Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 2016, Publication: 105th ILC session (2016)

Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87) - Bangladesh (Ratification: 1972)



A Government representative referred to the Committee’s conclusions on this case in 2015 and indicated that the Government had accepted to receive a High-level Tripartite Mission, which had taken place in April 2016. The report of the Mission had been received by the Government only on 6 June 2016, i.e. two days prior to the discussion in the Committee, which was the reason why no comments could yet be made on the content of that report. In view of the strong commitment of the Government to engage and work with the social partners to improve rights at work, the inclusion of Bangladesh in the list of individual cases was unjustified. The Government was committed to uphold international labour standards through promoting freedom of association of workers in line with the ILO Conventions. The right to organize was enshrined in the Constitution, and, in addition, trade unions and their leaders were protected under various provisions of the Bangladesh Labour Act, 2006 (BLA). Anti-union discrimination and reprisals were contrary to the BLA and subject to stringent legal actions. Under the BLA, any aggrieved worker could submit a complaint on unfair labour practices or anti-union activities to the Department of Labour for remedial action, which would be properly dealt with in an appropriate time frame. Of the 38 complaints received at the Department of Labour, 20 had been settled and 16 criminal cases had been filed, while one case was still being investigated. A helpline for workers had been operational since March 2015, and a total of 490 complaints from the ready-made garment (RMG) sector had been received between December 2015 and May 2016 through this helpline. The BLA had been amended in July 2013, including with a view to promote freedom of association and collective bargaining. After the amendment of the Act, trade union registration had increased significantly, with 899 new trade unions and 21 new trade union federations that had been registered, including 366 new trade unions in the RMG sector. Following the introduction of an online registration system in March 2015, 412 online applications had been received. Moreover, workers in the agricultural sector now had the right to form trade unions. Both the amendments to the BLA and the Rules implementing the BLA had been adopted upon consensus following a wide range of consultations with the tripartite stakeholders. Referring to various technical assistance activities with various actors, including the ILO, he emphasized that awareness raising and capacity building of workers about the right to organize and collective bargaining, especially in the RMG sector, was of high importance to the Government. Those positive initiatives should contribute to a qualitative change in the right to organize and collective bargaining. The export processing zones (EPZs) Workers’ Association and Industrial Relations Act adopted in 2004 was the first legal instrument that granted workers in EPZs the right to organize. Subsequently, the EPZ Workers’ Welfare Association and Industrial Relations Act (EWWAIRA) was adopted in 2010 to ensure freedom of association and collective bargaining of workers in EPZs in the form of workers’ welfare associations (WWAs), which were acting as collective bargaining agents. Out of 409 eligible enterprises in the EPZs, referendums had been held in 304 enterprises. In 225 of these enterprises, WWAs had been established following the referendums held. Between January 2013 and December 2015, 260 charters of demands were submitted by WWAs and settled amicably with agreements being signed. This clearly showed that workers in EPZs were enjoying the right to organize and collective bargaining. Moreover, from January 2015, workers in EPZs were also enjoying the right to strike. The adoption of a comprehensive EPZ Labour Act was at its final stage, and a wide range of consultations had been held with the elected worker representatives of EPZs, investors and other relevant stakeholders. The draft Act had also been shared with the ILO. It was evident that since the existence of EPZs, the labour rights within these zones had been gradually improving, and the EPZ Labour Act was expected to provide an even more effective protection of workers. The effective enforcement of the BLA also played an important role in upholding freedom of association. Therefore, the recruitment of additional staff at the Department of Labour had been initiated. The trade union culture in Bangladesh was complex and awareness building of employers and workers played a vital role in building harmonious industrial relations. Since 2013, more than 14,000 workers and trade union representatives had received training on labour relations. In conclusion, the Government representative expressed appreciation for the constructive engagement of the ILO and the development partners as well as for the technical cooperation provided, and stressed that there was a need for the greater engagement of the tripartite constituents in Bangladesh in the planning, designing and implementation of such technical assistance to promote rights at work.

