Suites données aux recommandations du comité et du Conseil d’administration - Rapport No. 368, Juin 2013

Effect given to the recommendations of the Committee and the Governing Body

1. 131. The Committee last examined this case, which concerns the following allegations of violations of the principles of freedom of association and trade union rights: (i) the individual dismissal of a leader of the Triumph International (Thailand) Labour Union in violation of the fundamental principle of freedom of expression, following a judicial procedure which took place in violation of the rights of the defence; (ii) the collective dismissal of 1,959 workers, including 13 union board members, in the framework of a restructuring process, allegedly in violation of a collective agreement in force; (iii) the use of dangerous sound devices by the police forces to disperse strikers who gathered in the aftermath of the collective dismissal; (iv) the arrest of three union leaders in the framework of a strike, on the basis of unsubstantiated criminal charges; and (v) the interference by authorities in the elections of the union, at its March 2012 meeting [see 363rd Report, paras 221–234]. On that occasion, the Committee once again urged the Government to take all necessary measures to seek the immediate reinstatement of Ms Kotchadej with full pay for back wages. If her reinstatement was found not to be possible for objective and compelling reasons, the Committee requested the Government to ensure that Ms Kotchadej is paid adequate compensation which would constitute a sufficiently dissuasive sanction against anti-union dismissals. The Committee expected that the complainant organization would be in a position to provide detailed information on the date and circumstances of the assaults against Ms Kotchadej in the near future in order for the Government to take the appropriate steps for their investigation and to provide information on the outcome. The Committee also expected that the complainant would be in a position to provide the relevant provisions of the collective agreement, including article 6, which allegedly stipulated that, in the event of a restructure, the decision concerning a lay-off was to be collectively agreed. As regards the dismissal of 1,959 workers, the Committee urged the Government to inquire whether anti-union criteria were applied when identifying the employees to be dismissed. Noting that the case of the dismissed board members of the union was still pending before the Supreme Court, the Committee once again requested the Government to provide a copy of the decision as soon as it is handed down, as well as of any other relevant judicial decisions. The Committee trusted that the Supreme Court would take into account the principle according to which no person should be dismissed or prejudiced in employment by reason of trade union membership or legitimate trade union activities, whether past or present [see Digest of decisions and principles of the Freedom of Association Committee, fifth (revised) edition, 2006, para. 770]. As regards the dispersal of the demonstration which took place on 27 August 2009, the Committee once again: (i) urged the Government to undertake appropriate investigations into this matter, including as regards the use of LRAD on the striking workers and to take the necessary measures to ensure that police forces or other government authorities do not intervene in demonstrations with excessive force and in a manner that is likely to cause injury to the striking workers; and (ii) further requested the Government to ensure the strict observance of due process guarantees in the context of any surveillance operations of workers’ activities by the army, in order to guarantee that the legitimate rights of workers’ organizations can be exercised in a climate that is free from violence, pressure or threats of any kind against their leaders and members. The Committee urged the Government to keep it informed of the measures taken in this respect. As regards the arrest of three trade union leaders, the Committee once again: (i) urged the Government to provide updated information on their present situation, including on the specific charges filed against them. Should these charges be related to their legitimate trade union activities and bearing in mind the Memorandum of Agreement concluding the dispute, it urged the Government to ensure that the charges are immediately dropped; (ii) requested the Government to ensure that the lawyers of the trade union leaders would be allowed to have full access to the arrest warrants as well as to any other relevant information for their proper defence and to keep it informed in this regard; and (iii) requested the Government to provide a copy of any relevant judicial decision in this respect, in particular, a copy of the appeal decision on the request made by the lawyers to receive a copy of the arrest warrants. As regards the elections of the Triumph International (Thailand) Labour Union Chairperson, the Committee urged the Government to indicate if the newly elected Chairperson of the union is recognized by the authorities and the employer so that the right of workers to elect their representatives freely and to bargain collectively is fully ensured.
2. 132. In its communication dated 19 April 2012, the Government provides partial information indicating that the case concerning the arrest of three trade union leaders is still pending before the court for examination of evidence and witnesses and that a hearing was scheduled on 24 May 2012.
3. 133. The Committee takes note of the information provided. The Committee once again notes with regret that although it had made extensive recommendations, the Government has not provided information with respect to most of these. In these circumstances, the Committee is bound to reiterate the abovementioned recommendations and firmly expects that the Government will make all efforts to provide the information requested including by seeking information from the employer through the relevant employers’ organizations concerned, as requested in its previous recommendation. The Committee further observes with regret that the complainant has not provided the information requested and recalls the importance of receiving full information to enable the Committee to carry out a full and objective consideration of the matters before it in full knowledge of the facts. In these circumstances, it will not pursue its examination of those matters.