National Legislation on Labour and Social Rights
Global database on occupational safety and health legislation
Employment protection legislation database
DISPLAYINEnglish - French - Spanish
Article 2 of the Convention. Previously, the Committee had referred to the need to amend section 18(4) of the Labour Relations (Amendment) Bill, 2006, which provides that if an organization fails to comply with the provisions of subsection (1) (which require an organization to annually submit audited financial statements, a list of the names and postal addresses of its officers, and its number of members) after being given a reasonable opportunity to do so, the Registrar may suspend and even cancel the registration and certificate of an organization. In its last comments, the Committee had noted, in this connection, that section 18(6) of the Labour Relations (Amendment) Bill provides that an organization may appeal against a decision of the Registrar to suspend or cancel its registration and certificate of registration. Furthermore, the Committee had noted the Government’s indication that the Labour Relations (Amendment) Bill has been revised so as to allow unions to appeal decisions of the Registrar to cancel their registration. The Committee notes that the Government does not refer to this issue in its last report. In these circumstances, the Committee once again requests the Government to indicate: (i) whether an organization’s appeal has the effect of suspending the administrative decision, pending the issuance of a final decision by the judiciary; and (ii) whether the judiciary, upon hearing an appeal, is able to deal with the substance of the case to enable them to decide whether or not the provisions pursuant to which the administrative measures in question were taken constitute a violation of the rights guaranteed by the Convention. In the event that either of these judicial safeguards against dissolution are not provided for, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to amend section 18(6) of the Labour Relations (Amendment) Bill so as to bring it into full conformity with the abovementioned principle.
The Committee once again requests the Government to transmit the final version of the Labour Relations (Amendment) Bill with its next report.
The Committee notes the Government replies to the comments submitted by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) dated 26 August 2009. The Committee also notes the comments submitted by ITUC dated 24 August 2010 that mainly refer to matters previously raised by the Committee.
In its previous comments, the Committee, noting that sections 45(3) and 47(2) of the Labour Relations Act empower the parties concerned to apply to the Industrial Relations Court for a determination as to whether a particular strike involves an essential service, had requested the Government to provide information on any strike declared illegal and the reasons therefor, as well as on any decisions rendered by the Industrial Relations Court under these sections of the Labour Relations Act. The Committee notes that the Government indicates in its report that: (i) no strikes have been declared illegal on the basis of essential services; (ii) no request for determination of an essential service has been made before the Industrial Relations Court; and (iii) the social partners considered that a clear list of what should be considered an essential service under the Labour Relations Act should be established; in this regard, a provision had been included in the Labour Relations (Amendment) Bill for the establishment of a subcommittee of the Tripartite Labour Advisory Council whose purpose is to determine a list of what should be considered an essential service under the Labour Relations Act. In these circumstances, the Committee requests the Government to provide information in its next report of any development concerning the establishment of the subcommittee and the advancement of its work.
A request concerning other points is being addressed directly to the Government.
Article 2 of the Convention. Previously, the Committee had referred to the need to amend section 18(4) of the Labour Relations (Amendment) Bill, 2006, which provides that if an organization fails to comply with the provisions of subsection (1) (which require an organization to annually submit audited financial statements, a list of the names and postal addresses of its officers, and its number of members) after being given a reasonable opportunity to do so, the Registrar may suspend and even cancel the registration and certificate of an organization. The Committee notes, in this connection, that section 18(6) of the Labour Relations (Amendment) Bill provides that an organization may appeal against a decision of the Registrar to suspend or cancel its registration and certificate of registration. The Committee further notes the Government’s indication that the Labour Relations (Amendment) Bill has been revised so as to allow unions to appeal decisions of the Registrar to cancel their registration. In these circumstances, the Committee requests the Government to indicate: (1) whether an organization’s appeal has the effect of suspending the administrative decision, pending the issuance of a final decision by the judiciary; and (2) whether the judiciary, upon hearing an appeal, is able to deal with the substance of the case to enable them to decide whether or not the provisions pursuant to which the administrative measures in question were taken constitute a violation of the rights guaranteed by the Convention. In the event that either of these judicial safeguards against dissolution are not provided for, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to amend section 18(6) of the Labour Relations (Amendment) Bill so as to bring it into full conformity with the abovementioned principle.
Article 3. The Committee had previously referred to the need to amend section 49(2) of the Labour Relations (Amendment) Bill, which provides that an employer may fairly dismiss an employee on grounds of operational requirements, notwithstanding that the operational requirements resulted from a strike undertaken in conformity with the Labour Relations Act. In this regard, the Committee notes with interest that the Government indicates that section 49(2) of the Bill has been deleted.
