Informe en el que el Comité pide que se le mantenga informado de la evolución de la situación - Informe núm. 324, Marzo 2001

1. 440. The Committee examined this case at its June 1999 and March 2000 meetings and presented two interim reports [see 316th Report, paras, 391-447, and 320th Report, paras. 531-546, approved by the Governing Body at its 275th and 277th Sessions respectively (June 1999 and March 2000)].
2. 441. The Government sent further observations in communications dated 13 April, 12 May and 14 August 2000.
3. 442. Costa Rica has ratified the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), as well as the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).

A. Previous examination of the case

1. 443. Following its examination of the case in March 2000, the Committee made the following recommendations on the allegations which remained pending [see 320th Report, para. 546]:
2. Allegations concerning the enterprise Bananera Isla Grande S.A.
3. (a) Regretting to note that the Government once again has not provided complete observations and noting that in its investigation into allegations concerning the enterprise Bananera Isla Grande S.A. the administrative authority had found that harassment had been used to force workers to leave their union, that there had been serious violations of labour legislation, and that the judicial authorities on 5 August 1998 ordered the reinstatement of the workers who had been dismissed to date (five in all), but that this decision has not been implemented to date, the Committee is bound to deplore once again these facts and urges the Government to send without delay the text of the final ruling made by the judicial authorities and to have the court ruling, already handed down and ordering the reinstatement of five dismissed workers, implemented pursuant to its obligations.
4. (b) The Committee regrets once again that the Government has not sent its observations on the other allegations concerning the company Bananera Isla Grande S.A., namely: the dismissal for "unjustified absence" of 90 trade union members who had signed the list of claims following an operation against illegal migrants conducted at the border between 17 and 19 August 1998 by police and immigration officials in the presence of company representatives and using lists of union members; pressure on workers to make them join a solidarity association; the proposal made to workers to sign a "direct arrangement" bypassing the union; and pressure on union members to sign blank pieces of paper. The Committee urges the Government promptly to send its observations in this regard.
5. Allegations concerning the enterprise PAIS S.A.
6. (c) The Committee requests the Government to send the text of the ruling given on the complaint presented by the administrative authorities concerning the use of harassment and threats against employees of PAIS S.A. to make them resign from their union as well as the withholding of trade union membership dues. The Committee requests the Government to inform it of any administrative action taken in response to the allegation that there are security doors at the enterprise and guards who aggressively prevent union officials from entering.
7. The complainant's allegations of 5 May 1999
8. (d) The Committee requests the Government to inform it of any ruling given on allegations concerning the dismissal of 16 workers employed by Bananera Isla Grande S.A. once it learned of their membership to the Agricultural Workers' Union of Limón (UTRAL). The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether or not the 16 workers concerned worked in the company and, if so, to indicate the reason for their dismissal.
9. (e) The Committee requests the Government to verify once again whether the dismissal of the trade union official Mr. Augustín Gaitán Fernández was due to unjustified absences over a three-day period, as the company claims, and to inform it in this regard.
10. (f) The Committee urges the Government to send its observations on the complainant's allegations of 21 May and 17 November 1999 concerning anti-union dismissals and other anti-union acts.
11. 444. In its communications of 21 May and 17 November 1999 (mentioned in the Committee's last recommendation), the IUF alleges that Mr. Daniel Gutiérrez Cárdenas, Secretary-General of the Workers' Trade Union of the Chiriquí Land Company, was dismissed in order to prevent him from using his experience towards the negotiation of a new collective agreement, that the company refuses to recognize him as a legitimate workers' representative, and that Mr. Fernando Valdelomar Canales was given a formal reprimand without good reason. It is also claimed that the company Oropel S.R. Ltd. is harassing the worker and trade union official, Mr. Roberto Durán, and accusing him of insubordination; that the Compañía Bananera Canfín dismissed Mr. José Reynaldo López González, a member of SITAGAH, after accusing him of verbally attacking the company administrator and another person; that the banana-producing company Roble is harassing the trade unionist Mr. Luis Pérez Jarquín, and blaming him alone for a poor harvest despite the fact that work is done in teams; that the banana company El Ceibo Limitada 1 and 2 is harassing members of the union SITRAP even though it has lodged a complaint with the Minister of Labour for alleged unfair labour practices by the union, thereby prompting a swift response from the Ministry [see 320th Report, para. 536].
