Interim Report - Report No 128, 1972

1. 44. The complaint of the Federation of the United Petroleum Trade Unions of the State is contained in a communication received by the ILO on 15 December 1970, supplemented by a further two communications dated 18 January and 8 February 1971. These communications were duly transmitted to the Government, which forwarded its observations on 2 June 1971.
2. 45. Argentina has ratified both 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. A. The complainants' allegations

1. 46. The complainants allege that by Acts Nos. 18800 and 18831 and Resolution No. 674/70 of the Secretariat of State for Labour, the Government has taken over the Federation of the United Petroleum Trade Unions of the State and its Buenos Aires and Ensenada branches. These measures were taken, respectively, in October and September 1970. Some time later, in December 1970, the Secretariat of State for Labour further ordered the taking over of the Plaza Huincul branch. The above-mentioned Acts state the grounds for the takeover as being the existence of serious irregularities in the administration of these organisations and repeated infringements of the laws and regulations, particularly as regards the administration of their funds and the keeping of accounts. In the case of the Plaza Huincul branch, the measure was said to have been taken on the grounds of " activities alien to trade union affairs ", but the text of the decision for the takeover offered no explanation as to the nature of these activities.
2. 47. As concerns Resolution No. 674/70, which relates to the Ensenada branch, the complainants allege that on 31 August 1970 a group of persons attacked the offices of that branch, displacing the legitimate authorities thereof. The police are said to have protected the assailants, and the Secretariat of State for Labour, when requested to see that the premises were handed back to the legitimate authorities of the Federation, issued the aforementioned resolution, whereby these authorities were stripped of their office and a controller was appointed.
3. 48. The complainants add that prior to the adoption of the takeover measures, the Government had ordered an inquiry to be made into the accounts of the Federation and of its Buenos Aires branch. The lawful authorities of these organisations were not notified of the results of this inquiry, carried out by inspectors from various Government departments, nor were they called upon to present any defence against any charges that might have been made against them; they were thus denied the right to defend themselves.
4. 49. The complainants explain at length the political motives which in their view prompted the Government to take the measures described above, deriving from the attitude taken by the Federation and its General Secretary, Adolfo Cavalli, to the Government and to its social and trade union policy. In reality these measures are alleged to be reprisals designed to " eliminate one of the keystones in the struggle to attain popular demands ". There has even been personal persecution of Mr. Cavalli, whose name has been removed, at the order of the Government, from the list of employees of the petroleum enterprise for which he worked.
5. 50. The complainants later describe the action taken by the controller appointed to manage the Federation and by the labour authorities once the takeover had taken effect. On the one hand, between October and December 1970 all the funds of the Federation were frozen and it was unable to meet its financial commitments, with the result that not only did the organisation lose its good reputation, but also it was involved in greater expenditure, having to meet the costs of the legal proceedings brought as a result of its failure to honour its commitments. On the other hand, the controller did not comply with the terms of reference given to him when the takeover of the Federation was ordered. Under the terms of the relevant Act, he should have convened the Central Executive Board of the Federation (in accordance with article 42 of the Federation's statutes) in order that the Board might decide upon appropriate measures to restore the situation to normal. However, he did not convene the Board because he was prevented from doing so by the Secretary of State for Labour, and on 14 October he closed the headquarters of the Federation. Military officials had exerted pressure on various members of the Central Executive Board in an attempt to persuade them to appoint a certain person as General Secretary, but their action did not produce the desired results. Subsequently, on 27 January 1971, the controller convened a group of 11 members of the Executive Board and, invoking an earlier agreement between the leaders of the Federation, appointed a National Secretariat to run the Federation until April 1972. According to the complainants, this agreement was not the outcome of any regular meeting of the Central Executive Board but was an agreement reached by a group behind the backs of the entire Board and based on the pressure and threats constantly exerted by the pro-Government sector as well as the pressure exerted by the Secretariat of State for Labour.
6. 51. Lastly, according to the complainants' statement, in February 1971 three of the most important branches of the Federation-those of Ensenada, Buenos Aires and Plaza Huincul-were still under the control of the Government.
7. 52. In its reply the Government states that the Federation of the United Petroleum Trade Unions of the State was taken over on the grounds that the authorities of the union in question had been remiss in carrying out their responsibilities. Matters had reached such a point that the Secretariat of State for Labour took legal proceedings to ascertain whether what had been done amounted to an offence under the Criminal Code. It was for this reason that, in the preambles to the Acts ordering the takeover of the Federation and its Buenos Aires branch, no specific mention was made of the conduct of the members of the National Secretariat of the Federation, so as not to compromise a free decision by the courts. The Federation never exercised its right to go to law itself.
8. 53. In the case of the Ensenada branch, on account of certain administrative irregularities-including refusal to hold elections-the labour authorities appointed an electoral delegate with the specific task of arranging elections and regularising the whole matter. The Plaza Huincul branch was taken over because there was evidence that the persons running it were engaging in activities of a political character.
9. 54. The Government goes on to state that in accordance with the legislation authorising the taking over of the Federation, and with its statutes, the controller possessed all the powers normally vested in the National Secretariat, the Central Executive Board and the Congress of the Federation. By virtue of the above, it was decided that the representatives of the Federation's member unions should assume control. The Government adds that elections are being held between July and September this year to ensure that the workings of this organisation return fully to normal.
10. 55. With regard to the alleged blockage of the Federation's funds, the Government states that the controller arranged for an audit of the accounts and communicated the results to the legal authorities with a view to possible criminal proceedings on a charge of fraud, but that there was never any question of a blockage of funds as alleged by the complainants. Lastly, as concerns Mr. Adolfo Cavalli, who was General Secretary of the Federation at the time of the takeover, the Government states that his behaviour is at present being investigated with a view to criminal proceedings. Although the complainants allege that he was the victim of an unfair practice on the part of the undertaking employing him, the National Industrial Relations Council has no record of any protest on his part of the kind customary in such circumstances.

