Demande directe (CEACR) - adoptée 2018, publiée 108ème session CIT (2019)

Convention (n° 87) sur la liberté syndicale et la protection du droit syndical, 1948 - Eswatini (Ratification: 1978)

Autre commentaire sur C087

Observation

Demande directe

Afficher en : Francais - EspagnolTout voir

Article 2 of the Convention. Right of workers and employers to establish organizations without previous authorization. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to bring the issue of the amendment of section 32 of the Industrial Relations Act to the relevant national tripartite structure for discussion. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the Labour Advisory Board (LAB) had examined the issue and concluded that section 32 ought to be amended simultaneously with sections 27 and 28 of the law. However the LAB decided to stay the amendment of section 32 in view of the fact that other provisions in the law were outdated and that it was advisable to conduct a comprehensive and holistic review of the whole legislation. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any developments in this regard.

Practical application. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the Industrial Court of Appeal upheld in a recent decision the principle that an employer is allowed to use replacement labour during the course of a lawful strike action (Case No. 12 of 2017). The Government specifies that it is holding a different view and had actually issued a public statement, before the Court decision, to the effect that employers are not allowed to resort to replacement labour during the course of a lawful strike action as such practice could negate the very purpose of a strike action as a collective bargaining tool available to workers. The Government states that it does not intend to interfere with the Industrial Court of Appeal decision, however it intends to include this subject matter in the planned holistic review of the Industrial Relations Act. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any development in this regard and recalls its view that provisions allowing employers to dismiss strikers or replace them temporarily or for an indeterminate period are a serious impediment to the exercise of the right to strike, particularly where striking workers are not able in law to return to their employment at the end of the dispute. The legislation should provide for genuine protection in this respect (see General Survey of 2012 on the fundamental Conventions, paragraph 152).