Visualizar en: Francés - Español
Effect given to the recommendations of the Committee and the Governing Body
Effect given to the recommendations of the Committee and the Governing Body
- 28. The Committee last examined this case at its March 2003 meeting when it made the following recommendations:
- n the Committee requests the Government to investigate whether in the public institutions concerned in the present case the trade union immunity of trade union officials of the Institute for Urban Development (SINDISTRITALES and SINTRASISE) and the Bogotá Council (SINDICONCEJO) has been suspended by a court (as required by law) and, if that is not the case, to take steps to reinstate them in their posts without loss of pay and, if that is not feasible, to provide them with full compensation;
- n as regards the other allegations regarding anti-union discrimination, namely: (a) the dismissal of SINTRABENEFICENCIAS officials for setting up a union in Cundinamarca District; and (b) the refusal to grant trade union leave and subsequent dismissal of SINTRASISE officials in the Transport Department, the Committee requests the Government to carry out an investigation in this matter and, if the allegations are found to be true, to take measures to reinstate the dismissed workers and ensure that the right to trade union leave is effectively enforced.
- 29. In its communications dated 21 and 25 March and 16 and 19 June 2003, the Union of Public Servants of the Districts and Municipalities of Colombia (UNES) alleges that, by virtue of Decree No. 1919 of 2002, the District Administration of Bogotá violated trade union agreements establishing certain advantages in respect of wages and benefits that have been recognized since 1992. The complainant organization furthermore states that despite the fact that Conventions Nos. 151 and 154 have been ratified, regulations for their application are yet to be established. As a result, public service workers are being denied the right to collective bargaining. The complainant adds that the mayor of Bogotá refuses to enter into any kind of negotiation.
- 30. In its communication of 11 March 2003, the Trade Union of Officials of the Ministry for Culture of Colombia alleges that the mass dismissal of 142 officials of the Ministry for Culture, 135 of which were members of the trade union (all of the musicians forming the National Symphony Orchestra and the National Symphony Band) took place as part of restructuring processes ordered by Decree No. 003210 of 27 December 2002. Nonetheless, the complainant organization recognizes that the Decree ordered the payment of all compensation provided for in the collective agreement, and that it respected the trade union immunity of officials.
- 31. As regards the dismissal of trade union officials of various public bodies, in its communications dated 31 January, 5 February, 26 March, 28 May and 12 June 2003, the Government states that it acted in accordance with the law and respected the constitutional rights of these officials. The Government provides details of legislation and jurisprudence relating to the legal protection of trade union officials. The Government indicates that when judicial authorization to dismiss trade union officials is not requested, those affected are responsible for initiating proceedings for their reinstatement or compensation. The Government adds that it has written to the Territorial Directorate of Cundinamarca to ascertain whether any administrative labour inquiries have been initiated against the district for the dismissal of workers with trade union immunity.
- 32. With regard to the allegations relating to the dismissal of SINTRABENEFICENCIAS officials for setting up a trade union in the Cundinamarca district, the Government states that the administrative inquiry initiated by the Territorial Directorate of Cundinamarca is being handled by the Coordination Office for the Inspection and Surveillance Group, which will issue the corresponding decision.
- 33. With reference to the refusal to grant trade union leave and the subsequent dismissal of SINTRASISE officials in the Transport Department, the Government states that the Ministry of Labour and Social Security initiated administrative labour proceedings, and that the head of the Inspection and Surveillance Division of the Regional Labour Directorate of Santa Fe de Bogotá issued resolution No. 000801 of 31 March 1998 stating that there was no evidence that the Department of Traffic and Transport of Santa Fe de Bogotá had violated labour standards, and that action for recourse (reposición) and appeal had been rejected.
- 34. As regards the dismissal of trade union officials of various public bodies related to the Institute for Urban Development (SINDISTRITALES and SINTRASISE) and Bogotá Council (SINDICONCEJO) without the corresponding suspension of trade union immunity, the Committee observes that the Government merely indicates that it has written to the Territorial Directorate of Cundinamarca to ascertain whether any administrative labour inquiries have been initiated against the district of Bogotá for the dismissal of workers with trade union immunity. The Committee requests the Government to provide it with information on inquiries that have been initiated, as well as the results of these inquiries.
- 35. As regards the allegations relating to the dismissal of SINTRABENEFICENCIAS officials for setting up a trade union in the Cundinamarca district, the Committee notes that the Government states that the administrative inquiry initiated by the Territorial Directorate of Cundinamarca is being handled by the Coordination Office for the Inspection and Surveillance Group, which will issue the corresponding decision. The Committee requests the Government to provide it with a copy of this decision.
- 36. With regard to the refusal to grant trade union leave and further dismissals of SINTRASISE officials in the Transport Department, the Committee notes that according to the Government, action for recourse (reposición) and appeal has been rejected. The Committee requests the Government to send copies of the corresponding resolutions.
- 37. With reference to the allegations made by the Trade Union of Officials of the Ministry for Culture of Colombia, the Committee observes that, in accordance with the comments made by the complainant organization itself, the Decree which provided for the restructuring of the National Symphony Orchestra and the National Symphony Band also ordered the recognition and payment of all compensation established in agreements relating to the unilateral termination without just cause of individual contracts of employment which affected all the workers of these bodies, and that the trade union immunity of officials was respected. Therefore, the Committee will not proceed with the examination of these allegations.
- 38. However, the Committee regrets to observe that the Government has not responded to the new allegations concerning the refusal of the mayor of Bogotá to bargain collectively, and the lack of regulations governing the right to collective bargaining in the public service, despite the fact that Colombia has ratified Conventions Nos. 151 and 154. The Committee requests the Government to take measures to promote collective bargaining in the Bogotá mayor’s office. With regard to the lack of regulations governing the right to collective bargaining in the public service, the Committee observes that this issue has been dealt with in previous cases. In this regard, the Committee reiterates that, while some categories of public servants must have already enjoyed the right to collective bargaining under Convention No. 98, this right is recognized in general for all public servants as of the ratification of Convention No. 154 on 8 December 2000. In these circumstances, recalling that special modalities of application may be fixed with regard to collective bargaining in the public service, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that the right of public servants to collective bargaining is respected in accordance with the provisions of the Convention which has been recently ratified [see 325th Report, Case No. 2068, para. 323]. Lastly, the Committee observes that the Government has not responded to the alleged non-compliance with trade union agreements establishing certain advantages in respect of wages and benefits that have been recognized since 1992. The Committee requests the Government to send its observations in this respect.
