REPRESENTATION (article 24) - VENEZUELA - C122 - 1998

Latin American Central of Workers (CLAT), Latin American Federation of Commerce (FETRALCOS)

Closed

Report of the Committee set up to examine the representation made by the Latin American Central of Workers (CLAT) and the Latin American Federation of Trade Workers (FETRALCOS) under article 24 of the ILO Constitution alleging non-observance by Venezuela of the Employment Policy Convention, 1964 (No. 122)

Decision

1. The Governing Body adopted the report of the tripartite committee. Procedure closed.

Complaint Procedure

1. I. Introduction
2. 1. By a communication dated 2 December 1996 to the Director-General of the International Labour Office, the Latin American Central of Workers (CLAT) and the Latin American Federation of Trade Workers (FETRALCOS) made a representation under article 24 of the ILO Constitution alleging non-observance by the Government of Venezuela of the Employment Policy Convention, 1964 (No. 122).
3. 2. The Employment Policy Convention, 1964 (No. 122), was ratified by Venezuela on 10 August 1982 and is in force for that country.
4. 3. The provisions of the Constitution of the International Labour Organization concerning the submission of representations are as follows:
5. Article 24
6. In the event of any representation being made to the International Labour Office by an industrial association of employers or of workers that any of the Members has failed to secure in any respect the effective observance within its jurisdiction of any Convention to which it is a party, the Governing Body may communicate this representation to the government against which it is made, and may invite that government to make such statement on the subject as it may think fit.
7. Article 25
8. If no statement is received within a reasonable time from the government in question, or if the statement when received is not deemed to be satisfactory by the Governing Body, the latter shall have the right to publish the representation and the statement, if any, made in reply to it.
9. 4. The procedure to be followed for the examination of representations is governed by the revised Standing Orders adopted by the Governing Body at its 212th Session in March 1980.
10. 5. In accordance with articles 1 and 2 of the Standing Orders, the Director-General acknowledged receipt of the representation, informed the Government of Venezuela thereof and transmitted the representation to the Officers of the Governing Body.
11. 6. At their meeting on 13 March 1997, the Officers of the Governing Body considered that there were insufficient elements to report to the Governing Body on the receivability of the representation.
12. 7. In their communications dated 5 September 1997 and 19 September 1997, CLAT and FETRALCOS furnished additional information and transmitted documents in support of their allegations. In a communication dated 30 October 1997, the CLAT and FETRALCOS made new allegations. Copies of these communications were transmitted to the Government.
13. 8. At its 271st Session (March 1998), the Governing Body decided, on the recommendation of its Officers, that the representation was receivable and set up a committee to examine it, composed of: Mr. A. Ducreux (Government member, Panama), Mr. W. Durling (Employer member, Panama) and Mrs. M. Rozas (Worker member, Chile).
14. 9. The Government of Venezuela made its observations in a communication dated 15 May 1998.
15. 10. The Committee met in Geneva on 16 November 1998 to discuss and adopt the present report.
16. II. Examination of the representation
17. 1. Allegations made by the complainant organizations
18. 11. In their communication dated 2 December 1996, CLAT and FETRALCOS allege that the approval by the Mayor of Libertador of a draft Municipal Ordinance prohibiting street trading is contrary to the provisions of Article 1 of Convention No. 122, as there is no plan for the redeployment of the workers who lose their jobs in a context of high rates of unemployment and underemployment. An alternative draft of the Municipal Ordinance submitted by the Coordinating Body of Informal Sector Traders of Venezuela (COMIVE), which would have ensured decent conditions of work for street traders has been ignored, despite the pertinence of the proposal and the willingness of workers to seek solutions through dialogue. Moreover, a peaceful demonstration protesting against the approval of the Ordinance was violently dispersed, causing one death and 15 injuries.
19. 12. CLAT and FETRALCOS also state that the 7,000 traders in the markets in La Hoyada, are threatened with eviction orders, which indirectly threaten the thousands of workers whose livelihood depends on those markets. In 1989, when the markets in La Hoyada were created, the agreements concluded with the authorities envisaged that they would be the ideal solution to the problems of street trading. Representatives of small traders' organizations offered to discuss structural solutions with the Governor in response to the problems engendered by the rapid and uncontrolled growth of street trading. They accordingly submitted proposals for policies and measures to be taken. The buildings promised at the time of the agreements have not been completed and, in the absence of any coherent intervention by the authorities, the markets have grown in a precarious and random manner. It is this situation, which bears little resemblance to the original plan, which is invoked by the Mayor as the grounds for abolishing the markets in La Hoyada, thereby giving precedence to aesthetic factors over the right to employment of thousands of workers.
20. 13. In conclusion, CLAT and FETRALCOS emphasize the important role of the authorities in resolving the interdependent problems of poverty, unemployment and the informal economy, as an important component of employment policy, in accordance with Article 1 of the Convention. They urge the Government to comply with the provisions of the Convention by pursuing a policy of full employment which creates opportunities for decent jobs and respects the right to work.
