Interim Report - Report No 144, 1974

Case No 760 (Spain) - Complaint date: 08-JUN-73 - Closed

1. 123. In two communications, dated 8 and 12 June 1973, the World Confederation of Labour presented a complaint concerning alleged infringements of trade union rights in Spain. The WCL also supplied further information in a communication dated 22 June 1973.
2. 124. The aforementioned communications were passed on to the Government, which furnished its observations in a communication dated 23 April 1974.
3. 125. In this letter, the Government reaffirms the position adopted in its communications of 29 February and 13 May 1972 with respect to certain cases pending in regard to Spain. In this connection the Committee draws attention to what was stated in paragraphs 98 and 99 of its 137th Report. In supplying information, the Government once again declares that "the fact that a government replies to a request for information on a specific complaint does not imply that the government recognises the accuracy or - even less - the validity of the complaint but merely that it is co-operating with the Committee and with the Governing Body".
4. 126. Spain has ratified neither the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), nor the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).

A. A. The complainants' allegations

1. 127. In its letter of 8 June 1973, the WCL alleges that on 30 May 1973 the management of the Michelin firm at Lasarte, in the province of Guipúzcoa, wrongfully dismissed a worker, with the result that all the workers employed in the workshop to which the dismissed man belonged stopped work. The undertaking thereupon dismissed four other employees. The entire labour force of the firm - 3,500 workers - then went on strike and the management decided to close the factory from 1 to 11 June.
2. 128. The WCL adds that the workers set up a strike Committee but that the management refused to have any dealings with the Committee, wishing to deal solely with the "official trade union", which the workers did not consider to be representative. Furthermore, according to the WCL, on 6 June 1973 the police arrested four members of the strike Committee and on 7 June issued a summons to a further three members. The WCL was of the opinion that the workers in the Michelin factory were on the eve of a long and unpleasant conflict.
3. 129. In its letter of 12 June 1973, the WCL states that the three members of the strike Committee who had been summoned by the police have been arrested and imprisoned. Furthermore, on 11 January 1973 two more workers and their fiancées were also imprisoned. The complainant organisation adds that the police of the province of Guipúzcoa are trying to round up the presumed leaders of the Basque Workers' Solidarity Movement (STV), which is affiliated to the WCL.
4. 130. In its communication of 22 June 1973, the WCL gives the names of the eleven arrested persons: Ramón Olaizola Yurrita, Juan Olaskuaga Yturri, Maite Diaz Alda, Félix Arteche Laskano, Ana Mari Eizmendi, Tapia, Manuel Echaido Olloquiegui, Juan Josh Yarza Echave, Jesús Arteche Laskano, Milagros Salverria Garcia and Lurdes Yarza Echenique. Of these eleven persons, eight have been provisionally released and three are still detained: Ramón Olaizola Yurrita, Juan José Yarza Echave and Jesús Arteche Laskano. The last two workers were arrested after their homes had been searched. The WCL adds that work was resumed at the Michelin works on 12 June but it does not think that the dispute has been settled. Finally, the complainant organisation states that the eleven persons mentioned in the complaint have been accused of belonging to the Basque Workers' Solidarity Movement, an organisation which was founded in 1911 and which is now on the list of trade unions which Spanish legislation has outlawed.
5. 131. In its letter of 23 April 1974, the Government states that, contrary to what is alleged by the WCL, there has been no long and unpleasant conflict, since the dispute was settled in 5 days according to normal procedure by the lawful trade union bodies and representatives belonging to the Trade Union Organisation. The Government adds that undertakings must, of course, deal with the true, freely elected representatives of the workers, and not with those who do not represent the workers. Furthermore, the Government considers it unacceptable for the complainant organisation to refer to the Spanish Trade Union Organisation as the "official trade union".
6. 132. The Government also denies the allegations concerning the search said to have been carried out for the presumed leaders of the Basque Workers' Solidarity Movement. It considers that the WCL describes the intentions and methods of the Spanish police in a manner that is insulting and slanderous. Moreover, the Government protests against the fact that the complainants describe as trade union organisations which can only be considered small subversive political groups. The present case, according to the Government, concerns an organisation with separatist aims, bent on undermining national unity and the territorial integrity of the Spanish State.
7. 133. The Government points out that the persons mentioned in the complaint have been arrested and are on trial for subversive activities of a political nature and for undermining public order. They have all been provisionally released and the case is still pending before the courts.

B. B. The Committee's conclusions

1. 134. The Committee takes note of the allegations made by the WCL and of the observations thereon made by the Government. In particular, it notes that the persons mentioned in the complaint have been provisionally released and that their case is still pending before the courts.

The Committee's recommendations

1. 135. In these circumstances the Committee, in accordance with the practice it has always adopted in such cases, recommends the Governing Body:
   • (a) to request the Government to supply the texts of the judgements concerning the eleven persons mentioned in the complaint when these have been delivered; and
   • (b) to take note of the present interim report, it being understood that the Committee will submit a further report to the Governing Body when it has received the information requested from the Government.