Report in which the committee requests to be kept informed of development - Report No 334, June 2004

Case No 2271 (Uruguay) - Complaint date: 28-MAY-03 - Closed

Allegations: The complainant alleges that the Government has been failing to comply with Article 4 of Convention No. 98 by creating obstacles, in most cases insurmountable, to the effective exercise of the right to collective bargaining

1. 797. The present complaint is contained in a communication from the Graphic Arts Union (SAG) together with the Inter-Trade Union Assembly-Workers’ National Convention (PIT-CNT) dated 28 May 2003. The SAG sent supplementary information in a communication dated 1 July 2003.
2. 798. The Government sent its observations in a communication dated 30 December 2003.
3. 799. Uruguay 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. 800. In its communications of 28 May and 1 July 2003, the Graphic Arts Union (SAG) and the Inter-Trade Union Assembly-Workers’ National Convention (PIT-CNT) indicate that since 1992, successive governments including the present one, instead of promoting the full development and implementation of voluntary collective bargaining procedures with a view to establishing collective agreements on conditions of employment in accordance with Article 4 of Convention No. 98, have created obstacles, in most cases insurmountable ones, to the effective exercise of the right to collective bargaining. As a result, the proportion of the workforce covered by collective agreements has declined since 1992 from 95 per cent to 16 per cent. The SAG claims that in the case of graphic arts, the last collective agreements concluded for the daily newspaper and public works and roads sectors date respectively from 1989 and 1993 and have lapsed.
2. 801. The complainants further state that obstacles to collective bargaining take the form of failure on the part of the Government to convene the Wages Councils since 1992. These are tripartite bodies made up of representatives of the Ministry of Labour, employers’ organizations and trade unions in all sectors except construction, health and transport, where conditions are determined by the State. The Councils are the only bodies that allow negotiation of wages, categories and conditions of employment, that are binding for the entire sector. In 1998, the Ministry, at the express request of the SAG, invited the Association of Graphics Manufacturers of Uruguay (AIGU) and SAG to take part in negotiations, but when both those parties asked the Government to approve the agreement so as to ensure that it covered the entire sector, it refused to do so and the talks broke down.

B. The Government’s reply

1. 802. In its communication of 30 December 2003, the Government outlined the historical background of the origins and development of collective bargaining in Uruguay and reviewed the current situation. The Government emphasizes that Uruguay has an excellent record of respecting and protecting freedom of association, collective bargaining and the right to strike. In 1943, Act No. 10449 was enacted, instituting the Wages Councils which, despite the fact that their role has been called into question, fulfilled an important role in improving workers’ conditions and encouraging them to become unionized. Labour relations functioned normally until the advent of the military dictatorship in 1973. Civil liberties were to be restored with the full restoration of democracy in 1985.
2. 803. That new phase was marked by meetings of the Wages Councils, making it possible to legitimize trade union activity and re-establish a culture of collective bargaining, while enabling the National Executive to establish a degree of control of wages by preventing wage increases from being passed on to the prices of products and services. The Government adds that once the objectives of restoring trade union activity were attained, and in accordance with the wishes of the social actors involved, the State began gradually to withdraw from collective bargaining.
3. 804. The Government states that three types of collective bargaining are known in Uruguay, namely: (a) so-called "typical" collective bargaining, in the form of bilateral, unregulated and autonomous processes involving one or more enterprises and a trade union; (b) the system established within the Wages Councils set up in 1943 under Act No. 10449, the results of which were endorsed through awards which, once approved by the Executive, took effect even with regard to undertakings not represented in the talks; (c) "mixed" negotiations, marking a departure from the original terms of Act No. 10449 resulting from the tendency of social partners to engage in bargaining in areas outside the remit of the tripartite bodies, while still submitting the results to the respective Wages Council with a view to extending them to other undertakings in the same branch or sector that were not affiliated to the organizations directly party to the agreement. The Government states that at present the first of these systems is in force without restriction, and the National Executive does not promote the other two types of bargaining.
4. 805. As regards the allegations concerning the sharp fall in the proportion of the workforce covered by collective agreements, the Government states that this phenomenon is evident in all countries and is due mainly to the decline in union membership. At the same time, there is a trend towards international collective bargaining.
5. 806. The Government also indicates that, in the present case, the trade union organization and the employers’ body conduct their activities and labour relations in the private sphere without interference or obstruction of any kind.
6. 807. Lastly, the Government states that although there is currently no law on collective bargaining, attempts have been made, thus far without success, to establish a regulatory framework for collective bargaining.

