Seguimiento dado a las recomendaciones del Comité y del Consejo de Administración - Informe núm. 338, Noviembre 2005

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

1. 87. The Committee has examined this case, which concerns the dismissal of trade union leaders and workers for organizing a strike in 1993 at Medellín Municipal Enterprises on two occasions [see 309th Report, paras. 92-105, and 313th Report, paras. 19-26]. The Committee urged the Government to take all necessary measures to reinstate in their posts the trade union leaders, members and workers who had been dismissed for participating in a strike at the undertaking in 1993 (specifically in the refuse collection sector), or, if that were not possible, to ensure that they received full compensation. Similarly, the Committee requested the Government to take measures to ensure that in future, declarations on the legal status of strikes would be made by an independent body and not by the administrative authority, and that amendments would be made to the provisions of the Substantive Labour Code which prohibit strikes in a wide range of services which cannot be considered to be essential services in the strict sense of the term.
2. 88. In a communication of June 2004, the complainant organization states that Medellín Municipal Enterprises are partially complying with the recommendations of the Committee on Freedom of Association and the ruling of the constitutional court, indicating that: 161 workers were reinstated from 27 December 1991 onwards; seven died during the period between their dismissal and the date on which their reinstatement took effect; five were retired by the company during the period between their dismissal and reinstatement; two expressly and voluntarily waived their entitlement to reinstatement; one was reinstated in the company by a judicial ruling of 13 May 1997; and 29 workers were not reinstated on the grounds that their jobs pertained to agricultural management, which did not match the social purposes of the company.
3. 89. In a communication of 15 April 2005, the Government indicates that the constitutional court’s protection ruling (sentencia de tutela) No. 568 of 1999 contains the following in section 2 of its decision clause:
   • Medellín Municipal Enterprises [are ordered] within three months following notification of this review to reinstate the 209 workers dismissed in connection with the events that led to these proceedings, and to acknowledge the arrears of wages and benefits owed to them, on the understanding that they have not been in continuous employment with the company. In the event that it is not possible to reinstate any one of the workers concerned, provided that this is confirmed by the Antioquía Administrative Court, the corporation shall determine the compensation which Medellín Municipal Enterprises shall be required to pay to workers who do not resume their former post for said reason.
   • The Government states that the company complied with this ruling. As regards the specific case of the 29 workers employed in agricultural services, it compensated them, which is in accordance with the decision clause of the court ruling. The trade union organization alleged two cases of contempt, but it was found that the company had not failed to comply with any judicial ruling. Reinstatement of the workers engaged in agricultural services was physically and legally impossible, given that under the terms of Act No. 142, the Medellín Municipal Council in Agreement No. 0198 of 1998 transformed Medellín Municipal Enterprises into a state industrial and commercial undertaking under municipal authority with the sole aim of providing public cleansing and related services, which does not cover agricultural services.
4. 90. The Committee takes note of this information.