Rapport définitif - Rapport No. 75, 1964

1. 32. The complaint by the Textile Workers' Association was submitted in a letter dated 26 November 1963 sent direct to the I.L.O. It was then forwarded to the Argentine Government with a covering letter dated 29 November 1963 for its observations, which were forwarded on 24 January 1964.
2. 33. Argentina has ratified the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), and the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).

A. A. The complainants' allegations

1. 34. In its complaint the Textile Workers' Association, an Argentine trade union organisation, claims that the Government has violated Article 3 of Convention No. 87 and section 38 of the Trade Union Act (No. 14455) by deliberately ending the term of office of the Association's senior officials and appointing Government administrators under Order No. 944/63 issued by the Ministry of Labour and Social Security.
2. 35. In its reply the Government stated that section 3 of the ministerial order referred to was rescinded by Order No. 979/63, a copy of which was attached. The preamble to Order No. 979/63 stated that the Ministry had power to take over control of the assets of trade unions with incorporated status in special circumstances (usually where the term of office of the executive committee was extended in violation of the relevant legislation and the union's own rules). The Government explained that such emergency measures did not involve interference in the work of the unions, but merely constituted a safeguard to protect the members' interests. The preamble of the order stated that a co-administrator would only be appointed for the remaining term of office of the present officials of the Textile Workers' Association, who were responsible for the management of the union's assets. The Government explained in its letter that when the Association made an application for the withdrawal of Ministerial Order No. 944/63, section 3 of that order was rescinded under a later Order No. 979/63.
3. 36. The Committee notes, in short, that according to the complainants, the Ministry issued an order appointing an official administrator for the Textile Workers' Association in violation of section 38 of Act No. 14455 as well as of Article 3 of Convention No. 87, under which workers' organisations are entitled to elect their representatives in full freedom, to organise their administration and activities and to formulate their programmes, while the public authorities are required to refrain from any interference which would restrict this right or impede the lawful exercise thereof.
4. 37. The Government for its part states that Order No. 944/63 was only issued in order to safeguard the union's assets and that it was for this purpose that a co-administrator was appointed. Furthermore, when an appeal was made section 3 of the order was rescinded.
5. 38. It would appear from the information supplied that the Ministry appointed a co-administrator in the special situation created when the term of office of the executive committee of the Textile Workers' Association was extended in violation of the law and the union's own rules. It would also appear that the co-administrator was appointed by virtue of section 3 of Order No. 944/63, which was later rescinded. The complainants allege that this measure involves a breach, not only of Article 3 of the Convention, but also of section 38 of Act No. 14455, which is worded as follows:
   • In no circumstances shall the enforcing authority have the power to intervene in the management or the administration of the occupational associations covered by this Act.

B. B. The Committee's conclusions

1. 39. The Committee recalls that in a number of other cases dealing with Argentina, it has had to examine the problem of government intervention in the affairs of a trade union. In these cases, the Governing Body decided to call the Government's attention to the importance it attaches to the principle explicitly set forth in Article 3 of Convention No. 87 (ratified by Argentina) that the public authorities should refrain from any interference which would restrict the right of workers' organisations to elect their representatives in full freedom and to organise their administration and activities.
2. 40. In the present case, it would appear that the Ministry of Labour appointed a co-administrator in special circumstances for a short period and in order to safeguard the union's own assets. When the complainants appealed against this order it was rescinded.