DISPLAYINFrench - Spanish
- 92. At its March 2013 meeting, the Committee made the following
recommendation on the matters still pending [see 367th Report, paras 82–83]:
- In its communications of 7 February, 3 May and 22 September 2011
and 4 May and 21 August 2012, the Government states that SINAUT–SUNAT filed an
appeal for amparo (protection of constitutional rights) with the judicial authority
with a view to having the employer (SUNAT) sign a written arbitration agreement; the
judicial authority rejected the application of the statute of limitations called for
by the employer; SUNAT appealed against the ruling, and the appeals court,
considering the employer’s request for application of the statute of limitations to
be well-founded, overturned the lower court ruling and ordered the case to be
shelved. The Government adds that the trade union filed a constitutional action.
This was granted, and the matter was ordered to be referred to the Constitutional
Court. The latter has examined the case and a judgment is currently pending.
- The Committee notes this information and requests the Government
to send a copy of the ruling of the Constitutional Court.
- 93. In its communication of 31 July 2013, the Government states that, on
16 July 2013, the Constitutional Court ruled on the appeal filed by SINAUT–SUNAT,
declaring the request unfounded on the grounds that optional arbitration and striking
are alternative and non exclusive options in collective bargaining, and that resorting
to one of them does not preclude the possibility of resorting to the other; however,
choosing either option will modify the type of labour arbitration, which is only
voluntary in accordance with article 63 of the single uniform text of the Collective
Labour Relations Act. In this regard, the trade union opted to exercise its right to
strike during the collective bargaining of the list of claims for the period 2008–09.
The Government adds that, therefore, the trade union’s right to collective bargaining
was not violated, and highlights SUNAT’s statement to the effect that: (1) it is
interested in finding a fair solution through collective bargaining, for which reason a
number of meetings have been held as part of the collective bargaining process and out
of court with the Ministry of Labour; (2) in 2011, 2012 and 2013, SUNAT concluded
collective agreements with several trade union organizations, such as FENTAT, SUTTSUNAT
and SINTRADUANAS; and (3) it is complying with the internal regulations governing
collective bargaining in the public administration, based on the principles of good
faith and free and voluntary collective bargaining. Lastly, the Government highlights
the fact that the abovementioned Constitutional Court ruling refers to the collective
bargaining process for the period 2008–09.
- 94. The Committee takes note of this information and, in particular, of
the outcome of the Constitutional Court ruling, which rejects the requests made by the
complainant organization in its appeal.
