Demande directe (CEACR) - adoptée 2017, publiée 107ème session CIT (2018)

Repetition

The Committee notes with concern the ITUC observations received on 1 September 2015 alleging union busting, harassment and anti-union dismissals of workers from the Bustamante Industrial Trade Union (BITU) and the National Workers’ Union (NWU). The Committee requests the Government to take all necessary measures to ensure that members of the BITU and the NWU can effectively benefit from the rights guaranteed by the Convention and to provide information on any measures taken in this regard.

Article 3 of the Convention. Picketing. The Committee notes the ITUC’s observations that: (i) according to section 33(1) of the Trade Union Act (TUA), picketing is unlawful if it is attended in such numbers or otherwise in such manner as to be calculated to intimidate any person in a house or place, to obstruct the approach thereto or egress therefrom or to lead to a breach of peace; (ii) in line with section 33(2) of the TUA, picketing is prohibited for sympathy or solidarity reasons (it is unlawful for a person to participate in a picket unless the person is the employer or a member of the company with which the industrial dispute is contemplated, a current or former (up to 12 months before the picketing) worker of the company or an officer of a registered trade union (maximum eight officers can be present); and (iii) sections 32 and 33 of the TUA impose excessive civil and penal sanctions for non-authorized picketing. In this regard, the Committee recalls that while workers should be able to participate in sympathy picketing and sympathy strikes if the initial strike they are supporting is itself lawful, the exercise of the right to strike should respect the freedom to work of non-strikers as well as the right of the management to enter the premises of the enterprise, and therefore legal provisions prohibiting picketing from disturbing public order, creating violence and threatening, intimidating or coercing non-strikers are legitimate (sections 32 and 33(1) of the TUA). The Committee further notes that participation in a peaceful and non-threatening solidarity strike is a legitimate measure and should not be subject to any penalties (section 33(2) of the TUA). The Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that peaceful picketing in the context of sympathy and solidarity strikes is allowed and is not subject to sanctions.

Limitation on strike action. The Committee notes the ITUC’s observations that in accordance with sections 10 and 32 of the Labour Relations and Industrial Disputes Act (LRIDA), the authorities can unilaterally prohibit, limit, suspend or cease strike action. The Committee observes that according to these provisions, if the Minister considers that an industrial action in non-essential services has or would be likely to cause an interruption in the supply of goods or in provisions of services of such a nature, or on such a scale so as to be gravely injurious to the national interest (national economy, national security, public order, life and health of a substantial number of persons), then the Minister may make an order to that effect and apply to the Supreme Court ex parte for an order restraining the parties from commencing or from continuing the industrial action. Recalling that outside essential services, the right to strike may only be restricted for public servants exercising authority in the name of the State, or in case of acute national crisis but only for a limited period of time and to the extent necessary, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on how sections 10 and 32 of the LRIDA are applied in practice, including examples of services in which industrial action has been restricted pursuant to these provisions.

Compulsory arbitration. The Committee had previously referred to the extensive power of the Minister to refer an industrial dispute to arbitration (sections 9, 10 and 11(A) of the LRIDA) and had noted the Government’s indication that it was considering the Committee’s request to amend these sections. The Committee notes that in its report the Government indicates that the legislation on the issue currently remains unchanged. The Committee expresses concern at the lack of progress and firmly hopes that sections 9, 10 and 11(A) of the LRIDA will be amended in the near future, taking into account that compulsory arbitration to end a collective labour dispute is acceptable only in instances where a strike may be restricted or even banned, that is, in the event of a dispute in the public service involving public servants exercising authority in the name of the State, or in essential services in the strict sense of the term, namely services the interruption of which could endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population, or in case of acute national crisis. The Committee requests the Government to indicate any developments in this regard.