Interim Report - REPORT_NO147, 1975

1. 263. This case was examined by the Committee at its session in November 1973 when it submitted to the Governing Body an interim report which is contained in paragraphs 411-422 of its 139th Report, which was approved by the Governing Body at its 191st Session (November 1973). At its subsequent sessions in February and May 1974 the Committee adjourned its examination of the case as the information which the Committee had requested from the Government had not been received.
2. 264. In a communication dated 20 May 1974 the Government transmitted additional information in connection with the complaints.
3. 265. Spain has not ratified the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), nor the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).

A. A. The complainants' allegations

1. 266. The Committee recalls that according to the complaint, the employees of "Control y Aplicaciones", "Sade" and "Copisa", who work together at the San Adrián del Besós power station - a total of 1,080 workers - held a meeting on 27 March 1973 to discuss a series of claims based on essential points relating to wages and conditions of work. On the following day, a meeting of 800 workers gave its overwhelming approval to this series of claims, and 2 April was fixed as the deadline for the management to reply to these demands. On 2 April, in view of the management's refusal to reply, the majority of the workers came out on strike; in the meantime a Committee elected from among the workers had had an interview with representatives of the management who refused to negotiate with them.
2. 267. On 3 April, continues the complaint, upon arrival at work the workers found the doors locked and a notice posted up to the effect that they were laid off for five days. The police surrounded and occupied the premises, using violence to prevent the workers from entering; a few workers were wounded by the police. The workers responded and drove the forces of order back to a railway line. When a train passed four workers were left alone on the side of the line where the police were, and they were arrested. Amid the tumult the train was brought to a halt, and the workers, realising that their comrades had been arrested, attempted to release them. The police opened fire with machine guns, killing Mr. Manuel Fernández Márquez and wounding Mr. Serafin Villegas Grimez in the neck. A number of other workers were also wounded.
3. 268. The workers, continues the complaint, retreated, but a group of 700 workers was quickly formed and marched to the railway station, where the passengers aboard two trains which had been stopped sided with them and joined in the demonstration. At midday, on 3 April 1973, San Adrián and a neighbouring village were occupied by troops.
4. 269. The complaint states that on the morning of 4 April the press published a communication from the Permanent Committee of the "Official Trade Union Congress" expressing its regret that some workers had been made use of by subversive groups from outside labour circles without any claim having been made through the established channels, "i.e. the official Trade Union". The Civil Governor of Barcelona expressed a concurrent view in an official statement. In the opinion of the complainants the workers, who have submitted clear, categorical and extremely specific claims, refuse to consider themselves represented by this union.
5. 270. The Government, in reply to the allegations made, had stated that the competent authorities had immediately opened an objective and impartial inquiry in order to ascertain the facts and determine who bore the responsibility for what had occurred, and that in the light of that inquiry and any other action taken in pursuance of the law, it would be possible in due course to provide more accurate information.
6. 271. At its session in the November 1973, the Committee, bearing in mind the detailed information supplied by the complainants and also the Government's statement that an objective and impartial inquiry was being held, had recommended the Governing Body to request the Government to be good enough to supply details of the findings of the inquiry once those were made known. The Committee also requested the Government to indicate whether the workers alleged to have been arrested were still in custody, and if so, to furnish information regarding any legal proceedings brought against these persons and the outcome of those proceedings and to supply, in this connection, the text of the judgments pronounced and the grounds adduced therefor.
7. 272. In a further communication, dated 12 February 1974, the WCL and the ICFTU jointly alleged that heavy prison sentences had been imposed by a military tribunal on four workers for their part in the demonstrations at San Adrián del Besós. The complainants give the name of Manuel Pérez Ezquerre who was sentenced to four years' imprisonment.
8. 273. In its communication of 20 May 1974 the Government states that investigation of what took place at San Adrián del Besós on 3 April 1973 led to the conclusion that everything had been prepared in advance in accordance with a revolutionary programme, organised and carried out by a clandestine group. Prior to the events in question there had been no industrial claims made through the shop stewards and the works Committee, and no demands had been made through any other channel.
9. 274. The Government explains that in San Adrián del Besós, in the province of Barcelona, a thermal power station is under construction by the company "Fuerzas Eléctricas de Cataluña SA", in conjunction with six other firms carrying out various specialised activities, whose labour force belongs to a number of trade unions, but mostly to the Construction and Metal Workers' Union.
10. 275. On 27 March, continues the Government, a group of agitators suddenly called on the workers to hold a so-called "industrial claims meeting". At the time the workers did not know what claims were meant, for as far as they knew none was outstanding, but many of them attended this meeting held by the group on the worksite. As usual in "meetings" organised with revolutionary tactics and aims, the agitators mixed with the crowd in order to provoke reactions favourable to their aims and to exercise coercion. ,
11. 276. On this occasion, as in the subsequent incidents, Manuel Pérez Ezquerre, who is mentioned in the complaints, was prominent as promoter and organiser. His police record, as given by the Government, may be summarised as follows: in 1962 he was arrested in Bilbao for failing to pay a hotel bill incurred in Madrid; in 1963, Court No. 1 in Pamplona ordered his arrest for theft; in 1965, the High Court of Justice for the province of Madrid ordered a check to be made on his address in order that he might appear in a case it was hearing; again in 1965, he was arrested in Bilbao for taking part in an illegal demonstration; in 1966, the same court repeated and added to the previous order; in May 1970, he was arrested on suspicion of being in charge of a communist cell, but the charge was stayed for lack of evidence; in 1971, he was handed over to the judicial authorities for being in charge of a communist cell in Añover de Tajo (Toledo); on 31 January 1973, he was arrested in Barcelona whilst distributing communist propaganda. He was handed over to the judicial authorities and by them allowed provisional liberty, but left his last known address. Accordingly, when the events at San Adrián del Besós occurred he was still under prosecution.
