Demande directe (CEACR) - adoptée 2016, publiée 106ème session CIT (2017)

Convention (n° 87) sur la liberté syndicale et la protection du droit syndical, 1948 - Mexique (Ratification: 1950)

Autre commentaire sur C087

Observation

Demande directe

Afficher en : Francais - EspagnolTout voir

Article 2 of the Convention. Registration of trade unions. In its previous comment, the Committee requested the Government to send its comments on the allegations of obstacles to the registration and recognition of trade unions made in the observations of IndustriALL Global Union (IndustriALL) and the National Trade Union of Workers in the Iron, Steel and Allied Products Industry (SNTIHAPDSC). The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the Federal Labour Act guarantees the right to establish trade unions without prior authorization and that it empowers the registering labour authority to verify fulfilment of the requirements established in the Federal Labour Act. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that it has adopted tools, such as inspection protocols, developed and concluded with representatives of the productive sectors, to provide guidance to the labour authorities and ensure that regulations are applied effectively in all workplaces (citing, by way of example, the new labour inspection protocol on free collective bargaining). The Committee also notes that in its latest observations IndustriALL reports continuing cases of the refusal of applications for trade union registration, and various obstacles to the establishment and recognition of independent trade unions. While requesting the Government to provide its comments on the allegations made by IndustriALL, the Committee welcomes the adoption of the above protocols and requests the Government to provide information on the implementation of these protocols in practice and on the development of other similar tools which may be adopted in relation to the issues raised.

Articles 2 and 3. Scope of trade union representation. The Committee notes that, in its observations, IndustriALL once again reports that branch unions are not authorized to represent workers from different branches (restriction of the scope of trade union representation). The Committee notes that, in this regard, the Government sent the opinion of the Third Collegial Court of the Fourth Circuit, which considered that a joint reading of various provisions of the Federal Labour Act leads to the conclusion that the right to negotiate a collective labour agreement must be claimed by a trade union in the same occupational branch as the respective enterprise. The Committee notes that IndustriALL also alleges that the labour authorities have denied permission for trade unions to amend their statutes in relation to the criteria governing the scope of trade union representation so that they can represent workers in other industries. In this respect, the Committee recalls that the right of workers to establish and join organizations of their own choosing, enshrined in Article 2 of the Convention, together with the right of workers’ organizations to draw up their constitutions, recognized in Article 3 of the Convention, implies the right to freely choose the structure and composition of trade unions, including their scope of representation, for example by amending their statutes. The Committee requests the Government to refer this matter to tripartite discussion in the context of the consideration of further modifications to the 2012 reform, so as to ensure that the current standards and their application effectively guarantee the right of trade unions to freely choose their scope of representation. The Committee requests the Government to provide information in this respect.

Article 3. Accreditation of elected trade union representatives (“note-taking”). In its previous request, the Committee noted the observations of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) and IndustriALL that the “note-taking” procedure (whereby elected trade union leaders are required, in order to take office, to obtain a certificate from the labour authorities attesting that the elections were held in accordance with the statutes of the trade union) continues to give rise to many abuses undermining the freedom of workers to elect their representatives, even though the Supreme Court of Justice has restricted the scope of this procedure through its case law. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that, in the framework of the consultation process initiated to identify further legislative changes to the 2012 labour reform, the Government is still hoping that workers’ and employers’ organizations will participate in the joint exploration of how to strengthen the legislation on freedom of association. The Government also recalls the findings of the Supreme Court of Justice, upholding the application by analogy of the procedure for the registration of trade unions to the “note-taking” procedure for changes in trade-union office holders. Taking due note of the Government’s indication that it has invited all social partners to provide their observations on additional modifications to the 2012 labour reform, the Committee requests the Government to refer this issue for tripartite discussion, with a view to considering any measures that may be necessary to ensure that the procedures effectively guarantee in practice the right to freely elect trade union representatives. The Committee requests the Government to provide information in this respect.

Right of workers’ organizations to organize their activities and to formulate their programmes. The Committee notes the observations of IndustriALL and the ITUC alleging violations of the Convention in practice relating to strikes. The Committee recalls that for many years it has been requesting the Government to take the necessary measures to amend various aspects of the legislation on the right to strike of public employees, and particularly: (i) section 99(II) of the Federal Act on State Employees (LFTSE), which establishes the requirement of two-thirds of the workers in the public body concerned to call a strike; (ii) the legislation that restricts the right to strike of certain state employees (including workers in the banking sector and those in many decentralized public bodies, such as the National Lottery and the Housing Institute) only to situations involving a general and systematic violation of their rights (section 94, Title 4, of the LFTSE, and section 5 of the Act issuing regulations under Article 123B(XIIIbis) of the Constitution); and (iii) several laws and regulations related to public services (the Railway Regulations Act, the National Vehicle Registration Act, the General Channels of Communication Act and the internal regulations of the Secretariat of Communications and Transport) which envisage the possibility of requisitioning staff in the event that the national economy is affected. The Committee notes that, with regard to these three pending issues, the Government, noting the observations of the International Organisation of Employers (IOE) and the Employer members of the Committee on the Application of Standards in 2016, asks the Committee to suspend its comments and requests regarding the right to strike until the International Labour Conference resolves the matter of its inclusion in the Convention. The Committee recalls that the issues raised, which have been the subject of comments for many years, are covered by its well recognized mandate to undertake an impartial and technical analysis of the application of the Convention in law and practice by all countries that have ratified it. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the application in practice of these legislative provisions, to hold consultations with the social partners on the revision of those provisions and to provide information on any developments in this respect.