Informe definitivo - Informe núm. 236, Noviembre 1984

COMPLAINTS PRESENTED BY THE WORLD CONFEDERATION OF LABOUR AND THE WORLD FEDERATION OF TRADE UNIONS AGAINST THE GOVERNMENT OF URUGUAY

• COMPLAINTS PRESENTED BY THE WORLD CONFEDERATION OF LABOUR AND THE WORLD FEDERATION OF TRADE UNIONS AGAINST THE GOVERNMENT OF URUGUAY
  152. 152 The Committee examined these cases at its February 1984 meeting when it submitted two interim reports to the Governing Body [see 233rd Report, paras. 404-424 and 425-448, approved by the Governing Body at its 225th Session (February 1984)]. The Government subsequently sent additional observations in a communication dated 25 May 1984.
  153. 153 Uruguay 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. Previous examination of the cases

1. 154. When the Committee examined Case No. 1207 at its February 1984 meeting, it made the following recommendations concerning the allegations that were still pending.
   • "The Committee notes that, according to the Government, the trade union leader Mr. Daniel Cocchi was dismissed for acts and omissions which undermined the trust which had been placed in this ship's captain. In order that it may examine this allegation in full knowledge of the facts, the Committee requests the Government to indicate specifically which concrete acts and omissions led to the dismissal of this trade union leader ...
   • The Committee requests the Government to send its observations on the allegation that the APEEF was required to request administrative authorisations (from the Ministry of Labour and the Police) for its establishment.
   • The Committee requests the Government to send its observations on the allegation that Mr. Roberto Alfonso has been disqualified from acting as a trade union leader because of his 'ideological' views."
2. 155. Regarding Case No. 1209, the Committee observed that the Government had not replied to certain allegations and requested it to communicate its observations on the matter.
3. 156. The complainants alleged, inter alia, that the Ministry of the Interior and Social Security had not authorised the holding of definitive elections within the various labour associations that had been registered, with the result that they were still operating with provisional committees.
4. 157. The complainants also alleged that the Ministry of the Interior had prohibited José Custodio, Asdrúbal Gadea, Nelson Curbelo and Julio Alonso, all members of the provisional committee of the Union of Manual Workers, Employees and Supervisors of FUNSA, from taking part in any trade union activities and had dismissed Roberto Mouriño, Miguel Miraballes, Daniel Buscarons, Hugo Nicola, Doroteo Díaz, Anselmo Oyarzábal, Enrique Larnaudie and César Martínez Yaquelo, militant members of the said trade union. It had also dismissed Daniela Amoroso, a member of the provisional committee of the Association of Employees of the Trade Development Bank for having protested against the dismissal of a union official. In addition, Carlos Larraya (Association of Officials of the Welfare Centre of the Medical Trade Union of Uruguay), Andrés Brun, Emeli Landriel and Julio Betervide (Association of Officials of the Association of Bank Employees of Uruguay), José Curbelo, Milton Antognazza (Association of Employees of the Banco La Caja Obrera) [the Committee had already examined the allegation regarding the disqualification of Mr. Antognazza in connection with Case No. 1153 (226th Report, paras. 174 and 180)], Gonzalo Rodírguez (Association of Employees of the Banco de Crédito), Joaquín Pau (Association of Employees of the Banco Exterior de España), Francisco Rama (Association of Employees of the Banco de Londres y América del Sur), Daniel González Mazzei and Roberto E. Miranda (Association of Employees of the Banco de Santander), Luis Becerra and Edgar Covagnaro (Association of Manual Workers and Employees of the Fábricas Nacionales de Cerveza) and Mario Carbajal (Association of Employees of the Banco Sudameris) had been disqualified from holding trade union office.
5. 158. Finally, the complainants stated that the Government had refused to recognise the representative nature of the Inter-Union Plenary of Workers of Uruguay.

