Rapport définitif - Rapport No. 214, Mars 1982

1. 270. The complaint is contained in a communication from the World Federation of Trade Unions dated 21 December 1981. The Government replied by communication dated 25 January 1982.
2. 271. Colombia has ratified the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), and the Eight to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98)

A. The complainant's allegations

1. 272. The World Federation of Trade Unions (WFTU) alleges that following the appointment of Raúl de J. Escobar Gutiérrez as President of the Trade Union Association of Salesmen, National Commercial Travellers and Commercial Workers (ASVIAN) in April 1975 the undertaking for which he was working as salesman and medical representative - CYANAMID DE COLOMBIA, S.A. - has been carrying on a violent and ruthless campaign of persecution against Mr. Escobar. According to the complainant, the persecution took the form of a deterioration of his conditions of work, discriminatory treatment, constant changes in his work areas, freezing of his basic salary, etc.
2. 273. The WFTU adds that on 27 March 1979 Mr. Escobar was arbitrarily dismissed from his employment without respect being had for his immunity as a trade unionist, with the result that on 17 March 1980 the Fourth Labour Court of the Medellin Circuit handed down a judgement in which it ordered the reinstatement of the worker "under the same conditions of employment and wages", together with payment of all the benefits and wages which he had not collected. Despite this - the complainant continues - the undertaking renewed its campaign of persecution.
3. 274. The complainant points out, finally, that the undertaking dismissed Mr. Escobar on 10 December 1980 without "the advance consent of the Labour Judge", despite the fact that he was covered by trade union immunity, thus once again breaching the provisions of the Substantive Labour Code, and that on 30 January 1981 Mr. Escobar brought before the judicial authorities an action for reinstatement.

B. The Government's reply

1. 275. In its communication dated 25 January 1982, the Government states that, in accordance with the provisions of section 405 of the Substantive Labour Code, amended by section 1 of Decree No. 204 of 1957, no worker covered by trade union immunity may be dismissed without just cause having first been established by the Labour Judge, failing which the worker may bring an action for reinstatement in the functions he was discharging and for the corresponding indemnification.
2. 276. The Government adds that Mr. Escobar had recourse to the jurisdictional authorities each time that his rights were infringed and that he has instituted reinstatement proceedings before a Labour Judge in Medellin, alleging presumed persecution by a transnational company.

C. Conclusions of the Committee

1. 277. The Committee observes that in the present complaint the complainant refers to a campaign of persecution against Raúl J. Escobar by the CYANAMID DE COLOMBIA undertaking, which has been going on since he was elected in 1975 as President of ASVIAN and which has taken the form of discrimination and various prejudicial acts going as far as dismissal of the above-mentioned trade union leader on two occasions: the first in March 1979 and the second - once the judicial authority had ordered his reinstatement on 17 March 1980 - in December 1980. The Committee also notes that, following the last dismissal, Mr. Escobar brought an action for reinstatement before the judicial authority on 30 January 1981.
2. 278. The Committee notes the Government's statement that when Mr. Escobar's rights were infringed he had recourse to the jurisdictional authorities, that in accordance with the law in force no worker covered by trade union immunity may be dismissed without just cause having been first established by the Labour Judge and that at present an action for reinstatement is pending before a Labour Judge in Medellin in respect of the dismissal effected in December 1980.
3. 279. In this connection, the Committee, noting in particular that the anti-trade union practices carried out against Mr. Escobar have been repeated throughout the last two years and that, when he was dismissed for the first time, a year elapsed between notification to him of the dismissal and the court decision ordering his reinstatement, wishes to stress the importance which it attaches to the fact that trade union leaders, trade unionists or workers should be able to enjoy effective protection against acts of anti-trade union discrimination through impartial and expeditious procedures. More particularly, the Committee hopes that the judgement in the reinstatement proceedings instituted already more than a year ago by Mr. Escobar on grounds of the dismissal effected on 10 December 1980 will be given without delay and will take the principles of freedom of association fully into account.