The Worker members recalled that in more than three years since the Rana Plaza incident, the international community had repeatedly encouraged the Government to protect the right to freedom of association. However, despite all of the technical assistance and all of the resources provided, the Government had utterly failed to make any meaningful progress. The Committee of Experts and the Conference Committee had repeatedly expressed serious concern with regard to the exercise of the right to freedom of association. Recalling the main conclusions of the Committee on this case in 2015, they expressed the view that the Government had failed on all counts. Firstly, concerning the amendments to the BLA and the adoption of Implementing Rules, some amendments to that Act had been adopted in 2013. However, the revised BLA continued to fall well short of international standards with regard to freedom of association and collective bargaining. In its comments published in 2015 and 2016, the Committee of Experts had “regret[ted] that no further amendments have been made to the BLA on certain fundamental matters”. The Committee of Experts had also underscored “the critical importance which it gives to freedom of association as a fundamental human and enabling right” and urged “that significant progress … be made in the very near future to bring the legislation and practice into conformity with the Convention on all of the abovementioned points”. In October 2015, the Government had finally issued the Bangladesh Labour Rules, many provisions of which violated the Convention. Of particular concern was that employers had a role in the election and filling of vacancies of Worker representatives in the participation committees. Workers on temporary contracts were unable to vote in such elections. Where no union existed, which was the case in the vast majority of workplaces, participation committees determined the representatives in the Safety Committees. The probability of management domination in these committees was high and clear and dissuasive sanctions for acts of interference appeared to be missing. Secondly, concerning freedom of association in EPZs, trade unions were banned and only WWAs were permitted in these zones. WWAs did not have the same rights and privileges as trade unions. While the EPZ authorities claimed that collective bargaining was permitted, this was not the case. There were also numerous cases in which leaders of WWAs had been laid off in retaliation for the exercise of their limited labour rights. On repeated occasions, the Committee had called on the Government to allow full freedom of association in EPZs. The Government had nevertheless refused to do so, pointing to the assurance given to investors years ago to keep these zones union free. The High-level Tripartite Mission “observed with concern the separate legislation for factories in the EPZs and the limitations on freedom of association and collective bargaining in these zones”. In February 2016, the Cabinet had approved a draft Bangladesh EPZ Labour Act, which had been submitted to Parliament in April. However, the Government had failed to engage in consultations with Worker representatives concerning this draft. Under the proposed law, workers in the EPZs would still not be able to form unions. All the provisions of the 2010 law in relation to WWAs had been incorporated into the draft. The Government claimed that it could not allow unions because of prior promises made to investors, but this was no excuse. The Government’s obligations and the tripartite conclusions concerning this case could not be clearer. Thirdly, with regard to the investigation and adjudication of cases of anti-union discrimination, there was a serious lack of commitment to the rule of law. At all levels, law enforcement was almost non-existent. Many union leaders of the unions registered after 2013 had suffered retaliation. Some union leaders had even been brutally beaten and hospitalized. Entire executive boards had been dismissed. In some cases, the police, at the apparent behest of factory management, had intimidated and harassed trade unionists. This was confirmed by the conclusions of the High-level Tripartite Mission report in paragraph 46, which “noted with concern the numerous allegations of anti-union discrimination and harassment of workers” as well as “blacklisting, transfers, arrests, detention, threats and false criminal charges”. The responses by the labour inspectorate had been extremely slow, and most union leaders or members illegally dismissed for trade union activity had not yet been reinstated, nor had the employers been punished for those egregious violations. Police routinely failed to carry out credible investigations in cases of anti-union violence, if such investigations were carried out at all. The Worker members were aware of over 100 acts of anti-union discrimination in factories where new trade unions had been registered. In the few cases where workers had been reinstated, this was due to international campaign pressure on brands, not because of labour inspection and enforcement. They finally referred to a drastic case of anti-union discrimination, in relation to which several complaints had been filed with the Ministry of Labour and Employment to no avail.

Finally, with regard to trade union registration, the Worker members indicated that following the Rana Plaza collapse, the Government had temporarily reversed its no-union policy in the RMG sector in response to intense international pressure. Therefore, new unions had been formed and successfully registered. However, in 2016, the situation had nearly returned to the pre-Rana Plaza days. In 2015 alone, the Joint Director of Labour (JDL) had rejected 73 per cent of all new union applications, in particular from the most active independent garment federations. The approval of a union’s application remained at the absolute discretion of the JDL, allowing it to reject legitimate registration applications. With regard to the number of newly registered trade unions since 2013, the Government had failed to mention that this number had decreased by over 100, as nearly 50 unions were now inactive due to anti-union retaliation and over 50 factories in which trade unions had been established were now closed. According to the mission report, the procedure for registering unions “had the likelihood of discouraging trade union registration” and various tactics that had been used which had led to the high rate of rejection of new applications. This was a deliberate policy of the Government and not a technical issue. With increasing regularity, factory management were now seeking injunctive relief from the courts to stay union registrations that had been properly granted. This practice constituted a gross violation of the right to freedom of association; indeed, the post hoc resort to the courts itself was a highly questionable use of the judicial process to frustrate trade unions after the registrar had already found the registration application to be in order. The Government’s hostility to freedom of association had been confirmed by the High-level Tripartite Mission. The Government had repeatedly broken the trust of the Committee with empty promises. It was time for this to finally change.

