Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87) - Guinea (Ratification: 1959)

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2022, published 111st ILC session (2023)

Article 3 of the Convention. Right of organizations to organize their activities and to formulate their programmes. In its previous comment, the Committee requested the Government to provide information on the work of the National Social Dialogue Council (CNDS) in resolving disagreements concerning the determination of minimum wages. The Committee also requested the Government to indicate the minimum services determined in the transport and communications services. The Committee notes the adoption of the new Decree of 31 May 2022 on the organization and functioning of the CNDS. The Committee notes that the Government indicates that it is in the process of adopting the measures necessary to render the CNDS operational and that the social partners have been requested to designate their members to allow the body to be up and running as soon as possible. According to the Government, as it is not yet operational, the CNDS has not intervened in resolving the disagreements concerning the determination of minimum wages. The Committee also notes that, according to the Government, following a number of collective disputes, minimum services have been determined at the level of certain institutions and that minimum services exist in the communication and transport sectors. In light of the above, the Committee once again requests the Government to provide information on the work of the CNDS, once operational, in the resolution of disagreements concerning the determination of minimum services. The Committee also once again requests the Government to provide information on the minimum services determined in the communication, transport and other sectors.

In its previous comment, the Committee welcomed the establishment of the commission to review the Labour Code and hoped that sections 431.5 and 434.4 of the Labour Code, on minimum service in case of strikes and compulsory arbitration respectively, would be amended in conformity with the Convention. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the amendment process of the Labour Code is under way, in consultation with the social partners, and that the next step is to establish a commission which will be responsible for bringing together the different observations made regarding the inadequacies, shortcomings, legal gaps and desired rectifications in certain articles of the Labour Code. On completion of that task, a “sharing” workshop will be organized, at the latest in the month of November 2022. The Committee notes that the Government indicates that it has requested ILO technical assistance in this regard. The Committee requests the Government to report on all progress made in this respect and encourages the Government to continue to avail itself of the technical assistance of the Office in this connection.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

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 International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), received on 1 September 2017, and of the National Employers’ Council of Guinea, transmitted with the Government’s report, which cover matters examined by the Committee.

Article 3 of the Convention. Right of organizations to organize their activities and to formulate their programmes. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to provide information on the determination of minimum services in the context of collective disputes through the framework for concerted social dialogue, and particularly to indicate the minimum services determined in the transport and communications services, where difficulties had previously been reported. The Committee notes with interest the Government’s indication that, following the development of the National Social Dialogue Charter, Decree No. 256 of 23 August 2016 establishing a National Social Dialogue Council was adopted. The Committee notes that, in accordance with section 4 of the Decree, the Council is responsible for ensuring permanent dialogue between the State and all the social partners, and that section 5(2) provides that the Council shall be consulted on major disputes. The Committee further notes that section 7 of the Decree provides for the tripartite composition of the Council and the appointment of its members. The Government adds that it will take every measure for its effective implementation, including the appointment of its members. The Committee notes the indication by the National Employers’ Council of Guinea, suggesting that the Council could also address, in addition to the transport and telecommunications sectors, services such as banking and insurance, health, education and microfinance. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the work of the National Employers’ Council of Guinea in resolving disagreements concerning the determination of minimum wages. The Committee once again requests the Government to indicate the minimum services determined in the transport and communications services, where difficulties had previously been reported, including by the ITUC in its observations referred to above.

The Committee recalls that in its previous comment it noted that, under the terms of section 431(5) of the Labour Code, employees are entitled to cease working completely, on condition that indispensable security measures and a minimum service are ensured. In this regard, the Committee previously requested the Government to take the necessary measures to amend section 431(5) of the Labour Code in order to limit the possibility to establish a minimum service to the following situations: (i) in services the interruption of which would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population (that is, essential services “in the strict sense of the term”); (ii) in services which are not essential in the strict sense of the term, but in which strikes of a certain magnitude and duration could cause an acute crisis threatening the normal conditions of existence of the population; or (iii) in public services of fundamental importance (see the 2012 General Survey on the fundamental Conventions, paragraph 136). The Committee also noted that, under the terms of sections 433(1) and 434(4) of the Labour Code, read in conjunction, recourse to arbitration may be compulsory in a dispute of such a nature as to compromise the normal functioning of the national economy. In this regard, the Committee recalled that compulsory recourse to arbitration to bring an end to a collective labour dispute or a strike is only acceptable in cases where strikes may be subject to restrictions, or even prohibited, namely: (i) in the case of disputes concerning public servants exercising authority in the name of the State; (ii) in disputes in essential services in the strict sense of the term; or (iii) in situations of acute national or local crisis, but only for a limited period of time and to the extent necessary to meet the requirements of the situation (see General Survey op. cit., paragraph 153). The Committee also noted the possibility envisaged in section 434(4) of the Labour Code to make executory an arbitration award despite the expressed opposition of one of the parties within the time limits set out in the law, which amounts to empowering the public authorities to bring an end to a strike, instead of the highest judicial authorities. The Committee therefore requested the Government to take the necessary measures to amend section 434(4) of the Labour Code as indicated above. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that it has established a commission to review the Labour Code, with a view to its revision, and that sections 431(5) and 434(4) will be analysed and discussed by this commission. The Committee welcomes the establishment of the commission to review the Labour Code and hopes that sections 431(5) and 434(4) of the Labour Code will be amended in the near future. The Committee requests the Government to report any progress achieved in this regard.

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

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2017, published 107th ILC session (2018)

The Committee notes the observations of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), received on 1 September 2017, and of the National Employers’ Council of Guinea, transmitted with the Government’s report, which cover matters examined by the Committee.

