Demande directe (CEACR) - adoptée 2015, publiée 105ème session CIT (2016)

Convention (n° 98) sur le droit d'organisation et de négociation collective, 1949 - Bermudes

Autre commentaire sur C098

Observation

Demande directe

Afficher en : Francais - EspagnolTout voir

The Committee takes note of the observations of the Bermuda Public Service Union (BPSU) annexed to the Government’s report.

Article 2 of the Convention. Protection against acts of employer interference. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that the Government had indicated in its report that the Labour Advisory Council was in the process of being consulted regarding the upgrading of a policy which was aimed to assist the certification process mandated by the Trade Union Act 1965. The Committee notes that the Government indicates in its report that the Minister of Home Affairs has composed a committee derived from members of the Labour Advisory Council to consult and recommend changes to the current Labour Laws of Bermuda. This committee has reviewed the Trade Union Act 1965, the Labour Relations Act 1975 and the Labour Disputes Act 1992 and discussion is scheduled to continue to determine the best legal framework for the development of labour practices in Bermuda. The Committee observes that it has been decided that the three Acts will be replaced by one statute and that a unified Tribunal system will replace the Employment Tribunal, Permanent Arbitration Tribunal, Labour Disputes Tribunal and the Essential Industries Disputes Board. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any developments in this regard and expresses the firm hope that it will be in a position to note progress in the near future.

Article 4. Collective bargaining by management personnel. The Committee takes note of a 2014 Supreme Court decision submitted with the Government’s report, according to which: (i) section 30A of the Trade Union Act hinders management personnel from engaging in collective bargaining with their employers under the statutory framework of compulsory recognition of collective bargaining agents; and (ii) management personnel are nevertheless free to engage in voluntary collective bargaining with their employers outside the statutory framework. The Committee recalls that itself and the Committee on Freedom of Association had previously examined the issue concerning the right to collective bargaining of management personnel in Bermuda. In this regard, the Committee on Freedom of Association had noted that, while it was clear that management personnel could not be represented by a union certified as an exclusive bargaining agent under the Trade Union Act, the exclusion only concerned the statutory system of compulsory recognition of collective bargaining agents and did not call into question the rights of management personnel to engage in negotiations existing under the voluntary system, nor their right to organize generally as workers under the Trade Union Act. The Committee further notes that the BPSU in its observations refers to the preparation by an ad hoc tripartite committee of recommendations to the Minister of Labour for legislative amendments to safeguard the collective bargaining rights of management personnel – the BPSU alludes to such process as the reason why it did not appeal the 2014 Supreme Court ruling. Recalling that only the police, the armed forces and public servants engaged in the administration of the State may be excluded from the obligation to promote the full development and utilization of machinery for voluntary collective negotiation set out in Article 4 of the Convention, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on any developments on this matter, including as to the impact of the Supreme Court ruling on the exercise of collective bargaining by management personnel and any legislative amendments being considered.