Afficher en : Francais - Espagnol
Effect given to the recommendations of the Committee and the Governing Body
Effect given to the recommendations of the Committee and the Governing Body- 49. The Committee examined the substance of this case concerning
anti-trade union practices and interference by Atento Servicios SA de CV, particularly
in connection with two ballots to determine the most representative union, at its June
2013 meeting [see 368th Report, paras 611–653]. On that occasion, it made the following
recommendations:
- (a) The Committee requests the complainant
union to provide information on any appeal filed by its members against dismissals
or anti-union practices and their outcomes, and against the second ballot obtained
from the authority to determine the union with bargaining rights.
- (b) The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments
on the claim of the JLCADF that the SPTCTRM union member voting list contains no
record of any company worker.
- (c) The Committee wishes to
emphasize the importance it attaches, if there is a new ballot, to the authorities
providing the safeguards necessary to avoid all alleged irregularities, thus
guaranteeing that the affected workers have a full and fair opportunity to
participate in an atmosphere of calm and security.
- 50. In its communication dated 28 October 2013, the Union of Telephone
Operators of the Mexican Republic (STRM) states that it is prepared to request, once
again, the bargaining rights for the collective agreement of the workers of Atento
Servicios SA de CV. The STRM notes that, according to information received from the
Federal District Local Conciliation and Arbitration Board (JLCADF), it has come to its
attention that other trade union organizations have already submitted requests for the
same bargaining rights. The STRM considers: that the presence of national and
international observers is required at a new election; that the voting list must only
include those workers who legally and legitimately have the right to vote, and not staff
in positions of trust or from outside the company as was the case in previous elections;
that there should be a commitment to non violence and intimidation on the part of the
company, the authorities and the trade unions; and that, on election day, all workers
who have the right to vote are guaranteed to be able to do so. The Committee notes that
the complainant organization indicates that it is prepared to request, once again, the
bargaining rights for the collective agreement of the workers of Atento Servicios SA de
CV and requests the complainant organization to keep it informed in this respect. Once
again, the Committee emphasizes the importance that it attaches, if there is a new
ballot, to the authorities providing the safeguards necessary to avoid any allegation of
irregularities, thus guaranteeing that the affected workers have a full and fair
opportunity to participate, in an atmosphere of calm and security.
- 51. In relation to recommendation (b), the Government states in its
communication dated 23 May 2014 that it was the responsibility of the JLCADF to make
sure that the ballot vote on 9 November 2011 was carried out in conformity with the
applicable rules and with all the guarantees required to enable voters to cast their
vote freely, directly and in secret. The Government stresses that the voting process
complied with the rules set out in article 931 of the Federal Labour Act, which
indicates that all workers who attend the election will be able to vote, without being
required to be affiliated to one of the trade union organizations in the company. The
Government highlights that the ballot vote was carried out, upon presentation of the
employee–employer contribution assessment certificate to the Mexican Institute of Social
Security. The Committee notes that, as indicated by the Government, the Federal Labour
Act provides that it is not necessary to be affiliated with one of the trade union
organizations in the company to be able to vote. The Committee would welcome information
on whether the complainant trade union filed a claim following the 2011 vote alleging
that the Progressive Union of Communication and Transport Workers of the Mexican
Republic (SPTCTRM) (rival of the complainant organization) had not registered any
company worker.
