Informe en el que el Comité pide que se le mantenga informado de la evolución de la situación - Informe núm. 311, Noviembre 1998

Caso núm. 1873 (Barbados) - Fecha de presentación de la queja:: 07-MAR-96 - Cerrado

Allegations: Restrictions on collective bargaining in the public sector

1. 97. The Committee already examined the substance of this case at its June 1997 meeting, when it presented an interim report to the Governing Body (see 307th Report, paras. 88 to 101, approved by the Governing Body at its 269th Session (June 1997)). In the light of the very partial observations sent by the Government in a communication dated 9 September 1997, the Committee, at its November 1997 meeting, decided to adjourn its examination of this case (see 308th Report, para. 5). At its May-June 1998 meeting, the Committee addressed an urgent appeal to the Government to send its observations (see 310th Report, para. 9). The Government has not sent any new observations to date.
2. 98. Barbados 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. Previous examination of the case

1. 99. The National Union of Public Sector Workers (NUPW) presented allegations to the effect that the Government had departed from any established collective bargaining practices by unilaterally imposing a new wage plan on the majority of public workers. The NUPW further alleged that although there were six other workers' organizations that had accreditation as bargaining bodies, the NUPW's membership was substantially larger than the combined membership of the other organizations and that they transcend more categories of workers.
2. 100. The Government, for its part, sent information in which it indicated that contrary to the complainant's claim, the Government did reach an agreement with a majority of trade union bodies representing the majority of civil servants. It added that it did not act in bad faith nor in a manner contrary to the previously agreed protocol but that it could not pay the members of the NUPW at one rate and members of the umbrella body of trade unions at another rate.
3. 101. The Committee, in its previous conclusions, had indicated that it could not conclude from the allegations at hand that the Government had refused collective bargaining altogether or that it had negotiated in deliberate bad faith.
4. 102. At its June 1997 Session, in the light of the Committee's interim conclusions, the Governing Body approved the following recommendations:
5. a. Recalling the importance it attaches to the obligation to negotiate in good faith for the maintenance of the harmonious development of labour relations, the Committee reminds the parties to give preference as far as possible to collective bargaining in determining the conditions of employment of public servants.
6. b. The Committee requests the Government to proceed to an objective verification of the claim by the NUPW that it represents the majority of the workers in the public sector in Barbados, and to send it the results of this verification.
7. B. The Government's new reply
8. 103. In a communication dated 9 September 1997, the Government sent a very partial reply where it only indicated that it was unable to complete a report to the ILO by the due date and it requested assistance with the structuring of the questionnaire on the verification of which union represented the majority of workers in the public sector in Barbados. In addition, the Government sent a copy of a communication which it had addressed to the NUPW on 26 July 1998, where it asked the NUPW whether it was still interested to pursue the matter relating to this complaint. Since that date, the Government has sent no new information.

C. The Committee's conclusions

1. 104. The Committee regrets that, despite the time which has elapsed since the complaint was presented, the Government has only sent very partial information in reply to allegations of the complainant organization, although it was invited on several occasions, including by means of an urgent appeal, to present its comments and observations on this case.
2. 105. In these circumstances, in accordance with the applicable procedural rule (see para. 17 of its 127th Report, approved by the Governing Body at its 184th Session), the Committee finds itself obliged to present a report on the substance of the case without being able to take into account the information it had hoped to receive from the Government.
3. 106. The Committee reminds the Government that the purpose of the whole procedure instituted by the International Labour Organization to examine alleged violations of freedom of association is to promote respect for this freedom in law and in fact. The Committee is convinced that, if it protects governments against unreasonable accusations, governments on their side must recognize the importance for the protection of their own good name of formulating for objective examination detailed factual replies to such allegations made against them. (See the Committee's First Report, para. 31).
4. 107. The Committee recalls that the allegations in this case refer to restrictions on collective bargaining in the public sector by the Government which imposed unilaterally a new wage plan on the majority of public workers.
5. 108. With regard to the allegation that a minority agreement between the Government and other public sector bargaining bodies was imposed on the general public services, the Committee indicated previously that this raised the question of the recognition of the most representative organizations in an industrial relations system, according to which the negotiating agent representing the most representative trade unions has a priority with regard to collective bargaining. Concerning this aspect of the case, the Committee can only recall that the competent authorities should, in all cases, be able to proceed to an objective verification of any claim by a union that it represents the majority of the workers in an undertaking, provided that such a claim appears to be plausible. The Committee regrets that more than one year after its recommendations, the Government has still not proceeded to such a verification. Therefore, the Committee once again urges the Government to proceed without delay to such a verification as to whether or not the NUPW represents the majority of the workers in the public sector. The Committee requests the Government to send it the results of this verification as soon as possible.
6. 109. Furthermore, the Committee recalls that the International Labour Office remains at the disposal of the Government to provide technical assistance with respect to the problems raised in this case.

The Committee's recommendations

• D. The Committee's recommendation
  110. 110 In the light of its foregoing conclusions, the Committee invites the Governing Body to approve the following recommendations:
       • (a) Regretting that more than one year after its previous recommendation, the Government has taken no action to date, the Committee once again urges the Government to proceed without delay to an objective verification as to whether or not the NUPW represents the majority of the workers in the public sector. The Committee requests the Government to send it the results of this verification as soon as possible.
       • (b) The Committee recalls that the International Labour Office remains at the disposal of the Government to provide technical assistance with respect to the problems raised in this case.