Seguimiento dado a las recomendaciones del Comité y del Consejo de Administración - Informe núm. 354, Junio 2009

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

1. 99. At its May–June 2008 session, the Committee made the following recommendations on the matters still pending [see 350th Report, para. 884]:
   • (a) While expressing its concern over the excessive slowness in administering justice, the Committee expects that the legal proceedings concerning the officials José René Veliz (transferred after the establishment of the complainant organization) and Manuel de Jesús Ramírez and César Rolando Alvarez Arana (both transferred and later dismissed after the establishment of the union) will be concluded without delay and requests the Government to keep it informed in this regard and, if the judicial authority confirms the ruling of first instance, to take the necessary measures without delay to reinstate the dismissed and transferred union officials in their posts.
   • (b) The Committee requests the Government to take measures without delay to promote collective bargaining between the Institute for Criminal Law Legal Aid and the complainant organization, and to keep it informed in this regard.
2. 100. In its communication dated 27 October 2008, the Government reports that José René Veliz reached an agreement on 21 September 2007 with the Institute for Criminal Law Legal Aid as a result of which he was reinstated in his post and dropped the legal proceedings that he had initiated against the Institute. The Committee notes this information with interest.
3. 101. With regard to the transfer and subsequent dismissal of union officials Manuel de Jesús Ramírez and César Rolando Alvarez Arana following the establishment of the union, the Government indicates that these workers took legal action alleging that their transfer was an act of reprisal, but the Second Court of Labour and Social Welfare declared the matter inadmissible as it considered that no reprisals had been taken.
4. 102. The Government indicates in this respect that, according to the employer, it was exercising its managerial and administration authority and acting on the basis of the applicable labour rules and internal labour regulations when it conducted a transfer from the place where the workers provided their services, and that these transfers cannot be considered, as is alleged by the complainant, as acts of reprisal for having initiated a collective labour dispute against the Institute, as the transfers were carried out before the introduction of the collective dispute.
5. 103. Furthermore, the employer adds that, by failing to comply with the transfer order, the trade union officials committed an act of misconduct in the terms set out in paragraphs (f), (h) and (m) of Article 83 of the Internal Labour and Disciplinary Regulations of the Institute for Criminal Law Legal Aid, which led to the initiation of disciplinary proceedings against them for failure to comply with an order, as well as to their subsequent dismissal for failing to turn up at work for two whole working days.
6. 104. According to the provisions of Article 85 of the Internal Labour and Disciplinary Regulations of the Institute for Criminal Law Legal Aid, “a dismissed worker shall remain suspended from his or her duties without pay until the Board of the Institute reaches a decision on the matter”. In this regard, in the case of the trade union officials, the applicable procedures were followed, in which their right to defence and the respective constitutional guarantees were upheld, and they even made use of the procedures provided to them by law to appeal before the Board of the Institute. In this respect, it should be stressed that although the disciplinary proceedings against the union officials were purely administrative in nature and related to the act of misconduct, the officials considered themselves to be dismissed and submitted reinstatement requests to the courts, without waiting for the outcome of the administrative proceedings.
7. 105. Accordingly, the Institute for Criminal Law Legal Aid, taking into account their right to defence and their constitutional guarantees in that regard, has taken the relevant legal action to safeguard the principle of legality, which is why these cases have been brought before the courts for consideration and decision, although to date no final decision has been handed down.
8. 106. The Committee notes this information and requests the Government to inform it of the decision that is handed down in connection with the dismissal of these officials and, given that the complaint dates back to 2007, emphasizes that justice delayed is justice denied, and firmly expects the authority to hand down a decision without delay.
9. 107. With regard to the collective labour dispute brought by the union before the judicial authority against the Institute for Criminal Law Legal Aid, according to the Government, the Institute indicates that the dispute does not meet the requirements relating to form and substance that make it a matter for negotiation, which is why legal proceedings have been brought before the administrative and judicial authorities, which are pending a final decision. The Committee takes note of this information and requests the Government to inform it of the outcome of the administrative and judicial proceedings initiated in connection with this dispute and with the claims made by the union in the context of collective bargaining.