Informe definitivo - Informe núm. 275, Noviembre 1990

1. 29. The Committee examined this case at its February 1990 meeting and submitted an interim report to the Governing Body (see 270th Report of the Committee, paras. 268-286, approved by the Governing Body at its 245th Session (February-March 1990)). The Government subsequently sent new observations in a communication dated 29 May 1990.
2. 30. Guatemala has ratified both the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87) and the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).

A. Previous examination of the case

1. 31. When the Committee examined this case at its February 1990 meeting, certain matters remained pending concerning acts of anti-trade union discrimination and interference by the Banque d'Occident to the detriment of the members of the Private Employees' Trade Union of the Republic of Guatemala (SEP), and the development of industrial relations in the bank.
2. 32. Specifically, the complainant organisation had alleged that between 1978-84, the Banque d'Occident had threatened and slandered SEP officials, had pressured trade union members in different ways to relinquish membership of the trade union and had made the hiring of workers subject to the condition that they not join the trade union. According to the complainant, measures taken by the employer during 1986-87 led to a 50 per cent reduction in the number of workers belonging to the trade union, thus weakening the trade union to such an extent that it is experiencing the greatest difficulties, owing to the small number of its members, in negotiating a new collective agreement.
3. 33. The Government in its reply had pointed out that the reduction in the number of members of the Private Employees' Trade Union (SEP) could not be ascribed to repression but to the creation of the Bank and Insurance Employees' Trade Union Federation (FSEBS) which brings together the trade unions of almost all banks in the country. In the same way, the Ministry of Labour and Social Welfare has not received any complaint from the Private Employees' Trade Union of the Republic of Guatemala against the Banque d'Occident alleging violation of the Constitution, the Labour Code, or the collective agreement regarding conditions of work signed by the parties or any labour regulations. Nevertheless, owing to the unique nature of the case, in the sense that the complaint was received through international channels and not through internal channels, the Ministry of Labour and Social Welfare had instructed the General Inspectorate of Labour to investigate the complaint submmitted by the Private Employees' Trade Union so as to verify in situ the veracity of the denunciations and take the pertinent legal measures.
4. 34. The Committee asked the Government to send detailed observations on the complainant's allegations that the employer had tried, by various forms of pressure, to force workers to withdraw from the trade union or to prevent the hiring of unionised workers; the Committee also asked the Government to send the results of the labour inspection investigation into the matter and to keep it informed of developments in industrial relations within the Banque d'Occident and, in particular, to advise whether a collective agreement had been negotiated.

B. The Government's reply

1. 35. In its communication of 29 May 1990, the Government states that the Secretary-General of the Private Employees' Trade Union of the Banque d'Occident, when a meeting was proposed with the General Inspectorate of Labour, said "that they did not want the General Inspectorate of Labour to intervene since it was a matter which did not fall within the competence of the labour inspectors because they lacked the capacity and skills to deal with this kind of matter; and that it was a political matter". Furthermore, to date no complaint has been made to the General Inspectorate of Labour alleging violation of the Constitution, the Labour Code, the international Conventions ratified by Guatemala or any other labour regulations. The Government adds that on 1 January 1988 a collective agreement came into force between the Private Employees' Trade Union and the Banque d'Occident for a period of three years. Finally, the Government emphasises that the complaint of the complainant organisation concerns accusations against the above-mentioned Bank and not the Government.

C. The Committee's conclusions

1. 36. The Committee notes that in reply to its request for information, the Government has stated that in January 1988, the complainant trade union and the Banque d'Occident signed a collective agreement which will remain in force for three years. Furthermore, as regards the allegations concerning anti-trade union acts of interference and discrimination by the Banque d'Occident, the Committee notes the statements by the Government that the Secretary-General of the complainant trade union declined to accept the meeting proposed by the Labour Inspectorate precisely to examine the veracity of the allegations contained in the complaint before the Committee and adopt the corresponding legal measures. The Committee also observes that the allegations in question refer to the periods 1978-84 and 1986-87 and that they were couched in very general terms, without referring in particular to specific dates or giving the names of persons who had been supposedly victimised. Thus bearing in mind that the complainant organisation has not sent any new comments and allegations on these matters, the Committee considers that this case does not call for further examination.