CMNT_TITLE

Minimum Wage-Fixing Machinery Convention, 1928 (No. 26) - Mauritius (RATIFICATION: 1969)

Other comments on C026

Observation

2015
2009
2008
1990

Direct Request

Replies received to the issues raised in a direct request which do not give rise to further comments

2021

DISPLAYINFrench - SpanishAlle anzeigen

The Committee notes the observations made by the Confederation of Private Sector Workers (CTSP), received by the Office on 5 August 2014. The Government has communicated its reply to these observations, which was received by the Office on 25 March 2015.

In its observations, the CTSP refers to section 95(1A) of the Employment Relations Act 2008 (Act No. 32 of 2008), which has been inserted through the Employment Relations (Amendment) Act 2013 (Act No. 5 of 2013). This paragraph provides that where, in an enterprise or industry, there is a collective agreement that covers matters specified in the relevant Remuneration Regulations which provide for minimum wage rates, those Remuneration Regulations shall not apply to that enterprise or industry, except for provisions in relation to matters not covered in the collective agreement. The CTSP also refers to section 57(2) of the Act, which has been inserted by the same amendment of 2013, and which provides that a collective agreement must not contain a provision reducing the wages provided in the Remuneration Regulations. The CTSP indicates that, through the insertion of the new section 95(1A), the Government interprets section 57(2) to apply only during negotiations and not after a collective agreement has been signed and is in force. The CTSP states that the Remuneration Order has been amended, providing for much higher minimum wage rates than those in the collective agreement. The CTSP considers that the new section 95(1A) can only be read to mean that provisions of a collective agreement should not be less favourable than the relevant Remuneration Regulations, except when such a collective agreement was signed before the relevant Remuneration Regulations. The CTSP questions the fact that the basic minimum protection of wages could be removed solely because a collective agreement has been signed.

In its reply, the Government indicates that with respect to section 95(1A) of the Employment Relations Act 2008, as amended, the rationale is that when a collective agreement is concluded, it has precedence over a Remuneration Regulation, thus promoting collective bargaining. With respect to section 57(2) of the Act, the reasoning for the Government’s interpretation as indicated above is based on paragraph 940 of the Digest of decisions and principles of the Freedom of Association Committee, which indicates that “mutual respect for the commitment undertaken in collective agreements is an important element of the right to bargain collectively and should be upheld in order to establish labour relations on stable and firm ground”, as well as on paragraph 1045, which states that “in a case in which general wage increases in the private sector were established by law, which were added to the increases agreed upon in collective agreements, the harmonious development of industrial relations would be promoted if the public authorities, in tackling problems relating to the loss of the workers’ purchasing power, were to adopt solutions which did not entail modifications of what had been agreed upon between workers’ and employers’ organizations without the consent of both parties”. The Government adds that the Employment Relations Act 2008 provides for a remedy through section 58 (as amended in 2013).

The Committee has taken due note of the above information, including the Government’s reference to certain paragraphs of the Digest of decisions and principles of the Committee on Freedom of Association, which appear to have limited relevance in the context of this particular case. The Committee therefore trusts that the Government and the CTSP will continue consultation with a view to maintaining and operating an effective minimum wage-fixing machinery.