Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87) - Ecuador (Ratification: 1967)

Other comments on C087

Observation

Direct Request

Display in: French - SpanishView all

The Committee notes the Government’s reply to the joint observations of the Trade Union Association of Agricultural, Banana and Rural Workers (ASTAC) and the Ecuadorian Confederation of Unitary Class Organizations of Workers (CEDOCUT), received on 1 October 2020, which are concerned with issues that the Committee examines in the present comment. The Committee also notes the observations of Public Services International in Ecuador (PSI-Ecuador), received on 1 September 2021, which are concerned with issues examined in the present comment, as well as the Government’s reply in this regard.

Technical assistance. The Committee recalls that in December 2019 the Office, at the request of the Government, carried out a technical assistance mission, which presented the tripartite constituents with a draft road map for initiating a tripartite dialogue with a view to adopting measures to address the comments of the ILO supervisory bodies. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the technical assistance provided in 2019 and the draft road map abovementioned did not result in any practical action. The Committee also takes note of the Government’s indication that for the time being it wishes to receive technical assistance only with regard to tripartite dialogue with the aim of improving and strengthening communication between the Government and the social partners. Noting with regret that no action has been taken to follow up the technical assistance provided by the Office in December 2019 concerning the measures to address the comments of the supervisory bodies, the Committee hopes that the technical assistance that the Government wishes to receive will be provided very soon so that the subsequent strengthening of social dialogue enables progress in taking the necessary measures to bring the legislation into line with the Convention with respect to the points set out below.

Application of the Convention in the private sector

Article 2 of the Convention. Excessive number of workers (30) required for the establishment of workers’ associations, enterprise committees or assemblies for the organization of enterprise committees. Possibility of creating trade union organizations by branch of activity. For several years the Committee has been asking the Government to take the necessary steps, in consultation with the social partners, to revise sections 443, 449, 452 and 459 of the Labour Code in such a way as to: (i) reduce the minimum number of members required to establish workers’ associations and enterprise committees; and (ii) enable the establishment of primary-level unions comprising workers from several enterprises. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that: (i) fixing a minimum number of workers and limiting associations to the level of an enterprise for the establishment of a trade union is not intended to restrict or limit the creation of this type of organization, but seeks to ensure the representativeness of the trade union organization in its relations with the employers, demonstrating cohesion and agreement on the part of the majority; and (ii) with regard to establishing labour organizations with workers from different enterprises, the Labour Code does not provide for a form of association that would allow for such organizations. In this regard, the Committee recalls that: (i) the requirement of a reasonable level of representativeness to conclude collective agreements must not be confused with the conditions required for the establishment of trade union organizations; (ii) the minimum number of members must be kept within reasonable limits so as not to obstruct the free establishment of organizations as guaranteed by the Convention; and (iii) the Committee generally considers that the requirement of a minimum number of 30 members to establish enterprise unions in countries where the economy is characterized by the prevalence of small enterprises hinders the freedom to establish trade unions. With regard to section 449 of the Labour Code, which requires trade unions to consist of workers from the same enterprise, the Committee recalls that, under Articles 2 and 3 of the Convention, it should be possible to establish primary-level trade unions comprising workers from several enterprises. The Committee recalls that ASTAC, in its observations of 2020, indicated that the Ministry of Labour had refused to register it as a trade union on the grounds that it was not formed of workers from the same enterprise. The Committee notes the Government’s indication, in reply to ASTAC’s observations, that ASTAC brought an action for constitutional protection and, by a ruling issued on 25 May 2021, the Provincial Court of Justice of Pichincha ordered the Ministry, pursuant to revision and analysis of the documents of ASTAC, to proceed with its registration as a trade union and also to regulate the exercise of the right to freedom of association by branch of activity so as to avoid any recurrence of such situations. The Government indicates that, even though it has filed an extraordinary motion for protection which is before the Constitutional Court of Justice, this action does not suspend the obligation to comply with the ruling, and so the Directorate of Labour Organizations at the Ministry of Labour continues to review the requirements of the present procedure for establishing ASTAC, in accordance with the ruling of 25 May 2021. Duly noting the ruling concerning ASTAC, the Committee firmly hopes that steps will be taken to proceed with the registration of ASTAC as a trade union. In particular, the Committee welcomes the fact that the ruling contributes towards enabling the establishment of trade union organizations by branch of activity, and trusts that the Committee’s view on this important development in the application of the Convention will be brought to the attention of the Constitutional Court of Justice. In light of the above, the Committee fully expects that the Government will take the necessary steps, in consultation with the social partners, to revise the sections of the laws referred to above in the manner indicated and requests the Government to keep it informed of developments in this respect.