Article 3 of the Convention. Right of organizations to organize their activities and to formulate their programmes. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to provide information on the determination of minimum services in the context of collective disputes through the framework for concerted social dialogue, and particularly to indicate the minimum services determined in the transport and communications services, where difficulties had previously been reported. The Committee notes with interest the Government’s indication that, following the development of the National Social Dialogue Charter, Decree No. 256 of 23 August 2016 establishing a National Social Dialogue Council was adopted. The Committee notes that, in accordance with section 4 of the Decree, the Council is responsible for ensuring permanent dialogue between the State and all the social partners, and that section 5(2) provides that the Council shall be consulted on major disputes. The Committee further notes that section 7 of the Decree provides for the tripartite composition of the Council and the appointment of its members. The Government adds that it will take every measure for its effective implementation, including the appointment of its members. The Committee notes the indication by the National Employers’ Council of Guinea, suggesting that the Council could also address, in addition to the transport and telecommunications sectors, services such as banking and insurance, health, education and microfinance. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the work of the National Employers’ Council of Guinea in resolving disagreements concerning the determination of minimum wages. The Committee once again requests the Government to indicate the minimum services determined in the transport and communications services, where difficulties had previously been reported, including by the ITUC in its observations referred to above.

The Committee recalls that in its previous comment it noted that, under the terms of section 431(5) of the Labour Code, employees are entitled to cease working completely, on condition that indispensable security measures and a minimum service are ensured. In this regard, the Committee previously requested the Government to take the necessary measures to amend section 431(5) of the Labour Code in order to limit the possibility to establish a minimum service to the following situations: (i) in services the interruption of which would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population (that is, essential services “in the strict sense of the term”); (ii) in services which are not essential in the strict sense of the term, but in which strikes of a certain magnitude and duration could cause an acute crisis threatening the normal conditions of existence of the population; or (iii) in public services of fundamental importance (see the 2012 General Survey on the fundamental Conventions, paragraph 136). The Committee also noted that, under the terms of sections 433(1) and 434(4) of the Labour Code, read in conjunction, recourse to arbitration may be compulsory in a dispute of such a nature as to compromise the normal functioning of the national economy. In this regard, the Committee recalled that compulsory recourse to arbitration to bring an end to a collective labour dispute or a strike is only acceptable in cases where strikes may be subject to restrictions, or even prohibited, namely: (i) in the case of disputes concerning public servants exercising authority in the name of the State; (ii) in disputes in essential services in the strict sense of the term; or (iii) in situations of acute national or local crisis, but only for a limited period of time and to the extent necessary to meet the requirements of the situation (see General Survey op. cit., paragraph 153). The Committee also noted the possibility envisaged in section 434(4) of the Labour Code to make executory an arbitration award despite the expressed opposition of one of the parties within the time limits set out in the law, which amounts to empowering the public authorities to bring an end to a strike, instead of the highest judicial authorities. The Committee therefore requested the Government to take the necessary measures to amend section 434(4) of the Labour Code as indicated above. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that it has established a commission to review the Labour Code, with a view to its revision, and that sections 431(5) and 434(4) will be analysed and discussed by this commission. The Committee welcomes the establishment of the commission to review the Labour Code and hopes that sections 431(5) and 434(4) of the Labour Code will be amended in the near future. The Committee requests the Government to report any progress achieved in this regard.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2016, published 106th ILC session (2017)

The Committee notes the observations of the International Organisation of Employers (IOE), received on 1 September 2015, which are of a general nature.

The Committee notes the new Labour Code (Act No. L/2014/072/CNT of 10 January 2014).

Article 3 of the Convention. Right of organizations to organize their activities and to formulate their programmes. The Committee recalls that its previous comments related to the need to take measures to establish an independent body having the confidence of the parties which can rapidly resolve any disagreements between parties with respect to the determination of the minimum service in the transport and communication services. The Committee notes the Government’s indication in its 2015 report that a national forum has validated the work of a tripartite initiative committee which formulated a National Social Dialogue Charter, internal regulations and a framework for concerted social dialogue. In the view of the Government, this framework for concerted social dialogue, which enjoys the confidence of the parties, could have the function of preventing and resolving disputes, including those relating to the determination of minimum services in the event of disagreement between the parties. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the determination of minimum services in the context of collective disputes by the framework for concerted social dialogue, and particularly to indicate the minimum services determined in the transport and communications services, where difficulties had previously been reported.

The Committee notes that, in the event of the failure of conciliation prior to a strike, under the terms of section 431(5) of the Labour Code, employed persons have the right to cease working completely, subject to ensuring indispensable security measures and a minimum service. In this regard, the Committee reminds the Government that the maintenance of minimum services in the event of a strike should only be possible in certain situations, namely: (i) in services the interruption of which would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population (or essential services “in the strict sense of the term”); (ii) in services which are not essential in the strict sense of the term, but in which strikes of a certain magnitude and duration could cause an acute crisis threatening the normal conditions of existence of the population; and (iii) in public services of fundamental importance (see the 2012 General Survey on the fundamental Conventions, paragraph 136). The Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to amend section 431(5) of the Labour Code in order to limit the possibilities of establishing a minimum service to the situations recalled above, and to report any progress achieved in this respect.

The Committee notes that, under the terms of sections 433(1) and 434(4) of the Labour Code, read jointly, recourse to arbitration may be compulsory in the following cases: (i) in a dispute of such a nature as to compromise the normal functioning of the national economy; (ii) in a strike in services the interruption of which could endanger life, personal safety and health; and (iii) during a period of acute national crisis. In this regard, the Committee recalls that compulsory recourse to arbitration to bring an end to a collective labour dispute or a strike is only acceptable in cases where strikes may be subject to restrictions, or even prohibited, namely: (i) in the case of disputes concerning public servants exercising authority in the name of the State; (ii) in conflicts in essential services in the strict sense of the term; or (iii) in situations of acute national or local crisis, but only for a limited period of time and to the extent necessary to meet the requirements of the situation (see the 2012 General Survey on the fundamental Conventions, paragraph 153). The Committee also notes that the possibility envisaged in section 434(4) of the Labour Code to make executory an arbitration award despite the expressed opposition of one of the parties within the time period set out in the law amounts to empowering the public authorities to bring an end to a strike or a lock-out, instead of the highest judicial authorities, which in the view of the Committee is not compatible with the Convention. The Committee, therefore, requests the Government to take the necessary measures to amend section 434(4) of the Labour Code as indicated above, and to report any progress achieved in this regard.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2014, published 104th ILC session (2015)

The Committee takes note of the adoption of the new Labour Code (Act No. L/2014/072/CNT of 10 January 2014). It requests the Government to provide all implementing texts of the Code in view of a complete review of the new legislation.