The Employer members thanked the Government for the detailed information provided. They recalled that following the 2016 observation from the Committee of Experts, the Government had accepted a High-level Tripartite Mission to the country in April 2016; the High-level Tripartite Mission’s report had been provided to the Conference Committee in advance of the discussion of the present case. In its latest comments, the Committee of Experts had noted with interest the establishment of a helpline for labour-related complaints targeting the RMG sector in the Ashulia area. The Committee of Experts had also noted that the Bangladesh Labour Rules were published on 15 September 2015 as part of the implementation of the BLA, and had welcomed the issuance of the Rules, trusting that they would assist in the implementation of the BLA in a manner fully consistent with the Convention. The Employer members joined the Committee of Experts in welcoming these positive developments and encouraged the Government to expand the operation of the helpline to other areas of the country. With regard to the registration of trade unions, they noted that the High-level Tripartite Mission considered this process as heavily bureaucratic, and further recalled the concerns expressed by the Committee of Experts in respect to this overly complicated procedure. They urged the Government to establish standard procedures in order to ensure that the registration process would set out requirements of a purely formal nature and would not, owing to its bureaucratic nature, itself become an obstacle to the registration of unions. In respect of the Committee of Experts’ comments on the minimum membership requirements for forming a trade union, they stressed that these requirements must be viewed in the national context. It was also important, in this regard, to consider that a proliferation of trade unions could be counterproductive to the development of healthy industrial relations and economic growth. The Employer members further urged the Government to provide information to the Committee of Experts on the steps taken to amend the BLA since 2013. They welcomed the initiative reported by the Government to provide training to workers and employers on the issue of anti-union discrimination, and asked the Government to continue with these capacity-building activities. With regard to the issue of the EPZs, they noted that a situation of separate legislative frameworks for enterprises within and outside the EPZs remained. The BLA applied to employers operating outside the EPZs, whereas a number of provisions of the EPZ Workers Welfare Association and Industrial Relations Act of 2010 collectively constituted a separate legislative scheme for employers operating inside the zones. The provisions of the Act did not allow workers and employers to form organizations of their own choosing. In respect to the EPZ concerns raised by the Committee of Experts, the Government had indicated that a draft of the EPZ Labour Act had been sent to the Ministry of Law for vetting prior to submission to Parliament. The Employer members noted that this draft law appeared to have been prepared with limited engagement of the national social partners, who indicated that they either were not consulted or were allowed very limited consultation in respect of this bill. They further noted that the High-level Tripartite Mission in its report had expressed concerns over the draft EPZ Labour Act, as it restricted the freedom of investor employers by requiring them to form central investors’ associations, rather than organizations of their own choosing. While having noted the information supplied by the Government to the effect that the above-noted dual legislative framework had arisen out of concerns to ensure the attractiveness of the EPZs to foreign investors, they urged the Government to ensure that the draft EPZ Labour Act allowed workers and employers to establish organizations of their own choosing, and to fully consult with the national social partners in this regard. Finally, the Employer members asked the Government to provide information on the labour laws applicable to the special economic zones as the Committee of Experts had requested.

The Worker member of Bangladesh considered that despite its claims of progress, the Government still denied workers their right to freedom of association in law and in practice as confirmed by the recent report of the High-level Tripartite Mission. Workers in all sectors in Bangladesh who attempted to organize and form trade unions faced severe and, at times, violent retaliation from employers without the Government making any serious effort to hold accountable those who violated the law. Workers whose contracts of employment were terminated due to trade union activity were almost never reinstated, unless Global Unions undertook a lengthy international campaign against the global garment brands. Therefore, he was deeply concerned with the Government’s continued denial of the right of freedom of association to workers in EPZs. In spite of several revisions to the Bangladesh Labour Rules, no guarantees had been provided to ensure the right of workers to establish and join organizations of their own choosing without interference from public authorities, which would restrict this right or impede its lawful exercise. The draft law prepared by the Government in 2016 and submitted to Parliament in April 2016, maintained the same exclusion of workers in EPZs from its scope of coverage. It was further stressed that WWAs were not unions, and collective bargaining in the EPZs was extremely rare. Moreover, workers who attempted to organize were dismissed, and prohibited by law from seeking the assistance of trade unions or non-governmental organizations outside of the EPZ. The new implementing Rules of the BLA were two years overdue and of poor quality. While trade unions had been consulted, the executive decrees created new obstacles to the right of freedom of association. For example, Rule 81 empowered the worker participation committee to elect the workers’ representatives in the safety committees while RMG employers largely controlled the process of establishing worker participation committees, and by extension occupational safety and health committees in light of Rule 82. The trade union movement in Bangladesh believed that there was no alternative to free trade unionism to ensure sustainable development, maintain industrial integrity and uphold democracy. In this regard, social dialogue was seen as important and the only way to achieve the desired goals. However, the Government had appeared before the Conference Committee both before and after the Rana Plaza disaster and continued to make promises that it did not uphold; the time has come to witness concrete results.

The Employer member of Bangladesh emphasized that, apart from being one of the most densely populated countries of the world, there were an additional 1.8 to 2 million youths every year joining the estimated 50 million economically active people in the labour market. Therefore the greatest challenge was not only to sustain the level of employment but also to create jobs for the millions who were joining the labour market and impart to them the right skills that would facilitate job search within the country and overseas. Recalling the fact that Bangladesh ratified 29 ILO Conventions within a year of its independence in 1971, the speaker indicated the full commitment of the country to safeguarding fundamental human rights, including freedom of association, and to ensuring compliance with international labour standards. With job creation, a greater space had been shaped for trade union rights and appropriate amendment to laws. Citing the economist, Dani Rodrick, the speaker referred to a time dimension as a prerequisite condition for achieving progress towards implementation of the Convention and indicated that the BLA, as amended in 2013, was to be considered one of the measures taken in this direction. He also mentioned that the tripartite partners would be continuously reviewing progress in line with the recommendations of the recent High-level Tripartite Mission. The speaker recognized activities of the ILO country office in Dhaka, seen as essential for the implementation of the Convention and aimed at promoting decent work in Bangladesh, fostering tripartism and building capacities of the social partners. Recalling the previous examinations and conclusions of the Conference Committee as well as the Committee of Experts, the Employer member brought attention to the issues raised in the last observations, specifically: the request to modify the law governing EPZs allowing for full freedom of association, including to form trade unions and to associate with trade unions outside of EPZs; harassment for participation in trade union activities; registration of union organizations without previous authorization; and excessive requirement for initial and continued union registration. He further noted that this case had not been the subject of a representation procedure under article 24 of the ILO Constitution. In the light of the recent High-level Tripartite Mission, which was welcomed by all the constituents, the speaker expressed his regret that this particular case had been shortlisted before the Mission had had the opportunity to share the findings in its report. The speaker commended the amended BLA, which had been done through tripartite consultations. Considering that Rules under the Law had been published in September, barely eight months ago, he suggested that the stakeholders ought to be allowed to observe implementation of the law for a reasonable time before making another attempt for further amendments. He also believed that the complaints lodged by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) would be verified through proper investigation by appropriate government agencies and further indicated that the registration process for trade unions had been made easy and open through the latest amendment to the BLA. Trade unions and their leaders were protected under various provisions of the BLA, including, inter alia, complaints procedures, anti-union discrimination penalties and remedies for aggrieved workers. The speaker strongly believed that the existing threshold of 30 per cent worker membership in an enterprise was realistic for union registration and lowering it would encourage a proliferation of unions without bringing any positive change to the bargaining strength. He also noted a particularity of the agricultural sector, 99 per cent of which was under small individual ownership and with a limited number of seasonal temporary workers. With regard to the request of the Committee of Experts to amend a number of sections of the Bangladesh Labour Rules, the speaker pointed out that a one-size-fits-all approach could not have been suitable and laws needed to be enacted in line with ILO Conventions as well as taking the socio-economic development of the country into account. A draft of the Bangladesh EPZ Labour Act, incorporating a provision for constitution of trade unions under the name of Shramik Kollyan Samity in the EPZs, was agreed by the Cabinet on 15 February 2016 and was expected to be enacted. The speaker concluded by reiterating the need for time in a process of development and expressed his hope for further support and cooperation.