Article 3. Compulsory time limits for convening trade union elections. The Committee has been asking the Government to amend section 10(c) of Ministerial Decision No. 0130 of 2013 issuing regulations on labour organizations, which provides that trade union executive committees shall lose their powers and competencies if they do not convene elections within 90 days of the expiry of their term of office, as set out in their respective union constitutions; such amendment being necessary to ensure that the consequences of any delay in holding elections shall be determined by the union constitutions themselves, subject to the observance of democratic rules. The Committee notes the Government’s reiteration that the regulations in question were approved with the participation of representatives of several labour organizations and trade union confederations, with the intention of resolving the issues faced by workers’ organizations when the latter are without leadership and it is impossible to convene new elections – providing a responsive, simplified mechanism in which the principles of participation, transparency and democracy predominate. The Government also indicates that, with the objective of providing legal certainty during the health emergency resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic, the Ministry of Labour exceptionally authorized the extension of the terms of office of executive committees of labour organizations for up to 90 days when their terms had expired after the last state of emergency. Recalling that under Article 3 of the Convention, trade union elections are an internal matter for organizations and should primarily be regulated by their constitutions, and observing that the consequences established by the regulations in the event of failure to respect the prescribed deadlines – the loss of powers and competencies for trade union committees – involve a serious risk of paralysing the capacity for trade union action, the Committee once again requests the Government to amend section 10(c) of the regulations in the manner indicated and to keep it informed of any developments in this respect.

Article 3. Requirement of Ecuadorian nationality to be eligible for trade union office. The Committee recalls that in 2015 it noted with satisfaction that section 49 of the Labour Justice Act had amended section 459(4) of the Labour Code and removed the requirement of Ecuadorian nationality to be eligible for trade union office. The Committee notes that the Government confirms that, as previously indicated by the social partners, section 49 was declared unconstitutional by ruling No. 002-18-SIN-CC of 2018. The Committee requests the Government to send a copy of the aforementioned ruling. The Government indicates in this regard that it is up to the legislative authorities to analyse and, if they see fit, to amend this prohibition. Recalling that under Article 3 of the Convention, workers’ and employers’ organizations should have the right to elect their representatives in full freedom, the national legislation must allow foreign workers to serve as trade union officials if permitted under their constitutions and rules, at least after a reasonable period of residence in the host country, the Committee accordingly requests the Government to amend section 459(4) of the Labour Code and to keep it informed of any developments in this regard.

Elections as officers of enterprise committees of workers who are not trade union members. The Committee previously indicated to the Government the need to amend section 459(3) of the Labour Code in such a way that workers who are not enterprise committee members may stand for office only if the enterprise committee’s own statute envisages that possibility. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the purpose of the legal provision is to ensure that all members have the right to participate and that in any case it will depend on how the right is formulated in the statute. Recalling that the legislative provision enabling workers who are not trade union members to stand for office on an enterprise committee is contrary to trade union independence as recognized by Article 3 of the Convention, the Committee once again requests the Government to take the necessary steps to amend the abovementioned provision of the Labour Code and to keep it informed of any developments in this respect.