21. 14. In their communications dated 5 September 1997 and 19 September 1997, CLAT and FETRALCOS stated that a number of market traders in La Hoyada had been evicted and their stalls demolished by the local authorities, thereby depriving the workers concerned and their families of their only possible source of income in a context of a deteriorating employment situation, increasing precarity and extreme poverty. They also refer to new threats to prohibit street traders in other areas of the capital. In emphasizing the importance that the informal sector has taken on in creating jobs, particularly in the service sector, the complainant organizations urge the Government to respect the agreements made at the time the markets in La Hoyada were created and to cease the evictions. They emphasize the need to seek a concerted solution through dialogue with the representative organizations of the persons concerned which respects the right to work of independent traders and to declare and pursue a genuine employment promotion policy.
22. 15. In their communication dated 31 October 1997, the complainant organizations considered that the eviction of thousands of workers from the markets in La Hoyada, in the absence of a concrete and concerted policy to relocate the traders concerned, constitutes a blatant violation of Convention No. 122 and is not in conformity with the objective of Article 1 of the Convention of "overcoming unemployment and underemployment". They allege that the failure of the national, regional and local authorities to develop genuine long-term alternatives to the informal economy and the general closure of opportunities for dialogue are inconsistent with a true policy of promoting "full, productive and freely chosen employment". The organizations refer, in this respect, to the provisions on the informal sector in Part V of the Employment Policy (Supplementary Provisions) Recommendation, 1984 (No. 169).
23. 2. The Government's reply
24. 16. In its communication dated 15 May 1998, the Government states, in the first place, that the Mayor and the town council of Libertador, or in other words local authorities, which are completely autonomous and distinct from the National Executive would be responsible for the alleged violation of the Convention. The right to work is provided for under article 85 of the Constitution and all residents in the Republic have the right to appeal to the courts to obtain effective protection in this regard. The complainants therefore enjoy all the guarantees available in national law for the protection of the right which they claim has been violated. Nevertheless, the exercise of the right to work is not absolute and cannot undermine other collective or individual rights which are of at least equal importance. In this case, it is clear that the Mayor and the town council are not seeking to undermine the right to work of traders or self-employed workers, but that they are seeking to prevent the centre of the capital city from plunging into a chaotic situation which would affect all its inhabitants, since the development of such activities are prejudicial to the formal commercial sector of this zone and engender problems of public safety, hinder the free movement of pedestrians and vehicles and give rise to insanitary conditions. The Government states that it is not a question of preventing citizens from carrying out activities which provide them with a dignified livelihood, but of ensuring that these activities are carried out in a manner which does not prejudice the other rights guaranteed to citizens and the community.
25. 17. The vital importance of Convention No. 122 is recognized by the Government, which deems it necessary to develop policies to promote full, productive and freely chosen employment. Contrary to what has been alleged, the National Executive allocates substantial resources to employment promotion measures, programmes and policies. Its concern in this respect is reflected in the 1997 report on the concerted employment policy, which was not exclusively drawn up by the Government, but was the product of tripartite consensus and contains a series of short-, medium- and long-term recommendations which together constitute a coherent and effective employment policy, the implementation of which commenced at the beginning of 1998.
26. 3. The Committee's conclusions
27. 18. The Committee notes that the representation consists, on the one hand, of precise and documented allegations relating to measures adopted by the local authorities in a specific context and, on the other, an allegation of a more general nature concerning the absence of a national employment policy in respect of the informal sector. The principal allegation of the trade union organizations is that measures which prohibit trading in the streets of the capital and the eviction of traders from markets specially created to cater for the informal sector have been taken without consulting the parties concerned and that, in the absence of compensatory reintegration measures, they significantly reduce their employment and income-generating opportunities and are therefore contrary to the Convention.
28. 19. In emphasizing that the allegations concern measures adopted by the autonomous local authorities and not the National Executive, the Government is tending to suggest that these measures do not lie within its responsibility under the terms of the Convention. At the same time, the Government justifies the measures adopted by the local authorities in view of the need to reconcile the right to exercise an activity with other requirements. It also refers to the adoption of a concerted employment policy which, in its opinion, demonstrates its overall commitment to comply with the provisions of the Convention.