The Government member of the Netherlands, speaking on behalf of the member States of the European Union (EU), as well as Albania, Iceland, Republic of Moldova and Norway, welcomed the Government’s acceptance of a High-level Tripartite Mission in April 2016, and noted that progress on a number of issues had been achieved in the framework of the Sustainability Compact, which, inter alia, outlined concrete commitments in respect of freedom of association. For instance, an online registration system for trade unions had been established, as well as a helpline for cases of violence against trade unionists targeting the RMG sector in the Ashulia area. In respect of the latter, he encouraged the Government to expand the helpline nationwide and provide information on the follow-up given to the calls received. These positive developments notwithstanding, serious issues remained in respect of the application of the Convention. For example, the number of registrations of trade unions had dropped significantly in recent months, and a number of registered trade unions no longer operated in practice. In this regard, he called upon the Government to ensure that trade union registration would be carried out in a transparent and expeditious manner. It was equally important, moreover, to ensure that unfair labour practices would be effectively investigated and prosecuted. He also urged the Government to amend the BLA so as to: (1) lower the minimum membership requirement of 100 workers for establishing an agricultural trade union; (2) ensure that the definition of “supervisor” was limited to individuals truly possessing managerial authority; and (3) lower the 30 per cent minimum membership requirement for the establishment of a trade union. He reiterated the call expressed by others in the Committee for the Government to review the draft EPZ Labour Act, so as to ensure full freedom of association rights to workers in the said zones, as well as to indicate which labour laws were applicable to the special economic zones. He concluded by affirming the EU’s commitment to continuing its intensive cooperation with the Government in the framework of the Sustainability Compact – in which Bangladesh, the United States, Canada and the ILO were partners – and urged the Government to take all the necessary steps to ensure a sound industrial relations system premised on respect for freedom of association.

The Government member of Switzerland, expressing regret that the Committee must once again discuss the issue of respect of the Convention by Bangladesh, supported the statement made by the EU. Given that in 2015 Switzerland had expressed concern about acts of violence and harassment directed towards trade unionists, it was to be hoped that the proceedings under way would be successful and would result in sanctions. In supporting the recommendations made by the Committee of Experts and the conclusions of the High-level Tripartite Mission, there were two points to highlight. Firstly, noting the reduction in the number of trade unions, she urged the Government to follow the recommendations made by the tripartite mission in that regard and to develop standard procedures for a simple and transparent trade union registration process. Secondly, the importance of having strong and coherent labour laws should be stressed. Noting with concern the shortcomings with regard to freedom of association and collective bargaining in EPZs, she asked the Government to implement the recommendations of the tripartite mission on that issue.

The Worker member of Canada, jointly with the AFL–CIO, stated that labour reforms had been initiated by Bangladesh in the aftermath of Rana Plaza with the revision of the BLA being identified as a priority to create a solid foundation upon which safety in the RMG sector could be built. While the BLA was revised in 2013, the vast majority of the observations of the Committee of Experts relating to freedom of association had not been addressed. Bangladesh had not lived up to its commitment to take into account the Committee of Experts’ observations under the terms of the Bangladesh Sustainability Compact, to which the EU, the United States, Canada, Bangladesh and the ILO were parties. Under the Compact, the Government had agreed to pass executive decrees to implement the BLA. The executive decrees of concern had been passed after a delay of two years, and even then, the Bangladesh Worker member noted that the executive decrees had actually created new problems with regard to the exercise of freedom of association. For example, some workers, who did not actually serve in a managerial capacity, were categorized as supervisors under the executive decrees, and consequently excluded from the BLA’s coverage. The executive decrees also failed to outline procedures for the resolution of unfair labour practices. Rule 202, in a general manner, restricted the actions that could be taken by trade unions. The fact that the Rules were so deeply flawed, despite the substantial ILO technical assistance, was further evidence that the Government had no intention to respect the ILO supervisory system or the rights of its workers. The Committee should hold the Government accountable for its obvious lack of political will to comply with its legal obligations. Canada had been called upon to use its leverage, as part of the Bangladesh Sustainability Compact, to promote compliance with the right to freedom of association in the “ready-made garment and knitwear industry” in Bangladesh, consistent with Canada’s commitment to improving conditions for workers in Bangladesh. Canada had also been urged to apply all the tools at its disposal to strengthen Bangladesh’s political will to advance workers’ rights and to achieve full compliance with the Convention, in all sectors in the country.