The Committee further notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It hopes that a report will be supplied for examination by the Committee at its next session and that it will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous comments.

Article 3 of the Convention. Right of organizations to organize their activities and to formulate their programmes. The Committee’s previous comments referred to the need to take steps to set up an independent body having the confidence of the parties, in order to reach a decision without delay on the difficulties encountered in the definition of the minimum service in the event of disagreement between the parties in the transport and communication services. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that: (1) to date, no independent body exists for deciding on this matter; (2) by means of Order No. 2732/MEFPRATE/CAB/2010 establishing the structure and operation of the Labour and Social Legislation Advisory Committee, the Government has established a tripartite body whose task is to rule on all questions relating to the world of work; (3) a national body for social dialogue will be established in the very near future; and (4) these questions will be placed on the agenda of forthcoming sessions of the Labour and Social Legislation Advisory Committee. The Committee requests the Government to supply information in its next report on the work done by the Labour and Social Legislation Advisory Committee on the definition of minimum services in the transport and communication services.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2012, published 102nd ILC session (2013)

Observations from workers’ organizations. In its previous observation the Committee asked the Government to send comments on the observations made in 2008 and 2010 by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) containing serious allegations of assaults by the security forces on demonstrators and strikers, and arrests of trade unionists, the ransacking of the headquarters of the National Confederation of Workers of Guinea (CNTG) and the search by military personnel of the residence of the general secretary of the CNTG.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that: (1) following a transition period (2008–10) and free, transparent and democratic presidential elections, acts of violence, murders and disappearances of trade union leaders are a thing of the past, and fundamental rights at work are scrupulously respected; (2) the Government enjoys excellent collaborative relations with the trade union movement; (3) in its desire to create a climate of lasting peace, the Government has just established a forum for periodic consultation with the social partners, including the CNTG; and (4) this forum has enabled negotiations to be held aimed at improving workers’ living conditions and the Government will make every effort to ensure the application in law and in practice of the international standards which it has freely adopted. The Committee further notes the observations of 31 July 2012 from the ITUC, which report the attempted assassination of the newly elected general secretary of the CNTG, death threats received by other leaders and an attack on the confederation’s headquarters which resulted in serious injuries to seven persons. The Committee recalls that freedom of association can only be exercised in conditions in which fundamental rights, and in particular those relating to human life and personal safety, are fully respected and guaranteed. Moreover, in the event of assaults on the physical or moral integrity of individuals, an independent judicial enquiry should be instituted without delay since this is a particularly appropriate method for fully clarifying the facts, determining responsibility, punishing those responsible and preventing the repetition of such acts. The Committee requests the Government to take the necessary steps to ensure observance of these principles.

Article 3 of the Convention. Right of organizations to organize their activities and to formulate their programmes. The Committee’s previous comments referred to the need to take steps to set up an independent body having the confidence of the parties, in order to reach a decision without delay on the difficulties encountered in the definition of the minimum service in the event of disagreement between the parties in the transport and communication services. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that: (1) to date, no independent body exists for deciding on this matter; (2) by means of Order No. 2732/MEFPRATE/CAB/2010 establishing the structure and operation of the Labour and Social Legislation Advisory Committee, the Government has established a tripartite body whose task is to rule on all questions relating to the world of work; (3) a national body for social dialogue will be established in the very near future; (4) these questions will be placed on the agenda of forthcoming sessions of the Labour and Social Legislation Advisory Committee; and (5) the Government is requesting technical assistance from the Office in this respect. The Committee hopes that the technical assistance requested by the Government will be provided in the very near future and requests the Government to supply information in its next report on the work done by the Labour and Social Legislation Advisory Committee on the definition of minimum services in the transport and communication services.

The Committee’s previous comments also referred to the need to take steps to ensure that compulsory arbitration is restricted to cases where both parties agree to request it, in essential services in the strict sense of the term, or in the event of an acute national or local crisis (sections 342, 350 and 351 of the Labour Code). The Committee notes the Government’s indication that a draft Labour Code is being prepared and that sections 433(1) and (6) take account of the Committee’s comments in this regard. The Committee requests the Government to supply information in its next report on the status of the legislative process relating to the new Labour Code and to send a copy of the legislative text once it has been adopted.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2011, published 101st ILC session (2012)

The Committee notes with regret that the Government’s report has not been received. It must therefore repeat its previous observation which read as follows:

Repetition

The Committee recalls that in its previous comments the Committee raised a number of points about the national legislation as follows:

• – the need for measures to set up an independent body that has the trust of the parties and is able to rule promptly on difficulties encountered in defining the minimum service where the parties are unable to agree as to the minimum service in transport and communications (which are not deemed essential in the strict sense of the term); and
• – the need for measures to ensure that compulsory arbitration (established in sections 342, 350 and 351 of the Labour Code) is restricted to cases where the two parties agree to request it, in essential services in the strict sense of the term, or in the event of acute national crisis.

The Committee trusts that the Government will take the measures requested very shortly, in consultation with the representative organizations of employers and workers concerned, and asks it to provide information on any developments in the situation.

The Committee reminds the Government that it may seek technical assistance from the Office, if it so wishes.