29. 20. The Committee recalls that, in ratifying the Convention, the Member has undertaken to declare and pursue, as a major goal, an active policy designed to promote full, productive and freely chosen employment (Article 1) and to decide on and keep under review, within the framework of a coordinated economic and social policy, the measures to be adopted for attaining those objectives (Article 2) in consultation with the representatives of the persons affected (Article 3). The facts described, which are not contested by the Government, appear to indicate that in this case the impact on employment of the decisions taken could have been taken more fully into account and that the opinion of CLAT and FETRALCOS is justified that other factors have prevailed over the "major goal" of promoting employment. Nor does the Government contest the allegation made by CLAT and FETRALCOS that the representative organizations of the persons concerned were not consulted.
30. 21. It is the responsibility of the Committee to determine the extent to which the situation that is described constitutes a case of the non-observance of the obligations of the Convention. Admittedly, the Government must not be held responsible for all the actions which may affect the achievement of the employment objectives set out in the Convention. For example, a Committee set up by the Governing Body to examine another representation alleging the non-observance of Convention No. 122 concluded that the actions of a private individual, even if they adversely affected the employment situation, did not suffice to prevent the Government from pursuing an employment policy in conformity with the provisions of the Convention. (Endnote 1) In the present case, it should be noted that the measures in question were adopted by public authorities and concern a category of workers numbering several thousand people. The Committee considers, in this respect, that a situation in which the attainment of the objectives of the Convention could be seriously jeopardized by the decisions of local authorities, irrespective of their level of autonomy from the Government, would not meet the requirements of the Convention.
31. 22. The complainant organizations also allege that, due to the absence of an employment policy concerning the informal sector, no measures have been taken for the reintegration of the persons affected by the decisions of the local authorities. Whilst noting that responding to the specific needs of workers in the informal sector is one of the principal objectives set out in the report on the concerted employment policy, referred to by the Government, which is appended to its statement, the Committee observes that no concrete measures have been taken by the Government in this case.
32. 23. The Committee recalls that, although the Convention only sets out in general terms the objectives and measures to be adopted in pursuing the employment policy and allows broad freedom in the choice of measures to be adopted, these measures must be related to national conditions, including the existence of a substantial informal sector. When adopting the Employment Policy (Supplementary Provisions) Recommendation, 1984 (No. 169), the International Labour Conference emphasized that employment policy should recognize the importance of the informal sector as a provider of jobs (paragraphs 27-29). When approving the revised report form for the Convention, (Endnote 2) the Governing Body considered that representatives of workers in the informal sector should be included among the representatives of the persons concerned who, under the terms of Article 3 of the Convention, shall be consulted concerning employment policies, "with a view to taking fully into account their experience and views and securing their full cooperation in formulating and enlisting support for such policies". In its examination of the reports on the application of the Convention submitted under article 22 of the Constitution, the Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations, depending on the characteristics of the labour market, regularly urges that the representatives of workers in the informal sector should participate in declaring and pursuing the employment policy.
33. 24. The Committee notes in this respect that the complainant organizations emphasize the willingness of the Coordinating Body of Informal Sector Traders of Venezuela (COMIVE) to participate in dialogue. It also notes that, in a recent report, (Endnote 3) the ILO qualified this example of an organization of workers in the informal sector as being "very interesting". In the opinion of the Committee, it would be in conformity with the measures required by the Convention for the Government to take the opportunity of this effort made by the workers in the informal sector to organize themselves to seek, through dialogue, in the spirit of Article 3 of the Convention, solutions to the employment problems arising from the existence of a very substantial informal sector.
34. III. The Committee's recommendations
35. 25. The Committee recommends that the Governing Body:
36. (a) approve the present report;
37. (b) invite the Government of Venezuela to include, in its next report on the application of the Convention under article 22 of the Constitution, full and detailed information on the employment policy measures adopted for the informal sector, as well as the manner in which the representatives of the workers concerned are consulted in this respect, so that the Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations can continue to examine this matter; and
38. (c) declare closed the present procedure brought before the Governing Body as a result of the representation in question.
39. Endnote 1
40. Report of the Committee set up to examine the representation made by the Latin American Central of Workers (CLAT) under article 24 of the ILO Constitution alleging non-observance by Nicaragua of the Protection of Wages Convention, 1949 (No. 95), the Social Policy (Basic Aims and Standards) Convention, 1962 (No. 117), and the Employment Policy Convention, 1964 (No. 122), Nov. 1995 (doc. GB.264/16/3, paras. 31 and 32).
41. Endnote 2
42. 202nd Session (March 1977), doc. GB.202/11/23.
43. Endnote 3
44. ILO: World Labour Report, 1997-98. Industrial relations, democracy and social stability, Geneva, 1997, p. 206.