The Government member of the United States indicated that the Government of Bangladesh had been requested to appear before the Committee every year since the tragic Rana Plaza building collapse in April 2013 and underlined that this year was the third discussion on freedom of association. Noting the increased attention of the Committee to this case in recent years, she pointed out a lack of progress in this regard and recalled last year’s statement of the United States Government regarding a decline in the rate of union registrations, obstacles related to the application process as well as significant and worrisome reports of unfair labour practices, which included violence against trade unionists and unfair dismissals. Referring to the Committee of Experts’ recommendation that union registration should be a simple formality, she called on the Government to establish standard procedures for union registration that would be transparent and not subject to discretionary authority. Furthermore, she urged the Government to establish a system for the thorough and timely investigation of the mentioned unfair labour practices, and to provide for redress, including reinstatement. Recalling the increased attention to the issue of freedom of association in Bangladesh’s EPZs since 1991 of both the Committee of Experts and the Conference Committee, the speaker reiterated that WWAs, as provided in the current and proposed law, were not equivalent to, or substitutes for, trade unions that were free to organize their own activities and to affiliate with other organizations outside the EPZs and urged the Government to ensure that its laws would allow for full freedom of association in the EPZs, including private EPZs, and in future economic zones such as the planned special economic zones. The speaker urged the Government to amend the BLA and its regulations in line with the Convention and observations of the Committee of Experts. She concluded by inviting the Government to take full advantage of the technical assistance from multiple sources and to implement the recommendations of the High-level Tripartite Mission, and of this Committee, without further delay.

An observer representing IndustriALL Global Union explained that her organization represented over 50 million workers in 140 countries in the manufacturing, mining and energy sectors with affiliates in RMG and shipbreaking. The issue of the refusal to register trade unions was particularly endemic in the RMG sector. While in the immediate aftermath of the Rana Plaza disaster and due to international pressure, new unions had been registered in the RMG sector, it had become increasingly difficult to do so over the previous two years. According to the data compiled by the Solidarity Centre in 2015, 134 applications for registration were filed with 61 unions granted registration and 148 rejected; and as of mid-April 2016, 13 applications were submitted with three approvals and 14 rejections. It was clarified that the sum of accepted applications and rejected ones did not add up to the total number of applications submitted, due to the fact that applications were kept pending from one year to the next. Moreover, the Government of Bangladesh made no progress in creating a database to track the registration process, and the Committee was urged to take note of this point. It also appeared from the data of the Solidarity Centre and the information provided by the affiliates of the IndustriALL (the National Garment Workers’ Federation (NGWF), the Bangladesh Garment and Industrial Workers Federation (BGIWF), Bangladesh Federation of Workers Solidarity (BFWS)), that applications filed by independent unions had a greater risk of being rejected even when they fulfilled all requirements. Ten of the IndustriALL affiliates submitted 61 applications in 2015, of which only 18 unions (with a total membership of 4,600) were registered and six applications remained pending with the JDL. The latter’s refusal of registration for various reasons showed the difficulties created in the registration process. One illustrative case was an RMG factory (Hanwen) where the JDL had rejected the application for union registration on the grounds that some workers claimed as members had not been aware of the union, and because the office bearers and some of the members had not belonged to that factory. The reality was that some of the workers were issued backdated termination letters after the union filed for registration, and new workers had been recruited just prior to the scheduled inspection required before registration. Therefore, the Committee was urged to take note that the JDL had absolute discretion in deciding applications for registration and that this issue was not addressed by the executive decrees issued under the BLA of 2013. Furthermore, the executive decrees of September 2015 made it mandatory to include the identity cards of all members whose names are part of the application for registration, giving rise to fears of harassment of union members. Further to the aforementioned obstacles, employers were approaching courts to seek injunctions on unions which had actually been granted registration with the result of ex-parte ad-interim orders being issued. These orders had the effect of not allowing a union to function, even after being duly registered. A case in point was that of a garment factory (Donglian Fashion) where the IndustriALL affiliate, the Sommolito Garment Sramik Federation (SGSF) had been organizing. The workers formed a union and managed to register it on 29 January 2015. The management filed Writ Petition No. 1244/2015 in the High Court alleging that registration to the union had been granted unlawfully by the JDL. The union had not been made a party to the court proceedings. Instead, the High Court, after hearing the employer, had issued an order on 30 November 2015 staying the registration of the union for six months pending the hearing of the Writ Petition. It was only following interventions from IndustriALL and affiliates in Japan, that there had been an agreement to withdraw the Writ Petition and to reinstate union activists who had been terminated earlier. With regard to the shipbreaking sector, affiliates organizing in the Sitakund yards submitted that shipbreaking yards were difficult for unions to access. In addition, the deaths of workers in shipyards had led to unions focusing more on safety issues. In conclusion, the Committee was urged to take note of the aforementioned issues that adversely impacted on workers’ rights to organize.

