Effect given to the recommendations of the committee and the Governing Body - Report No 338, November 2005

Case No 2281 (Mauritius) - Complaint date: 27-JUN-03 - Closed

Effect given to the recommendations of the Committee and the Governing Body

1. 241. The Committee last examined this case, which concerns the need to revise the Industrial Relations Act (IRA) in conformity with freedom of association principles, during its March 2005 meeting [336th Report, paras. 79-81]. On that occasion, the Committee took note with interest of the approval of the ratification of Convention No. 87 and the ongoing preparation of new legislation to revise the IRA and strongly encouraged the Government to maintain consultations with the social partners during the revision process, reiterating its hope that this process would be concluded soon so as to bring the law into full conformity with Conventions Nos. 87 and 98.
2. 242. In its communication dated 22 April 2005, the Government furnished a detailed chronology of the efforts made to adopt legislation revising the IRA. In particular, in June 2003 a technical committee was set up at the Ministry of Labour, Industrial Relations and Employment to work on the replacement of the IRA. The Committee started consultations with the social partners.
3. 243. At a first stage in the consultations, a meeting was held with the social partners, who were invited to submit their proposals in writing. The 13 federations of trade unions submitted a common memorandum on 30 January 2004 and the Mauritius Employers’ Federation submitted its proposals on 26 March 2004. At a second stage of consultations, the Ministry invited the ILO to provide technical assistance. A tripartite seminar was held from 8 to 11 July and broad consensus was reached with the help of the ILO experts on issues such as the right to strike, dispute settlement procedures and the autonomy of trade unions. The 13 federations of trade unions and the Mauritius Employers’ Federation were invited to participate in the seminar. Several trade union leaders did not attend or participated only in a few sessions of the seminar.
4. 244. At a third stage of consultations, in November 2004, a White Paper on new industrial relations framework-making proposals for a new legislation to replace the IRA was circulated publicly for national debate. The federations of trade unions and the employers’ organization, as well as any other interested party, were invited to submit their recommendations within a period of two months. They submitted their views. Only a few members of the public and one political party transmitted their comments and suggestions. At a fourth stage of consultations, a meeting was held with the trade unions to explain to them the various proposals contained in the White Paper and to listen to their observations. In December 2004, the Mauritius Employers’ Federation submitted its views. The federations of trade unions submitted their views in a common memorandum but, at the same time, burnt the White Paper publicly. This brought an end to the consultations.
5. 245. A fifth stage of consultations started in January 2005, when the Government again solicited the assistance of the ILO to resume consultations and continue the discussions on the proposed new legal framework with a view to building consensus. An ILO delegation held meetings with the trade unions and the Mauritius Employers’ Federation, as well as the Prime Minister, and made a number of recommendations to the technical committee and various ministries that were included in the draft bill.
6. 246. Following the ILO technical assistance mission, the Government decided to ratify Convention No. 87 in February 2005. The decision was implemented immediately and the instruments of ratification have already been deposited at the ILO. The decision to ratify the Convention reaffirmed the Government’s good faith and strong commitment to replace the IRA. The immediate ratification of the Convention was one of the main requests of the trade unions. At a sixth stage of consultations, three meetings were held with the trade unions and the employers’ organization separately to continue the consultations so that the final proposals could be drawn up for the preparation of a draft bill. Subsequently, a draft bill was prepared and a meeting was held in March 2005 with the trade unions and the employers separately to inform them of the final proposals which would be incorporated in the bill. The suggestions made by the trade unions were noted and some of them were included in the bill. The employers’ organization was informed that its persistent request to dismantle the National Remuneration Board would not be considered, as it would create social problems given that there was no consensus on the proposal.
7. 247. The bill was circulated to all trade unions and employers’ organizations on 9 April, as soon as the Government had approved it. The employers’ organizations held a meeting on 11 April and submitted a memorandum to the Government on the same day. They opposed the bill radically and reiterated their requests to dismantle the National Remuneration Board outright and to allow collective bargaining with non-unionized workers (text attached). As regards the trade unions, two federations made verbal proposals for minor amendments to the bill. Their proposals were taken into consideration and amendments were brought immediately, though the draft bill had already been submitted to the National Assembly. On 12 April, the bill was moved for first reading in the National Assembly (copy attached). On 13 April, the federations of trade unions wrote a letter (attached) to the Prime Minister asking that the debates on the bill be postponed to the following week, as the trade union movement was organizing a workshop on Friday, 15 April. This request for postponement put the enactment of the bill in jeopardy, as it was public knowledge that the National Assembly would be dissolved by 22 April, in view of the forthcoming general elections. The Minister of Labour, Industrial Relations and Employment nevertheless informed the unions that he was at their disposal to reply to any of their queries (letter attached). However, one trade union federation chose to circulate a petition in the National Assembly, asking that the bill should not be enacted without amendments (text attached), whereas others made diverse press statements decrying the bill as being pro-employer, repressive, denying the right to strike and being worse than the existing IRA, etc. Some stated that they were seeking the support of political parties of the opposition to stand against the enactment of the bill. Others raised objections on issues that had already been thrashed out during previous consultations and on which agreement had already been reached (text attached). Diverse and contradictory statements were made by the various trade unions.
8. 248. In view of the request of the trade unions, the Government had no choice but to postpone the enactment of the bill. In his statement in the National Assembly, the Prime Minister took the firm commitment that he would personally look at the requests for amendment and ensure that the bill was enacted after the elections (text attached).
9. 249. While duly noting the detailed information provided by the Government on the efforts made to prepare and pass through the National Assembly a draft bill to replace the IRA which would take into account the Government’s recent international commitments through the ratification of Convention No. 87, the Committee regrets that these efforts did not result in the adoption of legislation that would be based on broad consensus among the social partners. Noting with interest the Government’s recent ratification of Convention No. 87, the Committee and trusts that it will vigorously pursue its efforts to bring the IRA into full conformity with Conventions Nos. 87 and 98. The Committee would like to emphasize, once again, the importance that should be attached to full and frank consultations taking place on any questions or proposed legislation affecting trade union rights [see Digest of decisions and principles of the Freedom of Association Committee, 4th edition, 1996, para. 927] and trusts that the Government and the social partners will continue to engage fully in such consultations with the aim of building consensus and preparing the ground for future legislation amending the IRA.
10. 250. The Committee requests to be kept informed of further steps taken with a view to bringing national law into conformity with Conventions Nos. 87 and 98, ratified by Mauritius, and progress made in this respect. Noting that the technical assistance of the Office has been useful in the context of generating social dialogue on the possible future amendment of the IRA, the Committee would like to remind the Government that such technical assistance remains at its disposal if it so wishes.