Report in which the committee requests to be kept informed of development - Report No 327, March 2002

Case No 2142 (Colombia) - Complaint date: 25-MAY-01 - Closed

Allegations: The impossibility to obtain legal personality for a trade union, anti-union dismissals, compulsory collective agreements

1. 439. The complaint is contained in a communication dated 25 May 2001 from the National Trade Union of Metalworkers, Metallurgists, Steelworkers, Miners and Electrical and Electronic Workers (SINTRAMETAL). The Government replied in a communication dated 11 December 2001.
2. 440. Colombia 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. The complainant's allegations

1. 441. In its communication of 25 May 2001, the National Trade Union of Metalworkers, Metallurgists, Steelworkers, Miners and Electrical and Electronic Workers (SINTRAMETAL) states that in 1976 the Trade Union of Employees of Inca Metal S.A. (SINTRAINCAMETAL) registered as a trade union of the enterprise, but was destroyed by the enterprise and in 1978 its legal personality as a trade union was cancelled. The complainant (which represents the workers of the former trade union SINTRAINCAMETAL) states that in 1991 SINTRAINCAMETAL tried to reactivate its legal personality as a trade union but was unable to obtain the cooperation of the Ministry of Labour. The complainant adds that, in this context, collective contracts were made compulsory for those workers not belonging to a trade union (most recently for the 1998?2001 period) and a number of workers were dismissed for refusing to sign. Similarly, when workers were encouraged to join the industrial trade union SINTRAMETAL, 22 workers were dismissed in August 1999. The complainant adds that the 22 workers who were dismissed were the mainstay of trade unionism in the enterprise and were, in fact, the founders of the former trade union of the enterprise and had not accepted the collective contract of 1998. The complainant considers that these dismissals correspond to an act of anti-union persecution as more than 200 workers were taken on following the authorizations for the dismissals granted by the Ministry of Labour (the complainant states that legal proceedings relating to the dismissals were begun but that these were not successful).

B. The Government's reply

1. 442. In a communication dated 11 December 2001, the Government states that: (1) Inca Metal S.A. and the national trade union SINTRAMETAL have negotiated a collective agreement for the January 2000?May 2002 period that lays down labour relations and conditions for those workers who are members of SINTRAMETAL?Medellín Section (a copy of the agreement was attached wherein it states that workers who do not belong to a trade union can be covered by the agreement); (2) regarding the dismissal of the 22 workers, the Ministry of Labour authorized this dismissal on the basis of the legal regulations in force at the time of the dismissals; (3) regarding the efforts to revive the trade union SINTRAINCAMETAL, the latter did not fulfil the condition established in law that it must have more than 25 workers; and (4) the Ministry of Labour and Social Security convened a reconciliation meeting with the enterprise and the national trade union SINTRAMETAL with a view to finding a solution to the points raised in the complaint. (A copy of the act of reconciliation was attached in which the representative of SINTRAMETAL states that: the dismissals of the workers were anti-union in character; a collective contract had been negotiated before the collective agreement was signed, which did not allow for trade union membership; and the trade union organization is ready to discuss the issues and come to agreement as long as the enterprise is prepared to do so. The representative of the enterprise stated that: the enterprise has respected the right to establish and join trade unions; a collective agreement was negotiated with the trade union SINTRAMETAL; and the dismissal of the workers is a result of restructuring in the productive processes and is not related to trade union activities).

C. The Committee's conclusions

1. 443. Regarding the allegation that the trade union SINTRAINCAMETAL was unable to obtain legal personality, which had been cancelled in 1978, the Committee notes the Government’s statement that the prerequisite laid down in law that a trade union must have more than 25 members had not been fulfilled. In this respect, the Committee requests the Government to ensure that as soon as the organization fulfils this requirement, and any others, laid down in law, that the trade union of Inca Metal S.A. is granted legal personality. The Committee requests the Government to keep it informed in this respect.
2. 444. Regarding the allegation that 22 workers were dismissed from the enterprise in 1999, the Committee notes the Government’s statement that the Ministry of Labour authorized this dismissal on the basis of the legal regulations in force at the time (in the resolution issued by the Ministry, the dismissal of 30 workers is authorized with reference to the economic situation of the enterprise; at the same time, in the act of reconciliation completed between SINTRAMETAL and Inca Metal S.A., the representative of the enterprise indicates that the dismissals took place as a result of restructuring in the productive processes and were not related to trade union activities). The Committee also notes that the complainant states that those workers dismissed began legal proceedings relating to their dismissals and that these were not successful. In these circumstances, and taking into account that the complainant maintains that the enterprise subsequently hired more than 200 workers, the Committee requests the Government to recommend to Inca Metal S.A., should it anticipate hiring more workers, to make every effort to re-hire as many as possible of the 22 workers who were dismissed for economic and restructuring reasons. The Committee requests the Government to keep it informed of developments.
3. 445. Regarding the allegations referring to collective contracts being made compulsory (the most recent of these for the 1998-2001 period) in view of the impossibility of signing a collective agreement, the Committee notes the Government’s statement that Inca Metal S.A. and the trade union SINTRAMETAL concluded a collective agreement for the January 2000?May 2002 period that covers labour relations and conditions for workers at the enterprise who are members of SINTRAMETAL-Medellín Section (a copy of the agreement was attached wherein it states that those workers who do not belong to a trade union can be covered by the agreement).

The Committee's recommendations

1. 446. In the light of its foregoing conclusions, the Committee invites the Governing Body to approve the following recommendations:
   • (a) As regards the fact that the trade union of Inca Metal S.A. was unable to obtain legal personality as a trade union, the Committee requests the Government to ensure that the trade union is granted legal personality as soon as it has complied with the requirements laid down in law (in particular, to have a minimum membership of 25 workers). The Committee requests the Government to keep it informed in this respect.
   • (b) As regards the dismissal of 22 workers from the enterprise in 1999, the Committee requests the Government to recommend to Inca Metal S.A., should it anticipate hiring new workers, to make every effort to re-hire as many as possible of the 22 workers who were dismissed for economic and restructuring reasons. The Committee requests the Government to keep it informed of developments.