Effect given to the recommendations of the committee and the Governing Body - Report No 346, June 2007

Effect given to the recommendations of the Committee and the Governing Body

1. 147. The Committee last examined this case at its June 2005 meeting, when it made the following recommendations [see 337th Report, paras 1124–1136]:
   • (a) The Committee requests the Government, in consultation with the employers’ and workers’ organizations concerned, to take the necessary measures so as to avoid obstacles to the establishment of trade unions in the public sector and to keep it informed in this regard.
   • (b) The Committee requests the Government to take steps to ensure that health and social security authorities comply with the criteria laid down in respect of the deduction of trade union dues from wages and to keep it informed of all measures taken in this respect.
2. 148. In a communication dated 25 October 2006 the Government recalls that the National Trade Union of Social Security Workers (SINACUT ESSALUD) has been on the register of trade union organizations of public officials since 2 July 2004 and that there is no justification for its non-recognition by the social security institution, ESSALUD. It adds that on 18 April 2005 SINACUT filed proceedings for the protection of its constitutional rights so as to oblige ESSALUD to grant it unrestricted enjoyment of its constitutional right to freedom of association, to bargain collectively and to strike. The proceedings were finally resolved by the Constitutional Court in a 19 April 2006 ruling, declaring the complaint to be inadmissible on the grounds that article VII of the Preliminary Title and article 5, paragraph 2, of the Constitutional Procedural Code provided for a specific procedure which is equally satisfactory as a means of protecting a constitutional right that has supposedly been infringed. Consequently, because the matter in dispute comes under the country’s labour legislation, it will have to follow the procedure for administrative disputes. The Government states further that it has not been proved that the right to freedom of association, to bargain collectively or to strike has been infringed. Should ESSALUD persist in its refusal to recognize the trade union, SINACUT is clearly entitled to have recourse to the proper channels. The Committee takes note of this information, invites the Government to consider, together with ESSALUD, the effective recognition of SINACUT and requests the Government to inform it of the final outcome of any case brought before the administrative disputes authority by the organization with respect to its recognition by ESSALUD.
3. 149. The Government states that: (1) with regard to the requirements imposed on SINACUT by ESSALUD before it will deduct union dues from union members’ wages, ESSALUD claims that the presentation of a magnetic support containing a list of members of the trade union is necessary for the data to be entered into company payroll more quickly; the labour administration considers that this practice can constitute a burden that a trade union is not necessarily in a position to assume and that, consequently, in the absence of an agreement, it is for the employer to provide the necessary material and human resources for the data to be entered as efficiently as possible; (2) with regard to the requirement that SINACUT present a membership card and national identity document with each request for the deduction of union dues, ESSALUD states that, although it has the files of all the workers, there have been many instances where their signatures had been forged, to their cost, and it is impossible month after month to go through the files of every worker who authorizes the deduction of union dues just to check his or her ID; the labour administration considers that the point raised by ESSALUD is valid, since the purpose of this requirement is to protect the union dues, which is in the workers’ interests; and (3) with regard to the requirement that workers submit a letter of resignation from the union in order to suspend the deduction of union dues, ESSALUD states that this requirement has been dropped and that in many cases deductions are now being stopped simply at the worker’s request. The Government observes that the foregoing information demonstrates ESSALUD’s willingness to remove some of the requirements imposed and explains why others, in the employer’s opinion, are justified. The Committee takes note of this information and recalls that, on examining this case in June 2005, it considered that, when deducting trade union dues from wages, ESSALUD should restrict itself to requesting evidence of new affiliations or resignations of members.