Informe provisional - Informe núm. 364, Junio 2012

1. 760. The complaint is contained in a communication from the Pakistan Workers’ Federation (PWF) dated 2 April 2011.
2. 761. The Government sent its observations in a communication dated 13 March 2012.
3. 762. Pakistan 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. 763. In its communication dated 2 April 2011, the complainant indicates that, on 20 October 2010, the management of the National Bank of Pakistan illegally dismissed Mr Syed Jahangir, the General Secretary of the National Bank of Pakistan Trade Union Federation, for his exercise of lawful trade union activities and presenting a just charter of demands to the management.
2. 764. The complainant indicates that the dismissal took place while the National Industrial Relations Commission (NIRC) had issued, in the framework of an unfair labour practice complaint filed by the General Secretary against his employer, a prohibitory order to the management on 30 April 2010 ruling that “… disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner may continue but till next date of hearing final order shall not be passed”.
3. 765. Subsequently, on 25 October 2010, the NIRC suspended the operation of the order of dismissal dated 20 October 2010 and ordered reinstatement: “The contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner needs consideration. Admit. Notice. In the meanwhile the operation of the impugned order dated 20.10.2010 regarding dismissal of the petitioner is suspended.”
4. 766. The management then approached the Sindh High Court, Karachi against the 25 October 2010 order, seeking a stay of execution on the basis that the NIRC was not competent to suspend the order of dismissal. The High Court ordered, on 28 October 2010, that until the next audition, the status quo shall be maintained: “It is inter alia contended that Respondent No. 1 [NIRC] through interim order passed on 25.10.2010, has ordered reinstatement of an employee dismissed from service. Learned Counsel admitted that even the learned Member NIRC is not competent to do so in view of provisions contained in Regulation 32 of NIRC (Procedures and Functions), 1973. Let the admission notice be issued to the Respondent. Notice. Till the next date status quo shall be maintained”.
5. 767. Despite the illegal order of dismissal passed by the employer, which was suspended by the NIRC, the management has refused to reinstate Mr Syed Jahangir and pay his lawful dues.

B. The Government’s reply

1. 768. In its communication dated 13 March 2012, the Government indicates that the NIRC passed a prohibitory order in favour of Mr Syed Jahangir and that the Sindh High Court stayed the orders of the NIRC. According to the Government, presently two cases are pending adjudication before the Court, thus the NIRC cannot take further action in this regard.

C. The Committee’s conclusions

1. 769. The Committee notes that, on 20 October 2010, Mr Syed Jahangir, General Secretary of the National Bank of Pakistan Trade Union Federation was allegedly dismissed for the exercise of lawful trade union activities and presenting a just charter of demands to the management. The dismissal took place while a prohibiting order to do so had been issued by the NIRC. Subsequently, the NIRC suspended the operation of the order of dismissal dated 20 October 2010. The management appealed this decision before the Sindh High Court which stayed the orders of the NIRC. The management has refused to reinstate Mr Syed Jahangir. The Committee notes that according to the Government, presently two cases are pending adjudication before the Court, thus the NIRC cannot take further action in this regard.
2. 770. The Committee recalls that anti-union discrimination is one of the most serious violations of freedom of association, as it may jeopardize the very existence of trade unions. In no case should it be possible to dismiss a trade union officer merely for having presented a list of dispute grievances; this constitutes an extremely serious act of discrimination. The Government is responsible for preventing all acts of anti-union discrimination and it must ensure that complaints of anti-union discrimination are examined in the framework of national procedures which should be prompt, impartial and considered as such by the parties concerned [see Digest of decisions and principles of the Freedom of Association Committee, fifth (revised) edition, 2006, paras 769, 808 and 817]. Noting that according to the Government, two cases concerning Mr Syed Jahangir are pending adjudication before the Court, the Committee expects that any information relating to the alleged anti union nature of the dismissal will be considered by the courts bearing in mind these principles and expects that these decisions will be handed down in the very near future. The Committee requests the Government to take steps in consultation with the parties concerned, aimed at ensuring the reinstatement of Mr Jahangir pending the final decisions to be rendered by the courts. It requests the Government and the complainant to provide the court judgments as soon as they are handed down, as well as any further information relating to the anti-union nature of this dismissal.