Interim Report - Report No 316, June 1999

1. 670. The complaint in the present case is contained in communications from the General Confederation of Workers of Peru (CGTP) of 16 June, 4 August and 9 October 1998. The Government sent its observations in communications dated 6 October 1998 and 4 February 1999.
2. 671. Peru 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. 672. In its communications of 16 June, 4 August and 9 October 1998, the General Confederation of Workers of Peru (CGTP) alleges that in 1995, 71 National Bank employees, including officials of the National Bank Workers' Trade Union (SINATBAN) and national and regional officials of the CGTP, were arbitrarily dismissed. Ninety per cent of the dismissed workers were subsequently reinstated following a court ruling, while a minority, including seven SINATBAN and CGTP officials, were left without a satisfactory settlement as a result of interference, obstruction and procrastination on the part of the National Bank with the complicity of the judicial authorities.
2. 673. Specifically, the complainant states that as regards the SINATBAN officials Messrs. Marco Antonio Maravi Orellana, Pedro C. Reyes Saenz and Luis F. Cárdena Campanas, the higher court, in its ruling on the appeal lodged by the National Bank, overturned the lower court ruling ordering their reinstatement. A decision is still awaited on the appeal brought before the Constitutional and Social Law Chamber of the Supreme Court by the three union officials in question. As regards Mr. Joaquín E. Gutierrez Madueño, Vice-President of the CGTP, the acting Labour Judge modified the original order for reinstatement, which had been upheld by the Labour Court, by ordering that compensation should be paid in lieu of reinstatement. An appeal against this was lodged with the Supreme Court and no final ruling has yet been handed down.
3. 674. The complainant alleges that as regards Mr. Ronald Avila Candiotti, a national official of SINATBAN, the Bank appealed to the Constitutional and Social Law Chamber against the original court order for reinstatement, which was upheld by the Labour Court; the final ruling has not yet been given. In the case of Mr. Felipe Callacondo Durand, national official of the CGTP, who obtained an order of reinstatement from the lower court, the National Bank appealed to the Labour Court which substantially altered the ruling and rejected the claim for reinstatement. The complainant also points out that according to the ruling of the Lima Superior Court of 8 May 1997, which is relevant to the case of Mr. Callacondo Durand, a judge may not substitute financial compensation for reinstatement except at the request of the worker concerned. As regards Mr. Daniel B. Rosello Woolcott, union official of SINATBAN, who appealed to the labour court, the case was not pursued owing to the defendant's non-attendance.
4. 675. The CGTP also alleges the following violations of freedom of association: (a) the authorities of the General Corps of Voluntary Fire-Fighters of Peru (Cuerpo General de Bomberos Voluntarios del Perú) refuse to discuss the list of demands submitted by the Single National Union of Workers and Employees of the General Corps of Voluntary Fire-Fighters of Peru, whose officials are constantly harassed by these authorities; (b) workers of the Enrique Guzmán y Valle National University were dismissed en masse for anti-union reasons on the pretext of carrying out "reviews"; (c) unionized workers employed by the municipality of Villa el Salvador have suffered anti-union acts such as unwarranted transfers and harassment, refusal of leave and union licences, and refusal to deduct union subscriptions from wages; (d) trade union officials at the Federico Villareal National University have been dismissed for anti-union reasons and the authorities have broken into the union's premises.

B. The Government's reply

1. 676. In its communications of 6 October 1998 and 4 February 1999, the Government states, firstly, that there are various provisions in national legislation to protect workers and their leaders against acts of anti-union discrimination and interference; under legislation currently in force, workers have at their disposal appropriate legal means for defending any right which they may consider to have been infringed by anti-union acts or threats. The Government adds that the CGTP itself acknowledges that the workers claiming to have been wronged in the present case have used the available legal channels for defending the rights which they consider to have been infringed and which are protected by the judicial authorities. The Government states that there is no need for the complainant to present a complaint to the ILO when the rights of such workers have already been recognized by the courts. Lastly, the Government states that the complainant presents no evidence in support of the allegations of anti-union discrimination.

C. The Committee's conclusions

1. 677. The Committee notes that in the present complaint, the complainant alleges the following: (a) arbitrary dismissals of seven trade union officials in 1995 and refusal by the National Bank to reinstate them, despite the original ruling of the lower court; (b) refusal by the authorities of the General Corps of Voluntary Fire-Fighters of Peru to discuss the list of demands submitted by the Single National Union of Workers and Employees of the General Corps of Voluntary Fire-Fighters of Peru, whose leaders are constantly harassed by these authorities; (c) mass dismissal of workers at the Enrique Guzmán y Valle National University for anti-union reasons; (d) anti-union acts against unionized workers of the municipality of Villa el Salvador; (e) anti-union dismissals of union officials at the Federico Villareal National University and a break-in perpetrated by the authorities at the union's premises.
2. 678. With regard to the allegation of arbitrary dismissals at the National Bank, the Committee notes that, while 90 per cent of the dismissed workers were reinstated, the cases still pending concern trade union officials, evidencing the reluctance of the Bank to reinstate them, particularly in view of the fact that the dismissals took place four years ago (in 1995) and that the lower court had ordered reinstatement in six of the seven cases. In this context, the Committee requests the Government to provide it with the text of any rulings on the six cases that are still pending before the courts as soon as they are handed down, and trusts that if it is found that they were victims of acts of anti-union discrimination that they will be reinstated immediately.
3. 679. With respect to the allegations of the CGTP concerning the refusal by the authorities to discuss the list of demands submitted by the Single National Union of Workers and Employers of the General Corps of Voluntary Fire-Fighters of Peru, mass anti-union dismissals of employees at the Enrique Guzmán y Valle National University, anti-union acts against workers of the municipality of Villa el Salvador, anti-union dismissals of trade union officials of the Federico Villareal National University, and the break-in perpetrated by the authorities at the union's premises, the Committee requests the complainants to provide more detailed information.