The Committee recalls that the 2008 International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) comments reported assaults, by the security forces, on demonstrators and strikers, as a result of which around 40 people died and nearly 300 others were injured, arrests of trade unionists and the destruction of the headquarters of the National Confederation of Workers of Guinea (CNTG). The Committee recalls that a climate of violence in which murders and disappearances of trade union leaders go unpunished, constitutes a serious obstacle to the exercise of trade union rights and that such acts require severe measures to be taken by the authorities. When disorders have occurred involving loss of human life or serious injury, the setting up of an independent judicial inquiry is a particularly appropriate method of fully ascertaining the facts, determining responsibilities, punishing those responsible and preventing the repetition of such acts (see 1994 General Survey on freedom of association and collective bargaining, paragraph 29).

Finally, the Committee noted the comments made by the ITUC, dated 24 August 2010, on the application of the Convention, in particular, the allegations concerning the search of the home of the General Secretary of the CNTG by military forces. The Committee recalls that any search of unionists’ homes without a court order constitutes an extremely serious infringement of freedom of association. The Committee requests the Government to provide its observations on all the comments made by the ITUC.

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

Finally, the Committee notes the comments submitted by the ITUC, dated 4 August 2011, which refer to matters previously raised by the Committee.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2010, published 100th ILC session (2011)

The Committee notes with regret that the Government’s report has not been received. It must therefore repeat its previous observation which read as follows:

The Committee recalls that in its previous comments the Committee raised a number of points about the national legislation as follows:

–      the need for measures to set up an independent body that has the trust of the parties and is able to rule promptly on difficulties encountered in defining the minimum service where the parties are unable to agree as to the minimum service in transport and communications (which are not deemed essential in the strict sense of the term); and

–      the need for measures to ensure that compulsory arbitration (established in sections 342, 350 and 351 of the Labour Code) is restricted to cases where the two parties agree to request it, in essential services in the strict sense of the term, or in the event of acute national crisis.

The Committee trusts that the Government will take the measures requested very shortly, in consultation with the representative organizations of employers and workers concerned, and asks it to provide information on any developments in the situation.

The Committee reminds the Government that it may seek technical assistance from the Office.

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

The Committee notes the comments made by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), dated 26 August 2009. The Committee recalls that the 2008 ITUC comments reported assaults, by the security forces, on demonstrators and strikers, as a result of which around 40 people died and nearly 300 others were injured, arrests of trade unionists and the destruction of the headquarters of the National Confederation of Workers of Guinea (CNTG). The Committee recalls that a climate of violence in which murders and disappearances of trade union leaders go unpunished, constitutes a serious obstacle to the exercise of trade union rights and that such acts require severe measures to be taken by the authorities. When disorders have occurred involving loss of human life or serious injury, the setting up of an independent judicial inquiry is a particularly appropriate method of fully ascertaining the facts, determining responsibilities, punishing those responsible and preventing the repetition of such acts (see 1994 General Survey on freedom of association and collective bargaining, paragraph 29). The Committee requests the Government to provide its observations on all the comments made by the ITUC.

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

Finally, the Committee notes the comments made by the ITUC, dated 24 August 2010, on the application of the Convention, in particular, the allegations concerning the search of the home of the General Secretary of the CNTG by military forces. The Committee recalls that any search of unionists’ homes without a court order constitutes an extremely serious infringement of freedom of association. The Committee requests the Government to provide its observations in this respect.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2009, published 99th ILC session (2010)

The Committee notes with regret that the Government’s report has not been received. It must therefore repeat its previous observation which read as follows:

The Committee recalls that in its previous comments the Committee raised a number of points about the national legislation as follows:

–      the need for measures to set up an independent body that has the trust of the parties and is able to rule promptly on difficulties encountered in defining the minimum service where the parties are unable to agree as to the minimum service in transport and communications (which are not deemed essential in the strict sense of the term); and

–      the need for measures to ensure that compulsory arbitration (established in sections 342, 350 and 351 of the Labour Code) is restricted to cases where the two parties agree to request it, in essential services in the strict sense of the term, or in the event of acute national crisis.

The Committee trusts that the Government will take the measures requested very shortly, in consultation with the representative organizations of employers and workers concerned, and asks it to provide information on any developments in the situation.

The Committee reminds the Government that it may seek technical assistance from the Office.

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

The Committee notes the comments made by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), dated 26 August 2009. The Committee recalls that the 2008 ITUC comments reported assaults, by the security forces, on demonstrators and strikers, as a result of which around 40 people died and nearly 300 others were injured, arrests of trade unionists and the destruction of the headquarters of the National Confederation of Workers of Guinea (CNTG). The Committee recalls that a climate of violence in which murders and disappearances of trade union leaders go unpunished, constitutes a serious obstacle to the exercise of trade union rights and that such acts require severe measures to be taken by the authorities. When disorders have occurred involving loss of human life or serious injury, the setting up of an independent judicial inquiry is a particularly appropriate method of fully ascertaining the facts, determining responsibilities, punishing those responsible and preventing the repetition of such acts (see 1994 General Survey on freedom of association and collective bargaining, paragraph 29). The Committee requests the Government to provide its observations on all the comments made by the ITUC.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2008, published 98th ILC session (2009)

The Committee notes with regret that it has not received the Government’s report. It also notes the comments made by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), dated 29 August 2008, which relate to matters already raised by the Committee. Furthermore, the ITUC reports assaults, by the security forces, on demonstrators and strikers, as a result of which around 40 people died and nearly 300 others were injured, arrests of trade unionists and the destruction of the headquarters of the National Confederation of Workers of Guinea (CNTG). The Committee recalls that a climate of violence in which murders and disappearances of trade union leaders go unpunished, constitutes a serious obstacle to the exercise of trade union rights and that such acts require severe measures to be taken by the authorities. When disorders have occurred involving loss of human life or serious injury, the setting up of an independent judicial inquiry is a particularly appropriate method of fully ascertaining the facts, determining responsibilities, punishing those responsible and preventing the repetition of such acts (see 1994 General Survey on freedom of association and collective bargaining, paragraph 29). The Committee requests the Government to provide its observations in this regard, as well as on the comments made by the ITUC in 2007.

The Committee recalls that in its previous comments the Committee raised a number of points about the national legislation as follows:

–           the need for measures to set up an independent body that has the trust of the parties and is able to rule promptly on difficulties encountered in defining the minimum service where the parties are unable to agree as to the minimum service in transport and communications (which are not deemed essential in the strict sense of the term); and

–           the need for measures to ensure that compulsory arbitration (established in sections 342, 350 and 351 of the Labour Code) is restricted to cases where the two parties agree to request it, in essential services in the strict sense of the term, or in the event of acute national crisis.

The Committee trusts that the Government will take the measures requested very shortly, in consultation with the representative organizations of employers and workers concerned, and asks it inform it of any developments in the situation.

The Committee reminds the Government that it may seek technical assistance from the Office.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2007, published 97th ILC session (2008)

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It also notes the comments of 28 August 2007 by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) reiterating the comments made in 2006 by the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU, not ITUC) on matters already raised by the Committee. The ITUC reports recurring intimidation and threats against trade union leaders and violent repression of strikes by the police. The Committee hopes that the Government will do its utmost to ensure that henceforth the rights of workers’ and employers’ organizations are fully observed in a climate free from violence and pressure or threats of any kind against the leaders and members of these organizations. The Committee requests the Government to send its observations on the ITUC’s comments.

The Committee recalls that in its previous comments the Committee raised a number of points about the national legislation as follows:

–           the need for measures to set up an independent body that has the trust of the parties and is able to rule promptly on difficulties encountered in defining the minimum service where the parties are unable to agree as to the minimum service in transport and communications (which are not deemed essential in the strict sense of the term); and

–           the need for measures to ensure that compulsory arbitration (established in section 342, 350 and 351 of the Labour Code) is restricted to cases where the two parties agree to request it, in essential services in the strict sense of the term or in the event of acute national crisis.

While noting the difficulties the country is facing, the Committee reminds the Government that in its last report it undertook to take account of the Committee’s comments when revising the Labour Code. The Committee trusts that the Government will address these matters very shortly, in consultation with the representative organizations of employers and workers concerned, and asks it to keep it informed of any developments in the situation.

The Committee reminds the Government that it may seek technical assistance from the Office.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2006, published 96th ILC session (2007)

The Committee notes the comments of the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) of 10 August 2006, which refer, on the whole, to pending legislative issues which are now being examined. The ICFTU also indicates difficulties in exercising the right to strike, together with police repression and the arrest of trade union leaders in cases where strikes have taken place. In this regard, the Committee requests the Government to provide its observations relating to the comments made by the ICFTU.

Moreover, the Committee requests the Government to provide, in time for its next session in November-December 2007 and in accordance with the regular reporting cycle, its observations on all the issues mentioned in the Committee’s previous observation in 2005 (see 2005 observation, 76th Session).

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2005, published 95th ILC session (2006)

The Committee notes the Government’s report.

The Committee recalls that in its previous observation it requested the Government to: (1) indicate whether, in cases where the parties do not reach an agreement on a negotiated minimum service in transport and communications (which are not considered to be essential in the strict sense of the term), measures are envisaged for an independent body to examine rapidly the difficulties encountered in the definition of the minimum service; and (2) keep it informed of any measures adopted or envisaged to ensure that compulsory arbitration (contemplated in sections 342, 350 and 351 of the Labour Code) is limited to cases in which the two parties agree to request it, except in essential services in the strict sense of the term or in the event of an acute national crisis.

The Committee notes that the Government indicates that it has taken due note of these observations, which it will take into account when revising the Labour Code.

The Committee requests that the Government keep it informed of developments in this respect.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2004, published 93rd ILC session (2005)

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It must therefore repeat its previous observation, which read as follows:

In its previous comments, the Committee noted that public transport and communications do not in themselves constitute essential services in the strict sense of the term, but that they appear on the list contained in Order No. 5680/MTASE/DMTLS/95 of 24 October 1995, which defines and determines essential services in the context of the exercise of the right to strike. While noting the provisions of section 4 (according to which a minimum service shall be established in essential services and that the determination of the jobs necessary for the implementation of the minimum service and the designation of the workers responsible for their execution are the responsibility of the employer and the trade union body) it observes that, where the parties do not reach an agreement, it is for the public authorities to take the necessary measures to ensure the provision of indispensable minimum services (section 5). The Committee recalls that, where the parties do not reach an agreement, minimum services should be determined by an independent body. The Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate whether, in cases where the parties do not reach an agreement on a negotiated minimum service in transport and communications (which are not considered to be essential in the strict sense of the term), measures are envisaged for an independent body to examine rapidly the difficulties encountered in the definition of the minimum service.

The Committee also recalled that recourse to compulsory arbitration should only be imposed by one of the parties to a conflict in cases in which the right to strike may be limited or even prohibited, that is in essential services in the strict sense of the term or in the event of an acute national crisis. Noting that sections 342, 350 and 351 of the Labour Code permit recourse to arbitration at the request of one of the parties or of the minister in relation to essential services (the above Order includes public transport and communications in such services), the Committee once again requests the Government to provide information on the application in practice of these sections in recent years, and particularly the number of occasions on which recourse has been had to these provisions, the services concerned and the circumstances. The Committee requests the Government to keep it informed of any measures adopted or envisaged to ensure that compulsory arbitration is limited to cases in which the two parties agree to request it, except in essential services in the strict sense of the term or in the event of an acute national crisis.

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

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2003, published 92nd ILC session (2004)

The Committee notes with regret that the Government’s report does not contain a reply to its previous comments.

