Demande directe (CEACR) - adoptée 2020, publiée 109ème session CIT (2021)

Convention (n° 87) sur la liberté syndicale et la protection du droit syndical, 1948 - Dominique (Ratification: 1983)

Autre commentaire sur C087

Observation

Demande directe

Afficher en : Francais - EspagnolTout voir

The Committee notes with deep concern that the Government’s report has not been received. It expects that the next report will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous comments. The Committee informs the Government that, if it has not supplied replies to the points raised by 1 September 2021, then it may proceed with the examination of the application of the Convention on the basis of the information at its disposal at its next session.

Repetition

Article 3 of the Convention. Right of organizations to freely organize their activities and to formulate their programmes. The Committee recalls that it has been referring, for a number of years, to the need to take the necessary measures so as to exclude the banana, citrus and coconut industries as well as the port authority, from the schedule of essential services annexed to Act No. 18 of 1986 on industrial relations, which makes it possible to stop a strike in these sectors by compulsory arbitration. The Committee recalled that the right to strike may be restricted or prohibited only for public servants exercising authority in the name of the State or in essential services in the strict sense of the term (that is, services the interruption of which would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population). Nevertheless, the Committee recalled that in order to avoid damages which are irreversible or out of proportion to the occupational interests of the parties to the dispute, as well as damages to third parties, namely the users or consumers who suffer the economic effects of collective disputes, the authorities could establish a system of minimum service in services which are of public utility rather than impose an outright ban on strikes, which should be limited to essential services in the strict sense of the term (see General Survey on freedom of association and collective bargaining, 1994, paragraph 160).

The Committee had also requested the Government to amend sections 59(1)(b) and 61(1)(c) of the Act that empowers the minister to refer disputes to compulsory arbitration if they concerned serious issues in his or her opinion. The Committee recalled that compulsory arbitration to end a collective labour dispute and a strike is acceptable only if it is at the request of both parties involved in a dispute, or if the strike in question may be restricted or prohibited (as mentioned above, that is, for public servants exercising authority in the name of the State or in essential services in the strict sense of the term).

The Government indicates that the Committee’s comments have been discussed by the Industrial Relations Advisory Committee and that the latter is in the process of formulating its decision and reporting its recommendations to the Minister of Labour.

The Committee again hopes that the Government will take the necessary measures to amend the legislation so as to bring it into conformity with the principles of freedom of association and requests it to provide information on developments in this regard.