B. B. The Committee's conclusions

1. 56. The Committee observes that this is yet another case involving the taking over of trade unions by administrative authority, with the removal from office of their leaders and their replacement by an official appointed by the Government. The Committee has already had to examine a number of cases relating to Argentina involving the taking of similar measures by the authorities." The Committee, considering that such measures are contrary to the principles of freedom of association, has drawn the Government's attention to the importance of Article 3 of the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), which provides that workers' organisations shall have the right to elect their representatives in full freedom, to organise their administration and activities and to formulate their programmes, and that the public authorities shall refrain from any interference that would restrict this right or impede the lawful exercise thereof. The Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations, too, has observed that on various occasions the Government of Argentina has dismissed managing committees of trade unions and has appointed in their stead controllers responsible for administering the respective organisations. In the opinion of the Committee of Experts, measures of this nature are not in conformity with Article 3 of Convention No. 87, and the removal of trade union leaders in cases where violations of the legislation or of the internal statutes have been proved, as well as the appointment of temporary administrators, should be effected through the courts.
2. 57. The Committee on Freedom of Association wishes to emphasise yet again that the right guaranteed to workers' organisations by Article 3 of Convention No. 87, and the obligation imposed thereby upon the public authorities to refrain from any interference that would restrict this right or impede the lawful exercise thereof, do not mean that trade union leaders should be exempt from any supervision aimed at ensuring that their actions comply with the existing legislation (which in its turn should not run counter to the principles of freedom of association) or with the union's statutes. Nevertheless, it is of the greatest importance that in order to guarantee an impartial and objective procedure, such control should be exercised by the relevant judicial authority.
3. 58. As concerns the allegation that Mr. Adolfo Cavalli was the victim of an act of antiunion discrimination when his name was removed from the list of employees of the undertaking for which be worked, the Government has sent no information which throws light on this question. The Committee has pointed out in earlier cases, bearing in mind the provisions of Article 1 of the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98), that it is one of the fundamental principles of freedom of association that workers should enjoy adequate protection against acts of anti-union discrimination in respect of their employment-dismissal, transfer or other prejudicial measures-and that this protection is particularly desirable in the case of trade union officials because, in order to carry out their trade union functions in full independence, they must have the assurance that they will not be victimised by virtue of their trade union office a The Committee observes that the legislation of Argentina (Act No. 14455 respecting industrial associations of employees) contains a number of provisions for the protection of trade union officials and representatives in their employment, and that the National Industrial Relations Council is the body competent to examine complaints of infringement of these provisions and put matters right where it is proved that such infringement has taken place. In this respect the Committee takes note of the information supplied by the Government to the effect that no complaint concerning Mr. Cavalli has been filed with that body, as would have been natural in such a case.