The Government member of Thailand welcomed the ongoing efforts of the Government to promote compliance with the Convention, as well as its commitment to promote labour welfare, trade union rights and collective bargaining through labour law reforms and an increase of minimum wages. The Government should be given appropriate time to carry on its efforts.

The Worker member of the Philippines recognized previous concerns raised by the Committee of Experts in relation to the issue of freedom of association in Bangladesh and failure of the Government to ensure the possibility for workers to exercise their fundamental rights in practice. Observing a continuous lack of commitment to the rule of law, particularly with regard to anti-union violence, the speaker indicated that the leaders of a range of unions registered after 2013 had been suffering retaliation, in some cases violent; had been physically assaulted; and most had been illegally fired for trade union activities. He mentioned as well a slow responsiveness of the labour inspectorate. The speaker provided three examples of individual cases in support of the statements mentioned above. The first referred to an assault of the trade union president of a garment company, who was attacked, together with her husband, by several armed men in August 2014. The second example illustrated the incidence of 60 workers being fired at the RMG Washing Plant with at least one being physically assaulted. The SGSF affiliated union indicated that the retaliation had escalated once the union made a request to management in March 2014 related to collective bargaining negotiations. The speaker mentioned that the management had filed false criminal charges against union leaders. Finally, the third case related to the termination of 48 union members, including most of the leadership, by the management of a factory in September 2014. The speaker indicated that a peaceful protest outside the factory resulted in a clash with the police, summoned by the management, after which five workers, including the union president, underwent medical treatment. The speaker referred to the report of the ITUC, IndustriALL Global Union and UNI Global Union containing more than 100 cases of anti-union discrimination in factories, where new trade unions had been registered and had been expressing criticism towards the Government for failing to guarantee freedom of association. He urged the Government to align its laws and practices, and comply with its obligations under the Convention.

The Government member of China commended the Government for having taken a number of positive measures to apply the Convention, such as having introduced amendments to the BLA and conducted training on anti-union discrimination. He also observed that workers in EPZs enjoyed freedom of association rights. The Government had made sincere efforts to fulfil its obligations under the Convention, these efforts needed to be recognized and supported with technical assistance of the Office.

The Worker member of Germany said that the Confederation of German Trade Unions (DGB) wished to address the issue of persistent violations of freedom of association in EPZs in Bangladesh. The freedom to form an organization in defence of one’s rights was a universal right, and Convention No. 87 was one of the fundamental ILO Conventions. This right should apply to all, but it did not exist in Bangladesh’s EPZs. These zones were specially designated as industrial zones where enterprises could produce goods for export only. For these enterprises, labour, social and environmental laws had been redefined, and the right to organize did not exist. It should be noted that the same law should apply to all, throughout a territory; human rights should not stop at the gates of EPZs. It should be pointed out that WWAs were a parody of a replacement for trade unions and indeed could not replace them, given that they did not carry the same legal weight as a trade union and could be run by an employer. These associations could not therefore engage in collective bargaining, as an employer could not negotiate a collective agreement with itself or call for strike action against itself. Although the Government had referred to a draft EPZ Labour Act, this draft did not respect freedom of association in these zones and, consequently, the problem of applying the law would become worse. In 2015, US$403 million had been invested in EPZs, so funding was available. In these zones, workers suffered physical and psychological violence and humiliation in the workplace because of the lack of workers’ rights. It would be a mistake to consider the draft EPZ Labour Act as a step forward. Following the dramatic events of the past, a great deal of public attention was focused on working conditions in the textile industry in various countries. To conclude, an appeal was made to the Government as the German Government planned to invest in Bangladesh through the creation of the Vision Zero Fund. This would not be possible unless freedom of association was guaranteed for all workers in Bangladesh, in accordance with ILO Conventions.

The Government member of Cuba said that applying good practices in the area of cooperation would be advisable and encouraged the Government to continue moving in that direction through dialogue, information exchange, help for capacity building, and mutual recognition of progress made and challenges to overcome.

An observer representing UNI Global Union stated that violations of freedom of association were all too common in both the garment and telecommunications sectors. In both sectors, the Government refused to register trade unions and workers were dismissed with impunity for trying to organize. In respect of a trade union established by the employees of the nation’s largest telecommunications company, he stated that the company had dismissed 163 employees, including seven union officers, the day after having learnt of the union’s existence. The Government had also repeatedly refused to register the union and, after prolonged court proceedings, had appealed the Labour Appellate’s court decision finding in favour of the union and ordering the latter’s registration; a judgment of the appeal was still being awaited. Throughout these proceedings, he stated further, the company had maintained the untenable position that virtually all of its 3,000 employees could not form a union as they were all supervisors or managers. On 7 February 2016, workers at the second largest telecommunications company submitted an application to register the union, called BLEU. This effort drew immediate acts of reprisal from the company, including the dismissal of a union activist and threats made against union members. Furthermore the Government had refused to register the union, although it enjoyed a membership rate of 35 per cent. At a third telecommunications company, employees had managed to successfully register a union on 17 July 2014. However, shortly thereafter the company’s management launched a campaign aimed at convincing members to leave the union. Additionally the union’s treasurer was assaulted and dismissed, and on 27 March 2016 the Labour Directorate had informed the union that a case had been filed seeking the cancellation of the latter’s registration. It was abundantly clear, thus, that the Government had no intention of ensuring respect for freedom of association.

