All Comments

Home Page | Français | Español |

ILO is a United Nations Agency

RSS Feed | Newsroom | Contact us

NORMLEX

Information System on International Labour Standards

Instruments
Key documents
Ratification of ILO Conventions
Supervising the application of International Labour Standards: Supervision by country; Search comments by the supervisory bodies; Complaint procedures; Freedom of association cases; Representations (Art. 24); Commission of Inquiry (Art. 26)
Regular reporting
Country profiles
Comparatives
Maritime Labour Convention (2006)

MLC, 2006

NATLEX *new look*
National Legislation on Labour and Social Rights

LEGOSH
Global database on occupational safety and health legislation

EPLex
Employment protection legislation database

Compendium of court decisions

NORMLEX Home > Country profiles > > Comments > All Comments

Labour Relations (Public Service) Convention, 1978 (No. 151) - Colombia (Ratification: 2000)

Display in: French - Spanish

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2023, published 112nd ILC session (2024)

Previous comments: observation and direct request

The Committee takes note of the joint observations of the Confederation of Workers of Colombia (CTC), the General Confederation of Labour (CGT) and the Single Confederation of Workers of Colombia (CUT) and of the observations of the National Employers’ Association of Colombia (ANDI) received on 1 September 2023. These two observations relate to matters examined by the Committee in this comment.

Articles 1 and 4. Protection of precarious public service workers against anti-union discrimination. In its previous comments, the Committee noted the allegations of the central trade union bodies that many public service workers employed under service contracts do not benefit adequate protection against anti-union discrimination. The Committee takes note of the various initiatives described by the Government aimed at formalising precarious staff in the public administration, including, inter alia, the Plan for the Formalisation of Work in the Public Administration with Equity. The Committee also notes that the trade union centres, while recognising the efforts under way, indicate that the fraudulent use of service contracts has not disappeared and call for tighter controls and more information on the results of the formalisation policy. While taking due note of the actions under way to formalise public service personnel and recalling the broad scope of the Convention, the Committee requests the Government to ensure that workers linked to the public service by service contracts benefit effective protection against possible acts of anti-union discrimination. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information in this regard.

Article 6. Facilities to be granted to civil servants’ organizations. The Committee recalls that it had noted that article 416-A of the Labour Code, while recognising that the trade union organizations of civil servants have the right to be granted trade union leave by public entities, also indicates that the national Government regulates the matter, in consultation with the representatives of the trade union confederations. The Committee notes with satisfaction that the Government and the trade union confederations indicate that: (i) trade union leave for public employees was regulated by Decree No. 344 of 2021, resulting from collective bargaining in the public sector; (ii) as part of the collective bargaining in the public sector that led to the signing of the State Agreement of June 2023, circulars were issued to guarantee trade union leave in order to ensure the presence of representatives of trade union organizations at both central and sectoral negotiating tables ; and (iii) in accordance with what was agreed in the above-mentioned State Agreement, the Government undertakes to amend Decree No. 344 of 2021 concerning trade union leave for public sector employees, in order to continue to strengthen trade union guarantees for workers in the sector. The Committee invites the Government to provide information on any developments in this regard.

Article 7. Procedures for determining terms and conditions of employment. The Committee refers to its comments concerning the application of the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98), and the Collective Bargaining Convention, 1981 (No. 154).

Article 8. Settlement of disputes. The Committee had asked the Government to consider improving the existing mediation mechanisms and to indicate whether there is the legal possibility and the necessary mechanisms to have recourse to arbitration when, by mutual agreement, the two parties to the negotiation on the terms and conditions of employment of public employees so wish. The Committee notes that the Government indicates that: (i) there is currently no legal possibility of recourse to arbitration tribunals to settle labour disputes between public employees and State entities; (ii) however, Decree No. 160 of 2014 establishes mediation as a mechanism for settlement between the parties after the exhaustion of collective bargaining and its successive extensions.

The Committee further notes that the central unions state that: (i) mediation has not been used much in almost a decade of collective bargaining practice in the public administration, which may indicate that there are limits to the perception of its usefulness or effectiveness; and (ii) it is therefore necessary to take measures to strengthen the effectiveness of the mediation mechanism or, failing that, to incorporate the possibility for the parties to have recourse to arbitration.

