Informe en el que el Comité pide que se le mantenga informado de la evolución de la situación - Informe núm. 244, Junio 1986

1. 210. The Committee has already examined these complaints on two occasions, in November l984 (see 236th Report, paras. 603-622) and in November l985 (see 24lst Report, paras. 688-707). Since then the Government has sent its observations in a communication dated 16 April l986.
2. 211. Brazil has not ratified the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, l948 (No.087), but has ratified the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, l949 (No.098).

A. Previous examination of the case

1. 212. The complaints arose out of a labour dispute and strike which developed in l983-84 in Belgo Mineira, an iron and steel undertaking in the State of Minas Gerais, which led to the dismissal of workers and trade union leaders, the requisitioning of strikers and the recruitment of workers from outside the undertaking who were underpaid and forbidden to organise. The complaints referred in particular to the management's refusal to renew the collective agreement and its attempt to negotiate with the non-unionised workers.
2. 213. According to the complainants:
   • - in May l983 the enterprise dismissed l92 workers following the trade unions' refusal in February l983 to accept a wage cut;
   • - in June the same year the management withdrew the payment of time off for trade union leaders, a right which had been acquired more than 20 years before;
   • - the management notified the Belgo Mineira Staff Welfare Association that the enterprise intended to cease paying its contributions and cancelled the mainly administrative facilities that it had been granting the trade union since l974 to ensure the social protection of the staff, despite the fact that such protection is compulsory since the enterprise insists upon it when hiring staff;
   • - it refused to deduct trade union dues from the workers' pay as it had been doing since l95l, on the grounds that the cost of doing so would be too high;
   • - in October l983 it refused to renew the collective agreement and the trade union was obliged to call a strike. Following the court ruling on the dispute and on strike compensation, the enterprise dismissed a number of foremen and strikers;
   • - the management suspended a number of benefits that the staff had acquired and, in order to exhaust the union's financial resources, obliged it to take many cases to court;
   • - the bonus for night work was reduced and payment of the annual 2 per cent bonus was suspended;
   • - the enterprise initiated legal proceedings against the leaders of the trade union based on information published in the trade union bulletins and used absurd excuses to impose penalties on them;
3. - 246 foremen were obliged to leave the union as a result of the direct pressure brought to bear on them;
   • - union leaders Wilson Bastiere and Alipio Inacio Ferreira were dismissed from their duties;
   • - outpatient, dental, hospital and pharmaceutical assistance, normally provided by the Belgo Mineira Staff Welfare Association, was suspended;
   • - the enterprise closed certain sectors and recruited labour through subcontractors to replace its own staff;
   • - the enterprise decided unilaterally to increase its canteen prices by l,250 per cent.
4. 214. According to the Government's replies, the last of which was received on 5 December l984, the labour authorities of the State of Minas Gerais acted as mediators in the dispute. The Government declared that the right to organise and the obligation for employers to negotiate with the corresponding trade union were guaranteed by Brazilian law. It stated that no fewer than seven conciliation meetings had been held to no avail and that, as a result, legal proceedings were brought before the labour court. Furthermore, in l984 the trade union took the enterprise to court on three counts and the Government recalled that under Brazilian law trade union leaders could not be removed for any reason whatsoever.
5. 215. The complainants subsequently alleged in a communication of 6 December l984 that pressure had been brought to bear on the workers, who were called in individually by the management to sign an undertaking not to join any trade union, that the management refused to deduct union dues from the workers' pay, that a federal police superintendent had been dismissed by the Minister of Justice for daring to fine the enterprises and that "blacklists" had been circulated containing the names of workers who refused to yield to pressure by Belgo Mineira. These workers had allegedly been dismissed and prevented from finding another job. The complainants also explained that the enterprise, which had been negotiating with the complainant union for more than 30 years, had delegated its bargaining powers to the employers' associations in the iron and steel industry for the negotiation on its behalf of an agreement for this branch of activity within a global bargaining framework, including even small enterprises whose workers were negotiating for the first time; it hoped in this way to provoke a conflict between the workers of small enterprises and those of Belgo Mineira.
6. 216. The complainants also pointed out that the Minister of Labour had refused to supply them with copies of the labour inspection reports on the enterprise, although he had promised to do so at a mediation hearing on 12 July l984. The Minister had not applied the sanctions provided for under Legislative Decree No. 368/68. The enterprise was still refusing to deduct trade union dues even though required to do so by court order and the federal police had not solved the case concerning the criminal acts committed against the trade union by the management of Belgo Mineira, although the union lodged its complaint in l983.
7. 217. In November l985, the Committee on Freedom of Association regretted that, despite the time which had elapsed since the complainants' latest allegations, no written information had been received from the Government since December l984. It requested the Government to communicate the text of any judicial decisions handed down in respect of the labour dispute and to supply detailed information on developments in the dispute.

