Informe provisional - Informe núm. 118, 1970

1. 181. The Committee examined this case at its meeting in November 1969, when it submitted an interim report to the Governing Body which appeared in paragraphs 142 to 162 of its 114th Report, approved by the Governing Body at its 177th Session (November 1969).
2. 182. The complaints are contained in a communication sent to the ILO by the Bolivian National Trade Union Committee for the Defence of Workers' Rights on 1 October 1968 and in a communication sent to the ILO on 7 February 1969 by the Confederation of American Teachers.
3. 183. When the Committee examined the case in November 1969 it had received the preliminary observations of the Government in respect of the first of the two complaints, but not in respect of the second. In these circumstances the Committee had recommended in paragraph 162 of its 114th Report that the Government forward its detailed comments on the substance of both the complaints.
4. 184. By a communication dated 16 March 1969 the Government forwarded its observations on the complaint submitted by the Confederation of American Teachers. To date, however, the Government has not forwarded the detailed comments requested by the Committee in its 114th Report on the complaint submitted by the Bolivian National Trade Union Committee for the Defence of Workers' Rights.
5. 185. Bolivia has ratified the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), but has not ratified the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).

A. A. The complainants' allegations

1. 186. In its complaint dated 7 February 1969 the Confederation of American Teachers says that: " the deplorable financial circumstances of Bolivian teachers are at the root of the protest movement in which the majority of the country's teachers have taken part." Instead of meeting the teachers' legitimate demands for salary increases and improving their conditions of work, the Government, it is alleged, has ordered the dismissal of 25,000 teachers. It is further alleged that a Supreme Council for Education was set up, which reports directly to the President and " with which the teachers are obliged to re-register without their union being able to intervene in any way." According to the complaint, this was a requirement imposed upon the dismissed teachers if they wished to have a chance to work the following year.
2. 187. It is alleged that the Government of Bolivia took a series of repressive measures against the leaders of the teachers' unions. The complainants state that the General Secretary of the National Federation of Urban Schoolmasters, Mr. R. Dávila Morales, and the Press Secretary of this Federation, Mr. A. Quiroz Elguera, were expelled from the country.
3. 188. The Confederation of American Teachers, which has stated that it has affiliated organisations in Bolivia (the National Educational Workers' Confederation and the Departmental Schoolteachers' Federation of La Paz), considers that the Government has infringed the provisions of Conventions Nos. 87 and 98. It hopes that ILO intervention will induce the authorities to quash the order for the dismissal of 25,000 teachers, to restore the right to bargain collectively and to put an end to " the persecution of leaders of teachers' unions officially recognised by the administrative authorities of Bolivia."
4. 189. In its communication of 16 March 1970 the Government draws attention to Bolivia's present economic situation, which, it claims, made it impossible for it to accede to the teachers' demands for higher wages without causing hardship to other classes of workers and damaging the economy as a whole.
5. 190. The Government points out, moreover, that, despite the fact that the teachers had disrupted the educational process by encouraging their pupils to stage solidarity strikes and practise prolonged absenteeism, it had displayed boundless patience in a situation of considerable gravity. However, when, as a result of a mass demonstration in support of the Government's refusal to accede to the teachers' demands, the people expressed their desire for the dismissal of all the teachers, it was decreed that the school year should end forthwith and the teachers be dismissed.
6. 191. The Government further states that during the school holidays the recently created National Council for Education was able to carry out the arduous task of rationalisation by means of a code of standards and decisions which settled the education problem to the satisfaction of the majority of urban and rural schoolteachers, the heads of families and the population in general.
7. 192. The Government concludes its observations by denying the allegations relating to the deportation and persecution of teachers. According to the Government certain teachers had chosen voluntary exile whereas others had considered themselves persecuted by the security services either when they found that their political resistance to the Government and the decrees issued by the National Council for Education had been a complete failure, or possibly when each of them realised the extent of his own share in the blame.
8. 193. In the light of the above information it would appear that, having put forward a certain number of claims which were not met by the Government, the teachers encouraged the pupils to stage solidarity strikes in their support. It was then that the Government decided to dismiss the teachers and to take certain measures to resolve the education problem. As a result of these measures the teachers were obliged to re-register with the authorities if they wished to be reinstated and it seems that most of them were, in fact, re-employed for the following school year. According to the Government, no teachers have been persecuted or deported.

B. B. The Committee's conclusions

1. 194. The Committee notes the complainant's request that the right to engage in collective bargaining be restored to the teachers. In the light of the principles contained in Convention No. 98, the Committee would like to draw attention to the desirability of promoting voluntary collective bargaining, according to national conditions, with a view to the regulation of terms and conditions of employment. If the parties cannot come to any agreement during this procedure and if the right to strike is denied to certain categories of workers (as it is in Bolivia to public servants), the Committee has always considered that adequate guarantees should be afforded to the workers concerned in order fully to safeguard their interests, such as adequate, impartial and rapid conciliation and arbitration proceedings in which those concerned may participate at all stages. The Committee is of the opinion that had these procedures been followed in the present case the consequences of the dispute arising out of the teachers' claims might have been avoided or, at least, considerably attenuated.