Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2014, published 104th ILC session (2015)

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2009, published 99th ILC session (2010)

The Committee recalls that in its previous observation, after noting that the trade union confederation Inter-Union Assembly of Workers–Workers’ National Convention (PIT–CNT) had referred to the absence of machinery for collective bargaining in the public administration, the judicial authorities and education, it invited the Government to examine with the most representative organizations the possible machinery for the promotion of collective bargaining in the public administration and requested it to provide information in the next report on any developments in this respect.

In this regard, the Committee notes with satisfaction the Government’s indication in its report that, following the entry into office of a new administration in 2005, a bargaining framework was convened in the public sector. The Government indicates that the bargaining worked and a framework agreement was established which provides for three different levels of bargaining and that several agreements have been concluded (one of which covers the wages of workers in the public administration). Finally, the Committee also notes the adoption of Act No. 18508 of 26 June 2009 on collective bargaining in the framework of labour relations in the public sector.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2004, published 93rd ILC session (2005)

The Committee notes the Government’s report.

The Committee recalls that in its previous observation it noted that the trade union confederation PIT-CNT referred to the absence of machinery for collective bargaining in the public administration, the judicial authorities and education, and invited the Government to examine this matter with the social partners. The Committee notes the Government’s statement to the effect that, in this regard, no changes have occurred with respect to the information that was previously provided and that collective agreements have been concluded between the State and public servants, especially in public enterprises. In this respect, the Committee invites the Government to examine with the most representative organizations the possible machinery for the promotion of collective bargaining in the public administration and requests it to provide information in its next report on any developments in this respect.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2003, published 92nd ILC session (2004)

The Committee notes the comments made by the trade union congress PIT-CNT referring, among other matters, to the absence of machinery for collective bargaining in the public administration, the judicial authorities and education. The Committee refers to the comments that it is making under Convention No. 98 and requests the Government to examine these matters with the social partners. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on this matter.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2001, published 90th ILC session (2002)

The Committee notes the Government’s report.

In its previous observation the Committee had asked the Government to examine the possibility of modifying the composition of the Permanent Industrial Relations Committee (CPRL), which appeared to be unsatisfactory due to an imbalance between the representatives of the authorities and of the most representative trade union organizations; the Committee also referred to the competence of the Permanent Industrial Relations Committee (CPRL) which, according to section 739 of Act No. 16736 included "advising on conditions of employment and other matters covered by international labour Conventions" but, in practice, only discharged mediation functions which, in the opinion of the Committee of Experts, was unsatisfactory.

The Committee also recalls that the PIT-CNT forwarded observations on the application of the Convention. Specifically, the comments point out the lack of effective functioning of the CPRL which it believes is the only body existing to provide bargaining machinery with a possibility of impacting on the determination of employment conditions in the public sector and that employment conditions in the sector are determined through the Budget Act, without participation of the workers.

The Committee observes that the Government states that the composition and mediation form of the CPRL have not been altered. The Committee requests the Government to take measures to modify the composition of the CPRL and its functions so that organizations of public officials can participate more appropriately in the determination of employment conditions.

The Committee notes that, according to the Government, in various areas of the public sector (autonomous bodies, decentralized services, etc.) collective bargaining has been encouraged and that collective agreements exist in many enterprises. The Committee requests the Government to supply a list of collective agreements or Conventions concluded in the public administration sphere, indicating the number of officials covered.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2000, published 89th ILC session (2001)

The Committee notes the Government’s report.

The Committee regrets that the Government’s report does not refer to the following matters, which were raised in its previous observations.

1.  The Committee had requested the Government to examine the possibility of modifying the composition of the Permanent Industrial Relations Committee (which has five members: two representatives of the executive, appointed by the Ministry of the Economy and Finance and by the Planning and Budget Office; two designated by the most representative organizations of public servants; and the Minister of Labour and Social Security), which appears to be unsatisfactory due to an imbalance between the representatives of the authorities and of the most representative trade union organizations.

2.  The Committee had also referred to the competence of the Permanent Industrial Relations Committee which, in accordance with section 739 of Act No. 16736, includes "advising on conditions of employment and other matters covered by international labour Conventions". However, in practice the above Committee only discharges mediation functions which, in the opinion of the Committee of Experts, is unsatisfactory.

3.  In view of the Government’s previous indication that major collective agreements had been concluded in some state bodies, the Committee had requested the Government to provide information on the machinery whereby representatives of public employees may take part in determining the terms and conditions of employment of public employees, as well as on the contents, territorial scope and the categories covered by the collective agreements concluded within the context of the public administration during the period covered by the report.

The Committee requests that the Government provide information in its next report on all these matters.

