Definitive Report - Report No 239, June 1985

Case No 1206 (Peru) - Complaint date: 05-MAY-83 - Closed

1. 124. The Committee has already examined this case at its November 1984 meeting, when it submitted an interim report to the Governing Body. (See 236th Report of the Committee, paras. 459 to 512, approved by the Governing Body at its 228th Session (November 1984) .) Since then, the Government has sent additional information in communications received on 30 November 1984 and 25 February 1985.
2. 125. Peru has ratified the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87) and the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).

A. Previous examination of the case

1. 126. In November 1984, the Committee requested the Government to supply more detailed information on the reasons for the refusal of the undertaking Electro-Peru to negotiate collectively with the General Secretaries of the affiliates of the National Executive Council of the Federation of Light and Power Workers.
2. 127. As regards the allegation relating to the limitation of the scope of wage bargaining in public enterprises, the Committee expressed the firm hope that the tripartite committee, set up to examine the repercussions of legislation (section 46 of Act No. 23724 of December 1983) restricting wage increases in state undertakings to ensure that they do not exceed the consumer price index, would reach an agreement. It requested the Government to keep it informed of the solution found to this labour dispute.
3. 128. As regards the allegation relating to non-payment to public records staff of increases and bonuses to which they were entitled under an agreement adopted by a joint committee on 11 November 1983 and authenticated by the administration on 27 December 1983, the Committee recalled that agreements which had been reached by the social partners in good faith should be binding on the parties and applied in practice. It requested the Government to keep it informed of developments in this case.

B. The Government's reply

1. 129. In its communication of 29 November 1984 received on 30 November 1984, the Government states that workers who are members of public records unions have the right to form associations but not to negotiate their conditions of employment collectively. Nevertheless, the Government adds, the list of claims deposited by the Public Records Staff Union has been settled to the satisfaction of those concerned. On 9 March 1984, wage adjustments were authorised for the judicial sector, including the complainants, by Presidential Decree No. 097-84-EFC. The rates of adjustment were laid down in Ministerial Resolution No. 098-84-EFC. The Government attaches a photocopy of these two texts to its reply.
2. 130. In a later communication, dated 22 February 1985 and received 25 February 1985, the Government states, in connection with the complaint of the Federation of Light and Power Workers and the refusal of the undertaking Electro-Peru to negotiate with the General Secretaries of the organisations which are members of the National Executive Council of the Federation of Light and Power Workers, that the undertaking considered that the trade union delegation concerned was too large to be able to bargain constructively. Moreover, according to the Government, the list of claims was presented by the Federation of Light and Power Workers. The Government adds that, under Presidential Decree No. 11 of 21 August 1962 and Presidential Decree No. 006-72-TR, the undertaking is under the obligation to negotiate with the leaders of the Federation, but not necessarily with the representatives of each primary union, as the complainants claim.
3. 131. As regards the work of the tripartite committee set up to examine the repercussions of legislation (Act No. 23724, section 46) restricting wage increases in state undertakings to ensure that they do not exceed the consumer price index, the Government states that this committee has not reached agreement on the applicability of automatic wage adjustments of the kind which had been obtained previously by the workers of the Federation of Light and Power Workers under collective agreements of 1978 and 1979. According to the Government, the inapplicability of automatic wage adjustments was only temporary for 1984. The standards governing the financing of the public sector for 1985 are contained in Act No. 24030, section 139 of which expressly provides that nothing in the application of the new Act shall affect the acquired rights of the workers, whether these derive from legislation or from collective agreements.

