ILO-en-strap
NORMLEX
Information System on International Labour Standards
NORMLEX Home > Country profiles >  > Comments

DISPLAYINEnglish - French - SpanishAlle anzeigen

I. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its report which merely repeats precisely the information provided in its previous report. It also takes note of the comments made by the Pakistan Workers' Confederation (PWC) and the All Pakistan Federation of Trade Unions (APFTU).

1. As regards the Pakistan Television and Broadcasting Corporations (PTVC and PBC), the Committee notes with interest from information provided by the APFTU that the Supreme Court has rendered a judgement dated 2 July 1997 restoring the right to organize and to bargain collectively for employees of the Pakistan Television Corporation and of the Civil Aviation Authority. Apparently, however, the Court indicated that, in the absence of statutory backing, these employees would not have the right to strike or participate in go-slows and that the Government could provide reasonable restrictions in this respect through statutory rules under section 26 of the Industrial Relations Ordinance (IRO). While welcoming the decision of the Supreme Court concerning the right to organize for these workers, the Committee would recall that the right to strike may only be restricted in respect of essential services, that is services the interruption of which would endanger the life, personal safety or health of whole or part of the population, and in cases of acute national crisis. The Government may consider however in this regard the establishment, in consultation with the workers' organizations concerned, of a negotiated minimum service to meet basic needs or to ensure that facilities are operated safely. Furthermore, noting that these workers are excluded from the IRO and noting the indication in the Government's report that the recommendations of the tripartite task force on labour to restore trade union rights to PTVC and PBC employees were still being considered, the Committee expresses the firm hope that the Government will take the necessary measures to bring its legislation into conformity with the Supreme Court judgement as concerns the right to organize of these workers and to ensure that they are not prohibited from exercising the right to strike. It requests the Government to provide a copy of the Supreme Court judgement in this matter and to indicate the measures taken to ensure that these workers enjoy full rights under the Convention.

2. The Committee notes the comments made by the PWC according to which amendments have been made to the Banks (Special Courts) Ordinance, 1986, wherein section 27-B would now provide that a worker shall not be entitled to become a member or officer of any union in a banking company if he or she is not an employee of the bank in question. The Committee had noted from a communication received from the Government in this regard, that the purpose of the amendment in the banking companies Ordinance was to control disruptive activities of disgruntled elements in the interest of the economy. The amendment in no case contains workers' rights of association and collective bargaining; the workers are free to bargain with the management. The Government has, however, held meetings with workers' representatives at the highest levels to redress their genuine grievances and to meet their valid demands. In this regard, the Committee would draw the Government's attention to paragraph 117 of its General Survey of 1994 on freedom of association and collective bargaining wherein it indicates that provisions which require all candidates for trade union office to belong to the respective occupation, enterprise or production are contrary to the guarantees set forth in Article 3 of the Convention and infringe the organization's right to elect representatives in full freedom by preventing qualified persons, such as full-time union officers or pensioners, from carrying out union duties or by depriving unions of the benefit of the experience of certain officers when they are unable to provide enough qualified persons from among their own ranks. The Committee suggests in this respect that the legislation may be made more flexible either by admitting as candidates persons who have previously been employed in the occupation concerned, or by exempting from the occupational requirement a reasonable proportion of the officers of an organization. The Committee requests the Government to indicate, in its next report, the measures taken or envisaged to further amend this legislation so as to ensure that workers have the right to elect their representatives in full freedom along the lines mentioned above.

II. The Committee recalls that its previous observations referred also to the following discrepancies between national legislation and the Convention:

-- denial of the rights guaranteed by the Convention for workers in export processing zones (section 25 of the Export Processing Zones Authority Ordinance, 1980, and section 4 of the Export Processing Zones (Control of Employment) Rules, 1982);

-- exclusion of public servants of Grade 16 and above from the scope of the Industrial Relations Ordinance (IRO), 1969 (section 2(viii) (special provision)); restrictions on recourse to strikes (sections 32(2) and 33(1) of the Ordinance);

-- denial to minority unions from representing their members in relation to individual grievances;

-- exclusion from the definition of workers in the IRO, and thus of the right to join a trade union, of persons employed in an administrative or managerial capacity whose wages exceed 800 rupees per month (when the national minimum wage was fixed at 1,500 in 1995);

-- artificial promotions used as an anti-union tactic in the banking and finance sector;

-- denial of the right to form trade unions for employees in public and private sector hospitals; and -- denial of the right to organize of forestry workers and railway employees.

As concerns the Pakistan Essential Services (Maintenance) Act, 1952, the Committee had noted in its previous comments the Government's statement to the 1996 Conference Committee that the list of services prohibited from strike by virtue of this Act had been reduced to eight. The Government added that recommendations made by the national tripartite task force on labour to delete certain other services from the list were submitted to the Cabinet for approval. Noting with concern that, by virtue of section 7 of the Essential Services Act, any person working in a service deemed to be essential under the Act who participates in a strike shall be liable to up to one-year's imprisonment, the Committee requests the Government to provide with its next report the list of services presently covered by the Essential Services (Maintenance) Act and to indicate any developments with respect to the task force recommendations to further restrict this list.

Given that the Government has provided no new information on these matters for several years, the Committee, recalling that a direct contacts mission took place in January 1994 between a representative of the Director-General and the Government and that a national tripartite task force was established at that time with a wide mandate on labour and industrial relations issues, urges the Government to ensure that substantial progress is made in ensuring that its national legislation and practice are brought into conformity with the requirements of the Convention in the very near future, taking into consideration the recommendations of the direct contacts mission, and to provide detailed information in this regard in its next report.

© Copyright and permissions 1996-2024 International Labour Organization (ILO) | Privacy policy | Disclaimer