Rapport où le comité demande à être informé de l’évolution de la situation - Rapport No. 292, Mars 1994

1. 286. The complaint was submitted in a communication dated 16 June 1993 from the National Union of Banking Employees (UNEB). The Government sent its observations in a letter of November 1993.
2. 287. Colombia has ratified both the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organize Convention, 1948 (No. 87), and the Right to Organize and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).

A. The complainant's allegations

1. 288. In its communication dated 16 June 1993 the UNEB denounces the transfers to other cities of nine Banco Popular employees.
2. 289. The UNEB states that article 6 of the 1980 collective agreement has not been observed inasmuch as it stipulates that: "upon entry into force of the present collective agreement the transfer of an employee between cities may occur only after account has been taken of any impediment the worker may invoke. Whenever a worker is transferred from one city to another he/she will be granted a lump-sum payment, over and above the expenses laid down by law, of a benefit equivalent to one month's salary; this payment does not constitute a part of the worker's salary".
3. 290. Moreover, the complainants state that on 14 April 1993 Colombian state workers held a nationwide day of protest to denounce the prejudicial nature of 62 government decrees issued under the national Constitution, transitional article 20, authorizing the Government to "merge, abolish or restructure bodies of the Executive, public institutions, industrial and commercial enterprises and national mixed-economy companies with the purpose of aligning them with the directives of the present constitutional reform and, in particular, with those relating to the planned redistribution of powers and resources". They maintain that the effect of the government decrees is to make 60,000 state workers virtually redundant, all of which justifiably provoked a protest on their part. On 23 April 1993, pursuant to an alleged abrupt stoppage of service to the public, five workers of the San Diego branch office of the Banco Popular in Bogotá were dismissed. Later, on 30 April, six more workers in Bucaramanga were dismissed following a protest by the trade union at the dismissals in the San Diego office in Bogotá.

B. The Government's reply

1. 291. In its letter of November 1993 the Government states that the alleged transfers of nine Banco Popular employees were carried out to meet service requirements and for bank restructuring purposes and that the workers were notified of this measure and presented their grounds for not complying with the employer's decision. The reasons invoked were examined by the bank in an endeavour to honour the collective agreement. The Government points out that, ultimately, the result of the negotiations was that six workers arrived at an agreement with the bank through arbitration hearings, another negotiated an agreement directly and the remaining two instituted proceedings before a labour tribunal.
2. 292. In respect of the employees dismissed from the San Diego branch office, the Government states that they were cashiers and were justly dismissed for not serving customers and that no anti-union discrimination was involved. The Government indicates that these workers instituted the relevant legal proceedings. Finally the Government points out that in Bucaramanga there were grounds similar to those invoked in the San Diego office for justifiably dismissing workers and that the latter have also initiated legal action.

C. The Committee's conclusions

1. 293. The Committee notes that the allegations presented relate to the transfer to other cities of nine Banco Popular employees, in violation of the applicable collective agreement, and to dismissals of workers in the San Diego and Bucaramanga branches of the same bank.
2. 294. Referring to the allegation that nine Banco Popular employees were transferred to other cities in violation of the collective agreement, the Committee takes note of the Government's statement (1) that these transfers were carried out to meet service requirements and for bank restructuring purposes; (2) that in accordance with the collective agreement in force the workers were consulted and their reasons for not complying with the employer's decision were heard; and (3) that, in fact, of the nine transferred workers seven arrived at an agreement with the bank, the remaining two filing an appeal. Noting the contradictions between the allegations and the Government's reply as to whether or not the collective agreement was applied, the Committee emphasizes the importance it attaches to the fact that freely concluded collective agreements be fully applied.
3. 295. Referring to the alleged dismissals of five San Diego branch office workers of the Banco Popular in Bogotá and of six workers at the Bucaramanga branch of the same bank owing to protests at the San Diego dismissals, the Committee takes note of the Government's statement that the workers' dismissals were justifiable and that they had all filed appeals (the Government invoked shortcomings in the conduct of duties at the San Diego office - failing to serve the public - but has not indicated the reasons justifying the dismissals at the Bucaramanga office). In these circumstances the Committee cannot exclude the possibility that the dismissals are related to the day of protest held by state employees and feels bound to emphasize the principle that no one should be dismissed or prejudiced by reason of his/her legitimate trade union activities. The Committee requests the Government to keep it informed of the result of the appeals lodged by the dismissed workers.