In its previous comments, the Committee noted that public transport and communications do not in themselves constitute essential services in the strict sense of the term, but that they appear on the list contained in Order No. 5680/MTASE/DMTLS/95 of 24 October 1995, which defines and determines essential services in the context of the exercise of the right to strike. While noting the provisions of section 4 (according to which a minimum service shall be established in essential services and that the determination of the jobs necessary for the implementation of the minimum service and the designation of the workers responsible for their execution are the responsibility of the employer and the trade union body) it observes that, where the parties do not reach an agreement, it is for the public authorities to take the necessary measures to ensure the provision of indispensable minimum services (section 5). The Committee recalls that, where the parties do not reach an agreement, minimum services should be determined by an independent body. The Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate whether, in cases where the parties do not reach an agreement on a negotiated minimum service in transport and communications (which are not considered to be essential in the strict sense of the term), measures are envisaged for an independent body to examine rapidly the difficulties encountered in the definition of the minimum service.

The Committee also recalled that recourse to compulsory arbitration should only be imposed by one of the parties to a conflict in cases in which the right to strike may be limited or even prohibited, that is in essential services in the strict sense of the term or in the event of an acute national crisis. Noting that sections 342, 350 and 351 of the Labour Code permit recourse to arbitration at the request of one of the parties or of the minister in relation to essential services (the above Order includes public transport and communications in such services), the Committee once again requests the Government to provide information on the application in practice of these sections in recent years, and particularly the number of occasions on which recourse has been had to these provisions, the services concerned and the circumstances. The Committee requests the Government to keep it informed of any measures adopted or envisaged to ensure that compulsory arbitration is limited to cases in which the two parties agree to request it, except in essential services in the strict sense of the term or in the event of an acute national crisis.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2002, published 91st ILC session (2003)

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It must repeat its previous observation which read as follows:

Articles 3 and 10 of the Convention. The Committee had previously observed that, while public transport and communications do not in themselves constitute essential services in the strict sense of the term, they appear on the list contained in Order No. 5680/MTASE/DNTLS/95 of 24 October 1995 which defines and determines essential services in the context of the exercise of the right to strike. In this regard, the Committee requested the Government to indicate, in cases where the parties do not manage to reach an agreement on the negotiated minimum service, the measures envisaged for a joint independent body to examine rapidly and without formalities the difficulties raised in the determination of the minimum service.

In addition, the Committee recalled that arbitration at the request of one of the parties, in this case the employer (sections 342, 350 and 351 of the Labour Code), was likely to restrict the exercise of the right to strike, contrary to Article 3 of the Convention. In this regard, the Committee requested the Government to take measures in order to ensure that arbitration could not be imposed at the request of only one of the parties to a dispute. Finally, the Committee requested the Government to continue to provide information on the application in practice of the above sections of the Labour Code and of Order No. 5680/MTASE/DNTLS/95 of 24 October 1995.

The Committee had noted that, according to the information contained in the Government’s latest report, the Order of 24 October 1995 was discussed and adopted by the Advisory Commission on Labour and Labour Legislation, which is a tripartite structure. While in legal terms arbitration at the request of one of the parties, in this case the employer, may restrict the exercise of the right to strike, the Government emphasizes that in practice such arbitration has never extended beyond the scope of labour inspections. Finally, the Government stated that it will take the Committee’s comments into account in the revision of the Labour Code.

The Committee had noted this information. With regard to the determination of essential services in the context of the right to strike in public transport and communications, the Committee once again requests the Government to indicate, in cases where the parties do not reach an agreement on a negotiated minimum level of service, the measures which have been taken or are envisaged for a joint independent body to examine rapidly and without formalities the difficulties raised by the definition of such a minimum service (see General Survey on freedom of association and collective bargaining, 1994, paragraph 161). With regard to recourse to arbitration imposed by one of the parties to the conflict, the Committee once again requests the Government to continue to provide it with information on the application in practice of sections 342, 350 and 351 of the Labour Code and requests it to keep it informed of any measures which are taken or envisaged concerning the amendment of the Labour Code on this matter, with a view to ensuring that recourse to arbitration can be imposed by one of the parties to a conflict, in both law and practice, only in cases in which the right to strike may be limited or even prohibited, that is in essential services in the strict sense of the term, namely those the interruption of which would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population (see General Survey, op. cit., paragraph 159), or in the event of an acute national crisis.

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

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2000, published 89th ILC session (2001)

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its report. It recalls that its previous comments concerned the following points:

Articles 3 and 10 of the Convention.  The Committee had previously observed that, while public transport and communications do not in themselves constitute essential services in the strict sense of the term, they appear on the list contained in Order No. 5680/MTASE/DNTLS/95 of 24 October 1995 which defines and determines essential services in the context of the exercise of the right to strike. In this regard, the Committee requested the Government to indicate, in cases where the parties do not manage to reach an agreement on the negotiated minimum service, the measures envisaged for a joint independent body to examine rapidly and without formalities the difficulties raised in the determination of the minimum service.

In addition, the Committee recalled that arbitration at the request of one of the parties, in this case the employer (sections 342, 350 and 351 of the Labour Code), was likely to restrict the exercise of the right to strike, contrary to Article 3 of the Convention. In this regard, the Committee requested the Government to take measures in order to ensure that arbitration could not be imposed at the request of only one of the parties to a dispute. Finally, the Committee requested the Government to continue to provide information on the application in practice of the above sections of the Labour Code and of Order No. 5680/MTASE/DNTLS/95 of 24 October 1995.

The Committee notes that, according to the information contained in the Government’s report, the Order of 24 October 1995 was discussed and adopted by the Advisory Commission on Labour and Labour Legislation, which is a tripartite structure. While in legal terms arbitration at the request of one of the parties, in this case the employer, may restrict the exercise of the right to strike, the Government emphasizes that in practice such arbitration has never extended beyond the scope of labour inspections. Finally, the Government states that it will take the Committee’s comments into account in the revision of the Labour Code.

