ILO-en-strap
NORMLEX
Information System on International Labour Standards
NORMLEX Page d'accueil > Profils par pays >  > Commentaires

Demande directe (CEACR) - adoptée 2006, publiée 96ème session CIT (2007)

Convention (n° 98) sur le droit d'organisation et de négociation collective, 1949 - Zambie (Ratification: 1996)

Autre commentaire sur C098

Demande directe
  1. 2008
  2. 2006
  3. 2005
  4. 2004
  5. 2001
  6. 1999
  7. 1998

Afficher en : Francais - EspagnolTout voir

The Committee takes note of the Government’s reports.

The Committee also notes the comments made by the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) dated 10 August 2006 concerning the inefficiency of legal measures in cases of anti-union discrimination, including dismissals, particularly in the public sector; threats of dismissal in multinationals if workers do not give up trade union affiliation; and the increasing reluctance to bargain by national and municipal authorities. In its observations to these comments, the Government states, regarding the prevalence of anti-union discrimination, that it has experienced several illegal strikes in the local government where the Ministry of Labour and Social Security has intervened to resolve the matters and no cases of dismissal have been reported. The Government refutes the ICFTU’s claim that there is increasing reluctance to bargain, stating that the problem is that collective bargaining is being carried out centrally with the Local Government Association of Zambia instead of individual councils as employers.

Collective bargaining in the essential services. In its previous comments, the Committee had noted the Government’s statement to the effect that sections 75 and 76 of the Industrial Relations Act relate to the declaration of a collective dispute, and its reference to either conciliation or to the court. The Government had stated that the time frame stipulated in these sections promoted prompt interaction between the parties in the interest of collective bargaining. However, the Committee had pointed out that section 76 establishes that, where a collective dispute arises and any parties to it are engaged in an essential service, the parties to the dispute shall refer the dispute to the court. In its report, the Government indicates that collective bargaining in the framework of essential services is permissible only up to the point where a dispute is declared and that parties have to then refer the matter to the court. The Committee once again asks the Government to confirm that collective bargaining is possible in the framework of essential services, as well as to give examples of such collective bargaining indicating the period of time employed by the parties to negotiate.

The Committee notes that in its report, the Government indicates that consultations are taking place through the tripartite Consultative Labour Council under the Agenda of Review of Labour Laws. The Committee requests that the Government keep it informed of any developments in this regard.

© Copyright and permissions 1996-2024 International Labour Organization (ILO) | Privacy policy | Disclaimer