Solicitud directa (CEACR) - Adopción: 2002, Publicación: 91ª reunión CIT (2003)

The Committee notes that the Government’s report contains no reply to its previous comments. It must therefore repeat its earlier direct request, which addressed the following points.

The Committee notes the Labour Relations Act No. 15 of 1999 and requests the Government to indicate in its next report whether the Act has now come into force and to transmit any amendments which may have been made to this Act in the meantime.

Articles 2 and 4 of the Convention. The right of workers and employers to establish and join organizations of their own choosing without previous authorization and dissolution by the administrative authority. The Committee notes that sections 5(2) and 7 of the Labour Relations Act require ten or more employers for registration of an employers’ organization and that section 4 provides that no organization or member shall perform any act in furtherance of the purposes for which it has been formed unless such organization has first been registered, subject to a fine of up to 5,000 dollars. Furthermore, section 9 permits the cancellation of registration when the membership falls below the minimum requirement of ten employers. The Committee considers that the minimum requirement of ten employers to form an employers’ organization is excessive and could hinder the creation of employers’ organizations, particularly given the relatively small size of the country. It would therefore request the Government to consider amending its legislation by reducing the registration requirement to five employers. Furthermore, in light of the ban on activities of non-registered organizations and the powers of the Registrar to cancel registration if the minimum membership requirement is no longer met, the Committee requests the Government to indicate any practical effects which this requirement might have had on the Grenada Employers’ Federation or any other employers’ organization in the country.

Article 3. The right of workers’ organizations to organize their administration. The Committee notes that section 24(2) of the Labour Relations Act permits the Registrar to require the delivery of the detailed accounts of the revenue, expenditure, assets, liabilities and funds of the organization at any time and that failure to comply with this order will result in a fine of 10,000 dollars or one year’s imprisonment (section 24(6)). In this regard, the Committee would draw the Government’s attention to its 1994 General Survey on freedom of association and collective bargainingin which it states that problems of compatibility with the Convention arise when the administrative authority has the power to examine the books and other documents of an organization, conduct an investigation and demand information at any time. The Committee considers that the authority vested in the Registrar under section 24(2) should be limited to the obligation of submitting periodic financial reports or if there are serious grounds for believing that the activities of an organization are contrary to the rule of law (General Survey, paragraphs 125 and 126).

The right of workers’ organizations to organize their activities and formulate their programmes. The Committee notes that sections 46(1) and 49(1) of the Labour Relations Act grant the Minister the power to refer a dispute to binding compulsory arbitration if he thinks fit and whether or not both parties to the dispute consent. The Committee recalls that workers’ organizations shall have the right to organize their activities and formulate their programmes in defence of their members’ interests, in accordance with Articles 3 and 10 of the Convention and that binding arbitration should only be imposed in cases where both parties agree or in essential services in the strict sense of the term, in respect of public servants exercising authority in the name of the State or in an acute national crisis.

It further notes that section 46(2) of the Labour Relations Act grants the Minister the power to refer to compulsory arbitration a dispute in essential services, including in respect of seaport and dock services, and sanitation services, which the Committee does not consider to be essential in the strict sense of the term, that is to say, services, the interruption of which, would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population. In this respect, the Committee draws the Government’s attention to paragraph 160 of its 1994 General Surveywherein it states that, in order to avoid damages which are irreversible or out of all proportion to the occupational interests of the parties to the dispute, as well as damages to third parties, the authorities could establish a system of minimum service in other services which are of public utility rather than impose an outright ban on strikes, which would be limited to essential services in the strict sense of the term.

The Committee requests the Government to indicate in its next report the measures taken or envisaged to amend its legislation so as to bring it into full conformity with the Convention on the abovementioned points.

Article 4. Dissolution of workers’ or employers’ organizations by the administrative authority. Noting that section 9(3) and (4) of the Act allows the Registrar to cancel the registration of workers’ or employers’ organizations subject to the right of appeal to the High Court, the Committee draws the Government’s attention to paragraph 185 of its 1994 General Survey wherein it states that, where dissolution by administrative authority is permissible, the organization affected must have the right of appeal to an independent and impartial judicial body and that the administrative decision should not take effect until a final decision is handed down. The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether the appeal provided for in section 9 suspends the cancellation of registration pending the court judgement.