The Committee requests the Government, in consultation with the workers’ representative organizations, to take the necessary measures to improve the effectiveness of the mechanisms for settling collective disputes in the public administration. The Committee also requests the Government to provide information on the number, duration and results of mediation processes in collective bargaining in the public sector.

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

Articles 1 and 4 of the Convention. Application of the Convention to precarious workers in the public administration and their protection against anti-union discrimination. The Single Confederation of Workers (CUT) indicated in observations in 2011 and 2014 that many precarious public employees (workers engaged under service contracts, workers subcontracted through temporary work agencies or “trade union contracts”) are not able to benefit from trade union rights due to the fear that their contracts will not be renewed in the event of membership of a union and because of the absence of adequate measures to protect against anti-union discrimination. In particular, the CUT indicates that service contracts are reported to be broadly used to cover permanent jobs in the public administration, particularly in regional entities where, as indicated in official documents, the number of “service providers” exceeds the number of employees.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that administrative service contracts do not constitute an employment relationship and that trade union rights are not therefore applicable to such contracts. While recalling that it has already indicated its views, in the context of the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), on the right to trade union membership of workers covered by service contracts, the Committee recalls that, under the terms of Article 1 of the Convention, with the exceptions explicitly envisaged in paragraphs 2 and 3, the rights and guarantees of the Convention are applicable to all persons employed by public authorities. In this regard, the Committee notes the information provided by the Government concerning its labour formalization policy and its results. The Committee also notes that labour formalization in the public sector forms part of the working agenda of the Sectoral Committee for the Public Sector of the Standing Committee for Dialogue on Wage and Labour Policies. Under these conditions, the Committee trusts that the concerns expressed by the CUT will be examined by the Standing Committee for Dialogue on Wage and Labour Policies, together with the adoption of measures to prevent and punish acts of anti-union discrimination against precarious workers in the public sector, and that this examination will lead to the adoption of the corresponding improvements. The Committee requests the Government to report any developments in this regard.

Article 6. Facilities to be afforded to public employees’ organizations. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to indicate the applicable facilities under the terms of the law and whether facilities have been established for public employees’ organizations through collective agreements, and to provide specific examples. The Committee notes that the Government has provided copies of some specific clauses in collective agreements concerning trade union leave. The Committee also notes the following indications by the Government: (i) section 416-A of the Substantive Labour Code respecting trade union leave is applicable to members of the trade union organizations of public servants; and (ii) Decree No. 160 of 2004 provides guarantees for trade union leave for public servants during the negotiation of claims.

The Committee notes that section 416-A of the Substantive Labour Code, while recognizing the right of trade union organizations of public servants to be granted trade union leave by public entities, also provides that the national Government shall regulate this subject, in consultation with the representatives of trade union confederations. The Committee also notes that the provisions of Decree No. 160 of 2014 respecting trade union leave are confined to participation in the negotiation of claims. The Committee requests the Government to submit these issues to tripartite dialogue, report on any developments in the regulations applicable to the facilities that are to be afforded to public employees’ organizations (both trade union leave and other types of facilities) and to continue providing specific examples of the inclusion of clauses of this type in collective agreements.

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

The Committee notes the observations of the Union of Cali Municipal Enterprises Workers (SINTRAEMCALI), the General Confederation of Labour (CGT), the Confederation of Workers of Colombia (CTC) and the Single Confederation of Workers of Colombia (CUT), received between 4 June and 1 September 2014, which refer to matters already under examination by the Committee. The Committee notes the Government’s reply to the observations of SINTRAEMCALI of 2014 and those of the CUT of 2011.