4.  Finally, the Committee notes that the PIT-CNT has forward observations on the application of the Convention in communications dated 30 December 1999 and 25 January 2000. The Committee requests the Government to forward its comments in this respect.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1999, published 88th ILC session (2000)

1. The Committee notes with regret that the Government's report has not been received. It must therefore repeat its previous observation on the following matters:

The Committee had examined in its previous observation the comments presented by the Confederation of Civil Servants Organizations (COFE) in June 1997: Article 7 of the Convention. The Committee considers firstly that the composition of the permanent Industrial Relations Committee (five members: two representatives of the executive, one from the Ministry of Economy and Finance and one from the Office of Planning and Budget, two representatives from the most representative organizations of public officials and the Minister of Labour and Social Security), which is de facto a joint committee, appears to be unsatisfactory due to an imbalance between the representatives of the authorities and the most representative trade union organizations. In any case, according to the comments made by COFE, it does not enjoy the confidence of these organizations. In these circumstances, the Committee requests the Government to examine the possibility of modifying the composition of the permanent Industrial Relations Committee and to inform it accordingly. Secondly, the Committee notes that, in accordance with section 739 of Act No. 16736, the competence of the permanent Industrial Relations Committee is not restricted to advising on matters of wages, but also covers "advising on conditions of employment and matters covered by international labour Conventions". However, in the Committee's view, the broader statutory competence which appears to be restricted in practice to providing advice on conditions of employment and mediation is unsatisfactory. Finally, the Committee had noted in a previous direct request that the Government had provided assurances to the effect that a number of important collective agreements had been concluded in public institutions. In this respect, the Committee requests the Government to inform it, in its next report, of the procedures which enable public employees' representatives to participate in determining the terms and conditions of employment for public employees, as well as their contents and the territorial and personal scope of the collective agreements concluded in the public administration during the period covered by the report.

2. The Committee observes that in a communication of 21 November 1999, the PIT-CNT forwarded observations concerning the application of the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments thereon.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1998, published 87th ILC session (1999)

The Committee notes the Government's report and its comments on the report presented by the Confederation of State Officers' Organizations (COFE) in June 1997.

Article 4 of the Convention. The Committee notes COFE's statement that, during 1997, several incidents of trade union persecution occurred in the public service. In particular, COFE states that disciplinary measures had been taken against trade union leaders of the Federation of Public Health Employees and the Federation of Highway Workers by the administrative authority, including the non-payment of wages and transfers for reasons of exercising trade union activities. The Committee notes the Government's statement to the effect that, in respect of the allegations made, the administrative authorities have decided not to continue with the disciplinary proceedings. In respect of the allegations of transfers of trade union leaders as reprisals for their trade union activities, the Committee notes that the COFE has not provided sufficient detail in this respect (the number of employees affected, the dates of transfers and the names of institutions in which the transfers occurred) upon which an assessment of these allegations can be made.

Article 7 of the Convention. The Committee notes COFE's statement that, on 1 January 1996, Parliament adopted Act No. 16736 issuing the budget, which affects the working conditions of thousands of officials. In particular, COFE raises objections to certain provisions relating to staff and job redundancies and the establishment of a system of quotas for qualifications. COFE also states that the Act establishes a permanent Industrial Relations Committee for the central administration and other public bodies. COFE expresses objections to the composition of this body and also states that although the permanent Industrial Relations Committee has the responsibility of advising on wage issues, in practice, the representatives of the executive have refused to cover other matters related to conditions of employment. COFE also asserts that the functioning of this committee has proved to be totally inoperative.

In this respect, the Committee notes that the Government states that Act No. 16736 of 5 January 1996, issuing the budget, has contributed significantly to public sector reforms. In particular, the Government states that, as part of the reform process and subsequent to the passing of the above Act, many decrees have been issued whose purpose is to restructure the central administration, the system of evaluating performance, the system of promotion, the highly specialized functions and redundancies schemes. In this respect, the Committee notes the Government's indication that the process of public sector reforms is in conformity with the Constitution and the laws of the Republic and that it has involved those concerned in a "permanent dialogue" with public officials. The Government does not, however, detail the process which gave rise to the adoption of the above Act and decrees, which modify certain conditions of employment and careers for public officials. Moreover, the Committee also notes that neither COFE nor the Government have indicated whether consultations were held with sectoral trade union organizations prior to the adoption of the Act.

In these circumstances, the Committee recalls that Article 7 of the Convention provides that appropriate measures shall be taken, where necessary, to encourage and promote the full development and utilization of machinery for negotiation of terms and conditions of employment between the public authorities concerned and the public employees' organizations, or of other such methods as will allow representatives of public employees to participate in the determination of these matters.