The Committee notes this information. With regard to the determination of essential services in the context of the right to strike in public transport and communications, the Committee once again requests the Government to indicate, in cases where the parties do not reach an agreement on a negotiated minimum level of service, the measures which have been taken or are envisaged for a joint independent body to examine rapidly and without formalities the difficulties raised by the definition of such a minimum service (see General Survey on freedom of association and collective bargaining, 1994, paragraph 161). With regard to recourse to arbitration imposed by one of the parties to the conflict, the Committee once again requests the Government to continue to provide it with information on the application in practice of sections 342, 350 and 351 of the Labour Code and requests it to keep it informed of any measures which are taken or envisaged concerning the amendment of the Labour Code on this matter, with a view to ensuring that recourse to arbitration can be imposed by one of the parties to a conflict, in both law and practice, only in cases in which the right to strike may be limited or even prohibited, that is in essential services in the strict sense of the term, namely those the interruption of which would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population (see General Survey, op. cit., paragraph 159), or in the event of an acute national crisis.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1999, published 88th ILC session (2000)

The Committee notes that the Government's report has not been received and recalls that its previous comments concerned the following points:

The Committee had previously observed that, while public transport and communication do not constitute an essential service, they appear on the list contained in Order No. 5680/MTASE/DNTLS/95 of 24 October 1995 which defines and determines essential services in the context of the right to strike. The Committee again requests the Government to indicate, should the parties not manage to reach an agreement, the measures envisaged for a joint or independent body to examine rapidly and without formalities the difficulties raised by the definition of a minimum service (see General Survey on freedom of association and collective bargaining, 1994, paragraph 161).

In addition, the Committee recalls that arbitration at the request of one of the parties, in this case the employer (sections 342, 350 and 351 of the Labour Code), is likely to restrict the exercise of the right to strike, contrary to Article 3 of the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to take measures in order to ensure that arbitration cannot be imposed at the request of only one of the parties to a dispute.

The Committee also requests the Government to continue to provide, in its future reports, information on the application in practice of sections 342, 350 and 351 of the Labour Code on compulsory arbitration and Order No. 5680/MTASE/DNTLS/95 of 24 October 1995 which defines and determines essential services in the context of the right to strike.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1998, published 87th ILC session (1999)

The Committee notes that the Government's report has not been received. It must therefore repeat its previous observation which read as follows:

Referring to its previous comments concerning sections 342 and 351 of the Labour Code respecting the right to strike in essential services, which provide inter alia that the arbitration procedure may be implemented at the request either of a party to a dispute, or of a minister if he considers that a strike occurring in an essential service or during a period of national difficulty is likely to be prejudicial to public order or to the general interest, the Committee notes with interest the content of Order No. 5680/MTASE/DNTLS/95 of 24 October 1995 which defines and determines essential services in the context of the right to strike. The Committee observes that according to the Order, essential services are "those which if interrupted may endanger the lives, freedom, safety or health of individuals", and that the list provided corresponds partly to the principles of freedom of association. The Committee also observes that essential services imply the provision of a minimum service negotiated by an employer and his workers. Observing that public transport and communication, which do not in itself constitute an essential service, appear on the list contained in the Order, the Committee requests the Government to indicate, should the parties not manage to reach an agreement, the measures envisaged for a joint or independent body to examine rapidly and without formalities the difficulties raised by the definition of a minimum service (see General Survey on freedom of association and collective bargaining, 1994, paragraph 161). In addition, the Committee recalls that arbitration at the request of one of the parties, in this case the employer, is likely to restrict the exercise of the right to strike, contrary to Article 3 of the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to take measures in order to ensure that arbitration cannot be imposed at the request of only one of the parties to a dispute. The Committee also requests the Government to continue to provide, in its future reports, information on the application in practice of sections 342, 350 and 351 of the Labour Code and Order No. 5680/MTASE/DNTLS/95 of 24 October 1995 which defines and determines essential services in the context of the right to strike.

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

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1997, published 86th ILC session (1998)

Referring to its previous comments concerning sections 342 and 351 of the Labour Code respecting the right to strike in essential services, which provide inter alia that the arbitration procedure may be implemented at the request either of a party to a dispute, or of a minister if he considers that a strike occurring in an essential service or during a period of national difficulty is likely to be prejudicial to public order or to the general interest, the Committee notes with interest the content of Order No. 5680/MTASE/DNTLS/95 of 24 October 1995 which defines and determines essential services in the context of the right to strike. The Committee observes that according to the Order, essential services are "those which if interrupted may endanger the lives, freedom, safety or health of individuals", and that the list provided corresponds partly to the principles of freedom of association. The Committee also observes that essential services imply the provision of a minimum service negotiated by an employer and his workers.

Observing that public transport and communication, which do not in itself constitute an essential service, appear on the list contained in the Order, the Committee requests the Government to indicate, should the parties not manage to reach an agreement, the measures envisaged for a joint or independent body to examine rapidly and without formalities the difficulties raised by the definition of a minimum service (see General Survey on freedom of association and collective bargaining, 1994, paragraph 161).

In addition, the Committee recalls that arbitration at the request of one of the parties, in this case the employer, is likely to restrict the exercise of the right to strike, contrary to Article 3 of the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to take measures in order to ensure that arbitration cannot be imposed at the request of only one of the parties to a dispute.

The Committee also requests the Government to continue to provide, in its future reports, information on the application in practice of sections 342, 350 and 351 of the Labour Code and Order No. 5680/MTASE/DNTLS/95 of 24 October 1995 which defines and determines essential services in the context of the right to strike.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1996, published 85th ILC session (1997)

The Committee notes that the Government's report has not been received. It hopes that a report will be supplied for examination by the Committee at its next session and that it will contain full information on the matter raised in its previous direct request:

With reference to its previous comments concerning section 342 of the Labour Code respecting the right to strike in essential services, the Committee notes that the Government states once again in its report that the draft regulations respecting strikes affecting these services will be examined in the very near future and that it will take into account the concerns expressed by the Committee. The Committee hopes that the concept of essential services in which strikes can be limited, or even prohibited, will be confined to services the interruption of which would be likely to endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population. The Committee requests the Government to provide it with a copy of the text which is being prepared so that it can examine its scope.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1995, published 82nd ILC session (1995)

With reference to its previous comments concerning section 342 of the Labour Code respecting the right to strike in essential services, the Committee notes that the Government states once again in its report that the draft regulations respecting strikes affecting these services will be examined in the very near future and that it will take into account the concerns expressed by the Committee. The Committee hopes that the concept of essential services in which strikes can be limited, or even prohibited, will be confined to services the interruption of which would be likely to endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population. The Committee requests the Government to provide it with a copy of the text which is being prepared so that it can examine its scope.

