Observation (CEACR) - adoptée 2023, publiée 112ème session CIT (2024)

Convention (n° 151) sur les relations de travail dans la fonction publique, 1978 - Sao Tomé-et-Principe (Ratification: 2005)

Previous comment

Articles 4 and 5 of the Convention. Adequate protection against acts of anti-union discrimination and interference. In its previous comment, the Committee requested the Government to take the necessary measures for the adoption of legislative provisions imposing sufficiently effective and dissuasive sanctions for acts of anti-union discrimination and acts of interference against trade union organizations of public employees. The Committee notes firstly that, under section 3(1)(a) of the Preamble to Act No. 6/2019 on the Labour Code: without prejudice to special legislative provisions, the provisions of the Labour Code relating to, inter alia, equality and non-discrimination are applied mutatis mutandis to the legal public employment relationship conferred on the public servant or the public administration official. The Committee also notes that: (i) the Government indicates that section 362(2) and (3) specify that any form of interference in trade union associations is prohibited; and (ii) under section 363 of the Code, any act or agreement is prohibited that: (a) makes the employment of a worker subject to their membership or non-membership of a trade union association or their withdrawal from an association of which they are a member; and (b) dismisses, transfers or otherwise prejudices a worker because of their exercise of rights relating to participation in collective representation organizations or membership of a trade union. The Committee also notes that the Code prohibits employers from engaging in any discrimination, direct or indirect, based on trade union membership (section 17), and from following discriminatory procedures in the treatment of workers because of workers’ trade union membership (section 101(2)(b)). With regard to the penalties for these acts, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that sections 534 and 539 of the Labour Code provide for applicable penalties in the area of anti-union discrimination and interference. The Committee notes in this regard that section 539 provides that: (i) bodies or organizations that violate the provisions of section 362(1) and (2) (acts of interference) and section 363 (anti-union discrimination) are punishable by a fine of up to 120 days (section 539(1)); and (ii) administrators, directors or managers and workers occupying managerial positions who are responsible for the acts referred to in the previous paragraph are liable to imprisonment of up to one year (section 539(2)). Observing that section 539, unlike other similar provisions of the Labour Code, does not clearly define the unit of measurement for calculating the fine incurred (expressed in days without any other indication), the Committee requests the Government to specify what this provision corresponds to in terms of a financial penalty. In addition, the Committee notes that section 534 does not impose any specific penalties for violations of section 17 and section 101(2)(b) of the Code. In view of the above,the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to adopt legislative provisions imposing sufficiently effective and dissuasive sanctions for acts of anti-union discrimination and for acts of interference against trade union organizations of public employees.

Article 8. Settlement of collective disputes. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that section 11 of Act No. 4/92 on Strikes provides for compulsory arbitration but noted that the legislation does not establish any mechanism for mediation or conciliation in the event of a dispute between the parties. While noting that the Acts on trade unions and on strikes are henceforth part of Act No. 6/2019 issuing the Labour Code, under the Preamble of the Code, the Committee requests the Government to provide detailed information on the settlement of collective disputes in the public administration, as well as on the mediation mechanisms that are under the responsibility of the Directorate of the Public Administration.