Allegations: The complainant organizations allege numerous anti-union acts by
companies in the telecommunications sector, including manoeuvres to have an industry trade
union dissolved, anti-union dismissals and the establishment of a company union controlled
by the employer. The complainants also claim that several provisions of El Salvador’s
legislation on freedom of association need to be amended
- 174. The Committee examined this case at its March 2013 meeting, when it
presented an interim report to the Governing Body [see 367th Report, paras 651–685,
approved by the Governing Body at its 317th Session (March 2013)].
- 175. At its March 2014 meeting [see 371st Report, para. 6], in the
absence of observations from the Government, despite the time that had elapsed since the
last examination of the case, the Committee made an urgent appeal to the Government and
drew its attention to the fact that, in accordance with the procedural rules set out in
paragraph 17 of its 127th Report, approved by the Governing Body at its 184th Session,
it could present a report on the substance of the case at its next meeting, even if it
had not received the information or observations from the Government in due time. To
date, it has not received any information from the Government.
- 176. El Salvador has ratified the Freedom of Association and Protection
of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), the Right to Organise and Collective
Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98), and the Workers’ Representatives Convention, 1971
(No. 135).
A. Previous examination of the case
A. Previous examination of the case- 177. In its previous examination of the case in March 2013, the Committee
made the following recommendations on the allegations that remained pending [see 367th
Report, para. 685]:
- (a) The Committee requests the Government
to keep it informed of the implementation of the Committee’s recommendations with
regard to Case No. 1987, notably that the legislation be amended to remove the
excessive formalities that apply to the establishment of trade union organizations
and that trade union leaders, Luis Wilfredo Berrios and Gloria Mercedes González, be
reinstated in their posts.
- (b) The Committee requests the
Government to take the necessary steps to ensure that SITCOM’s continued existence
is not jeopardized for motives that run counter to the principles of freedom of
association and to bring the principles concerning dual trade union membership to
the attention of the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court. The Committee
expects that those principles will be taken into account by the Court and requests
the Government to keep it informed of the corresponding ruling handed down. The
Committee moreover urges the Government to take the necessary steps to amend section
204 of the Labour Code prohibiting dual union membership.
- (c) Regarding the suspension by the CTE of the deduction of union dues for workers
affiliated to SITCOM, the Committee requests the Government to keep it informed of
the outcome of the sanctions procedure that has been initiated and expects the
sanctions imposed to be sufficiently dissuasive so that there is no recurrence of
this kind of anti union action in future in the company concerned.
- (d) Regarding the dismissal of trade union officials, Tania
Gadalmez and César Leonel Flores, the Committee requests the Government to keep it
informed of developments in the sanctions procedure that has been initiated and
expects the sanctions imposed to be sufficiently dissuasive so that there is no
recurrence of this kind of anti-union action in future in the company
concerned.
- (e) The Committee requests the Government to
send it information without delay on the alleged discriminatory dismissal of five
trade union officials at Construcciones y Servicios Integrales de Telecomunicaciones
S.A. de C.V., a subcontractor, and on the alleged anti-union dismissals at the
Atento company.
- (f) The Committee requests the Government
to send it detailed information without delay on the request for a special
inspection into the alleged domination of SINTRABATES by the employer, on the
outcome of the corresponding court action brought by SITCOM and on the measures
taken to amend the legislation as it relates to acts of interference to the
detriment of trade unions.
- (g) The Committee requests the
Government to provide it with information on the measures taken, including
legislative measures, to provide union officials with effective protection in the
event of anti-union discrimination.
- (h) The Committee
invites the Government to consider, in consultation with the social partners, the
review of section 622 of the Labour Code which provides that no appeal may be lodged
against decisions handed down by a court of second instance.
B. The Committee’s conclusions
B. The Committee’s conclusions- 178. The Committee regrets that, despite the time elapsed since the
presentation of the complaints, the Government has not provided the requested
information, even though it was requested to do so through an urgent appeal at its March
2014 meeting. The Committee requests the Government to be more cooperative in the
future.
