Solicitud directa (CEACR) - Adopción: 2013, Publicación: 103ª reunión CIT (2014)

Convenio sobre la libertad sindical y la protección del derecho de sindicación, 1948 (núm. 87) - Bahamas (Ratificación : 2001)

Otros comentarios sobre C087

Observación

Solicitud directa

Visualizar en: Francés - EspañolVisualizar todo

The Committee notes that the Government indicates in its report that no changes in respect of the application of the Convention have occurred and that the requested information is not currently available. In this respect, the Committee hopes that the Government’s next report will contain full information on the following matters raised that it is bound to reiterate based on its previous comments.

Article 3 of the Convention. Freedom to elect representatives. The Committee notes that the constitution of every trade union should provide that executive committees and officers of trade unions should be elected at intervals not exceeding three years (section 9(4)(1) of Schedule I). The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether this section implies that trade union officers cannot be re-elected for a consecutive term.

Right of organizations freely to organize their activities and to formulate their programmes. The Committee notes that section 20(3) of the Industrial Relations Act (IRA) requires a strike ballot to be taken under supervision by an officer of the ministry. If this section is not complied with, a strike is unlawful. The Committee considers that, with a view to ensuring freedom from any influence or pressure by the authorities which might affect the exercise of the right to strike in practice, the legislation should not provide for supervision of a ballot by the authorities. The Committee requests the Government to amend section 20(3) according to the above principle and to indicate any measures taken or envisaged in this respect.

The Committee notes that, under the terms of section 73 of the IRA, the minister shall refer a dispute to the tribunal if the parties to the dispute, within non-essential services, failed to reach a settlement. It is unlawful to have recourse to strike action once the dispute is referred to the tribunal (section 77(1) of the IRA). Furthermore, according to section 76(1) of the IRA, a strike which, in the opinion of the minister, affects or threatens the public interest, might be referred to the tribunal for settlement. The Committee recalls that compulsory arbitration to end a collective labour dispute and a strike is acceptable only if it is at the request of both parties involved in a dispute, or if the strike in question may be restricted, even banned, that is in the case of a dispute in the public service involving public servants exercising authority in the name of the State, in the event of an acute national or local crisis, or in essential services in the strict sense of the term, namely those services whose interruption would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population. The Committee therefore requests the Government to take the necessary measures to amend its legislation so as to bring it into conformity with the Convention and to indicate any measures taken or envisaged in this respect.

The Committee notes that section 75 of the IRA provides that any strike is illegal if it: (i) has any object other than or in addition to the furtherance of a trade dispute within the trade or industry in which the strikers are engaged; or (ii) is a strike designed or calculated to coerce the Government either directly or by inflicting hardship upon the community. In this respect, the Committee requests the Government to indicate if workers’ organizations are able to use strike action to support their position in the search for solutions to problems posed by major social and economic policy trends which have a direct impact on their members and on workers in general, in particular as regards employment, social protection and the standard of living.

The Committee notes that, when a strike is organized or continued in violation of the abovementioned provisions, excessive sanctions, including imprisonment for up to two years are provided (sections 74(3), 75(3), 76(2)(b) and 77(2) of the IRA). The Committee recalls that no penal sanction should be imposed against a worker for having carried out a peaceful strike and therefore measures of imprisonment should not be imposed on any account. Such sanctions could be envisaged only where during a strike, violence against persons or property or other serious infringements of rights have been committed, and can be imposed pursuant to legislation punishing such acts. Nevertheless, even in the absence of violence, if the strike modalities had the effect of making the strike illegitimate, proportionate disciplinary sanctions may be imposed against strikers. Therefore, the Committee requests the Government to amend the abovementioned sections of the IRA so as to bring it into conformity with freedom of association principles on this point.