Moreover, the Committee notes that, in respect of COFE criticisms concerning the composition, scope and failure of the permanent Industrial Relations Committee to function properly, the Government: (1) emphasizes that the above-mentioned committee has responsibility for advising on and providing information on salaries and other matters covered by international labour Conventions. The Government states that, for example, in matters pertaining to wages, public sector workers' representatives prepared a report on the evolution of salaries in real terms from 1985 to 1996 and presented it to the above-mentioned committee, which also received a similar report produced by the executive's experts; (2) details its participation in resolving various conflicts and states that the above-mentioned committee has acted with regard to various public organizations and institutions and has contributed to restoring dialogue and labour relations and provides other such examples; and (3) states that public sector employees are addressing several issues to the permanent Industrial Relations Committee which had been addressed to the Sectoral Committee on State Reform but were subsequently withdrawn.

The Committee considers firstly that the composition of the permanent committee (five members: two representatives of the executive, one from the Ministry of Economy and Finance and one from the Office of Planning and Budget, two representatives from the most representative organizations of public officials and one from the Ministry of Labour and Social Security), which is de facto a joint committee, appears to be unsatisfactory due to an imbalance between the representatives of the authorities and the most representative trade union organizations. However, according to the comments made by COFE, it appears not to enjoy the confidence of these organizations. In these circumstances, the Committee requests the Government to examine the possibility of modifying the composition of the permanent Industrial Relations Committee and to inform it accordingly.

Secondly, the Committee notes that, in accordance with section 739 of Act No. 16736, the competence of the permanent Industrial Relations Committee is not restricted to advising on matters of wages, but also covers "advising on conditions of employment and matters covered by international labour Conventions". However, in the Committee's view, the broader statutory competence which appears to be restricted in practice to providing advice on conditions of employment and mediation is unsatisfactory.

Finally, the Committee notes that in a previous direct request it had noted that the Government had provided assurances to the effect that a number of important collective agreements had been concluded in public institutions. In this respect, the Committee requests the Government to inform it, in its next report, on the procedures which enable public employees' representatives to participate in determining the terms and conditions of employment for public employees, as well as their contents and the territorial and personal scope of the collective agreements concluded in the public administration during the period covered by the report.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1997, published 86th ILC session (1998)

The Committee notes the observation of the Confederation of Civil Servants' Organizations (COFE) relating to the application of the Convention, received in June 1997, and requests the Government to send its comments on this matter in its next report.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1994, published 81st ILC session (1994)

The Committee takes note of the information supplied by the Government in its report, and recalls that in its previous direct request it asked the Government to state:

- whether Act No. 15903 (which provides for various penalties for enterprises that infringe international labour conventions) applies to state enterprises in order to ensure adequate protection against acts of interference for organizations of public employees covered by the Convention;

- what facilities are afforded to the representatives of public employees' organizations to enable them to perform their functions;

- whether employees in state enterprises, teachers and public employees in central administration may conclude collective agreements.

In answer to the Committee's question concerning Act No. 15903, the Government indicates that the penalties provided for in the Act do not apply to the central administration, autonomous bodies or decentralized services. It adds, however, that acts of Ministers of State which are in breach of the Constitution or the law are subject to political hearings by the National Assembly and unlawful acts of directors of autonomous bodies may be examined by the Executive.

With regard to the facilities granted to representatives of public employees' organizations so that they may carry out their functions in practice, the Government states that such representatives do have ample facilities for carrying on their activities, even during working hours.

The Committee takes due note of this information.

In answer to the question whether employees of state enterprises, teachers and employees of the central administration may conclude collective agreements, the Government states that major collective agreements have been concluded in state bodies. The Committee would be grateful for detailed information on the machinery whereby representatives of public employees' organizations may take part in determining the terms and conditions of employment of public employees.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1993, published 80th ILC session (1993)

The Committee takes note of the information supplied by the Government in its first report on the Convention and, in particular, of the collective agreements concluded in the public sector.

Article 5

With regard to protection against acts of interference by a public authority, the Committee asks the Government to state whether Act No. 15903 which provides for a number of sanctions such as warnings, fines or the closure of establishments in the event of infringement of international labour Conventions, laws, decrees, resolutions, decisions or collective agreements, applies to state enterprises in order to ensure adquate protection for the public employees' organizations covered by this Convention.

Article 6

The Committee asks the Government in its future reports to provide information on the facilities afforded to the representatives of public employees' organizations, either by collective agreements or by other measures, to enable them to perform their functions in practice.

Article 7

The Committee requests the Government to indicate in its next report whether employees in state enterprises, teachers and public employees in central administration (ministries and similar institutions), can conclude collective agreements (stating the numbers and areas covered by existing agreements), or whether any other methods are provided for to allow representatives of public employees to participate in the determination of conditions of employment.