B. The Government's reply

1. 218. In its reply of 16 April l986, the Government stated that on 4 October l985 it contacted Leonardo Diniz Dias, the President of the complainant trade union, who informed it that the situation had improved but was still not altogether satisfactory. No final judgement had yet been handed down on the l983-84 and l984-85 disputes. However, with regard to the matters raised in the latest communication of the complainants, the President of the trade union observed that wages were now paid punctually and that, after two months' interruption, trade union dues were again being deducted from pay. The appropriate deductions were not, however, being made for the cost of pharmaceuticals, ambulances, funeral services and other welfare facilities. According to the President, the situation with respect to the criminal acts against the trade union was unchanged and no federal police file had been opened on the subject.
2. 219. On the basis of available information and documents, the Government considers that a copy of the labour inspection report should be communicated to the trade union so that it can, if necessary, take appropriate action to defend the interests of its members and of non-members. It states, however, that Legislative Decree No. 368 of 19 December l968 is not applicable as there has been no delay in the payment of wages. According to the Government, the enterprise decided unilaterally to reduce the working day and cut payment for overtime accordingly, from 40 to 37.5 per cent; it also stopped paying overtime for night work. However, there has been no holding back of wages which continue to be paid punctually, thereby rendering the said Legislative Decree inapplicable in the view of the Government.
3. 220. The Government notes further that after two months' interruption union dues are being deducted from pay regularly. The deductions that the enterprise is refusing to make correspond to the cost of benefits which the trade union pays directly or makes available to its members. With regard to the union President's statement that he has taken the case to court, the Government states that the matter has been settled inasmuch as the decision now lies with the judiciary. With respect to the criminal acts committed against the trade union by the management of Belgo Mineira, the Government encloses a copy of a letter of October l983 sent by the regional labour delegate of Minas Gerais to the regional labour court and regional prosecutor of Minas Gerais following the trade union's denunciation of criminal acts. It does not, however, comment on the matter.

C. The Committee's conclusions

1. 221. The Committee observes that the Government has endeavoured to obtain information from the President of the trade union on developments in this labour dispute. The Government does not, on the other hand, appear to have contacted the employer directly with a view to resolving the issue once and for all.
2. 222. The Committee notes, nevertheless, that the workers' wages are now being paid on time and that, after two months' interruption, union dues are again being deducted from pay.
3. 223. The Committee also observes that a number of appeals are still sub judice.
4. 224. The Committee draws the Government's attention to the need to ensure workers and trade union leaders adequate protection against acts of anti-union discrimination and, in particular, to ascertain that no worker or foreman has had to leave the union as a result of direct pressure.
5. 225. The Committee recalls in particular the very great importance that it attaches to the right to strike as a legitimate means of defending the workers' interests.
6. 226. The Committee requests the Government to ensure that there will be no violations of trade union rights during the labour dispute in the Belgo Mineira company.
7. 227. The Committee requests the Government to continue to keep it informed of the outcome of the appeals that have been brought before the courts and of developments in this labour dispute.