Informe definitivo - Informe núm. 310, Junio 1998

1. 508. The complaint is contained in a communication from the Latin American Central of Workers (CLAT) of 1 July 1997.
2. 509. The Government sent its observations in communications dated 30 September 1997 and 17 February 1998.
3. 510. Panama has ratified 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. The complainant's allegations

1. 511. In its communication of 1 July 1997, the Latin American Central of Workers (CLAT) alleges that, at the end of June 1997, 107 trade union leaders in the education sector and five teachers at the Isabel Herrera Obaldío School were dismissed in contravention of ILO Convention No. 98 following a six-day strike in that sector, although the right of public servants to strike is guaranteed under Panamanian law. The CLAT explains that the decision to strike followed the presentation to the Legislature of draft Education Act No. 98 on which there was no consultation and which undermines teachers' living conditions (by decentralizing the education system, reducing holidays and abolishing the Staff Council).

B. The Government's reply

1. 512. In its communications of 30 September 1997 and 17 February 1998, the Government states that the dispute in the education sector was resolved by an agreement dated 29 July 1997 between representatives of the teaching unions and the Ministries of the Presidency and Education. The Government attaches the text of this agreement and that of Act 28 of 1 August 1997, which established the school education councils and contained various other provisions. The Government states that its intention was to modernize the national education system in order to bring it into line with current educational thinking.
2. 513. The Government adds that, as a result of the agreement, it reinstated all the teachers who had been dismissed.

C. The Committee's conclusions

1. 514. The Committee notes that in the present case, the complainant alleged mass dismissals of teachers following a strike at the end of June 1997.
2. 515. The Committee notes the agreement between the teaching unions and the authorities dated 29 July 1997, transmitted by the Government, which ended the collective dispute in the education sector. The Committee notes with interest that as a result of that agreement, all the teachers who had been dismissed following the strike were reinstated in their posts. The Committee hopes that in future, the authorities will fully take into account the principle according to which "no one should be penalized for carrying out or attempting to carry out a legitimate strike" (see Digest of decisions and principles of the Freedom of Association Committee, 4th edition, para. 590). Nevertheless, given that the present case was resolved satisfactorily by a collective agreement and all the teachers who had been dismissed were reinstated in their posts, the Committee considers that this case does not call for further examination.