The Committee also takes due note of the Government's observations in reply to the communication from the General Union of Guinean Workers (UGTG), dated 8 October 1992. The Government affirms that the Convention is widely known to Guinean workers and the leaders of the new central trade union organizations. It adds that Guinean workers can join organizations of their own choosing and that there are now several trade union organizations, including the National Organization of Free Trade Unions of Guinea, the General Union of Guinean Workers and the Trade Union Association of Guinean Workers. This pluralism is a result of the public will, as reflected in the provisions of the 1988 Labour Code.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1993, published 80th ILC session (1993)

With reference to its previous comments, the Committee notes the Government's assurances in its report that the list of essential services referred to in section 342 of the Labour Code will be fully consistent with the principles of the Convention. The Committee hopes that the above list will limit the public authorities' powers to resort to compulsory arbitration to cases in which the interruption of work owing to a strike would be likely to endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population, and once again asks the Government to provide a copy of the list now being prepared so that it can examine its scope.

The Committee also notes the observations made by the General Union of Guinean Workers (UGTG) on 8 October 1992 criticizing the fact that the Government has not brought the content of the Convention to the notice of Guinean workers and that the latter cannot, in practice, join unions of their own choosing or form organizations outside the existing trade union structure which is subordinated to the party in power.

The Committee asks the Government to include its observations on the points raised by the UGTG in its next report.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1992, published 79th ILC session (1992)

The Committee notes with interest the information contained in the Government's report to the effect that, in the preparation of the implementing legislation of the Labour Code, attention will be given to the question of the exercise of the right to strike, particularly in the essential services referred to in section 342 of the Code. The Government states that a list of such services is being examined and will be submitted to the social partners for their opinion before its adoption.

The Committee hopes that the Government will do everything possible to ensure that the list is in keeping with the principles of the right to organise whereby the limitation or prohibition of the right to strike should be confined to services whose interruption would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population. It asks the Government, in its next report, to provide information on developments in this respect, including the list of essential services now being prepared.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1991, published 78th ILC session (1991)

The Committee notes that the Government's report has not been received. It must therefore repeat its previous observation which read as follows:

The Committee noted that, under the terms of the procedure for the settlement of industrial disputes set out in sections 342, 350 and 351 of the Labour Code, a dispute may be referred to compulsory arbitration: (a) at the request of one party to the dispute; (b) at the request of the Minister if he considers that a strike is liable to endanger the public order or the national interest; and that, in the event of opposition to an arbitration decision and in the event of disputes that are liable to jeopardise the normal functioning of the national economy, the Minister may request the Council of Ministers to give the decision executory force.

The Committee notes with interest that section 342, as amended, limits the powers of the Minister to submit a dispute to compulsory arbitration to cases of strikes which occur in an essential service or during a period of national crisis when it would endanger public order or the national interest.

The Committee notes however that recourse to the arbitration procedure can be initiated at any time at the request of only one party to a labour dispute, which might limit the exercise of the right to strike.

The Committee asks the Government to supply information on the measures taken to limit the restrictions on the right to strike in accordance with the principle of freedom of association and to provide a list of the essential services referred to by section 351, as amended, if such a list has been adopted.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1989, published 76th ILC session (1989)

The Committee observes that the Government took note of its comments aoncerning the restrictions that section 329 of the Code may induce with respect to the various forms of strike.

The Committee draws the Government's attention to the fact that to be fully compatible with the Convention, section 329 of the Code (which defines a strike as "... a collective and complete stoppage of work ...") should cover other forms of strike, such as work-to-rule, occupation of enterprises or workplaces, sit-down strike or peaceful picketing, which may be excluded by the term "complete".

The Committee hopes that the legislation will be amended along these lines.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1989, published 76th ILC session (1989)

The Committee notes the Government's report.

In its previous observation the Committee noted a number of discrepancies between the legislation and the Convention:

- The right of access to trade union office reserved for workers of Guinean nationality (section 251 of the Labour Code).

- Restrictions on the exercise of the right to strike (sections 342, 350 and 351 of the Labour Code).

1. The Committee notes with satisfaction that section 251 of the Labour Code, as amended, extends the right to exercise trade union office, which had previously been restricted to Guinean nationals, to any person who has been resident in the Republic of Guinea for at least five years.

2. In its previous observation, the Committee noted that, under the terms of the procedure for the settlement of industrial disputes set out in sections 342, 350 and 351 of the Labour Code, a dispute may be referred to compulsory arbitration: (a) at the request of one party to the dispute; (b) at the request of the Minister if he considers that a strike is liable to endanger the public order or the national interest; and that, in the event of opposition to an arbitration decision and in the event of disputes that are liable to jeopardise the normal functioning of the national economy, the Minister may request the Council of Ministers to give the decision executory force.

The Committee notes with interest that section 342, as amended, limits the powers of the Minister to submit a dispute to compulsory arbitration to cases of strikes which occur in an essential service or during a period of national crisis when it would endanger public order or the national interest.

The Committee notes however that recourse to the arbitration procedure can be initiated at any time at the request of only one party to a labour dispute, which might limit the exercise of the right to strike, in contravention with Article 3 of the Convention.

The Committee asks the Government to supply information on the measures contemplated to give effect to the Convention in that respect and to provide a list of the essential services referred to by section 351, as amended, if such a list has been adopted.