12. B. The Government's reply
13. 445. In its communications of 13 April, 12 May and 14 August, the Government refers to the ongoing action by the Ministry of Labour and Social Security to resolve the collective disputes that have arisen and indicates that as a result of this action satisfactory agreements for both parties have been concluded; these are detailed below. The National Directorate of the Inspectorate of Labour is the competent body to ensure compliance with labour legislation and to investigate complaints of unfair labour practices, while the Labour Affairs Department is responsible for mediating amicably in industrial disputes to achieve out-of-court conciliation in the interests of maintaining social and industrial peace in work centres. The information provided below comes from various reports from these agencies which the Government sent with its reply.
14. 446. With regard to the allegations concerning the dismissal of Mr. Daniel Gutiérrez Cárdenas, the Secretary-General of SITRACHIRI, the company's refusal to recognize him, the formal reprimand without good reason given to Mr. Fernando Valdelomar Canales and the alleged insubordination of trade union official Mr. Roberto Durán, the Government submits an agreement concluded between the trade union SITRACHIRI and the enterprise Chiriquí Land Company dated 11 January 2000 in which the trade union undertakes to withdraw all the complaints (including those relating to the enterprise Bananera Isla Grande) it has submitted to the Ministry of Labour, the courts and the ILO, and the enterprise undertakes: (1) to take steps to annul the proceedings against the trade union and against Mr. Daniel Gutiérrez Cárdenas (Secretary-General of the trade union); (2) to allow him to participate in collective bargaining as the Secretary-General of the trade union; and (3) with regard to the dismissal of this official, it undertakes to pay double the benefits and compensation due to him. In view of this agreement the authorities filed the case. Whatever the case may be, with reference to the alleged dismissal of 90 workers from the enterprise Bananera Isla Grande, all of them members of the trade union who had signed a list of claims, the Government states that no formal complaints have been lodged and therefore there are no administrative proceedings relating to this matter. The Government sends a copy of a decision dated 2 July 1999 in which the enterprise Chiriquí Land Company is cleared of a complaint of giving preferential treatment to the solidarity association, prompting workers who belong to the trade union SITRACHIRI to resign their membership, harassment of trade unionists and anti-union dismissals.
15. 447. Concerning the dismissal of 11 workers from the UTRAL trade union at the enterprise Bananera Isla Grande and other anti-union practices, the Government sends a copy of an agreement dated 16 February 2000 concluded between the enterprise and the trade union in which the latter undertakes to relinquish all proceedings under way and the enterprise to pay 250,000 colones to cover damages (compensation for the trade union's financial outlays), to respect freedom of association (acceptance of memberships and resignations from memberships, deduction of trade union dues, etc.) and to refrain from taking reprisals against the members of the UTRAL trade union. This agreement covers four sets of proceedings that were under way and was officially approved by the judicial authority; the imputed party was the enterprise Proyecto Agroindustrial de Sixaola S.A. (País S.A.).
16. 448. With respect to the alleged dismissal of the trade union official Mr. Agustín Gaitán Fernández, the Government states that the trade union organization and the enterprise Chiriquí Land Company reached an agreement, the trade union desisted from the action it had undertaken and the administrative authority therefore filed the case.
17. 449. With regard to the alleged dismissal of Mr. José Reynaldo López González by the banana company Canfín after he was accused of verbally attacking the company administrator and another person, the Government states that the Ministry of Labour convened the parties for administrative conciliation proceedings, during the course of which on the request of the workers' representative, the party in question was awarded compensation for his labour rights and benefits.
18. 450. Concerning the allegations relating to the enterprise Oropel (reprimands addressed to the trade union official Mr. Roberto Durán in the context of trade union persecution), the Government indicates that at the request of the trade union organization SITAGAH the Ministry of Labour carried out conciliation proceedings. The trade union party requested that its complaint be submitted to the General Labour Inspectorate.
19. 451. As regards the allegations concerning the enterprise Roble (harassment of the trade unionist Mr. Luis Pérez Jarquín), the Government indicates that, without prejudice to the investigation (under way) initiated by the General Directorate of the Inspectorate of Labour, conciliation proceedings were conducted. The trade union representative asked that this matter be transferred to the General Labour Inspectorate.
20. 452. Concerning the allegations about the banana enterprise Ceibo (persecution of SITRAP members), the Government states that it is not true that the trade union organization has submitted a complaint to the Ministry of Labour.

