Informe provisional - Informe núm. 335, Noviembre 2004

1. 732. The Committee last examined this case at its March 2004 meeting [see 333rd Report, paras. 465-486] and submitted an interim report to the Governing Body. The General Confederation of Democratic Workers, Antioquia branch, provided additional information in a communication dated 23 September 2004.
2. 733. The Government sent its observations in communications dated 9 March, 5 April and 14 and 26 May 2004.
3. 734. Colombia has ratified the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98), the Labour Relations (Public Service) Convention, 1978 (No. 151), and the Collective Bargaining Convention, 1981 (No. 154).

A. Previous examination of the case

1. 735. At its March 2004 meeting, the Committee formulated the following recommendations [see 333rd Report, para. 486]:
   • (a) With regard to the dismissal of 34 workers from Textiles Rionegro, the Committee requests the Government to keep it informed of the results of the pending judicial proceedings relating to three workers to whom the Government made no reference in its observations. Moreover, as to the other allegations submitted by SINTRATEXTIL concerning the enterprises Fabricato, Enka and Coltejer and Rio Negro, the Committee requests the Government to send its observations without delay. (These allegations are reproduced below: the National Union of Textile Industry Workers (SINTRATEXTIL) alleges: (a) in the Fabricato enterprise: (1) there is violation of the collective agreement; (2) trade union leave is denied; (3) trade union leaders are denied access to the premises; (b) in the Enka enterprise: (1) non-fulfilment of agreements concluded between the president of the company and the trade union; (2) violation of the collective agreement through the conclusion of contracts with companies to conduct work directly covered by the collective agreement; (3) distribution of the hardest tasks to unionized workers; (c) in the Coltejer enterprise: dismissals on the grounds of restructuring, in violation of a collective agreement; and (d) in the Textiles Rionegro enterprise: (1) favouritism towards one of the enterprise trade unions to the detriment of the industry union; and (2) violation of the collective agreement.)
   • (b) Concerning the allegations presented by ASEINPEC relating to constant threats, sanctions, disciplinary proceedings and transfers involving trade union leaders, the dismissal and suspension of trade union leaders without pay in violation of trade union immunity and the refusal by the director of the INPEC to return the trade union offices, the Committee requests the Government to take measures to ensure that the judicial decisions ordering the reinstatement of the trade union leaders and the return of the trade union offices are implemented without delay and to send its observations with respect to the further allegations of anti-union discrimination relating to threats, sanctions, disciplinary proceedings and transfers involving trade union leaders of ASEINPEC.
   • (c) As regards the allegations submitted by ADEM concerning non-compliance with an agreement in which the Government had undertaken to reinstate 83 workers covered by trade union immunity, the Committee requests the Government to carry out an investigation at the office of the Mayor of Medellín to determine whether the agreement was in fact concluded and if it was, to take measures to ensure it is implemented as soon as possible.
   • (d) As regards the murders of trade union officials Jesús Arley Escobar, Fabio Humberto Burbano Córdoba, Jorge Ignacio Bohada Palencia and Jaime García, the Committee once again requests the Government to take the necessary steps to ensure that the investigations allow those responsible for these murders to be punished in the near future and to keep it informed in this respect.

B. The Government’s reply

1. 736. In its communications dated 9 March, 5 April and 14 and 26 May 2004, the Government states that, as regards the dismissal of 34 workers from Textiles Rionegro, in fact the number of workers dismissed was 31, and not 34, and as regards the legal proceedings pending in the case of three of those 31 workers of Textiles Rionegro, the Government attaches copies of the decisions handed down by the High Court of Medellín, which upheld the decisions of the courts of first instance ordering their reinstatement.
2. 737. As regards the allegations presented by SINTRATEXTIL that in the Fabricato enterprise, the collective agreement is being violated, trade union leave is being denied and trade union leaders are denied access to the premises, administrative labour investigations were opened by the Antioquia Territorial Directorate into the denial of trade union leave and anti-union harassment, and a decision was handed down, leaving the parties free to bring the case before the ordinary labour courts. As regards the violation of the collective agreement, two investigations were opened: in the first case, the enterprise was fined, and in the second, the Territorial Directorate declared itself incompetent to rule. The Government states that there are currently three more investigations under way concerning violation of the collective agreement.
3. 738. As regards the allegations that in the Enka enterprise, agreements concluded between the president of the company and the trade union are not being respected, the collective agreement is being violated through the conclusion of contracts with companies to conduct work directly covered by the collective agreement, and the hardest tasks are being distributed to unionized workers, the Ministry of Social Protection, through the Antioquia Territorial Directorate, opened an administrative labour investigation against the enterprise and handed down a decision acquitting the enterprise.
4. 739. As regards the allegations presented by ASEINPEC concerning disciplinary proceedings and transfers carried out against trade union leaders, the dismissal and suspension without pay of trade union leaders in violation of trade union immunity, the Government attaches a table listing the judgements ordering reinstatement of the officials covered by trade union immunity who were suspended, and a copy of the decisions issued by the secretary general of INPEC ordering that the judgements be carried out.
5. 740. As regards the allegations presented by ADEM concerning non-compliance with an agreement in which the Government had undertaken to reinstate 83 workers covered by trade union immunity, in accordance with Act No. 617 of October 2000 on fiscal adjustment, which entailed reducing the operating costs of all public bodies, consideration was given to the possibility of eliminating a number of posts in the Medellín Municipal Council. To that end, the municipal administration issued Decrees Nos. 165 and 300 of 2001, eliminating the posts. This prompted protest action by several trade union organizations. With a view to finding a solution to the dispute, the administration called an extraordinary meeting with the trade unions, at which a number of issues were discussed and certain agreements were reached, which were set forth in a document entitled “Memorandum of Understanding between the trade union organizations of Medellín municipality, ADEM, SIDEM, ASDEM and ANDAT, and the Mayor of the city”. As regards possible non-compliance with some of the points agreed upon, in particular the reinstatement of 83 workers covered by trade union immunity, the municipal administration states that although this subject was addressed in the discussions, it was not included in the Memorandum of Understanding. Moreover, Decrees Nos. 165 and 300 ordering the elimination of the posts were issued before the establishment of the SIDEM trade union, and hence the 83 workers alleged to have been covered by trade union immunity did not in fact enjoy such protection. In addition, the workers concerned had brought their case before the ordinary labour courts, which ruled in every case in favour of Medellín Municipal Council.