12. 277. The Government adds that on 28 March 1973, that is, on the day following the "meeting", pamphlets from a clandestine source, dated 27 March but prepared before that date, were distributed in San Adrián del Besós. On the same day altercations took place in the company's canteens. Later, a group of agitators circulated documents among the workers for signature. They contained various claims designed to attract the workers, together with others included on purpose and known beforehand to be completely unfeasible. According to the Government, less than one third of the workers signed, some in good faith, many without knowing what they were signing, and many more under moral or physical compulsion.
13. 278. On Friday, 30 March, continues the Government, four or five individuals in each company handed these documents to their respective managements and gave them until Monday, 2 April to accept their demands. The companies replied that although notice of cancellation of the relevant collective agreement had not been given they were nevertheless ready to consider any claims made through the workers' legal representatives. On 2 April, before work was due to start, groups of agitators took up their positions on the various worksites, using force to prevent the start of work and locking the workers in the canteens. From very early on in the morning the Chairman of the Union of Workers and Technicians of the Building industry trade union for the province of Barcelona, the Secretary of that trade union and two trade union legal advisers were in contact with the rebels, the most turbulent of whom rejected their mediation and prevented them from making contact with the other workers. The companies punished a number of workers with dismissal for conduct gravely prejudicial to discipline. The dismissed workers appealed to the Labour Magistrates' Court No. 3 in Barcelona which gave judgment on 24 May 1973 to the effect that the dismissals were improper.
14. 279. These, in detail, states the Government, are the facts of the supposedly labour side of the question. In no circumstances could this be classed as a strike, because the recognised procedure to be followed by the workers in industrial disputes was not followed; the question was not raised through trade union channels; no application was made for the declaration of a collective dispute; the collective agreement had not been denounced, and no request was made for conciliation procedure to be applied. To sum up, no use at all was made of legal channels; this was not a strike but a riot.
15. 280. The Government states that, from midnight on 2-3 April onwards, the events which took place have reference solely to the keeping of the peace. This was no clash of interests, but violent opposition to law and order provoked by a revolutionary group. On the morning of 3 April, serious events took place which were subversive and nothing else. Before working hours, about 150 persons congregated outside the premises of the company "Fuerzas Eléctricas de Cataluña". Some of them had no connection with "Constructora Pirenaica", the "Sociedad Argentina de Electrificación" or "Control y Aplicaciones". Their orders were to occupy and maintain themselves in the premises of the "Fuerzas Eléctricas de Cataluña". Their attitude was threatening and the police ordered them to move on. A first attempt to attack ensued, but the ringleaders desisted, perhaps for lack of sufficient numbers.
16. 281. The group left its meeting point for the Barcelona-Massanet railway line, where they stoned and held up two passenger trains, one very shortly after the other. It is not true, states the Government, that the passengers took the rebels' part, but it is certain that the rebels attacked the passengers by throwing stones at the train windows. This incident was premeditated and was designed to cause a serious breach of the peace, bodily assault, damage to property and disorganisation of a public service.
17. 282. According to the Government, the same group later made for the premises of the "Fuerzas Eléctricas de Cataluña". Its attitude was violent and it obviously intended to storm the premises. The police took the necessary action to prevent this, and after giving the regulation warnings were obliged to fire into the air as a warning to the assailants. Some of these, instead of desisting, made a violent attack on the forces of law and order, who were constrained to repel it. During the scuffle, the rebels were seen to put two wounded into two cars. It was later ascertained that one of these died before reaching Badalona Out-Patients' Hospital. A sergeant, three corporals and five guards of the police were injured.
18. 283. The Government states that the competent authorities immediately carried out an objective impartial inquiry to ascertain the facts of the case and allocate responsibility. This showed that at first the riot police guarding the worksite used only persuasion to ensure that the rebels gave up their intentions of occupying it, but were violently attacked and obliged to use their weapons in legitimate self-defence, so as not to be overwhelmed. Finally, the Government adds that the court martial which tried the case (because of the attack on the armed forces) condemned Manuel Pérez Ezquerre, as the principal accused, to four years' imprisonment, and three other accused to one year's imprisonment.

B. B. The Committee's conclusions

1. 284. From the information available to it the Committee notes that following a refusal by the management to discuss, except with their legal representatives, the claims put forward by the workers, demonstrations took place which resulted in violent clashes between the workers and the police. These clashes took place when the police attempted to prevent the workers from releasing some of their comrades who had been arrested and from occupying the premises of the company "Fuerzas Eléctricas de Cataluña". As a result of the clashes, one worker was killed and a number of other workers as well as members of the police were injured. In these circumstances, the Committee, while noting the allegation of the complainants that the workers did not consider themselves represented by the existing trade union and deploring the situation which led to the death of one person and injury.to several others, considers that insufficient evidence has been put forward to prove that the intervention of the forces of order constituted an infringement of trade union rights.