B. The Government's reply

1. 159. The Government states that the dismissal of Mr. Cocchi, ship's captain, as indicated in the judgment handed down by the Disciplinary Court of Misdemeanours of the Merchant Marine (the text of which the Government enclosed), was the result of his having given an arbitrary and unnecessary order which endangered a seaman's physical well-being and that he did so to satisfy a personal whim even though it meant needlessly exposing a worker to danger.
2. 160. The Government further states that, according to section 15, paragraph (b), of Act No. 15137 on occupational associations, the statutes of such associations must specify their purpose and objective, which must relate to labour issues. Through the Register of Labour Associations, the Ministry of Labour and Social Security verifies compliance with this requirement; when a request is received to hold a meeting it accordingly examines the agenda, which is approved if it corresponds to the terms of the statutes. Once authorisation has been granted, the police headquarters are notified of the date and place of the meeting as required by current provisions on the matter, inasmuch as it is the police which is responsible for the maintenance of law and order. However, this requirement does not imply that there is any police intervention in the premises where the meetings are held.
3. 161. As to the alleged disqualification of Roberto Alfonso from acting as a trade union leader, the Government states that it does not possess sufficient information to identify the person concerned or the organisation to which he is said to belong.
4. 162. Regarding the alleged delaying of trade union elections, the Government states that the Ministry of Labour regularly organises elections to designate the permanent officials of registered occupational associations. Between January and May 1984, ministerial resolutions were issued convening elections for the following associations Autonomous Bus Trade Union, Labour Association of Security Officers of the Port of Montevideo, Labour Association of Manual Workers and Employees of Facer Plast, Association of Appartment Janitors, Society of Drivers and Conductors United of ONDA S.A., Occupational Association of FUNSA Management Staff. These associations were previously operating with provisional officers elected by the workers at the time they were established.
5. 163. Regarding the alleged refusal of the authorities to recognise the representative nature of the Inter-Union Plenary of Workers of Uruguay (PIT) the Government states that the PIT never applied to the Ministry of Labour and Social Security for registration, for recognition of its legal personality or for registration of its statutes and list of officials - all of which is in violation of Act No. 15137. As to its activities as a de facto organisation, the Government observes that the PIT called a general strike on 19 January 1984, among other things to demand the release of persons convicted by the courts of terrorist activities, and that it was for this reason that it was dissolved.
6. 164. Concerning the disqualification of certain union leaders from holding office,- the Government states that the persons referred to by the complainants were summonsed by police headquarters for failure to comply with section 39, paragraph (d), of Decree No. 513/81 containing regulations issued under Act No. 15137 on occupational associations. All these persons notified the Registrar of Labour Associations of the Ministry of Labour and Social Security of their resignation from the post of provisional official. With respect to the ban on holding trade union office provided for in section 39(d) of Decree No. 513/81, the Government states that the provision is an elaboration of section 5(d) of the Act, whose wording was agreed to by the last direct contacts mission that the ILO sent to Uruguay. This provision does not permit union officials to be disqualified "for trade union reasons"; the fact is that the organisations which at the time were declared unlawful by the public authorities were banned not for trade union reasons but for having joined political movements seeking to overthrow the Government by violent means. The records which the Director-General's representative examined on the occasion of the above-mentioned direct contacts mission showed clearly that the repressive action taken against certain persons who at the time were acting as union officials was adopted not in connection with trade union activities but on account of their active participation in terrorist movements. Similarly, the organisations were dissolved not for "trade union reasons" but in defence of national sovereignty and security. Accordingly, because they have been disqualified by virtue of the Constitution, the leaders of former organisations involved in terrorist activities are not eligible for election to trade union posts. Would any State, the Government asks, allow persons who have been involved in such activities to act as trade union officials?
7. 165. Concerning the alleged dismissals, the Government states that Roberto Mouriño, Miguel Miraballes, Daniel Buscarons, Hugo Nicola, Doroteo Díaz, Anselmo Oyarzábal, Enrique Larnaudie and César Martínez Yaquelo are not listed in the records kept by the Registrar of Labour Associations, which means that they are neither provisional officers of the Union of Manual Workers, Employees and Supervisors of FUNSA nor have they initiated proceedings to have the union established officially. When questioned on the subject, the undertaking confirmed that the persons referred to were merely employees and not union leaders and that they had been on unemployment insurance for a year and a half without being reinstated. Miss Daniela Amoroso, who has never been a member of the provisional committee of the Association of Employees of the Trade Development Bank, is in a similar situation.

