Seguimiento dado a las recomendaciones del Comité y del Consejo de Administración - Informe núm. 338, Noviembre 2005

Effect given to the recommendations of the Committee and the Governing Body

1. 202. The Committee last examined this case at its March 2003 meeting. It concerns allegations of preferential treatment granted to certain workers’ organizations in the appointment of nominees to the central and prefectoral labour relations commissions (PLRC), and various other central and local councils. The Committee noted with interest that the number of worker members coming from trade unions affiliated with the complainant organization and appointed to the PLRCs had been raised, but noted with regret that this had not been the case as regards appointments to the Central Labour Relations Commission (CLRC). The Committee expressed the hope that the Government would take remedial measures in that respect for the 28th term of the CLRC, or before that, should worker member positions become vacant in the meantime. It requested the Government to keep it informed of developments [see 330th Report, para. 122].
2. 203. In its communication dated 27 February 2003, the complainant, the National Confederation of Trade Unions (ZENROREN), recalled that no ZENROREN members were appointed for the 27th term of the CLRC and that the Government stated at the time that it had chosen “persons suitable to represent the interests of workers in general … taking various criteria into consideration” while ignoring the Committee’s recommendations. This showed that the Government had not changed its attitude and failed to take objective criteria into account.
3. 204. In its communication of 17 March 2005, ZENROREN states that, along with the National Liaison Council of Trade Unions (ZENROKYO), they nominated two candidates for the 28th term of CLRC, but all workers appointed on 16 November 2004 were from RENGO ranks, thereby excluding ZENROREN candidates. According to the complainant, the Government stated: that those “more fit for representing the interests of workers in general” are selected and appointed on the basis of a comprehensive evaluation of various factors; that the final decision rests with the Prime Minister; and that the criteria would remain unchanged for the 29th term of the CLRC. The Government also cited the 5.9 to 1 ratio between RENGO and ZENROREN memberships. ZENROREN filed a lawsuit in Tokyo district against workers’ appointments for the 28th term of CLRC.
4. 205. In its communications of 6 January and 28 April 2005, the Government replies that as regards workers’ appointments for the 28th term of the CLRC, the competent persons to represent workers’ interests in general were appointed by the Prime Minister, based on recommendations made by trade unions, by taking various factors into comprehensive consideration, including the organizational situation of each trade union. As a result all 15 workers appointed for the 28th term were RENGO affiliates. The Government points out that some figures provided by the complainant in their March 2005 communication are not appropriate because they take into account public employees in the non-operational sector, whereas organizations established by public employees in the non-operational sector cannot recommend any candidates as CLRC labour members. As regards the lawsuit filed by ZENROREN, the Government states that neither this union nor KOKKOREN (Japan Federation of National Public Employees Union) notified a recommendation on the nomination of candidates. The Government also denies that the competent ministry stated that the criteria would remain unchanged for the 29th term of the CLRC; the actual answer was that it would depend on the situation at the time. As for PLRCs, the Government states that ZENROREN now has affiliates in eight prefectures; two more than at the end of 2002.
5. 206. The Committee notes from the information provided by the complainant and the Government that no ZENROREN affiliate was appointed as worker member for the 28th term of the CLRC, contrary to the hope expressed by the Committee in its 330th Report. The Committee recalls the rationale of its previous recommendation in this context, i.e. the necessity to afford fair and equal treatment to all representative organizations, with a view to restoring the confidence of all workers in the fairness of the composition of labour relations commissions and other similar councils, that exercise extremely important functions from a labour relations perspective [328th Report, paras. 444-447]. The Committee therefore urges the Government to take these principles into consideration when appointing worker members for the 29th term of the Central Labour Relations Commission (CLRC), to keep it informed of developments in this respect, and to provide it with the decision of the Tokyo District Court as soon as it is issued.