Application of the Convention in the public sector

Article 2 of the Convention. Right of workers, without distinction whatsoever, to establish and to join organizations of their own choosing. The Committee previously noted that although section 11 of the Basic Act reforming the legislation governing the public sector (Basic Reform Act), adopted in 2017, establishes the right to organize for public servants, certain categories of public service staff were excluded from that right, especially those under contract for occasional services, those subject to free appointment and removal from office, and those on statutory, fixed-term contracts. Recalling that under Articles 2 and 9 of the Convention, with the sole possible exception of the members of the police and of the armed forces, all workers, including permanent or temporary public servants and those under fixed-term or occasional services contracts, have the right to establish and to join organizations of their own choosing, the Committee asked the Government to take the measures required to bring the legislation into line with the Convention. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that: (i) the public institutions of the State are working to ensure that public servants have their respective definitive appointments, provided that their activities are not temporary; and (ii) public servants on statutory, fixed-term contracts and those who are subject to free appointment and removal from office are officials who technically could perform roles equivalent to those of employers in the private sector, and so their participation in the exercise of public servants’ right and freedom to organize would cause conflicts of interest. In this regard, the Committee is bound to emphasize that even though barring public servants who exercise authority from the right to join trade unions which represent other public sector workers is not necessarily incompatible with the Convention, this depends on two conditions: (i) senior public officials should be entitled to establish their own organizations to defend their interests; and (ii) the legislation should limit this category to persons exercising senior managerial or policy-making responsibilities (see 2012 General Survey on the fundamental Conventions, paragraph 66). In light of the above and once again recalling that under Articles 2 and 9 of the Convention, with the exceptions previously mentioned, all workers have the right to establish and to join organizations of their own choosing, the Committee once again requests the Government to take the necessary measures to bring the legislation into line with the Convention.

Article 2 of the Convention. Right of workers to establish organizations of their own choosing without previous authorization. Organizations of public servants other than the committees of public servants. The Committee observed that, according to the provisions of the Basic Reform Act and Ministerial Decision MDT-2018-0010 regulating the right to organize of public servants, the committees of public servants, which must comprise “50 per cent plus one” of the staff of a public institution, have the responsibility for defending the rights of public servants and are the only bodies which can call a strike. Recalling that trade union pluralism must be possible in all cases, the Committee has been asking the Government to indicate what means are available to organizations of public servants, other than the committees of public servants, for defending the occupational interests of their members. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that: (i) public servants’ right to organize is duly guaranteed by the Basic Public Service Act (LOSEP) (amended by the Basic Reform Act); and (ii) Decision No. SNGP0008-2014 of the National Policy Management Secretariat promotes the functioning of organizations which exercise the constitutional right of association and organization without there being any legal basis for dealing with these organizations in the Basic Reform Act. The Committee observes that the Decision No. SNGP0008-2014 to which the Government refers, establishes the competencies of the institutions of the State for regulating social organizations created under the Civil Code. It also notes the Government’s indication, in the reply to the observations of PSI-Ecuador, that the LOSEP recognizes the committees of public servants as the only form of organization. In light of the above, the Committee is bound once again to recall that under Article 2 of the Convention, trade union pluralism must be possible in all cases, and that no organization of public servants should be deprived of the essential means for defending the occupational interests of its members, organizing its administration and activities, and formulating its programmes. Underlining the fact that all organizations of public servants must be able to enjoy the various guarantees established in the Convention, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on organizations of public servants other than the committees of public servants and to indicate in detail what means they have for defending the occupational interest of their members. The Committee also requests the Government to provide a copy of the updated text of the LOSEP and to take the necessary steps to ensure that this law does not restrict recognition of the right to organize to the committees of public servants as the sole form of organization.

Articles 2, 3 and 4. Registration of associations of public servants and their officers. Prohibition of the administrative dissolution of such associations. The Committee previously asked the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that the rules of Decree No. 193, which retains engagement in party-political activities as grounds for administrative dissolution, do not apply to associations of public servants whose purpose is to defend the economic and social interests of their members. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that party politics are the sum total of activities aimed at governing society from a specific ideological or philosophical standpoint and that these activities are prohibited for trade union organizations since the unions’ objectives, regardless of political affinity, must seek and focus on the economic and social improvement of their members. It indicates that the amendment of the Decree is a matter for the President of the Republic in any case. Recalling that defending the interests of their members requires associations of public servants to be able to express their views on the Government’s economic and social policy and that Article 4 of the Convention prohibits the suspension or administrative dissolution of such associations, the Committee firmly urges the Government to take the necessary steps to ensure that the rules of Decree No. 193 do not apply to associations of public servants which have the purpose of defending the economic and social interests of their members.

