Seguimiento dado a las recomendaciones del Comité y del Consejo de Administración - Informe núm. 363, Marzo 2012

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

1. 215. The Committee last examined this case, which concerns obstruction and violation of the right to organize and bargain collectively, at its March 2011 session [see 359th Report, paras 198–201]. On that occasion, the Committee requested the complainant organization, the Federation of Thailand Automobile Workers’ Union (TAW), to provide information on the reasons why the 178 trade unionists who had resigned from their jobs at Thai Summit Eastern Seabord Autoparts Industry Co. Ltd (TSESA) decided not to file a complaint against the acts of their employer. As to the other allegations, the Committee once again requested the Government to provide information on whether the labour court, in its hearing of the dismissal of the ten trade unionists (No. 780-787/2008), was in full possession of all the material facts referred to in the Committee’s previous conclusions, including the report of the Thailand National Human Rights Commission, and requested the Government to transmit a copy of the judgment once handed down. It also requested once again, the Government to initiate discussions in order to review the possible reinstatement of the ten workers or, if reinstatement is not possible, the payment of adequate compensation. Finally, the Committee requested the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that the union and the employer engage in good faith negotiations, with a view to concluding a collective agreement on terms and conditions of employment. The Committee requested the Government to keep it informed of any developments in respect of all these issues.
2. 216. In a communication dated 19 August 2011, the Government indicates, as regards the 178 trade unionists who had resigned from their jobs, that they did not submit their case to the Labour Relations Committee but had rather submitted them to the Labour Court. With regard to the promotion of collective bargaining, the Government indicates that the department of labour protection and welfare is considered primarily as a mediator to encourage employees and employers to engage in good faith negotiations. To promote collective bargaining, the department of labour protection and welfare has taken measures to ensure good faith negotiations between the employer and the employees. It has also created several educational materials to promote the principle of good faith negotiation, such as CD-ROM and guideline books distributed in the Bangkok metropolitan area and the provinces.
3. 217. In a communication dated 22 September 2011, the Government forwarded the decision of the Supreme Court (No. 3801-3824/2553 dated 27 May 2010), concerning the non-respect by the company of the Order No. 329-577/2007 of the Labour Relations Committee which ordered the company to reinstate 239 union members. The Government indicates that the complainant organization had brought an action before the Second Regional Labour Court in this regard but that the action was dismissed by that court. The complainant appealed this case to the Supreme Court but the latter sustained the decision of the Second Regional Labour Court. The Supreme Court held that the company complied with the order of the Labour Relations Committee.
4. 218. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government. As to the situation of the 178 trade unionists, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that these workers have apparently submitted their case to the Labour Court. The Committee observes that this information seems to contradict the Government’s previous indication that the employees had not exercised their rights before the Labour Court [see 359th Report, para. 199]. The Committee therefore requests the Government and the complainant organization to clarify whether the 178 trade unionists who had resigned from their jobs (not the employees still working at the enterprise and concerned by the decision No. 3801-3824/2553 of the Supreme Court) have filed a complaint before the Court and if not, it requests the complainant organization to indicate the reasons why these employees decided not to exercise their right to file a complaint against the acts of their employer.
5. 219. As to the dismissal of the ten trade unionists, the Committee regrets that the Government did not provide any information in this regard and urges the Government to provide without delay information on whether the Labour Court, in its hearing of the dismissal of the ten trade unionists (No. 780-787/2008), was in full possession of all the material facts referred to in the Committee’s previous conclusions, including the report of the Thailand National Human Rights Commission, and requests the Government to transmit a copy of the judgment once handed down. It also requests the Government once again to initiate discussions in order to review the possible reinstatement of the ten workers or, if reinstatement is not possible, the payment of adequate compensation.
6. 220. Finally, as regards the measures taken by the Government to ensure that the union and the employer engage in good faith negotiations, the Committee notes that the Government indicates, in a general manner, that the department of labour protection and welfare has taken measures to ensure and promote good faith negotiations between the employer and the employees. However, the Committee does not know the concrete measures taken by the department of labour protection and welfare and is not in a position to assess if they concern directly the parties in the present case. In these circumstances, the Committee requests the Government to ensure that specific measures are taken so that the union and the employer concerned can engage in good faith negotiations, with a view to concluding a collective agreement on terms and conditions of employment. The Committee requests the Government to keep it informed of any developments in respect of all these issues.