C. The Committee’s conclusions

1. 808. The Committee notes that in the present case, the Graphic Arts Union (SAG) and the Inter-Trade Union Assembly-Workers’ National Convention (PIT-CNT) allege that the Government has failed to encourage and develop collective bargaining, which has resulted in a decline in the proportion of the workforce covered by collective agreements from 95 per cent to 16 per cent. The complainants state that this is mainly due to the fact that the Government has not convened the Wages Councils since 1992. The latter, in accordance with a tradition established by the social partners, endorse collective agreements concluded by trade unions and employers outside the tripartite system set up by the Councils, in order to extend their provisions to the entire sector in question. As a result, there have been no collective agreements in the graphics sector since 1992, since, although there was a willingness to negotiate agreements on the part of the SAG and the Association of Graphics Manufacturers of Uruguay (AIGU), the Government puts an end to talks by its refusal to endorse them.
2. 809. The Committee notes the Government’s reply, in which it gives a historical outline of collective bargaining in the country and states that there are three types of bargaining: talks of the traditional type between a trade union and an employer or group of employers; bargaining of the type provided for in Act No. 10449, the results of which are approved by awards which, once certified by the National Executive, are applicable even to undertakings not represented in the talks; and lastly, a mixed system that responds to initiatives by the trade unions and the employers which submit agreements concluded among themselves in private for approval by the Executive so that their provisions can be extended to the entire sector in question.
3. 810. The Committee notes that, according to the Government, the parties enjoy total freedom to negotiate conditions of employment. The Committee notes that the dispute in the present case has arisen from the impossibility of extending collective agreements to the entire sector owing to the Government’s failure to confirm the extension of the collective agreement. The complainants state, by way of example, that in 1998 the Ministry of Labour, at the request of the SAG, invited the Association of Graphics Manufacturers of Uruguay (AIGU) and SAG to negotiate a collective agreement, but a request to the Government to confirm that the agreement would be applicable to the entire sector was rejected and talks broke down. The complainants maintain that the Government is thereby failing to observe Article 4 of Convention No. 98, which states the obligation "to encourage and promote the full development and utilization of machinery for voluntary negotiation". The Committee notes that the specific question of the extension of collective agreements is addressed not in Conventions Nos. 87 and 98, but in the Collective Agreements Recommendation, 1951 (No. 91), which does not provide for a strict obligation to extend the provisions of collective agreements. Nevertheless, the Committee underlines that Paragraph 5.1 of the Recommendation provides, "Where appropriate, having regard to established collective bargaining practice, measures, to be determined by national laws or regulations and suited to the conditions of each country, should be taken to extend the application of all or certain stipulations of a collective agreement to all the employers and workers included within the industrial and territorial scope of the agreement".
4. 811. The Committee, however, notes the sharp fall in the proportion of workers in all sectors covered by collective agreements, from 95 per cent to 16 per cent, a fact which is not denied by the Government. The Committee notes, with regard to the application of Convention No. 98, that the Committee of Experts has referred to observations by the PIT?CNT to the effect that collective bargaining is "impossible in major sectors", and requested the Government to provide "information on the number of collective agreements concluded by enterprise and by sector, including the public sector, with an indication of the sectors and numbers of workers covered" [see the Committee of Expert’s observation on the application of Convention No. 98 in 2003]. In this context, the Committee requests the Government to examine, together with the complainant and all other concerned parties, the state of collective bargaining in the graphic arts sector, and to communicate any measures that may be adopted to promote collective bargaining in the sector in question.

The Committee's recommendations

1. 812. In the light of its foregoing conclusions, the Committee invites the Governing Body to approve the following recommendations:
   • (a) The Committee requests the Government to take measures to promote collective bargaining in conformity with Article 4 of Convention No. 98.
   • (b) The Committee requests the Government to examine, with the complainant and all other concerned parties, the state of collective bargaining in the graphic arts sector.
   • (c) The Committee requests the Government to communicate any measure that may be taken to promote collective bargaining in the sector.