C. The Committee’s conclusions

1. 741. As regards the dismissal of 34 workers from Textiles Rionegro (of whom, according to the previous examination of the case, 15 workers have been reinstated and 13 others have reached an agreement with the enterprise [see 333rd Report of the Committee on Freedom of Association, para. 471]), the Committee notes the information provided by the Government according to which the number of persons originally dismissed was 31 and not 34. The Committee points out that out of these 31 workers, it remained for the Government to inform it of the outcome of the pending judicial proceedings relating to three workers, in respect of whom the Government states that the High Court of Medellín ordered their reinstatement.
2. 742. As regards the allegations presented by SINTRATEXTIL that in the Fabricato enterprise trade union leave is denied and trade union leaders are denied access to the premises, the Committee notes that according to the Government, the Antioquia Territorial Directorate opened administrative labour investigations and handed down a decision leaving the parties free to bring the case before the ordinary labour courts. The Committee requests the Government to inform it whether the trade union has initiated judicial proceedings.
3. 743. As regards violation of the collective agreement in the Fabricato enterprise, the Committee notes that five investigations were opened: in the first, the Antioquia Territorial Directorate fined the enterprise, and in the second, it declared itself incompetent to rule; there are currently three more investigations under way concerning violation of the collective agreement. The Committee requests the Government to keep it informed of the final outcome of the three pending administrative investigations and to ensure effective compliance with the collective agreement in the enterprise.
4. 744. As regards the allegations that in the Enka enterprise, the agreements concluded between the president of the company and the trade union are not being fulfilled, the collective agreement is being violated through the conclusion of contracts with companies to conduct work directly covered by the collective agreement, and the hardest tasks are being distributed to unionized workers, the Committee notes that the Antioquia Territorial Directorate opened an administrative labour investigation against the enterprise and handed down a decision acquitting it. The Committee requests the Government to keep it informed of any judicial appeal lodged by the trade union in this case.
5. 745. The Committee regrets to note that the Government has not sent observations concerning the remaining allegations presented by SINTRATEXTIL referring to dismissals on grounds of restructuring, in violation of a collective agreement, in the Coltejer enterprise and favouritism towards one of the enterprise trade unions to the detriment of the industry union, as well as violation of the collective agreement in the Textiles Rionegro enterprise, and urges it to do so without delay.
6. 746. As regards the allegations presented by ASEINPEC concerning the dismissal and suspension without pay of trade union leaders in violation of trade union immunity, the Committee notes with interest the judgements ordering reinstatement of the officials covered by trade union immunity, as well as the decisions issued by the secretary-general of INPEC ordering that the judgements be carried out. The Committee observes, however, that the Government does not state whether INPEC has returned the offices to the trade union as ordered by the judicial authority, neither has it provided information on the other allegations of anti-union discrimination relating to threats, sanctions, disciplinary proceedings and transfers involving ASEINPEC union leaders. The Committee strongly urges the Government to take steps to ensure that the ASEINPEC offices are returned without delay, as ordered by the judicial authority, and to send its observations concerning the remaining allegations.
7. 747. As regards the allegations presented by ADEM concerning non-compliance with an agreement in which the Government had undertaken to reinstate 83 workers covered by trade union immunity, under a memorandum of agreement signed between the municipal authorities and the trade union, the Committee notes that according to the Government, this issue was not included in the Memorandum of Understanding and that Decrees Nos. 165 and 300 ordering the elimination of posts on grounds of fiscal readjustment were issued before the establishment of the SIDEM trade union to which the dismissed workers belonged, and hence they could not be covered by trade union immunity. The Committee also notes that according to the Government, these workers brought their case before the ordinary labour courts and that in every case the courts ruled in favour of the employer.
8. 748. As regards the murders of trade union officials Jesús Arley Escobar, Fabio Humberto Burbano Córdoba, Jorge Ignacio Bohada Palencia and Jaime García, the Committee deeply regrets that, despite the time which has elapsed since the events occurred and the request of the Committee in its 333rd Report, the Government has not sent its observations, and once again strongly urges it to take the necessary steps without delay to ensure that the investigations allow those responsible for these murders to be punished in the near future and to keep it informed in this respect.
9. 749. Finally, the Committee requests the Government to provide its observations concerning the additional information submitted by the CGTD, Antioquia branch, in its communication of 23 September 2004.