Definitive Report - REPORT_NO323, November 2000

1. 151. The complaint is contained in a communication dated 2 February 2000 from the Confederation of Banking Trade Unions (CSB).
2. 152. The Government sent its observations in a communication dated 9 June 2000.
3. 153. Chile has ratified the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), and the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).

A. The complainant's allegations

1. 154. In its communication of 2 February 2000, the Confederation of Banking Trade Unions (CSB), which is affiliated to the Single Central Organization of Chilean Workers (CUT), alleges that the Chilean authorities have disregarded the principles of freedom of association and violated Convention No. 87, to the detriment of trade union autonomy and the free election of CUT officials, in that public officials were directly involved in funding the election campaigns of certain candidates in the CUT leadership elections. The CSB supplies an official document from the Under-Secretary of Labour to the Finance Minister stating that a trade union official had referred to a commitment by the Minister to provide assistance for trade union officials on their election visits to various regions in December 1998. The document refers to nine trade union officials by name. This illicit procedure is one of a number of actions which resulted in several candidates not standing for election or withdrawing their candidatures. According to the CSB, the debate concerning the legitimacy and transparency of the election process is still continuing.

B. The Government's reply

1. 155. In its communication of 9 June 2000, the Government states that the allegations are based on a communication dated 13 November 1998 from the Under-Secretary of Labour to the Finance Minister requesting financial assistance for travel by Christian Democrat trade union officials during the CUT elections. The Government states that the letter in question was of a purely personal nature but that, owing to an administrative error, it was sent on official stationery and that, because of its purely personal nature, it in no way implied any commitment to the use of public funds, nor did it constitute government interference in the internal affairs of trade union organizations.
2. 156. The Government states that an internal inquiry established that, during November and December 1998, the only travel in this context involved officials of the Under-Secretariat of Labour on official business, and that none of the trade union officials named in the communication referred to above undertook any trips at the expense of the Under-Secretariat. The Public Accounts Inspectorate of the Republic, a body that is independent of any state ministry, authority or department, and is responsible among other things for monitoring compliance with the Administrative Statutes, was informed of the inquiry. The Government recalls that the authority in question can carry out any inspections or inquiries that it may deem necessary and establishes the facts under investigation through administrative proceedings.
3. 157. The Government adds that on 2 August 1999, the official inspector of the Public Accounts Inspectorate took a statement under oath from the official who had been Under-Secretary of Labour in 1998, to the effect that the communication in question, which was published in El Metropolitano on 30 July 1999, was purely personal in nature, that no reply to it was ever received from the Finance Minister, and that no public funds were involved, nor was there any payment of travel expenses on behalf of the trade union officials named in the communication. This information was also passed on to the Chamber of Deputies on 30 December last, and the authorities at the time reiterated that public funds were not used to benefit certain trade unionists.
4. 158. The Government concludes by stating that it has been the practice of governments to encourage the autonomous development of workers' and employers' organizations in order to create a channel for social dialogue and thereby implement economic and social policies intended to bring about both economic growth and social equity.

C. The Committee's conclusions

1. 159. The Committee notes that in the present case the complainant has alleged that public officials were directly involved in funding the election campaigns of certain candidates in the CUT elections in December 1998, in particular with regard to financial assistance for travel to different regions. The Committee notes the statements of the Government to the effect that the official document from the Under-Secretariat of Labour, on which the complainant bases its allegations, was a purely personal document which, owing to an administrative error, was sent on official stationery. The Committee also notes that according to the public accounts inspectorate of the Republic, public funds were not involved and travel expenses were not paid on behalf of the officials referred to by the complainant.
2. 160. While regretting the use of official stationery for personal communications on trade union matters by a government representative, the Committee considers that the case does not require further examination.