Visualizar en: Francés - Español
Effect given to the recommendations of the committee and the Governing Body
Effect given to the recommendations of the committee and the Governing Body- 59. The Committee last examined this case, which was submitted in
February 2018 and which concerns allegations of anti-union practices carried out by the
management of a restaurant chain, as well as the Government’s failure to ensure respect
for trade union rights, at its March 2019 meeting [see 388th Report, paras 396–425]. On
that occasion, the Committee made the following recommendations [see 388th Report, para.
425]:
- (a) The Committee requests the Government to take the
necessary measures, including legislative if necessary, in consultation with the
social partners, in order to ensure the full protection of workers’ fundamental
freedom of association rights and the invalidation of any private company rules or
regulations that may provide to the contrary. It requests the Government to keep it
informed of the measures taken to that end.
- (b) Noting
that 16 workers are, according to the Government, seeking judicial review of the
Supreme Court decision, the Committee requests the Government to bring the
conclusions in this case to the attention of the relevant judicial authorities and
to provide information on the outcome of the reviews.
- (c)
The Committee requests the Government to engage with the social partners concerned
with a view to achieving agreement on policy to recognize the company’s needs while
assuring that transfers do not interfere with workers’ right to freedom of
association.
- 60. The Government provides its observations in a communication dated 12
September 2019. With regard to protection of workers’ freedom of association rights, the
Government indicates that it had conducted several meetings between the company and the
union, in which it was agreed that the company was committed to implementing the Supreme
Court’s decision to pay the severance pay to the workers and would realize harmonious
industrial relations.
- 61. As to 16 workers who had filed for a judicial review of the Supreme
Court decisions that had confirmed their dismissals, the Government indicates that: (i)
in the West Java Province, the six workers and the management agreed to the termination
in accordance with the October 2017 Supreme Court decision, which was affirmed in a
collective agreement; and (ii) in the Banten province, the Supreme Court sent back the
documents of the judicial review to the Industrial Court of the State Court of Serang,
stating that the decision of the Industrial Court could only be challenged at cassation,
that there were no other legal measures for judicial review against such decision and
that the request for judicial review did not fulfil formal requirements and was thus
declared unacceptable; in July 2019, the ten workers and the management agreed to the
termination in accordance with the November 2017 Supreme Court decision, which was
affirmed in a collective agreement. According to the Government, all issues relating to
the termination of employment, including workers’ rights, have thus been properly
settled.
- 62. Concerning the staff transfers at the company, the Government
reaffirms that the transfers were conducted under the company regulations and that
coordination with the parties showed that it was not motivated by trade union membership
of the employees and that all employees were treated equally in this respect.
- 63. The Committee takes note of the information provided by the
Government. It observes, in particular, that the remaining 16 workers who filed for
judicial review of the 2017 Supreme Court decisions that had confirmed their dismissals,
agreed to termination and payment of compensation and concluded agreements to this
effect with the management of the company. The Committee also notes the Government’s
indication that the staff transfers had not been motivated by trade union membership of
the workers and that the Government had conducted meetings between the union and the
company, in which it was agreed that the company would realize harmonious industrial
relations. While observing from the above that the dispute at the origin of this case
has now been settled, the Committee trusts that the Government will take the necessary
measures to ensure that, in the future, company rules or regulations do not unduly
restrict workers’ fundamental rights to freedom of association, including the right to
peaceful protest and demonstration. The Committee considers this case closed and will
not pursue its examination.