Observación (CEACR) - Adopción: 2001, Publicación: 90ª reunión CIT (2002)

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its report.

The Committee’s previous comments referred to discrepancies between national legislation and the Convention on the following points:

-  obstacles to voluntary bargaining in the private sector (sections 7(2), 22 and 22A of the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969 (IRO)). The Committee had pointed out that collective bargaining was not developed in small establishments because sections 7(2), 22 and 22A of the IRO appeared to inhibit the establishment of "sectoral" or "industry" unions. It had therefore requested the Government to take the necessary steps to remove the requirements: (a) in section 7(2) that, in order to be registered under the IRO, a trade union must have a membership of at least 30 per cent of the total number of workers in the establishment or group of establishments in which it was formed; and (b) in sections 22 and 22A of the IRO that only unions which were registered in accordance with section 7 may become collective bargaining agents;

-  restrictions on voluntary bargaining in the public sector (section 3 of Act No. X of 1974), in particular through the practice of determining wage rates and other conditions of employment by means of government-appointed wages commissions;

-  lack of legislative protection against acts of interference (Article 2 of the Convention);

-  denial of the rights guaranteed by Article 1 (Protection against anti-union discrimination), Article 2 (Protection against acts of interference), and Article 4 (Right to bargain collectively) of the Convention for workers in export processing zones (section 11A of the Bangladesh Export Processing Zones Authority Act, 1980).

The Committee notes with interest that the Government has issued on 31 January 2001 a declaration (SRO No. 24, Law/2001) that will allow workers in EPZs the right of association and other facilities, as from 1 January 2004. The Committee requests the Government to provide the text of that declaration and to keep it informed of progress made in this respect, hopefully before 1 January 2004.

As regards the other issues, the Committee is bound to note that the Government, once again, repeats more or less the same arguments as raised in previous reports, to deny the existence of the above violations or, alternatively to justify them. The Committee once again brings the Government’s attention to the fact that these discrepancies between national legislation and the Convention constitute serious violations of the Convention, a point which the Committee has commented on in detail for several years.

The Committee further notes that the draft Labour Code, submitted by the National Labour Commission and apparently raised several objections from various quarters (workers, employers and other legal bodies), was reviewed by a committee of legal experts which, in turn, has submitted its views and report, and that the Government is taking active steps to have it passed by Parliament. The Committee, once again, strongly encourages the Government to ensure that the above comments are duly taken into consideration, so that they are reflected in the text as adopted by Parliament and, to that end, invites it once again to consider requesting ILO technical assistance. The Committee requests the Government to inform it in its next report of any progress made in this respect.