our official data, and macroeconomic indicators show us – even though some sectors, perversely, do not even consider them – that we are growing once more, they show us that our interventionist wage policies have not had any effect on unemployment rates, let alone on any supposed decline of Bolivian enterprises. On the contrary, all the figures have been positive over the years.

With regard to the direct contacts mission called for in one statement, the Plurinational State of Bolivia affirms that since there is no violation of the Convention, or at least none that has been demonstrated at this session, there is no need for this mechanism. On the contrary, we urge the ILO to focus technical assistance on the promotion of labour rights and on the creation of opportunities for work, but decent work, improving social protection.

We are aware that we are on the right side in these class contradictions which have been made evident in these statements.

Employer members – First of all, let me say that the Employer members have very generously accepted all the statements of all speakers. However, when a speaker speaks out of turn and does not refer to the case or use the parliamentary language to which this Committee should adhere, there is good reason to request a point of order. The Employer members request that the statements of the Worker member of Uruguay be removed from the record of the meeting of this Committee.

Having made this clarification, we are surprised to see something very unusual in this case, which is that the Government of the Plurinational State of Bolivia and the Workers are making their statements from the same venue. Besides being unusual, this may be the real evidence, the true reflection of what is happening in the Plurinational State of Bolivia, specifically with regard to fixing the national minimum wage.

The Government of the Plurinational State of Bolivia continues in its non-compliance with the Convention, which, like all the Conventions, was adopted on a tripartite basis. It was freely ratified by the Plurinational State of Bolivia in 1977. We do not have to explain, therefore, that the Plurinational State of Bolivia must fulfil its international commitment.

Furthermore, the Committee is one of the manifestations of the ILO supervisory bodies and nothing entitles us to judge political intentions when requiring compliance with the standard adopted on a tripartite basis and ratified voluntarily by a State. Such is the case we are dealing with. Nor is it feasible to distinguish between Conventions that are fundamental, governance or technical, as in this case. They are all subject to the supervisory mechanisms of this Organization and must all be properly enforced. Tiny or insignificant non-compliance does not exist, and in this case there is only one situation, which is non-compliance.

Once again, the Employers wish, on this occasion, to state that we cannot and must not fail to warn this Committee in the strongest possible terms of such non-compliance by the Plurinational State of Bolivia, and to demand compliance with its international commitments. It is unacceptable for a Government to disregard social dialogue just because the views expressed may be uncomfortable to hear. This time it is the employers but, in this and other cases, it could also be the workers who are affected, and this Organization must use the same standards to judge all these situations.

Hence, the Employer members propose the following conclusions for the case, in which this Committee should highlight the seriousness of the situation and should request the Government, as a matter of urgency, to: (1) carry out full consultations with all actors in the world of work with regard to wage setting, both with the representative workers’ organizations and the most representative employers’ organizations and, in these consultations and in setting the minimum wage, take into account all the elements set forth in Article 3(a) and (b) of the Convention; (2) provide information on such actions to the Committee of Experts in its next report; (3) accept the direct contacts mission already repeatedly requested by this Committee and the technical assistance of the Office, possibly in order to realize the extent of the non-compliance currently denied by the Bolivian Government; and (4) lastly, owing to the seriousness of this matter, the Employers’ group requests that the conclusions of this case be included in a special paragraph in the Committee’s report.

Worker members – I should like to thank the Government of the Plurinational State of Bolivia for the explanations provided. We note the indignation expressed by some speakers. The same approach would be most welcome when it comes to discussing cases where workers’ fundamental rights are flouted, or even situations where lives are quite simply taken.

I can only reiterate our request to the Government to hold minimum wage fixing consultations, as provided for in the Convention.

Nevertheless, we highlight the Government’s efforts to improve the lives of workers and to fulfil the commitment made by ratifying the Convention. In this regard, it is worth noting that economic factors have been fully taken into consideration in the minimum wage increases.

We should also like to state that we absolutely disagree with the analysis of the Employers’ group, which draws a direct link between informality in the country and the increase in the minimum wage. This is a risky assertion that would certainly require more detailed analysis.

A careful examination of the situation should logically enable us to distinguish between its various factors, so as to make an adequate assessment of the situation.

Conclusions of the Committee

The Committee took note of the information provided by the Government representative and the discussion that followed.

The Committee recalled the high importance of full consultation with the social partners, as well as the elements to be taken into consideration in determining the level of minimum wages as set forth in Article 3 of the Convention.

The Committee regretted that the Government did not accept a direct contacts mission, as they were invited to by the Committee in 2019 in order to implement all its 2019 recommendations.

The Committee therefore, once again, urges the Government of Bolivia to:

• carry out full consultations with the social partners with regard to minimum wage setting; and
• take into account the needs of workers and their families as well as economic factors when determining the level of the minimum wage as set out in Article 3 of the Convention.

The Committee requests that the Government avail itself, without delay, of ILO technical assistance to ensure compliance with the Convention in law and practice.

The Committee requests the Government to provide, in consultation with the social partners, further information to the Committee of Experts on the application of the Convention before its next sitting in 2021.

The Committee once again urges the Government to accept an ILO direct contacts mission before the next session of the International Labour Conference in 2022.

Government representative – We note the Committee’s conclusions. We regret that the Committee gives the impression of defending the privileged sector more than families from historically vulnerable sectors. We are concerned at the fact that no account has been taken of indicators of sustained economic growth since 2006, which undermine the Employers’ arguments and contradict the report issued by the Committee itself.

The Plurinational State of Bolivia takes note of the Committee’s suggestions and reaffirms the strong commitment to achieve a State with social justice through compliance with the principles and rights enshrined in the Political Constitution of the State. These criteria were even referred to only yesterday by the Pope, appealing to the trade unions and the most disadvantaged not to forget their true calling, namely to produce wealth in the service of all and not just the few.

The Government reiterates that it is not failing to comply with the Convention, which is why it does not consider a direct contacts mission to be necessary, since dialogue is the basis on which state policies are formulated. On the contrary, we urge the ILO to generate technical cooperation to guarantee the full exercise of labour rights.

We vigorously underline the fact that the Committee’s second suggestion is what we, as a democratic Government, have taken into account. It appears that the Committee is unwilling to recognize this.

We are on the list of cases because in order to determine the minimum wage we take account of the factors mentioned in Article 3 of the Convention. Hence we affirm that we have succeeded in maintaining this balance.

The Plurinational State of Bolivia reaffirms its compliance with the agreements and its commitment to continue generating better conditions of employment and decent work in the context of our sovereignty.