The Committee requests the Government to transmit the final version of the Labour Relations (Amendment) Bill with its next report.
The Committee notes the Government’s report and its reply to the comments submitted by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) dated 29 August 2008. The ITUC’s comments mainly refer to matters previously raised by the Committee on the right to strike.
In its previous comments, the Committee, noting that sections 45(3) and 47(2) of the Labour Relations Act empower the parties concerned to apply to the Industrial Relations Court for a determination as to whether a particular strike involves an essential service, had requested the Government to provide information on any strike declared illegal and the reasons therefore, as well as on any decisions rendered by the Industrial Relations Court under these sections of the Labour Relations Act. The Government indicates in this regard that the procedures set out in the Labour Relations Act concerning strike action are often not followed by unions, which leads to many strikes being declared illegal, and adds that, with international assistance, it has intensified tripartite discussion on, among other things, the issue of illegal strikes. The Committee once again requests the Government to provide information on any strike declared illegal and the reasons therefore, as well as on any decisions rendered by the Industrial Relations Court, under sections 45(3) and 47(2) of the Labour Relations Act.
The Committee notes the Government’s report. It observes, however, that it does not reply to the points raised in its previous comments. In these circumstances the Committee reiterates its previous comments.
Article 2 of the Convention. The Committee noted that section 18(4) of the Labour Relations (Amendment) Bill, 2006, provides that, if an organization fails to comply with the provisions of subsection (1) (on submission of financial and membership information to the registrar) after being given a reasonable opportunity to do so, the registrar may suspend and even cancel the registration and certificate of an organization. The Committee recalls that measures of suspension or dissolution by the administrative authority constitute serious infringements to the principles of freedom of association. Measures of dissolution of trade union organizations should only occur in extremely serious cases and following a judicial decision so that the right to a defence is fully guaranteed.
Article 3. The Committee also noted that section 49(1) of the Labour Relations (Amendment) Bill, 2006, provides for the prohibition of the employer from taking disciplinary action or dismissing an employee for participating in a strike in conformity with this Bill. However, section 49(2) of this Bill provides that an employer may fairly dismiss an employee on grounds of operational requirements, notwithstanding that the operational requirements resulted from a strike in conformity with this Act. The Committee recalls once again that although the inclusion of dismissal on grounds of operational requirements is generally acceptable, in the specific situation of a strike this could lead to those involved in the strike being targeted and therefore constitute discrimination in employment.
The Committee therefore requests the Government to take the necessary measures in order to ensure the full conformity of the forthcoming legislation with the Convention. It requests the Government to keep it informed of any development in this regard and to transmit a copy of the amended text, when adopted.
The Committee notes the Government’s report. It observes, however, that it does not reply to the points raised in its previous comments.
The Committee noted that the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU, now ITUC – International Trade Union Confederation) submitted comments that referred in particular to violent police repression of a protest march by tea sector workers as well as acts of violence against a trade union organizer. The Committee recalls that freedom of association can only be exercised in conditions in which fundamental rights, and in particular those relating to human life and personal safety, are fully respected and guaranteed. The Committee expresses the firm hope that the Government will take all the necessary measures to ensure that this kind of violent acts will not take place in future.
The Committee had noted that sections 45(3) and 47(2) of the Labour Relations Act empower the parties concerned to apply to the Industrial Relations Court for a determination as to whether a particular strike involves an essential service. The Committee once again requests the Government to provide information on any strike declared illegal and the reasons therefor, as well as on any decisions rendered by the Industrial Relations Court under sections 45(3) and 47(2) of the Labour Relations Act.
The Committee takes note of the Labour Relations (Amendment) Bill, 2006.
Article 2. The Committee notes that section 18(4) of the Bill provides that if an organization fails to comply with the provisions of subsection (1) (on submission of financial and membership information to the Registrar) after being given a reasonable opportunity to do so, the Registrar may suspend and even cancel the registration and certificate of an organization. The Committee recalls that measures of suspension or dissolution by the administrative authority constitute serious infringements to the principles of freedom of association. Measures of dissolutions of trade union organizations should only occur in extremely serious cases and following a judicial decision guaranteeing the right to a defence.
Article 3. The Committee also notes that section 49 of the Labour Relations (Amendment) Bill, 2006, provides for the prohibition for the employer to take disciplinary action or dismiss an employee for participating in a strike in conformity with this Act. However, section (2) of this Bill provides that an employer may fairly dismiss an employee on grounds of operational requirements, notwithstanding that the operational requirements resulted from a strike in conformity with this Act. The Committee recalls that although the inclusion of dismissal on grounds of operational requirements is generally acceptable, in the specific situation of a strike this could lead to those involved in the strike being targeted and therefore constitute discrimination in employment.