C. The Committee's conclusions

• Pending questions relating to the enterprises Chiriquí Land Company, Bananera Isla Grande and
• Proyecto Agroindustrial Sixaola S.A. (País S.A.)
  453. 453 The Committee takes note of the agreements concluded between the enterprise Chiriquí Land Company, the enterprise Bananera Isla Grande and the Proyecto Agroindustrial Sixaola S.A. (País S.A.) on the one hand and the trade union organizations SITRACHIRI and UTRAL on the other, as well as of the fact that SITRACHIRI undertook to desist from the complaints submitted against the enterprise (including those submitted to the ILO) and UTRAL undertook to cease all proceedings under way. Likewise, the Committee notes that the enterprise Chiriquí Land Company and the trade union organization reached an agreement relating to the dismissal of the trade union official Mr. Agustín Gaitán Fernández and that the trade union desisted from the action that it had taken. The Committee observes that on the basis of these agreements the administrative and judicial proceedings taken in relation to these matters were filed. The Committee also notes the decision of 2 July 1999 which clears the enterprise Chiriquí Land Company from a complaint of giving preferential treatment to the solidarist association, prompting workers who belong to SITRACHIRI to resign their membership, harassment of trade unionists and anti-union dismissals.
  454. 454 Given this situation, the Committee will not pursue the examination of the allegations and questions contained in its recommendations (a), (b), (c) and (d) of paragraph 546 of its 320th Report nor the portion of the allegations made by the complainant on 21 May and 17 November 1999 relating to anti-union acts against SITRACHIRI officials and members (the dismissal of the trade union leader Mr. Daniel Gutiérrez Cárdenas and the refusal by the enterprise to recognize him; the formal reprimand without good reason (warning) given to trade union official Mr. Fernando Valdelomar Canales).
• Questions relating to other banana enterprises
  455. 455 With regard to the dismissal of Mr. José Reynaldo López González (banana enterprise Canfín), the Committee notes that during the administrative conciliation proceedings the representative of this worker asked compensation for his labour rights and benefits.
  456. 456 Concerning the allegations relating to the enterprise Oropel (anti-union reprimands addressed to the trade union official Mr. Roberto Durán in the context of trade union persecution) and to the enterprise Roble (harassment of the trade unionist Mr. Luis Pérez Jarquín, blaming him alone for a poor harvest), the Committee notes that during the conciliation proceedings the trade union representative asked that these matters be transferred to the General Labour Inspectorate. The Committee requests the Government to keep it informed of the results of the investigation conducted into this matter.
  457. 457 Lastly, with regard to the allegations concerning the banana enterprise Ceibo (persecution of SITRAP members), the Committee notes that according to the Government the trade union organization has not submitted a complaint to the Ministry of Labour. Noting the contradiction between the complainant's allegations and the reply of the Government concerning the submitting of a complaint, the Committee urges the Government to ensure that this matter is promptly investigated.