Rapport intérimaire - Rapport No. 44, 1960

1. 99. At its meeting in November 1959 the Committee further examined the allegations in this case relating to restrictions on trade union membership and election of officers, concerning which it had previously reported to the Governing Body in its 32nd Report, in paragraph 9 of its 33rd Report and in paragraph 10 of its 36th Report. At the conclusion of its consideration of the case at its last meeting the Committee made certain recommendations to the Governing Body in paragraph 195 of its 41st Report, which reads as follows:
2. 195. In all the circumstances, therefore, the Committee recommends the Governing Body to emphasise the importance which it attaches to an early solution of the issues involved in the present case, which has been before the Committee since the meeting in November 1958, to express the hope that such a solution will be reached at an early date through discussions between the Government and the organisations concerned, and:
   • (a) to draw the attention of the Government to the conclusion reached by the Governing Body at its 140th Session (November 1958) that the fact that a trade union official or executive member who is dismissed by the management of a public corporation or national enterprise loses not only his employment but also his right to participate in the administration of his trade union means that the management could in this way interfere with the right of workers to elect their representatives in full freedom, a right which constitutes one of the essential aspects of freedom of association and which is guaranteed by Article 3 of the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87) ;
   • (b) to take note of the statements contained in the communication from the Government dated 26 October 1959, and, having regard to the earlier statement by the Government, noted in paragraph 10 of the Committee's 36th Report, to express the hope that the remaining difficulties referred to therein will be resolved in the near future, as the Government anticipates they will be, and that the Government will be able to ratify the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87) at an early date, and to request the Government to keep the Governing Body informed of any further developments in the situation ;
   • (c) to take note of and to endorse the observation by the I.L.O. Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations, that the provisions of section 4 (3) of the Public Corporation and National Enterprise Labour Relations Law and section 5 (3) of the Local Public Enterprise Labour Relations Lawand, in particular, having regard to the fact that in the event of the dismissal of a trade union officer the trade union must replace him-may facilitate acts of interference on the part of the managements of the undertakings covered by the said legislation and that, in order to ensure fuller application of Article 2 of the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98), ratified by Japan, it would be desirable for the provisions in question to be repealed or amended ; to take note also of the hope expressed by the Conference Committee on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations that the legislative provisions mentioned in the observations of the Committee of Experts will be revoked; to draw this conclusion to the attention of the Government and to request the Government to inform the Governing Body of the measures that it intends to take ;
   • (d) to note the Government's statement that the officers of the Locomotive Engineers' Union and the All-Japan Postal Workers' Union were not dismissed arbitrarily, which the law of Japan does not permit, but for having performed unlawful acts of dispute;
   • (e) to note that the Committee will report in due course to the Governing Body on the remaining allegations in the case which are not examined in the present report.

A. A. The complainants' allegations

1. 100. On 9 February 1960 the Government of Japan forwarded the following further observations on these aspects of the case. On 20 December 1959 the Chairman of the Public Corporation and National Enterprise Labour Relations Commission made a further effort to settle the dispute with the All-Japan Postal Workers' Union. He made the proposal that the union should appoint for the time being a provisional representative in place of the officers who had been dismissed for the purpose of negotiating with the Postal Authority. Both parties accepted this proposal. A settlement of certain urgent questions was negotiated and the demand for a wages increase was jointly submitted to arbitration and an award was handed down on 14 January 1960. Now, states the Government, collective bargaining relations between the Postal Authority and the All-Japan Postal Workers' Union have been restored.
2. 101. The Government goes on to say that preparations for the abrogation of section 4, paragraph 3, of the Public Corporation and National Enterprise Labour Relations Law and section 5, paragraph 3, of the Local Public Enterprise Labour Relations Law and for the readjustment of other related laws and regulations are now being made by the Ministries concerned in accordance with the decision made at a Cabinet meeting in February 1959.
3. 102. The Government points out, with respect to the Committee's recommendation in paragraph 195 (c) of its 41st Report cited above, that it furnished an annual report on the application of the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98), which will be considered by the Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations at its meeting. In that report the Government set forth its view, for consideration by the Committee of Experts, that section 4 (3) of the Public Corporation and National Enterprise Labour Relations Law is not incompatible with that Convention. The Government, therefore, regards the matters referred to in paragraph 195 (c) of the Committee's 41st Report as still, in a sense, sub judice, and requests that the Governing Body should take no decision on the particular recommendation in question.
4. 103. The annual report referred to above has been received by the Office and will be examined by the Committee of Experts at its meeting from 21 March to 2 April 1960.