C. The Committee's conclusions

1. 166. The Committee notes the findings of the Disciplinary Court of the Merchant Marine that union leader Daniel Cocchi, ship's captain, was dismissed for having given an arbitrary and unnecessary order which endangered a seaman's physical well-being.
2. 167. Regarding the allegation that the APEEF was required to request authorisations for its establishment, the Committee observes the Government's statement that, prior to the holding of any meeting, the responsible officials of the ministry of Labour and Social Security examine the agenda which they approve if it conforms to the requirements of section 15(d) of Act No. 15137 on occupational associations, which states that the statutes of such associations must specify their purpose and objective and that the latter must relate to labour issues. The Committee also observes that, once the agenda has been approved, the police headquarters are notified of the place and date of the meeting but that this does not imply that there is any police intervention in the place where the meetings are held.
3. 168. The Committee considers that the requirement that the agenda of the meeting to discuss the establishment of a trade union organisation should be submitted to the authorities for approval constitutes a considerable restriction on trade union independence and draws the Government's attention to the fact that the right to hold trade union meetings should not be subject to prior authorisation and that the authorities should refrain from any interference liable to restrict that right [see, for example, 233rd Report, Case No. 1217 (Chile), para. 109].
4. 169. Regarding the alleged delay in holding definitive elections for the officials of occupational associations, the Committee notes that elections have already been convened by ministerial resolution in a number of occupational associations (of which the Government lists six). The Committee wishes to point out that the right of workers to elect their representatives freely should be exercised in accordance with the statutes of their occupational associations and should not be subject to the convening of elections by ministerial resolution since this constitutes interference by the authorities contrary to the principles contained in convention No. 87. The Committee regrets that, as a result of the interference of the authorities, most of the constituted organisations still have no permanent officers more than three years after the adoption of the new trade union legislation. The Committee requests the Government to take steps consistent with the above-mentioned principles so that all existing organisations can elect permanent officials as soon as possible.
5. 170. With respect to the disqualification of union leaders from holding office, the Committee notes that the Government recognises that, except for Roberto Alfonso, they were all summonsed by police headquarters for failure to comply with section 39(d) of Decree No. 513/81 containing regulations issued under the Act on occupational associations. The Committee also notes from the Government's statements that the persons disqualified from holding trade union' office under section 39(d) of the said Decree were leaders of former organisations which had been involved in terrorist activities. On this point the Committee recalls that, in its examination of Case No. 1209 in its 223rd Report, it considered that section 39(d) of Decree No. 513/81 (requiring for election to trade union office that a person should not have held any executive post in organisations that have been declared unlawful) was contrary to the principles of Convention No. 87 and gave legal force to the possibility of disqualifying trade union leaders from carrying out their functions, even on trade union grounds - for example, for having held an executive post in a trade union organisation that has been declared unlawful.
6. 171. In the circumstances, noting that persons may be disqualified for having held executive posts in organisations that have been declared unlawful whether or not they have committed offences that constitute a genuine threat to the exercise of their trade union functions, the Committee requests the Government - as it did in its 233rd Report - to take the necessary steps to amend section 39(d) of Decree No. 513 and to quash the ruling whereby the persons referred to by the complainants were disqualified from holding trade union office.
7. 172. The Committee observes that the Government states in its reply that it does not have sufficient information to identify Roberto Alfonso or the organisation to which he belongs. In this connection the Committee refers the Government to the allegations of the World Confederation of Labour contained in its communication dated 2 June 1983 [see 233rd Report, Case No. 1207, para. 407] which indicate that the organisation to which Roberto Alfonso belongs is the Association' of Navigating Personnel of the FRIPUR company and that he has been disqualified from holding trade union office on account of his "ideological" beliefs. In view of the time which has elapsed since the allegation was presented, the Committee cannot but repeat the considerations set out in the preceding paragraph.
8. 173. Concerning the alleged dismissals, the Committee observes that, according to the Government's communication of 25 May 1984, the eight persons referred to by the complainants are not provisional officials of any labour association and have been on unemployment insurance for a year and a half without being reinstated. In this respect the Committee recalls that protection against acts of anti-union discrimination applies to all workers and not only trade union leaders. Consequently, the Committee must express its regret that the Government has not specified the reasons for their dismissal. In view of the time which has elapsed since the allegations were presented, the Committee will limit itself to drawing the Government's attention to the fact that the dismissal of workers for engaging in trade union activities is contrary to the principles of freedom of association.
9. 174. The Committee will examine the allegation concerning the refusal of the Government to recognise the representative nature of the Inter-Union Plenary of Workers of Uruguay in the framework of Case No. 1257.