C. The Committee's conclusions

1. 132. The present complaint relates to the application of a wage agreement in the public records sector, the agreement by the employer to bargain with one trade union interlocutor rather than another and impediments to wage bargaining in public undertakings.
2. 133. As regards the application of the wage agreement in the public records sector, according to information communicated by the Government, this agreement, which dated from December 1983, was implemented in March 1984. While regretting that a delay of three months elapsed before the agreement took effect, the Committee observes that the complainant obtained satisfaction. In these circumstances the Committee considers that this aspect of the case does not call for further examination.
3. 134. Regarding the choice by an employer, the undertaking Electro-Peru, to negotiate with the Executive Council of the Federation of Light and Power Workers rather than with the General-Secretaries of the first-level unions of this Federation, the Committee observes that, according to the Government, the employer considered that the trade union delegation, consisting of the General Secretaries of the organisations members of the Executive Council of the Federation was too large to engage in constructive bargaining. Moreover, still according to the Government, it was the Federation of Light and Power Workers that had presented the list of claims. While taking note of these explanations, in particular the fact that the trade union delegation which wished to negotiate with the Electro-Peru undertaking was allegedly too large to engage in constructive bargaining, the Committee recalls the importance which it attaches to the obligation to negotiate in good faith for the maintenance of the harmonious development of labour relations.
4. 135. As regards the impediments to wage negotiation in the public sector contained in section 46 of Act No. 23724 of December 1983, the Committee notes that, according to the Government, the standards governing the financing of the public sector for 1985 are now contained in Act No. 24030 of 14 December 1984. The Committee has examined these texts, and notes in particular that by virtue of section 3 of Act No. 24030 hydro-electric power stations and communication lines will be given preference in the programme of agreed action and investments for 1985 and that by virtue of section 139 nothing in the new Act shall affect the acquired rights of workers, whether they derive from legislation or from collective agreements.
5. 136. The Committee recalls that the complaint which was at the origin of this case, presented on 13 February 1984 by the Federation of Light and Power Workers, referred to the application of section 46 of Act No. 23724, which changed the former system of automatic wage adjustments laid down in collective agreements of 1978 and 1979. It also recalls that a tripartite committee had been set up on 5 March 1984 to examine the repercussions of this legislation and to decide whether automatic wage adjustments were applicable for 1984. Since Act No. 23724 has been replaced by Act No. 24030, which provides that nothing in the new Act shall affect the acquired rights of the workers, whether they derive from legislation or from collective agreements, and since the system of remuneration at present operating in the electricity sector has not been criticised by the complainant federation, the Committee considers that in the present circumstances this aspect of the case does not call for further examination.

The Committee's recommendations

1. 137. In these circumstances, the Committee recommends the Governing Body to approve this report, and in particular the following conclusions:
   • (a) As regards the application of a wage agreement for the public records sector which dated from December 1983, the Committee notes that this agreement has been implemented by Presidential Decree No. 097-84-EFC and Ministerial Resolution No. 098-84-EFC of 9 March 1984. While regretting that a delay of three months elapsed before the agreement took effect, the Committee considers that, since the complainants obtained satisfaction, this aspect of the case does not call for further examination.
   • (b) As regards the choice by the undertaking Electro-Peru to negotiate with the Federation of Light and Power Workers rather than with the General Secretaries of the first-level organisations of this Federation because the undertaking considered that the trade union delegation, which consisted of the General Secretaries of the first-level unions, was too large to engage in constructive bargaining, the Committee notes that, according to the legislation, the employer was under the obligation to negotiate with the leaders of the Federation and not necessarily with the representatives of each first-level union. In this case, the Committee nevertheless recalls the general importance it attaches to the obligation to bargain in good faith for the maintenance of the harmonious development of industrial relations.
   • (c) As regards the impediments to wage bargaining in the public sector, particularly in the electricity sector, contained in section 46 of Act No. 23724 of December 1983, which modified for the year 1984 the former automatic wage adjustment system laid down by collective agreements of 1978 and 1979, the Committee notes that, according to the Government, this provision was only of a temporary nature. Since it was repealed by Act No. 24030 of 14 December 1984 concerning the standards governing the financing of the public sector, which expressly provides that nothing in the new Act shall affect the acquired rights of the workers, whether they derive from legislation or from collective agreements, and that the new Act has not been criticised by the complainant organisation, the Committee considers that this aspect of the case does not call for further examination.