Definitive Report - Report No 294, June 1994

Case No 1609 (Peru) - Complaint date: 22-OCT-92 - Closed

1. 29. The Committee examined this case at its meeting of February 1993 when it presented an interim report to the Governing Body (see 286th Report of the Committee, paras. 426-437, approved by the Governing Body at its 253rd Session (May-June 1992)). Subsequently, the Federation of Bank Employees of Peru sent additional information in a communication dated 28 October 1993. The Government sent new observations in communications dated 29 June and 24 September 1993 and 18 April 1994.
2. 30. Peru has ratified the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organize Convention, 1948 (No. 87), and the Right to Organize and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).

A. Previous examination of the case

1. 31. At its meeting of February 1993, when the Committee examined allegations concerning a rationalization and staff reduction process in the banking sector, there remained pending the allegation that 40 new workers had been recruited in the Banco Minero del Peru at a time when it was in the process of reducing its staff, on the condition that they did not join organizations of the Federation of Bank Employees of Peru. On that occasion the Committee made the following recommendation (see 286th Report, Case No. 1609, para. 437): "The Committee considers that the recruitment by the Banco Minero del Peru of 40 new staff members on condition that they do not join the FEB ... appears to constitute an act of anti-union discrimination. It requests the Government to supply its comments on this allegation".
2. 32. In communications dated 29 June and 24 September 1993, the Government stated that the public enterprises in the banking sector were experiencing a serious financial and economic situation resulting from surplus staff in the sector and that they had therefore drawn up and implemented staff reduction programmes. In the specific case of the Banco Minero del Peru, the Government states that the allegation that new workers had been recruited on the condition that they did not join the trade union appears illogical since the bank in question has gone into definitive liquidation as a result of its economic losses and is therefore not in a position to recruit other workers.
3. 33. In a communication dated 28 October 1993, the complainant organization alleged that during liquidation processes in the public banking sector in general and the Banco Minero in particular new workers have been recruited on the condition that they do not join the trade union organization.
4. 34. At its meeting of March 1994, considering that the information received did not allow it to examine the matter in full knowledge of the facts, the Committee requested the Government and the complainant organization to provide additional information (see 292nd Report, para. 6).

B. The Government's reply

1. 35. In its communication dated 18 April 1994, the Government stipulates that a group of workers in the Banco Minero del Peru accepted the voluntary retirement plan and that no new workers have been recruited.

C. The Committee's conclusions

1. 36. The Committee observes that the allegations pending from its meeting of February 1993 referred to the alleged recruitment of 40 new workers in the Banco Minero del Peru, during a rationalization and staff reduction process, on condition that the workers did not join organizations of the Federation of Banking Employees of Peru. In the same way the Committee notes that the Government denies the recruitment of new workers in the Banco Minero del Peru, arguing that this bank is in definitive liquidation.
2. 37. Since it has not received the additional information requested from the complainant organization and since the Government has categorically denied the recruitment of new workers in the Banco Minero del Peru and affirmed on the contrary that the bank in question is in liquidation, the Committee concludes that this case does not call for further examination.

The Committee's recommendations

1. 38. In the light of its foregoing conclusions, the Committee invites the Governing Body to decide that this case does not call for further examination.