Article 7 of the Convention. Participation of public employees’ organizations in the determination of their terms and conditions of employment. In its comments last year on the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98), the Committee noted the adoption of Decree No. 1092, of 24 May 2012, and the conclusion by the national Government and the trade union confederations CUT, CGT and CTC and other organizations representing State employees of the National Collective Accord of 16 May 2013. The Committee also noted that it had been agreed to examine the amendment of Decree No. 1092, the content of which had been criticized by some national workers’ organizations. The Committee notes with interest the adoption, following a process of dialogue with the trade union confederations, of Decree No. 160, of 5 February 2014, which repeals Decree No. 1092, with a view to improving and unifying bargaining in establishments in which there are various trade unions. The Committee notes that the various trade union organizations which provided observations concerning the application of the Convention, notwithstanding the shortcomings identified by some of them, agree in considering that Decree No. 160 constitutes progress in relation to the previous legislation. The Committee notes in particular that, in contrast with Decree No. 1092, Decree No. 160 explicitly provides that: (i) wages can be the subject not only of dialogue, but also of bargaining; (ii) relations between public entities and trade unions of public employees are a subject for negotiation; (iii) the necessary information on the subjects covered by bargaining will be provided to the parties; and (iv) the bargaining process formally concludes with the signature of a collective agreement. The Committee also notes that Decree No. 160 continues to exclude pension from the scope of both bargaining and dialogue. The Committee is addressing this issue in the context of its examination of the application of the Collective Bargaining Convention, 1981 (No. 154).

The Committee also notes with interest the Government’s indications to the effect that: (i) further to the National Collective Agreement, in 2013 in the public administration, 300 sets of claims were negotiated, giving rise to a total of 236 agreements; (ii) Decision No. 2143, of 28 May 2014, entrusts the territorial directorates of the Ministry of Labour with responsibility for promoting and guaranteeing collective bargaining in the public sector; (iii) within the framework of the Sectoral Committee for the Public Sector of the Standing Committee for Dialogue on Wage and Labour Policies, the State and the trade union organizations of public employees are discussing, based on an agreed agenda, a broad range of subjects relating to the economic and social interests of public employees; and (iv) within this framework, agreement was reached on the revision of the General Budget of the Nation with a view to the wage increase for 2015.

Article 8. Machinery for the settlement of disputes arising in connection with the determination of terms and conditions of employment. The Committee notes the indication by the CUT, CTC and CGT that the collective bargaining machinery applicable to public employees lacks effective dispute settlement machinery as, on the one hand, Decree No. 160 does not provide for recourse to arbitration and, on the other, there are neither the financial resources nor the personnel to conduct effectively the mediation process envisaged by the Decree. The Committee requests the Government to consider, within the framework of social dialogue with the most representative workers’ organizations in the public sector, the improvement of existing mediation machinery, and to report any developments in this respect. The Committee also requests the Government to indicate whether the possibility exists in law, and whether the machinery exists to have recourse to arbitration when, by common agreement, both parties engaged in the negotiation of the terms and conditions of employment of public employees so wish.

The Committee is raising other matters in a request addressed directly to the Government.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2011, published 101st ILC session (2012)

The Committee notes the comments of 30 August 2011 from the Single Confederation of Workers (CUT) and the Confederation of Workers of Colombia (CTC). Its asks the Government to send its observations thereon.

The Committee also takes note of earlier comments made by the National Federation of State Service Workers (FENALTRASE–CUT), the National Federation of Public Servants (FENASER–CTC), the National Union of State and Public Service Workers (UNETE–CGT), the National Union of State and Public Service Workers of Colombia (UTRADEC–CGT), the CUT and the Coordinator of Andean Trade Union Confederations (CCSA). The Committee is addressing the main issues raised by these organizations in its comments on the application of the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).

Lastly, the Committee once again asks the Government to provide in its next report information of the following matters:

-the facilities to be afforded to representatives of recognized public employees’ organizations to enable them to carry out their functions properly and efficiently, both during and outside their hours of work. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the facilities to be applied under the legislation and to state whether any facilities have been established under collective agreements, providing examples (Article 6 of the Convention);
-the independent and impartial machinery established for the settlement of disputes arising in connection with the determination of terms and conditions of employment in the context of the process of collective bargaining (Article 8);
-its observations on the comments of 3 April 2006 from the Trade Union of Public Officials of the “University Hospital of Valle” (SINSPUBLIC), and the CUT’s comments of 4 April 2006, to the effect that Act No. 909 of 2004 and its implementing decrees, promulgated without consulting employers’ and workers’ organizations, require public sector workers to sit further competitions in order to be confirmed in their posts, in breach of the collective agreement concluded by SINSPUBLIC and the hospital administration.

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

The Committee notes the comments made by the National Association of Telephone, Communication and Allied Technicians (ATELCA) and the Government’s reply. The Committee is examining these comments in the context of its examination of the application of the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).

