Informe provisional - Informe núm. 202, Junio 1980

1. 374. By two communications dated 12 June 1979, the Labour Centre of Elefsina, Aspropirgos and Vicinity and the Mineworkers' Federation of Greece presented complaints of infringement of trade union rights in Greece. The complaining organisations supplied additional information in substantiation of their complaints in communications dated 21 and 25 July 1979. The Government, for its part, furnished its observations by a letter received on 24 April 1980.
2. 375. Greece has ratified both the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Eight to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), and the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).

A. The complainants' allegations

1. 376. The complaint of the Labour Centre of Elefsina, Aspropirgos and Vicinity (LCEA) refers to the dismissal of a large number of trade unionists from the Elefsina Shipyard, said to be run by the State, and from the company Petrola Hellas. The purpose of these dismissals is allegedly to prevent the workers from choosing their own union: officials.
2. 377. The complaint of the Mineworkers' Federation (OME) refers to the dismissal of trade unionists by the Mining, Industrial and Shipping Company at Mantoudi, on the island of Eobe, the dissolution of trade unions and the placing of the trade union movements in these companies under judicial control.
3. 378. The LCEA alleges in its complaint of 12 June 1979 that the management of the Elefsina Shipyard persecutes workers and trade unionists by interfering with union activities and setting up a rival union. It claims that 6 members of its administrative Committee and 80 workers, most of them members of union Committees, have been dismissed. In addition, the Elliniki Halivourgia steelworks is alleged to have discharged 27 employees, including trade unionists, without granting them the severance pay required by law, with the aim of dissolving a union. The LCEA points out that the president and the general secretary of the Union of Steel Workers, wrongfully charged with violating Act No. 330/76 and Act No. 3239/55, have been acquitted by the Athens Lower Court.
4. 379. In its further communication of 25 July 1979, the LCEA states that when the shipyard workers' union announced elections for 24, 25 and 26 June 1979, the management, apparently acting under orders from the Government and seeking to falsify the election results, unleashed a campaign of intimidation, and two union officials were dismissed upon their election.
5. 380. The LCEA adds that in its endeavours to break the labour movement of Elefsina the Government closed down the textile works Elleniki Klostoufantourgia, depriving 200 workers of their jobs.
6. 381. With regard to the company Petrola Hellas, in its first communication the LCEA refers in particular to the company's refusal to reinstate union officials who had been wrongfully dismissed and points out that two directors of the company have been sentenced to four months' imprisonment for interfering with the internal affairs of the union.
7. 382. In conclusion, the complaining organisation alleges that the insecurity created by these measures is designed to facilitate the Government's attempts to strengthen a pro-government and pro-employer labour movement and thereby prevent the workers from choosing their own trade union officials.
8. 383. In its communications of 12 June and 21 July 1979, the Mineworkers' Federation reports the dismissal of 3,000 workers, including about 50 trade union officials, employed by the Mining, Industrial and Shipping Company in the Mantoudi area, the dissolution of union executive Committees and the appointment by court decision of three successive interim executive Committees which the workers were not allowed to elect themselves.
9. 384. The OME further claims that two trade unions have been dissolved - the Technical Workers' Union and the Technicians' Union. Describing the climate prevailing in the trade union movement, the complainants allege that the miners are under police supervision during working hours and that the employers endeavour to collect information about the workers' trade union activities which they keep in "envelopes".
10. 385. In its letter of 21 July 1979, the complaining organisation gives the names of some of the trade union leaders dismissed for standing as candidates for election to union office or participating in union activities. The employers are alleged to have secured the invalidation of the elections by invoking Act No. 330/76 and bringing about ten legal actions against the two unions.