- 179. Hence, in accordance with the applicable procedural rules [see 127th
Report, para. 17, approved by the Governing Body], the Committee is obliged to present a
report on the substance of this case without being able to take account of the
information which it had hoped to receive from the Government.
- 180. The Committee recalls that the purpose of the whole procedure
established by the International Labour Organization for the examination of allegations
of violations of freedom of association is to promote respect for trade union rights in
law and in practice. The Committee is confident that, while this procedure protects
governments against unreasonable accusations, they must recognize the importance of
formulating, for objective examination, detailed replies concerning allegations brought
against them.
- 181. The Committee also recalls that the case under examination refers to
allegations of numerous anti-union acts by companies in the telecommunications sector,
including manoeuvres to bring about the dissolution of a branch union, anti-union
dismissals and the establishment of a company union controlled by the employer and that,
in addition, the complainants claim that several provisions of El Salvador’s legislation
need to be amended to guarantee more effective protection of freedom of
association.
- 182. The Committee underlines the seriousness of these allegations, and
again regrets that the Government has not sent the requested observations and
information. It therefore reiterates the recommendations it made at its March 2013
meeting.
The Committee’s recommendations
The Committee’s recommendations- 183. In the light of its foregoing interim conclusions, the Committee
invites the Governing Body to approve the following recommendations:
- (a) The
Committee regrets that, despite the time elapsed since its last examination of the
case in March 2013, the Government has not provided the requested information and
observations, even though it was requested to do so through an urgent
appeal.
- (b) The Committee again requests the Government to keep it informed
of the implementation of the Committee’s recommendations with regard to Case No.
1987, notably that the legislation be amended to remove the excessive formalities
that apply to the establishment of trade union organizations and that trade union
leaders, Luis Wilfredo Berrios and Gloria Mercedes González, be reinstated in their
posts.
- (c) The Committee once again requests the Government to take the
necessary steps to ensure that SITCOM’s continued existence is not jeopardized for
motives that run counter to the principles of freedom of association and to bring
the principles concerning dual trade union membership to the attention of the
Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court. The Committee expects that those
principles will be taken into account by the Court and requests the Government to
keep it informed of the corresponding ruling handed down. The Committee moreover
urges the Government to take the necessary steps to amend section 204 of the Labour
Code prohibiting dual union membership.
- (d) Regarding the suspension by the
CTE of the deduction of union dues for workers affiliated to SITCOM, the Committee
once again requests the Government to keep it informed of the outcome of the
sanctions procedure that has been initiated and expects the sanctions imposed to be
sufficiently dissuasive so that there is no recurrence of this kind of anti-union
action in future in the company concerned.
- (e) Regarding the dismissal of
trade union officials, Tania Gadalmez and César Leonel Flores, the Committee once
again requests the Government to keep it informed of developments in the sanctions
procedure that has been initiated and expects the sanctions imposed to be
sufficiently dissuasive so that there is no recurrence of this kind of anti-union
action in future in the company concerned.
- (f) The Committee once again
requests the Government to send it information without delay on the alleged
discriminatory dismissal of five trade union officials at Construcciones y Servicios
Integrales de Telecomunicaciones SA de CV, a subcontractor, and on the alleged
anti-union dismissals at the Atento company.
- (g) The Committee again
requests the Government to send it detailed information without delay on the request
for a special inspection into the alleged domination of SINTRABATES by the employer,
on the outcome of the corresponding court action brought by SITCOM and on the
measures taken to amend the legislation as it relates to acts of interference to the
detriment of trade unions.
- (h) The Committee once again requests the
Government to provide it with information on the measures taken, including
legislative measures, to provide union officials with effective protection in the
event of anti-union discrimination.
- (i) The Committee once again invites the
Government to consider, in consultation with the social partners, the review of
section 622 of the Labour Code which provides that no appeal may be lodged against
decisions handed down by a court of second instance.