Article 3. Right of workers’ organizations and associations of public servants to organize their activities and to formulate their programmes. The Committee previously asked the Government to take the necessary measures to amend section 346 of the Basic Comprehensive Penal Code (COIP), which provides for imprisonment of one to three years for stopping or obstructing the normal provision of a public service, so as to prevent the imposition of criminal penalties on workers engaged in a peaceful strike. The Government previously indicated that this matter was going to be referred to the relevant state institutions in order to consider whether the Code should be amended. The Committee notes that the Government focuses its reply on emphasizing that public servants’ right to strike is set forth in chapter III of the LOSEP, and that the criminal penalties are only imposed in cases where strikers act unlawfully, namely, by totally blocking access for the general public to public services, committing acts of violence or causing damage to public property. The Committee recalls in this regard that it has continually emphasized that no penal sanctions should be imposed against a worker for having carried out a peaceful strike and thus for merely exercising an essential right, and therefore that measures of imprisonment or fines should not be imposed on any account. Such sanctions could be envisaged only where, during a strike, violence against persons or property, or other serious infringements of penal law have been committed, and can be imposed exclusively pursuant to legislation punishing such acts, such as the Penal Code (for example, in the case of failure to assist a person in danger, deliberate injury or damage deliberately caused to property) (see 2012 General Survey, paragraph 158). In light of the above, the Committee once again urges the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that section 346 of the Basic Comprehensive Penal Code (COIP) is amended in the manner indicated and to keep it informed of any developments in this regard.

Administrative dissolution of the National Federation of Education Workers (UNE). In its last comment, having noted the registration of social organizations related to the UNE, (which was dissolved by an administrative act issued by the Under-Secretariat of Education in 2016), the Committee asked the Government to take the necessary steps to ensure the registration of the UNE as a trade union organization with the Ministry of Labour, if the organization so requested. It also asked the Government to ensure the full return of the property seized from the UNE as well as the removal of any other consequences resulting from the administrative dissolution of the UNE. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that: (i) the UNE opted to register as a social organization and there are no procedures pending at the Ministry of Labour in which the UNE applied for registration as a trade union organization; (ii) in the 2019–21 period, 38 social organizations were registered under the UNE title; and (iii) by a decision of 7 June 2021, the Under-Secretariat of Education of the Metropolitan District of Quito approved the constitution of the organization called the “National Federation of Education Workers (UNE-E)” and granted it legal personality. While duly noting the detailed information from the Government, the Committee notes that, according to PSI-Ecuador, the registration of the UNE as a trade union organization and not as a social organization is facing obstruction because of legal confusion and the lack of application of the Convention in its sector. The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether the registration of the UNE-E with the Under-Secretariat of Education of the Metropolitan District of Quito means that the UNE has been able to resume its activities of defending the occupational interests of its members. The Committee also once again requests the Government to take all necessary measures to ensure the registration of the UNE as a trade union organization with the Ministry of Labour, if the UNE so wishes. The Committee also once again requests the Government to ensure the full return of the property seized as well as the removal of any other consequences resulting from the administrative dissolution of the UNE, and to provide information in this regard.

The Committee notes with regret that to date it has been unable to observe progress on the adoption of measures needed to bring the legislation into line with the Convention. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that, because of the upheaval caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, it is currently giving priority to an Opportunities Bill, which incorporates the different views of the stakeholders in the labour and social spheres and through which the Government is endeavouring to stimulate and revitalize the labour market. While taking due note of these indications, the Committee recalls the fundamental importance of ensuring the full application of the Convention to tackle the consequences of the pandemic and urges the Government to make the necessary efforts to adopt specific measures in relation to the points highlighted in this comment. In this regard, the Committee notes that the Ministry of Labour, through the Directorate of Labour Organizations, expresses the intention of collaborating on any legislative initiative aimed at improving the exercise of workers’ rights. The Committee hopes that the technical assistance that the Government wishes to receive to strengthen social dialogue will be provided very soon and that its results enable progress with regard to the matters raised in the present comment. In this regard, the Committee hopes that any legislative reforms undertaken, in consultation with the social partners, will contribute towards ensuring observance of the rights established by the Convention.

The Committee is raising other matters in a request addressed directly to the Government.

[The Government is asked to reply in full to the present comments in 2022.]