CMNT_TITLE

Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98) - Mauritius (RATIFICATION: 1969)

Other comments on C098

Observation

Direct Request

2016

DISPLAYINEnglish - French - SpanishAlle anzeigen

The Committee notes the observations from the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) received on 1 September 2014, the observations from the International Organisation of Employers (IOE) and the Mauritius Employers’ Federation (MEF) received on 21 July 2011 and 1 September 2014, and the observations of the General Workers Federation (GWF) and four unions of the sugar industry received on 22 August 2013. The Committee requests the Government to conduct the necessary inquiries into allegations of anti-union discrimination made by the ITUC and, in any cases in which the allegations are found to be substantiated, to ensure the application of sufficiently dissuasive sanctions.

Articles 1–3 of the Convention. Sanctions against anti-union discrimination and interference. The Committee welcomes the Government’s indication of increases in the maximum fines able to be imposed in cases of anti-union discrimination or interference through the Employment Relations (Amendment) Act 2013, introducing amendments to sections 31, 103 and 104 of the Employment Relations Act, 2008 (ERA).

Article 4. Collective bargaining. In its previous observation, the Committee requested the Government’s comments on an allegation that the number of collective agreements signed in 2009 had reduced by 70 per cent; to indicate any concrete measures undertaken to promote collective bargaining in export processing zones (EPZs), the textile sector and for migrant workers; and to provide information on the establishment of a new tripartite mechanism. The Committee notes that the Government indicates that statistics are not available allowing it to comment on the alleged reduction in collective agreements. The Committee welcomes the Government’s indication that the National Tripartite Forum has met four times since its establishment in September 2010 and the possibility of establishment of a conciliation service at the request of parties to a dispute (section 79A of the ERA). The Committee notes that the Government reports that 43 collective agreements were registered for the period June 2010–May 2014. Noting that the Government reiterates that there is no legislative impediment to collective bargaining in EPZs, the textile sector or for migrant workers, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on any concrete measures taken or envisaged to encourage and promote the full development and utilization of machinery for voluntary negotiation between employers or employers’ organizations and workers’ organizations, with a view to the regulation of terms and conditions of employment by means of collective agreements, in EPZs, the textile sector and for migrant workers. So as to be able to review the operation of collective bargaining in practice, the Committee requests the Government to take measures in order to compile statistical information on collective agreements in the country (number of agreements in the public and private sectors, subjects dealt with and number of workers covered) and on the use of conciliation services.

Interference in collective bargaining. The Committee notes the observations from the IOE and the MEF alleging that the Government intervened in the collective bargaining process in the sugar industry by referring the 21 issues that could not be resolved during the collective bargaining process to the National Remuneration Board (NRB). According to the Government, the NRB is an independent body able to make recommendations and the referral was made after lengthy negotiations that had reached a deadlock. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the dispute has been resolved and the court proceedings lodged by the MEF in this regard have been withdrawn.