The Government member of Sri Lanka observed that the Government had made substantial steps to recognize freedom of association rights and improve work safety in EPZs, and appreciated the measures taken to promote social dialogue among the stakeholders. He asked the Government to continue its efforts with the technical assistance of the Office.

The Government member of Canada commended the progress made to improve working conditions in the RMG sector and welcomed the information provided in the report of the High-level Tripartite Mission. Freedom of association and collective bargaining, as fundamental elements of an effective labour relations system, needed to be further strengthened within the RMG sector and extended to other sectors of the economy, including EPZs and special economic zones. He called on the Government to reaffirm its commitment to transform the economically important RMG sector and to advance women’s empowerment. The speaker expressed concern in relation to the high rejection rates of trade union registrations in 2015 and 2016, despite an overall increase in registrations, and noted the High-level Tripartite Mission’s finding regarding the related procedures and 30 per cent membership requirement that may have been seen as obstacles to trade union registration. He commended the Tripartite Mission’s recommendations and appreciated the cooperation of the authorities and stakeholders with the Mission. Recognizing the achievements made, he underlined the need to ensure an open and transparent environment in which trade unions and workers’ committees can freely and effectively fulfil their roles. Regarding the BLA of 2013, he noted the Committee’s request to make amendments in certain fundamental areas and urged the Government to work in a tripartite manner in order to bring forward amendments that are in conformity with the Convention. The speaker concluded by reiterating the commitment of Canada to work with all stakeholders to improve safety and workers’ rights in Bangladesh, in particular in the RMG sector.

The Government member of India expressed appreciation regarding the follow-up made by Bangladesh on the main recommendations formulated by the Conference Committee in 2015 and for having accepted the High-level Tripartite Mission of April 2016. However, the report of the tripartite contact mission had been shared with Bangladesh only a few days after the admission of the case against it by the Committee, while the Government had been undertaking labour reform processes to harmonize its national laws with the Convention, as well as other steps to improve workplace safety and compliance. In this regard, reference was made to the specific measures initiated to strengthen enforcement by increasing recruitment of labour inspectors, investing in their training while enhancing regular inspections of RMG factories and increasing access to complaint mechanisms through the hotline. The Government had been actively engaged with the ILO and had availed itself of technical assistance in implementing many of the aforementioned measures, including the development of the Tripartite National Plan of Action on Fire Safety and Structural Integrity in the RMG Sector. Bangladesh was also in the process of adopting a comprehensive EPZ Labour Act to further protect labour rights, including the right to form associations in the EPZ enterprises. The speaker trusted that the Committee would fully take into account the detailed responses provided by Bangladesh on its compliance with the Convention, when finalizing its recommendations.

The Government member of Egypt noted the steps undertaken by the Government to amend the BLA so as to ensure the protection of workers’ rights in establishing and joining unions of their own choosing. The Government had stressed its complete respect for international labour standards and its full commitment to the Convention. Bangladesh was encouraged to pursue this course of action and to undertake additional steps in the framework of social dialogue, which guaranteed the participation of all parties. In this respect, it was hoped that the Office would provide the necessary technical support.

The Government member of Qatar expressed his gratitude to the Committee and the Government for the discussion and the detailed description of the measures taken. He welcomed the progress made.

The Government member of Malaysia commended the Government for having accepted the High-level Tripartite Mission in April 2016. She stated that she shared the Government’s view that the Committee’s decision to hear the present case was premature, given that the tripartite mission’s work was still continuing. Nevertheless, the measures reported on by the Government signalled a strong commitment to protecting the rights and improving the welfare of workers. She called upon the Committee to recognize these measures as progress made in the implementation of the Convention.

