Rapport définitif - Rapport No. 375, Juin 2015

1. 201. The Committee last examined this case at its May–June 2014 meeting, when it presented an interim report to the Governing Body [see 372nd Report, paras 125–156, approved by the Governing Body at its 321st Session (June 2014)].
2. 202. The Government forwarded its observations in communications dated 15 July 2014 and 10 March 2015.
3. 203. Egypt 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. Previous examination of the case

1. 204. In its previous examination of the case, the Committee made the following recommendations [see 372nd Report, para. 156]:
   • (a) The Committee cannot but regret that, despite the Declaration of 12 March 2011 affirming the right to freedom of association, the Government has to date yet to adopt the necessary legislative framework to ensure full legal recognition to the numerous newly formed independent unions, which has apparently had disastrous effects on industrial relations in practice.
   • (b) Welcoming that the final draft law on trade union organizations and protection of the right to organize abandons the single trade union system and recognizes trade union pluralism, the Committee firmly expects that the draft law will be adopted as a matter of priority giving clear legislative protection to the numerous newly formed independent trade unions and ensuring full respect for freedom of association rights (including the right of these organizations to freely elect their representatives, organize their administration and activities and bargain collectively). In particular, recalling that anti-union discrimination is one of the most serious violations of freedom of association, as it may jeopardize the very existence of trade unions, the Committee expects that the law will guarantee comprehensive and effective protection against anti-union discrimination of all leaders and members of the new independent unions. It requests the Government to transmit a copy of the law once adopted.
   • (c) The Committee requests the Government to repeal or amend the relevant provisions of Part 15 of Book Three and Part 13 of Book Two of the Penal Code so as to guarantee full respect of the principles enunciated in its conclusions, and to ensure that their application in practice does not impede the legitimate exercise of trade union rights. The Committee also requests the Government to provide a copy of and detailed information on, the new Act on organizing demonstrations which replaces the repealed Act No. 96/2012.
   • (d) The Committee, recalling the importance it attaches to the right of workers to elect their representatives in full freedom without any interference from the public authorities, requests the Government to take the necessary steps to repeal Decree No. 97/2012.
   • (e) The Committee generally expects that the provisions of the new Constitution as amended by the referendum held on 14 and 15 January 2014 are not applied in such a manner as to restrict the legitimate exercise of the freedoms of speech, assembly and association.
   • (f) Moreover, as regards the complainants’ specific allegations concerning the enterprise Kraft/Mondelez, the Committee requests the Government, in view of the apparent systematic resort to acts of anti-union discrimination at the abovementioned company and the number of workers allegedly affected, to also initiate an independent investigation into the allegations of acts of anti-union discrimination of 2011 (compulsory retirement of 38 workers for attempting to establish an independent union), 2012 (dismissal of five leaders of the independent union following a work stoppage and demonstration) and 2013 (transfer of 35 known union supporters and workers having given testimony at the court proceedings over anti-union dismissals), and to keep the Committee informed of its outcome. The Committee further requests to be kept informed of the final outcome of the ongoing judicial proceedings referred to by the Government over the five alleged anti-union dismissals of union officials in 2012 and of all measures of redress taken. Should it be found (during the investigation or the court proceedings) that the relevant trade union leaders and members were dismissed or otherwise prejudiced due to their exercise of legitimate trade union activities (including founding a new union or calling industrial action) or on account of their union affiliation, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that they are fully reinstated without loss of pay or transferred back to the original duty station. In the event that reinstatement or re-transfer is not possible for objective and compelling reasons, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that the worker concerned is paid adequate compensation which would constitute a sufficiently dissuasive sanction for anti-union discrimination.

B. The Government’s reply

1. 205. In its communications dated 15 July 2014 and 10 March 2015 the Government provides information regarding the alleged forced retirement, dismissals and transfers from the Kraft/Mondelez enterprise. In particular, the Government indicates that the complaint has been independently reviewed by the Directorate of Manpower, which has concluded to the following:
   • (a) There has been no discrimination against the members of the union’s executive board. The company has independent unions at all its branches and they are dealt with in accordance with the law and regulations.
   • (b) The retirement of 38 workers was effected in accordance with the law. The workers filed applications to retire and these were accepted by the management, which paid them all their financial entitlements (two and half months’ wages for each year of service; the balance of leave; three months’ wages for those with more than ten years of service and two months to those with less than 10 years of service).
   • (c) The five dismissed employees were all reinstated (four workers following reconciliation procedures and one worker by a court order). They are now back at work and secure in their jobs.
   • (d) Regarding the allegation of the arbitrary transfer of 35 workers, it appears that the company had established a new factory at Borg el-Arab. Experienced workers were chosen to be transferred to this factory in return for greater benefits. The transfer was conducted in accordance with workers’ contracts of employment and the legislation in force.
2. 206. In a communication dated 27 May 2015, the Government transmitted a copy of Law No. 107 of 2013 on the right to peaceful public meetings, processions and protests.

C. The Committee’s conclusions

1. 207. The Committee recalls that in the present case, the complainant organizations alleged that the Government was not taking the necessary steps, in law or in practice, to allow for the establishment of a free and democratic trade union movement and had further allowed employers to violate the workers’ right to freedom of association with near impunity, referring, in particular to the acts of anti-union discrimination at the Kraft/Mondelez enterprise.
2. 208. The Committee notes that in its communications dated 15 July 2014 and 10 March 2015, the Government provides information regarding the alleged forced retirement, dismissals and transfers from the abovementioned enterprise. In particular, the Government indicates that the complaint has been independently reviewed by the Directorate of Manpower, which concluded that: (1) the retirement of 38 workers was effected in accordance with the law and on the basis of workers’ written applications and that all of them received financial compensation to which they were entitled; (2) all five dismissed employees have been reinstated (following either reconciliation procedure or the court ruling); and (3) the transfer of 35 workers was effectuated in accordance with their contracts of employment and the legislation in force. The Committee expects that the union will be able to fully exercise its trade union rights without intimidation or interference.
3. 209. The Committee regrets that no information has been provided on the following outstanding legislative issues: (1) the adoption of the law on trade union organizations and protection of the right to organize recognizing trade union pluralism and guaranteeing comprehensive and effective protection against anti-union discrimination; (2) abrogation or amendment of the relevant provisions of Part 15 of Book Three and Part 13 of Book Two of the Penal Code so as to ensure that their application in practice does not impede the legitimate exercise of trade union rights; and (3) repeal of Decree No. 97/2012 so as to ensure the right of workers to elect their representatives in full freedom without any interference from the public authorities. The Committee therefore reiterates its previous recommendations and expects that the Government will transmit its reply, in light of its ratification of Conventions Nos 87 and 98 to the Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations.