Observación (CEACR) - Adopción: 2009, Publicación: 99ª reunión CIT (2010)

Convenio sobre la terminación de la relación de trabajo, 1982 (núm. 158) - Camerún (Ratificación : 1988)

Articles 12, 13 and 14 of the Convention. Severance allowance. Collective dismissals. The Committee previously noted a communication of the General Union of Workers of Cameroon (UGTC), forwarded to the Government in October 2008, in which the UGTC referred to the dismissal of 215 workers in a shipyard enterprise without consultation. The Government indicates that the restructuring process of the reorganized or liquidated state enterprises has led to the creation of several committees in which representatives of the Ministry of Labour and Social Security participated. At the end of this process, a total of 22,553,594,820 Communauté Financière Africaine francs (XAF) was paid to 13,310 former employees of 49 companies. The Committee notes Decision No. 06/1438/CF of 10 July 2006 on the creation, organization and operation of the tripartite committee set up to assess the balance of social rights of the former employees of the liquidated or restructured state companies. The severance allowances of the workers dismissed from the liquidated or restructured state companies were assessed by a tripartite committee. Once that work had been completed, the Committee sent a report to the minister responsible for finance and the procedure for the settlement of those entitlements is now under way. The Committee requests the Government to indicate in its next report whether the dismissed workers are paid their severance allowance and to provide information on the measures taken to mitigate the adverse effects of dismissals, such as those envisaged in Paragraphs 25 and 26 of the Termination of Employment Recommendation, 1982 (No. 166).

Article 4. Determination of valid reasons for termination of employment. The Government indicates that full effect is given to the provisions of Article 4 through the relevant provisions of the Labour Code, which are reproduced in collective agreements. The Committee notes several court decisions handed down by the High Court in which the reasons given were not regarded as valid reasons, namely:

–           termination of employment for early retirement which is not based on the worker’s will or a negotiated agreement;

–           termination of the employment of a staff representative without requesting the opinion of the joint managers and without the authorization of the competent labour inspector; and

–           termination of employment not justified by professional misconduct on the part of the worker.

The Committee requests the Government to continue providing up to date examples of court decisions on cases of wrongful dismissal.

Article 5(c) and (d). Invalid reasons for termination. The Government indicates that the reasons set out in section 39 of the Labour Code are not exhaustive and that paragraph 2 of that section provides that the competent court may rule that a dismissal was wrongful following an investigation into the causes and circumstances of the termination of the employment contract and that the reasons which may be mentioned in the court decision include race, colour, sex and marital status. The Government also indicates that sections 9 and 10 of Act No. 2005/006 of 29 July 2005 on the status of refugees in Cameroon strengthens the protection of refugees against termination of employment. The Committee recalls that the filing of a complaint or the participation in proceedings against an employer involving alleged violation of laws or regulations or recourse to competent administrative authorities (Article 5(c)), as well as race, colour, sex, marital status, family responsibilities, religion, political opinion, national extraction or social origin of the worker (Article 5(d)) do not constitute valid reasons for termination. The Committee requests the Government to provide examples of court decisions relating to invalid reasons for termination.

Article 7. Defence procedure prior to termination of employment. The Committee notes the extracts of the collective agreements applicable to certain categories of workers, such as those working in insurance, road transport and pharmacies, in which workers are given the right to justify themselves before termination of their employment. The Committee requests the Government to indicate how it is ensured that all workers, particularly those not covered by collective agreements, have the possibility of defending themselves against allegations made against them with regard to their conduct or performance before their employment is terminated.

Article 8, paragraph 3. Time limits for the appeal procedure. The Government once again indicates that any appeal against unjustified or wrongful termination automatically results in a claim for wages or damages for breach of contract. The Committee notes that section 74(1) of the Labour Code stipulates a limitation of three years for an action to recover wages or compensation for breach of contract. The Committee asks the Government to communicate the judicial decisions ensuring that the time limit for the appeal procedure against an unjustified dismissal is three years.

Articles 11 and 12, paragraph 3. Definition of serious misconduct. The Government indicates that it does not currently have the material resources to make inquiries to the competent courts to obtain the court decisions handed down relating to termination of employment for serious misconduct. A collection of the leading judgements in labour case law is in the process of being produced under the programme to support the implementation of the ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work (PAMODEC). The Committee observes that the principal manner in which these important provisions of the Convention are made effective is by means of court decisions. The Committee hopes that progress will be made with the assistance of the ILO and that the Government will be able to provide up to date information on the application of the Convention in practice (particularly court decisions), as well as statistics on the number of terminations for economic reasons, the number of appeals against terminations and the compensation granted (Part V of the report form).

[The Government is asked to reply in detail to the present comments in 2011.]