Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2023, published 112nd ILC session (2024)

Labour Relations (Public Service) Convention, 1978 (No. 151) - Colombia (Ratification: 2000)

Previous comments: observation and direct request

The Committee takes note of the joint observations of the Confederation of Workers of Colombia (CTC), the General Confederation of Labour (CGT) and the Single Confederation of Workers of Colombia (CUT) and of the observations of the National Employers’ Association of Colombia (ANDI) received on 1 September 2023. These two observations relate to matters examined by the Committee in this comment.

Articles 1 and 4. Protection of precarious public service workers against anti-union discrimination. In its previous comments, the Committee noted the allegations of the central trade union bodies that many public service workers employed under service contracts do not benefit adequate protection against anti-union discrimination. The Committee takes note of the various initiatives described by the Government aimed at formalising precarious staff in the public administration, including, inter alia, the Plan for the Formalisation of Work in the Public Administration with Equity. The Committee also notes that the trade union centres, while recognising the efforts under way, indicate that the fraudulent use of service contracts has not disappeared and call for tighter controls and more information on the results of the formalisation policy. While taking due note of the actions under way to formalise public service personnel and recalling the broad scope of the Convention, the Committee requests the Government to ensure that workers linked to the public service by service contracts benefit effective protection against possible acts of anti-union discrimination. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information in this regard.

Article 6. Facilities to be granted to civil servants’ organizations. The Committee recalls that it had noted that article 416-A of the Labour Code, while recognising that the trade union organizations of civil servants have the right to be granted trade union leave by public entities, also indicates that the national Government regulates the matter, in consultation with the representatives of the trade union confederations. The Committee notes with satisfaction that the Government and the trade union confederations indicate that: (i) trade union leave for public employees was regulated by Decree No. 344 of 2021, resulting from collective bargaining in the public sector; (ii) as part of the collective bargaining in the public sector that led to the signing of the State Agreement of June 2023, circulars were issued to guarantee trade union leave in order to ensure the presence of representatives of trade union organizations at both central and sectoral negotiating tables ; and (iii) in accordance with what was agreed in the above-mentioned State Agreement, the Government undertakes to amend Decree No. 344 of 2021 concerning trade union leave for public sector employees, in order to continue to strengthen trade union guarantees for workers in the sector. The Committee invites the Government to provide information on any developments in this regard.

Article 7. Procedures for determining terms and conditions of employment. The Committee refers to its comments concerning the application of the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98), and the Collective Bargaining Convention, 1981 (No. 154).

Article 8. Settlement of disputes. The Committee had asked the Government to consider improving the existing mediation mechanisms and to indicate whether there is the legal possibility and the necessary mechanisms to have recourse to arbitration when, by mutual agreement, the two parties to the negotiation on the terms and conditions of employment of public employees so wish. The Committee notes that the Government indicates that: (i) there is currently no legal possibility of recourse to arbitration tribunals to settle labour disputes between public employees and State entities; (ii) however, Decree No. 160 of 2014 establishes mediation as a mechanism for settlement between the parties after the exhaustion of collective bargaining and its successive extensions.

The Committee further notes that the central unions state that: (i) mediation has not been used much in almost a decade of collective bargaining practice in the public administration, which may indicate that there are limits to the perception of its usefulness or effectiveness; and (ii) it is therefore necessary to take measures to strengthen the effectiveness of the mediation mechanism or, failing that, to incorporate the possibility for the parties to have recourse to arbitration.

The Committee requests the Government, in consultation with the workers’ representative organizations, to take the necessary measures to improve the effectiveness of the mechanisms for settling collective disputes in the public administration. The Committee also requests the Government to provide information on the number, duration and results of mediation processes in collective bargaining in the public sector.