Solicitud directa (CEACR) - Adopción: 2016, Publicación: 106ª reunión CIT (2017)

Convenio sobre la libertad sindical y la protección del derecho de sindicación, 1948 (núm. 87) - Bahamas (Ratificación : 2001)

Otros comentarios sobre C087

Observación

Solicitud directa

Visualizar en: Francés - EspañolVisualizar todo

The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the most recent amendment to the 2001 Industrial Relations Act (IRA) occurred in 2012. It observes with regret that the Industrial Relations (Amendment) Act, 2012, did not address the concerns raised in its previous direct request and notes the Government’s statement that discussions to this end continue.

Article 3 of the Convention. Right of organizations to elect their representatives in full freedom. The Committee had previously noted that the constitution of every trade union should provide that executive committees and officers of trade unions should be elected at intervals not exceeding three years (section 9(4)(1) of Schedule I of the IRA). The Committee requests the Government once again to clarify whether this section implies that union officials cannot be re-elected for a consecutive term.

Right of organizations freely to organize their activities and to formulate their programmes. The Committee had previously noted that section 20(3) of the IRA requires a strike ballot to be taken under supervision by an officer of the ministry, and that, if this section is not complied with, a strike is unlawful. The Committee requests the Government once again to review section 20(3) with a view to ensuring freedom from any influence or pressure by the authorities which might affect the exercise of the right to strike in practice.

In its previous comments, the Committee had noted that: (i) under the terms of section 73 of the IRA, the minister shall refer a dispute to the tribunal if the parties to the dispute, within non-essential services, failed to reach a settlement, and that, pursuant to section 77(1), it is unlawful to have recourse to strike action once the dispute is referred to the tribunal; and (ii) according to section 76(1) of the IRA, a strike which, in the opinion of the minister, affects or threatens the public interest, might be referred to the tribunal for settlement. The Committee reiterates that, in order not to excessively restrict the right of organizations to formulate their programmes and organize their activities, recourse to compulsory arbitration to bring an end to a collective labour dispute and a strike is only acceptable when the strike in question may be restricted, or even prohibited, that is: (i) in the case of disputes concerning public servants exercising authority in the name of the State; (ii) in conflicts in essential services in the strict sense of the term (that is services the interruption of which would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population); or (iii) in situations of acute national or local crisis. The Committee therefore requests the Government once again to take the necessary measures to review sections 73, 76 and 77, in order not to excessively restrict the right of organizations to formulate their programmes and organize their activities.

The Committee had previously noted that section 75 of the IRA provides that any strike is illegal if: (i) it has any object other than, or in addition to, the furtherance of a trade dispute within the trade or industry in which the strikers are engaged; or (ii) it is designed or calculated to coerce the Government either directly or by inflicting hardship upon the community. In this respect, the Committee requests the Government once again to clarify whether workers’ organizations are able to use strike action to support their position in the search for solutions to problems posed by major social and economic policy trends, which have a direct impact on their members and on workers in general, in particular as regards employment, social protection and the standard of living.