The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received.
The Committee notes the comments of the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) dated 10 August 2006, which refer to issues previously raised by the Committee on the right to strike and allege acts of violence against a trade union organizer. The Committee requests the Government to send its observations on the ICFTU comments, including those dated 31 August 2005 concerning in particular violent police repression of a protest march by tea workers (see 2005 observation, 76th Session).
In addition, in its previous comments, the Committee had noted that section 45(3) and 47(2) of the Labour Relations Act of 1996 empower the parties concerned to apply to the Industrial Relations Court for a determination as to whether a particular strike involves an essential service. The Committee once again requests the Government to provide information on any strike declared illegal and the reasons, therefore, as well as on any decisions rendered by the Industrial Relations Court under sections 45(3) and 47(2) of the Labour Relations Act.
Finally, the Committee notes the Government’s communication dated 2 October 2006 which refers to its reply in relation to the communication received from the Malawi Congress of Trade Unions concerning the application of the Convention. The Committee recalls that these comments were examined in the framework of Convention No. 98.
The Committee notes the comments submitted by the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) in a communication dated 31 August 2005 with regard to violent police repression of a protest march by tea workers in September 2004 as well as issues previously raised by the Committee on the right to strike. Noting that freedom of assembly and demonstration constitutes a fundamental aspect of trade union rights and that the authorities should refrain from any interference which would restrict this right or impede the lawful exercise thereof, provided that the exercise of these rights does not cause a serious and imminent threat to public order, the Committee requests that the Government communicate its observations on the ICFTU comments, along with its response to the Committee’s previous direct request (see 2004 direct request, 75th Session) in its next report which is due in 2006.
The Committee also takes note of the comments made by the Malawi Congress of Trade Unions (MCTU) dated 26 December 2004 as well as the Government’s observations thereon. These comments will be examined in the framework of Convention No. 98.
The Committee notes the Government’s report.
Article 3 of the Convention. Essential services. The Committee recalls that in its previous comments it had requested the Government to provide detailed information on any decisions rendered by the Industrial Relations Court under sections 45(3) and 47(2) of the Labour Relations Act, 1996, in relation to the question of whether a particular strike involves an essential service, and notes the information from the Government that the Court has so far not registered any dispute in connection with those sections and, accordingly, has not rendered any decision in this regard.
The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information in future reports on any strikes declared illegal and the reasons thereof, as well as on any decisions rendered by the Industrial Relations Court under sections 45(3) and 47(2) of the Labour Relations Act, 1996.
The Committee notes the Government’s report. It also takes note of the comments formulated by the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) on the application of the Convention as well as the Government’s detailed observations in reply to these comments.
The Committee recalls that its previous comments concerned the following.
Article 3 of the Convention. Essential services. The Committee had noted that section 47(2) of the Labour Relations Act of 1996 empowers the minister to apply to the Industrial Relations Court for a determination as to whether a threatened or actual strike involves an essential service, and thus had requested the Government to keep it informed of any decision from the Industrial Relations Court in this regard. In its latest report, the Government indicates that no decision from the Industrial Relations Court has yet been rendered on this point since no doubts or disagreements have occurred which would have led the minister to apply to the Court.
On this issue, the Committee further notes the comments formulated by the ICFTU to the effect that, while workers in essential services are permitted to strike after certain prescribed procedures have been met, the lack of specification as to which services are essential and which are not, results in many strikes being declared illegal. In its reply, the Government states that section 2 of the Labour Relations Act defines essential services as "services the interruption of which would endanger the life, health or personal safety of the whole or part of the population". The Government points out that this definition was adopted to avoid abuse by authorities in suppressing the workers’ right to strike by coming up with an endless list of essential services. In addition, sections 45(3) and 47(2) stipulate that the concerned parties can have recourse to the Industrial Relations Court for determination as to whether the branch of economic activity concerned belongs to essential services or not.
The Committee takes due note of this information. It once again requests the Government to provide detailed information in its next report, on the number of strikes which have been declared illegal and the reasons therefor, as well as on any decisions rendered by the Industrial Relations Court under sections 45(3) and 47(2).
The Committee notes with interest the Government’s first report, and in particular the adoption of the Labour Relations Act of 1996. Noting that section 47(2) of the Labour Relations Act of 1996 empowers the Minister to apply to the Industrial Relations Court for a determination as to whether a threatened or actual strike involves an essential service, the Committee requests the Government to keep it informed, in its next reports, of any decision from the Industrial Relations Court in this regard.