Report in which the committee requests to be kept informed of development - Report No 348, November 2007

Case No 2520 (Pakistan) - Complaint date: 23-SEP-06 - Closed

Allegations: The complainant alleges unfair and discriminatory practices against the Karachi Shipyard Labour Union, one of its affiliates. In particular, the complainant alleges that the management of Karachi Shipyard and Engg Works Ltd has refused to recognize the union and ignored its concerns, and that the latter’s registration has been unlawfully cancelled

1016. The complaint is set out in a communication of 23 September 2006.

1. 1017. As a consequence of the lack of a reply on the part of the Government, at its June 2007 meeting [see 346th Report, para. 10], the Committee launched an urgent appeal and drew the attention of the Government to the fact that, in accordance with the procedural rules set out in paragraph 17 of its 127th Report, approved by the Governing Body, it may present a report on the substance of this case even if the observations or information from the Government have not been received in due time.
2. 1018. Pakistan 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. 1019. In its communication of 23 September 2006, the complainant states that its affiliate the Karachi Shipyard Labour Union (KSLU), which represents employees of the Karachi Shipyard and Engg Works Ltd (hereafter the employer) was registered by the Registrar of Trade Unions of Sindh Province and declared as the collective bargaining agent on 8 January 2003. The employer is a large commercial and industrial establishment, operating both a foundry and laboratory. Its major customers are the sugar mills, foundries, rolling mills and shipping companies belonging to the private sector.
2. 1020. Upon certification as the collective bargaining agent, the KSLU presented a charter of demands for collective bargaining to the employer; the charter of demands, however, was kept pending for the next four years.
3. 1021. The complainant alleges that several “conciliation meetings” were held between the KSLU and the employer from March to August 2006. The meetings were presided over by a conciliator and aimed at resolving the dispute concerning the settlement of the charter of demands.
4. 1022. According to the complainant, on 1 August 2006 a joint meeting of all three of the establishment’s registered trade unions was called by the Registrar of Trade Unions to determine the collective bargaining agent for the three-year period to follow. The said meeting continued until the third week of August 2006. On 24 August 2006 the Registrar requested the KSLU to indicate their affiliation with a national trade union federation; two days later it issued an order for cancellation of the KSLU’s registration, on grounds that the union “ceased to exist”.
5. 1023. The complainant states that no written notice or opportunity to respond was given prior to the issuance of the order. Additionally, the cancellation of the KSLU’s registration contravenes section 12(3) of the Industrial Relations Ordinance (IRO), 2002, which provides that the registration of a trade union shall be cancelled by the Registrar only after holding an inquiry. The cancellation of the KSLU’s registration, the complainant contends, violates freedom of association principles and is intended to curb trade union activities at the employer’s premises.
6. 1024. The complainant attaches a 5 August 2006 notification from the Ministry of Defence Production. The document indicates that the employer had been placed under the administrative control of the Ministry of Defence Production, pursuant to Cabinet Division Order No. 4-15/2006-Min-I of 2 August 2006, and would carry out defence and strategic tasks assigned to it by the Ministry.
7. 1025. Finally, the complainant also attaches a copy of a 26 August 2006 order issued by the Sindh Registrar. The order cancels the registration of the KSLU and two other trade unions, in view of the fact that the employer had been placed under the administrative control of the Ministry of Defence Production and was therefore no longer subject to the provisions of the IRO. The order further indicates that the cancellation had been executed pursuant to section 12(3)(i) of the IRO.
8. 1026. Section 12(3) of the IRO, 2002, provides that the registration of a trade union shall be cancelled by the Registrar, by giving reasons for such cancellation in writing, if, after holding an inquiry, he finds that any trade union:
9. (i) has dissolved itself or has ceased to exist; or
10. (ii) has not been a contestant in a referendum for the determination of a collective bargaining agent; or
11. (iii) has not applied for determination of collective bargaining agent under section 20(2) within two months of its registration as another union or promulgation of this Ordinance, whichever is earlier, provided there does not already exist a collective bargaining agent determined under section 20(11) in an establishment, or group of establishments or industry; or
12. (iv) has secured less than 15 per cent of polled votes per final list of voters, during a referendum for the determination of collective bargaining agent.

