Rapport définitif - Rapport No. 330, Mars 2003

1. 193. The complaint is set out in a communication of December 2001 from the Union of Staff and Workers of the Provincial and Municipal Public Administration of Salta (SEOAP).
2. 194. The Government sent its observations in a communication dated 15 January 2003.
3. 195. 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. The complainant’s allegations

1. 196. In its communication of December 2001, the Union of Staff and Workers of the Provincial and Municipal Public Administration of Salta (SEOAP) alleges that the relevant authorities of the Ministry of Labour refused to accept the trade union’s application for registration, which had been submitted in May 2000.
2. 197. According to the complainant, the registration was refused on the basis of questions and requirements which violated the provisions of Convention No. 87 in application of an administrative resolution of October 2000 calling for certain requirements to be met (declaration that the statutes submitted had been approved by the assembly, declaration of the members of the executive committee, and confirmation of the employee status of the workers belonging to the trade union) and of another resolution of 20 September 2001 calling for compliance with two of the previous requirements and of new requirements relating to the trade union’s statutes (including elimination of abbreviations which might cause confusion as to the name of the organization; modification of the provisions on refusal of membership of the organization, expulsion or resignation; the lack of precision on the number of members of the provincial executive board; the need for the executive board to be elected by an assembly or extraordinary congress; the need for direct action measures to comply with the law; and the requirement that the trade union could not be dissolved while there was a certain number of members).

B. The Government’s reply

1. 198. In its communication of 15 January 2003, the Government states that the Union of Staff and Workers of the Provincial and Municipal Public Administration of Salta (SEOAP) duly initiated the process in the Ministry of Labour, requesting registration as a trade union. Under the relevant procedures, the relevant authority requested the complainant to comply with the formal and substantive requirements under Law No. 23551 and its regulatory Decree No. 467/88 and additional rules, in order to process the application for registration. Up to now, the complainant has not complied with this request, and thus the registration has not been finalized for reasons outside the Ministry of Labour’s control and solely attributable to the complainant.
2. 199. The Government adds that on no occasion has the ILO Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations commented upon Law No. 23551, as concerns section 21 and others concerning the minimum requirements to be satisfied in an application for registration as a trade union. It can therefore be concluded that the formalities laid down in national regulations on the constitution and functioning of workers’ and employers’ organizations are consistent with the provisions of Convention No. 87 and, in the specific case of Argentina, there is no contradiction with the guarantees laid down in this international standard.
3. 200. The Government states that the requirements under Law No. 23551 for registration as a trade union, which were not satisfied by the complainant, do not conflict with the principles of freedom of association, and, as mentioned above, have never been the subject of observations by the ILO supervisory bodies. It indicates that the questions to which the complainant objects were as follows: (1) the constituent act of the trade union and the assembly act approving the text of the trade union statutes do not satisfy the requirements laid down in article 27 of the administrative rules of procedure; (2) it is not clear from the text of the assembly act which supposedly approved the statutes what text was actually approved by the assembly; and (3) 16 articles of the statutes presented conflict with the provisions of Law No. 23551, its regulatory decree and additional rules concerning the minimum requirements to be satisfied by trade unions.
4. 201. The Government states that the Union of Staff and Workers of the Provincial and Municipal Public Administration of Salta (SEOAP) has not so far complied with these points, despite the fact that the finding was notified personally to its Secretary-General on 2 November 2001, who stated that the organization would comply. Finally, the Government states that, with consideration to the principle of freedom of association, if the complainant satisfies the minimum requirements laid down in Law No. 23551 and its regulatory Decree No. 467/88 for obtaining registration as a trade union, the administrative authority will act accordingly.

C. The Committee’s conclusions

1. 202. The Committee observes that the Provincial and Municipal Public Administration of Salta (SEOAP) alleges that the relevant authorities of the Ministry of Labour have refused to grant registration as a trade union to this organization since May 2000. According to the complainant, questions and observations which violate the provisions of Convention No. 87 were used as grounds for not granting registration. (The observations refer to the declaration that the statutes submitted are the text approved by the assembly; the statement concerning the membership of the executive committee; and the certification of the employee status of workers who are members, and various articles of the trade union’s statutes on the elimination of abbreviations that might give rise to confusion as to the name of the organization; the modification of the provisions on refusal of membership of the organization, expulsion or resignation of a member; the lack of precision on the number of members of the provincial executive board; the need for the executive board to be elected by an assembly or extraordinary congress; the need for direct action measures to be governed by law; and the need that the trade union should not be dissolved while there was a certain number of members.)
2. 203. The Committee observes that the Government states in its reply that: (1) the relevant authority requested the complainant to comply with the legal requirements under Law No. 23551 and its regulatory Decree No. 467/88 and additional rules in order to process the registration; (2) at no time have the ILO Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations or other ILO supervisory bodies objected to the minimum requirements to be met by the application for registration laid down in the current law, which is consequently considered consistent with the provisions of Convention No. 87; (3) up to now the SEOAP has not complied with the observations formulated by the administrative authority (of 20 September 2001) which were notified on 2 November 2001; and (4) in general the queries concerning the application for registration refer to problems with the constituent act of the trade union and the act of the assembly which approved the statutes and the contradiction between various articles of the SEOAP statutes and the Trade Unions Act and additional rules.
3. 204. In this respect, the Committee considers that the requirements asked of the complainant by the administrative authority to process the trade union registration do not seem to raise problems of compatibility with the principles of freedom of association. However, the Committee regrets that the registration procedure followed in this case has taken so long, partly because the complainant did not comply with the points raised by the administrative authority and in part due to administrative delays.
4. 205. Nevertheless, the Committee takes note of the desire to respect the principles of freedom of association and to register the SEOAP as a trade union, provided that the complainant meets the minimum requirements established by Law No. 23551 and its regulatory decree. In these circumstances, the Committee invites the complainant to meet the legal requirements indicated by the administrative authority and expresses the hope that, as affirmed by the Government, once the SEOAP has done so, its registration as a trade union will be quickly realized.