In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to provide its observations concerning the comments made by the Union of Public Officials of the University Hospital of Valle (SINSPUBLIC), of 3 April 2006, and the Single Confederation of Workers (CUT), of 4 April 2006, according to which Act No. 909 of 2004 and its implementing regulations, enacted without prior consultation with trade union organizations, compel workers in the public sector to undergo once again merit competitions in order to be confirmed in their posts, in violation of the collective agreement concluded between SINSPUBLIC and the hospital administration. The Committee reiterates its request.

Article 4 of the Convention. The Committee welcomes the adoption of Act No. 1309 of 2009 (respecting conduct that may be punished which is prejudicial to the legally protected property of the members of a legally recognized trade union organization) which provides that any person who prevents or disturbs a lawful meeting or the exercise of the rights afforded by labour laws or engages in reprisals by reason of a lawful strike, meeting or association, shall be liable to a fine of from 100 to 300 minimum monthly wages as set out in the law or to imprisonment.

Article 7. The Committee is examining Decree No. 535, of 24 February 2009, on collective bargaining in the public sector, in the context of its examination of the application of Convention No. 98.

Furthermore, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the application of the Convention in practice and to provide information on the following matters:

– the facilities to be afforded to representatives of recognized public employees’ organizations in order to enable them to carry out their functions promptly and efficiently, both during and outside their hours of work. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the facilities applicable under the legislation and whether facilities have been established through collective agreements, and to provide examples (Article 6 of the Convention).

– the independent and impartial machinery established for the settlement of disputes arising in connection with the determination of terms and conditions of employment in the context of the process of collective bargaining (Article 8 of the Convention).

Finally, the Committee notes the Government’s indication concerning the adoption of Decree No. 3399, of 8 September 2009, modifying the composition of the Inter-sectoral Commission to Promote the Formalization of Decent Work in the Public Sector, which will include the Minister of Social Protection, the Minister of Finance and Public Credit, the Director of the National Planning Department, the Director of the Administrative Department of the Public Service (and in which the Superintendent of the Solidarity Economy and a delegate of each of the public sector federations, designated by workers’ confederations, will have the status of permanent invited participants).

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2006, published 96th ILC session (2007)

The Committee notes the comments of the Union of Public Officials of the University Hospital of Valle (SINSPUBLIC), of 3 April 2006, and the Single Confederation of Workers (CUT), of 4 April 2006, according to which Act No. 909 of 2004 and its implementing regulations, enacted without prior consultation with trade union organizations, compel workers in the public sector to undergo once again merit competitions in order to be confirmed in their posts, in violation of the collective agreement concluded between SINSPUBLIC and the hospital administration. The Committee requests the Government to provide its observations on this subject.

The Committee also notes the joint comments made by CUT, the General Confederation of Labour (CGT), the Confederation of Workers of Colombia (CTC) and the Confederation of Pensioners of Colombia (CPC), dated 16 June 2006, according to which section 416 of the Substantive Labour Code does not allow trade unions of public employees to engage in collective bargaining. In this respect, the Committee refers to its comments on the application of Convention No. 154.

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

The Committee notes the Government’s report.

In its previous comments, the Committee referred to the denial of the right to collective bargaining of public employees. In this regard, the Committee refers to its comments on the application of Conventions Nos. 98 and 154.

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

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not yet been received, nor has its reply to the comments of the Confederation of Workers of Colombia (CTC) to the effect that the right to collective bargaining of public employees has been denied by a decision of June 2001 issued by the Supreme Court of Justice. The Committee requests the Government to send a detailed report based on the report form for the Convention approved by the Governing Body, together with relevant legislation.

The Committee notes the communication of 29 August 2003 from the World Confederation of Labour (WCL) on the application of the Convention, raising the same issue as the CTC. The Committee addresses this matter in its observation on the application of Convention No. 98.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2002, published 91st ILC session (2003)

The Committee notes the Government’s first report. In this respect, the Committee observes that it is an incomplete report and therefore requests the Government to provide a new detailed report based on the relevant report form approved by the Governing Body, with copies of the relevant legislation in force.

The Committee also notes the observation dated 21 June 2002 of the Confederation of Workers of Colombia (CTC) on the application of the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments in this respect with its next report, as regards the application of the Convention.