B. The Committee’s conclusions

1. 1027. The Committee deplores that, despite the time that has elapsed since the submission of this complaint, it has not received the Government’s observations, although the Government has been invited on several occasions, including by means of an urgent appeal, to present its comments and observations on the case. The Committee strongly urges the Government to be more cooperative in the future.
2. 1028. Under these circumstances, and in accordance with the applicable rules of procedure [see 127th Report, para. 17, approved by the Governing Body], the Committee finds itself obliged to present a report on the substance of the case without the benefit of the information which it had hoped to receive from the Government.
3. 1029. The Committee recalls that the purpose of the whole procedure established by the International Labour Organization for the examination of allegations of violations of freedom of association is to promote respect for this freedom in law and in fact. The Committee remains confident that, if the procedure protects governments from unreasonable accusations, governments on their side will recognize the importance of formulating, for objective examination, detailed replies concerning allegations made against them.
4. 1030. The Committee recalls that the present case involves allegations concerning the cancellation of a trade union’s registration. The Committee observes, from the information before it, that the employer concerned – the Karachi Shipyard and Engg Works Ltd – had been placed under the administrative control of the Ministry of Defence Production, following which the registration of the KSLU was cancelled by an Order of the Sindh Registrar of Trade Unions, pursuant to section 12(3) of the IRO.
5. 1031. With respect to the Cancellation Order, the Committee recalls that it has always emphasized that the cancellation of registration of an organization by the registrar of trade unions, or their removal from the register, is tantamount to the dissolution of that organization by administrative authority [see Digest of decisions and principles of the Freedom of Association Committee, fifth edition, 2006, para. 685]. The Committee considers moreover that the dissolution of trade union organizations is a measure which should only occur in extremely serious cases; such dissolutions should only happen following a judicial decision so that the rights of defence are fully guaranteed [see Digest, op. cit., para. 699].
6. 1032. The Committee notes, from the order of the Sindh Registrar, that the cancellation of the union’s registration appears to be due to the fact that the employer had been placed under the administrative control of the Ministry of Defence Production. While the complainant contends that the majority of the work of the enterprise is in the private sector, the Committee wishes to emphasize in any event that civilian workers in the manufacturing establishments of the armed forces should have the right to establish organizations of their own choosing without previous authorization, in conformity with Convention No. 87 [see Digest, op. cit., para. 227]. In these circumstances, the Committee can only conclude that the cancellation of the KSLU’s registration runs contrary to the freedom of association principles mentioned above. It therefore requests the Government to take the necessary measures to revoke the Registrar’s order, so as to reinstate the registration of the KSLU and of any other unions that may have been dissolved due to the administrative control of the enterprise concerned by the Ministry of Defence Production. The Committee requests the Government to keep it informed of the steps taken in this regard.
7. 1033. The Committee notes that section 12(3) of the IRO provides for the cancellation of a trade union’s registration where: the union has dissolved itself or ceased to exist; or not been a contestant in a referendum for the determination of a collective bargaining agent; or has not applied for determination of collective bargaining agent under section 20(2) of the IRO; or has secured less than 15 per cent of polled votes in a referendum for the determination of collective bargaining agent. Although the voluntary dissolution of a trade union by the workers concerned does not, generally speaking, infringe upon trade union rights, in view of the serious consequences that cancellation of a trade union’s registration entails for the representation of workers, the Committee considers that the remaining grounds for cancellation provided for in section 12(3) of the IRO – all of which concern the failure to obtain or seek collective bargaining agent status under the relevant procedures – should not result in the cancellation of a trade union’s registration. It requests the Government to review and amend section 12(3) of the IRO accordingly.
8. 1034. The Committee notes that the KSLU, in spite of having been certified as the collective bargaining agent in 2003, had unsuccessfully pursued negotiations with the employer on several occasions, including by means of conciliation meetings held from March to August 2006 that were aimed at settling the dispute over its charter of demands. In this respect, the Committee requests the Government to initiate an investigation into the obstacles to collective bargaining encountered by the union during this period, and to promote future collective bargaining with the KSLU, if it is still found to be representative of the workers at the Karachi Shipyard and Engg Works Ltd.
9. 1035. The Committee draws the attention of the Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations to the legislative aspects of this case.

The Committee's recommendations

1. 1036. In the light of its foregoing conclusions, the Committee invites the Governing Body to approve the following recommendations:
   • (a) Deploring that it has not received the Government’s observations, despite the time that has elapsed since the submission of the complaint, the Committee strongly urges the Government to be more cooperative in the future.
   • (b) The Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to revoke the Sindh Registrar’s Cancellation Order so as to reinstate the registration of the KSLU and of any other unions that may have been dissolved due to the administrative control of the employer concerned by the Ministry of Defence Production. The Committee requests the Government to keep it informed of the steps taken in this regard.
   • (c) The Committee requests the Government to review and amend section 12(3) of the IRO, 2002, so that the failure to seek or obtain collective bargaining agent status does not constitute grounds for the cancellation of a trade union’s registration.
   • (d) The Committee requests the Government to initiate an investigation into the obstacles to collective bargaining encountered by the KSLU during the period 2003–06 and to promote future collective bargaining with the union, if it still found to be representative of the workers at the Karachi Shipyard and Engg Works Ltd.
   • (e) The Committee draws the attention of the Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations to the legislative aspects of this case.