B. The Government's reply

1. 386. As regards the allegations made by the LCEA with respect to the Elefsina Shipyard, the Government explains in its reply that the management embarked upon a programme for the reorganisation of the shipyard which resulted in the dismissal of a few workers. The employees' union of the company decided on 2 May 1979 to call a public protest meeting at 2 p.m., just at the time of the change of shifts. In order to prevent any trouble, the management, while authorising the meeting, ordered that it be held in a different place from usual and in the presence of an attorney. On 27 June 1979 the management did indeed dismiss two of the newly elected members of the union's administrative council - the deputy general secretary and the treasurer - without observing the normal legal procedure. The Ministry of Labour twice intervened in a vain attempt to secure the reinstatement of the dismissed workers; since its efforts were unsuccessful, the trade unionists in question were obliged to take the matter to court.
2. 387. As regards the Hellenic textile and spinning company, the Government states that this firm, which had been placed under the control of the Hellenic Hank for Industrial Development, was closed down allegedly because it had got into financial difficulties. The company paid to the employees it discharged the whole of the indemnity prescribed by law. The only staff kept on were two employees to balance the books and settle any outstanding business and two watchmen.
3. 388. As concerns the company Petrola Hellas, the Government acknowledges that in the course of 1975 this undertaking discharged some of its employees, allegedly for financial reasons. Those discharged included, as well as members of the provisional administrative Committee of the union, certain workers who had recently completed their military service. As required by law the company paid them a supplementary indemnity corresponding to six months' wages. The dismissed trade unionists brought proceedings in the civil courts and obtained their wages in full for wrongful breach of contract of employment. On 28 May 1976 the company again discharged 12 of the workers who had been reinstated, alleging that it was impossible to collaborate with them in any way because of the dispute which had resulted in their going to court. Only one of these workers is still pressing his claims today. It is true that two directors of the company have been sentenced to four months' imprisonment for interference in trade union affairs, and they have filed an appeal. Parallel with this, on 1 October 1979, the Athens Court dismissed the charge of anti-union activity brought by the Labour Centre of Elefsina against Petrola Hellas.
4. 389. In conclusion, the Government refutes the allegations of the complaining organisation, claiming that the Labour Centre of Elefsina was founded and is functioning in conformity with the relevant provisions of the legislation.
5. 390. As regards the allegations made by the OME with respect to dismissals from the Mining, Industrial and Shipping Company at Mantoudi, the Government confirms that the number of employees of this undertaking has fallen from 5,000 in 1975 to 2,350 today, and points out that the reasons given by the management for this reduction of staff relate to difficulties in the marketing of its products. At the request of the workers' associations, the Ministry of Labour offered to mediate with a view to securing the reinstatement of the workers dismissed. The workers' associations have claimed that 12 dismissals are attributable to trade union activities, and this is confirmed by the Government, which gives the names of the persons concerned. The Government adds that it interceded in vain with the management with a view to securing their reinstatement, meeting with a refusal on the pretext that the satisfaction of such demands was beyond the means of the undertaking. The Government accordingly filed an appeal with the public prosecutor for the Court of Summary Jurisdiction at Chalcis, who has ordered an inquiry. The Government states that one of the dismissed workers was reinstated on 22 November 1978, whilst another did not wish to be reinstated.

C. The Committee's conclusions

1. 391. The Committee notes that this case concerns several branches of activity in which, for financial reasons, there have been retrenchments of staff and an undertaking has even been closed down. Faced with this situation, the workers have organised demonstrations of solidarity.
2. 392. Several waves of collective dismissals have taken place, affecting in particular trade union officials recently elected to press for the maintenance in employment of as many workers as possible. According to the complainants, the total number of workers dismissed in a wide variety of branches of activity is more than 3,000, including the most active trade unionists. In a number of cases there have been court proceedings, which have resulted in the reinstatement of or payment of compensation to some of the workers dismissed on account of their trade union activities, and even in the conviction of two company directors for interference in trade union activities. The complainants further allege that some unions have been placed under the control of the courts or dissolved.
3. 393. The Committee must point out first of all that workers should enjoy adequate protection against all acts of anti-union discrimination and that such protection is particularly desirable in the case of trade union officials because, in order to carry out their trade union functions, they must have the assurance that they will not be victimised by virtue of their trade union office. One way of ensuring the protection of trade union officials is to provide that they may not be dismissed, either during their period of office or for a certain time thereafter, except, of course, for serious misconduct.
4. 394. In the various branches of activity in question, the workers dismissed were made redundant on financial grounds. The Committee nevertheless observes that the managements of the undertakings concerned, far from endeavouring to keep on the trade unionists in their employ, on the contrary dismissed them in large, numbers, sometimes even refusing to reinstate them when ordered by a court or requested by the Government to do so. In these circumstances, the Committee must draw attention, as it has already done in other cases concerning Greece, to the principles set forth in the preceding paragraph as regards the protection of trade union officials.
5. 395. The Committee further recalls that in two earlier cases involving Greece it has already stated that after examining Act No. 330/76 respecting occupational associations and federations it considered that measures should be envisaged to ensure fuller protection for leaders and members of trade unions against discriminatory action. It is a fact that even though section 26 of this Act prohibits the dismissal of trade union officials unless for serious cause, the extent of this protection varies according to the size of the membership of the organisation.
6. 396. In this connection the Committee refers to the assurances given by the Government in March 1977, in a report supplied under article 22 of the ILO Constitution regarding the application of Convention No. 98, to the effect that it envisaged the future possibility of improving the provisions for the protection of trade union officials. The Committee trusts that measures to this effect will be taken by the Government.
7. 397. Lastly, the Committee notes that the Government has furnished no observations concerning the dissolution of two mineworkers' unions and the appointment by court decision of three successive union executive Committees.