The Government representative thanked the members of the Conference Committee for their constructive comments. With respect to the issues relating to EPZs, he stated that the social partners had been engaged in the drafting of the EPZ Labour Act. In March 2014, for instance, the Bangladesh EPZs Authority had consulted on that bill with representatives of workers’ and employers’ organizations in the EPZs. He underscored that the EPZ Act of 2010 ensured freedom of association and collective bargaining rights, and that 135 officials comprising 90 counsellors cum inspectors and 45 industrial relations officers were presently engaged in the EPZs to ensure compliance with the relevant laws. Seven labour courts and one labour appellate tribunal had been designated to address disputes in the EPZs. A total of 161 cases had been filed with the EPZ labour courts since their establishment in 2011, of which 86 had been settled. Intensive training programmes were also being carried out by the Bangladesh EPZs Authority on issues falling under the EWWAIRA, fire safety, health and hygiene safety, industrial relations, grievance handling procedures and social dialogue processes. In the period 2014–15 a total of 700 such programmes had been conducted. Referring to paragraph 40 of the High-level Tripartite Mission report, he stated that his Government had accepted to initiate the implementation of the social dialogue project in the RMG sector, focusing on: (1) improving social dialogue; (2) collective bargaining; (3) dispute prevention and resolution; (4) conciliation; and (5) arbitration, with special consideration given to female employees. He added that the project would continue to provide training to build the capacity of labour officers to handle cases of anti-union discrimination, and establish a “Workers’ Resource Centre” that would act as a centre of excellence for workers’ training and awareness building. On the registration of unions, the BLA had been amended to simplify the registration procedure. Moreover, an online registration system had been established with ILO technical assistance. He stated that in 2013, 64 trade unions had been registered, a figure representing 46 per cent of all applications. The rate of registration had been 42 per cent in 2014, and had dropped to 27 per cent in 2015. Nevertheless, the rate of registrations thus far was 64 per cent, and this increase was due to the awareness-raising measures the Government had undertaken. With regard to the harassment of trade unionists, notably in the RMG sector, the enforcement agencies were always mindful of the need to ensure workers’ welfare and handled reported cases in a manner consistent with national laws. In some cases, however, it had been trade unionists who had committed crimes by inciting violence in the industrial sector, blocking roads or vandalizing factories. In such cases, it had been necessary for the authorities to act to protect property and restore order; nevertheless the authorities always acted cautiously to ensure their actions did not result in the harassment of trade unionists or the disruption of trade union activities. In respect of trade unions in the telecom sector, he stated that at present there were two unions in one of the largest telecom companies in the country. In paragraph 40 of its report the High-level Tripartite Mission had welcomed the progress the country had made by, inter alia, the creation of a labour complaint helpline, the establishment of an online registration system and the implementation of numerous training and capacity-building programmes aimed at improving industrial relations. The Mission, moreover, had noted that through these initiatives the Government had demonstrated its commitment to improving the freedom of association situation in the country. He concluded by affirming his country’s readiness to work with the social partners, the ILO and all development partners in promoting freedom of association, in line with the national legislation and the Convention.

The Employer members thanked the Government for the detailed information provided and encouraged further cooperation with the social partners and the ILO with a view to ensuring that social dialogue would lead to changes in law and practice. They urged the Government to ensure the establishment of the standard procedures that would guarantee that the trade union registration process requirements were not overly bureaucratic and were not constituting an obstacle to such registration. They further urged the Government to ensure that the law governing EPZs allowed for freedom of association, providing employers and workers the right to establish and join organizations of their own choosing. They also requested them to provide further information about the way Rules pursuant to the BLA were applied in law and practice. The Employer members called for implementation of the recommendations of the High-level Tripartite Mission without delay and urged the Government to make real and meaningful progress in this regard. Recalling the issues raised in their opening statement on this case, they urged the Government to achieve progress in relation to all the issues discussed through constructive social dialogue.

The Worker members recalled their experience in the country, as part of the High-level Tripartite Mission, and stated that the Government was making it nearly impossible for workers to organize or join a union. Workers were threatened and intimidated by management, and at times by police, local thugs and political operatives. In some cases, these threats turned into dismissals or into severe beatings. Some union activists were forced to sign blank pages, which were then turned into resignation letters. The labour inspectorate or the police did nothing to stop this, to punish an employer, to get a worker reinstated or to compensate for the harm caused to the workers. There appeared to be no labour justice for workers. Workers in all sectors were denied their right to form unions. The Government either delayed or denied new union registrations by using tactics such as disqualifying the signatures for the slightest mismatches, and by constantly invoking requirements that were not in the laws. The Government had failed to comply with nearly every international commitment. It had ignored the observations of the Committee of Experts, the conclusions of this Committee, the Bangladesh Sustainability Compact, and even its trade obligations. Every year, they told the Committee that they would do better, but returned the following year without having complied with the conclusions. This was not due to the lack of technical assistance or resources, as the ILO and numerous international donors had made welcome investments in industrial relations, but simply because there was no will. The Worker members urged the Government to comply with the 2015 conclusions of the Committee as well as with the recommendations of the recent High-level Tripartite Mission. They requested that the conclusions of the Committee be placed in a special paragraph.

Conclusions

The Committee took note of the information provided by the Government representative and the discussion that followed on issues raised by the Committee of Experts.

The Committee welcomed the report of the ILO high-level tripartite mission and noted with deep concern that the Government has failed to make progress on the repeated and consistent conclusions of this Committee despite the substantial technical assistance and financial resources provided by donor countries.

Taking into account the discussion of the case, and taking into account the conclusions of the Committee of 2015, the Committee repeats it concerns and urges the Government to:

• ■ undertake amendments to the 2013 Labour Act to address the issues relating to freedom of association and collective bargaining identified by the Committee of Experts, paying particular attention to the priorities identified by the social partners;
• ■ ensure that the law governing the EPZs allows for full freedom of association, including the ability to form employers’ and workers’ organizations of their own choosing, and to allow workers’ organizations to associate with workers’ organizations outside of the EPZs;
• ■ investigate as a matter of urgency all acts of anti-union discrimination, ensure the reinstatement of those illegally dismissed, and impose fines or criminal sanctions (particularly in cases of violence against trade unionists) according to the law; and
• ■ ensure that applications for union registration are acted upon expeditiously and are not denied unless they fail to meet clear and objective criteria set forth in the law.

Further, we invite the Government to implement the recommendations of the 2016 high-level tripartite mission together with the social partners.

The Committee decided to include its conclusions in a special paragraph of the report.

The Government representative underlined that the Government had just received the report of the high-level tripartite mission and had yet to discuss it with the relevant ministries and social partners. In view of the need to reflect on its content and continue the dialogue, he did not see any rationale behind proposing a special paragraph. This decision set a bad precedent.