Rapport intérimaire - Rapport No. 217, Juin 1982

1. 495. The Committee has examined this case on several occasions and, in particular, at its meeting in November 1981 when it submitted an interim report to the Governing Body.
2. 496. Since then, the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) has supplied further information in telegrams dated 14 and 22 December 1981 and 10 and 24 May 1982.
3. 497. The Government supplied its observations in two communications dated 10 February and 21 April 1982.
4. 498. Chile has not ratified either the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87) or the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).

A. Previous examination of the case

1. 499. At its November 1981 Session the Committee had reached interim conclusions on two aspects of the case. On the one hand, the Committee had requested the Government to supply information on the results of the legal proceedings pending against two leaders of the national Trade Union Co-ordination Body (Coordinadora Nacional Sindical) (CNS), Manuel Bustos and Alamiro Guzmán who, according to the complainants, had been arrested for presenting a list of demands on behalf of their organisation. On the other hand, the Committee had requested the Government to supply its observations on the dismissal of 35 workers of the Panal Textile Undertaking, allegedly as a result of their trade union activities during the 57-day strike which had been organised in that undertaking.
2. 500. Furthermore, the Committee had asked to be kept informed of any subsequent developments concerning two other aspects of the case, viz. the inquiries undertaken into the disappearance of trade unionists or former trade unionists and the trade union legislation.

B. New allegations

1. 501. In its telegram dated 14 December 1981 the ICFTU refers to the arrest on 1 and 4 December 1981 of two advisers of the CNS and the executive secretary of the Chile Committee for Human Rights, Eugenio Diaz Corvalan, Sergio Aguiló and Germán Molina Valdiviego.
2. 502. In its telegram dated 22 December 1981, the ICFTU states that it had been informed that the prosecution authorities considered that there was not sufficient evidence to prosecute Manuel Bustos and Alamiro Guzmán. In spite of that, the ICFTU adds, the Court decided to prosecute them and the case will be referred to the Supreme Court. The ICFTU recalls that the activities of the two trade unionists were always in accordance with the mandate conferred on them by the Chilean workers, and it calls for their release.

C. The Government's reply

1. 503. Commenting on the Committees previous conclusions on the proceedings against Manuel Bustos and Alamiro Guzmán, the Government recalls, in particular, that the CNS has no legal existence, and that 30 trade union organisations stated that they would not sign the "register of national demands" prepared by the CNS even though the latter mentioned them among its affiliates. The Government stated that the demands submitted were not social and occupational, and that the legislation offers the broadest freedom to form federations and Confederations.
2. 504. As regards the situation of the two trade union leaders in question, the Government recalls that they had violated the provisions of section 1 of Legislative Decree No. 2347 of 1978 concerning the usurping of trade union representation. Nevertheless, the persons concerned were released on 31 December 1981. Their trials are at the investigatory stage and it is hoped that the investigating magistrate will soon hand down his decision.
3. 505. As regards the dismissal of workers of the Panal Textile Undertaking, the Government observes that the allegations were contained in a document drawn up by a body known as the "Sole Central Trade Union Organisation of Chilean Workers" which has no legal existence. On the substance of the matter, the Government explains that two collective bargaining procedures were engaged in at the Panal undertaking, corresponding to each of the existing trade unions.
4. 506. Negotiations with trade union No. 2 began on 18 August 1980 and ended on 1 October 1980 with the signing of a collective agreement. A strike was voted for on 26 September but it finally did not take place. Negotiations with trade union No. 1 began on 21 August 1980 and ended on 4 December 1980. In accordance with the law, the workers demanded that the employer sign a new collective agreement under the conditions obtaining at the time when the draft agreement was first presented- with these conditions being, however, updated and subject to readjustment. The workers went on strike from 8 October to 4 December 1980, the date on which they went back to work. From 5 to 14 January 1981 the management of the enterprise terminated the contracts of 37 workers for dishonesty, acts of violence, insults or serious immoral conduct, absence from work for two days without explanation and the operational requirements of the undertaking. Only two of these dismissed workers presented an appeal for wrongful dismissal to the labour authorities: one received compensation equivalent to US$2,000 and the other dropped his appeal. Of the 37 dismissed workers, 10 belong to trade union No. 2, 26 to trade union No. 1 and one is not a member of any organisation. According to the Government, it appears from this information that there was no anti-union victimisation at the enterprise.
5. 507. As regards the ICFTU allegations concerning the arrest of Messrs. Eugenio Diaz, Sergio Aguilo and Germán Molina, the Government points out that it is incorrect to state that the first two were arrested for being the legal advisers of the CNS, since other people were the group's lawyers. The three persons concerned are leaders of a dissolved political party and were arrested and prosecuted for offences relating to Legislative Decree No. 77 of 13 October 1973 which declares various political parties illegal and dissolved, and to the law on state security and the control of arms. According to the Government, their arrest accordingly has nothing to do with trade union reasons since none of them was a trade union leader or engaged in trade union activities. The Government states that these persons have been free since 7 April 1982 in accordance with a Supreme Court order.

D. Further developments

1. 508. In its telegram of 24 May 1982, the ICFTU alleges that the Chilean Appeal Court has sentenced to 540 days' imprisonment the CNS leaders Manuel Bustos, Alamiro Guzmán, Sergio Freyhofer, Germán Jofre, Luis Suarez, José Verasay, Manuel Jiménez, Humberto Vergara, Arturo Martinez and Carlos Apazo. The Appeal Court based its decision on the violation of Legislative Decree No. 2347. The sentenced trade union leaders have lodged an appeal before the Supreme Court of Chile. If the appeal fails, Manuel Bustos and Alamiro Guzmán will be imprisoned until they have completed the above-mentioned sentence.

E. The Committee's conclusions

1. 509. The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government on the prosecution of the two leaders of the CNS, Manuel Bustos and Alamiro Guzmán, and in particular that they are no longer imprisoned. However, since - according to the new allegations - the Chilean Court of Appeal has sentenced not only Manuel Bustos and Alamiro Guzmán, but also 8 other CNS leaders, to 540 days' imprisonment for the violation of legislative Decree No. 2347 concerning trade union representation and since the sentenced leaders will be forced to complete their sentence if their appeal before the Supreme Court fails, the Committee would stress that the adoption of measures of detention and sentencing against workers' representatives in connection with activities related to the protection of the workers' interests endangers the free exercise of trade union rights. Noting that appeal proceedings are still under way the Committee requests the Government to keep it informed of developments in the matter.
2. 510. Concerning the dismissals of workers from the Panal undertaking, while noting the Government's explanations on the nature of the reasons for the dismissals in question, the Committee must note that these measures came very shortly after action had been undertaken by the trade union organisations of the undertaking in support of their claims, and in particular after a fairly protracted strike. In these circumstances the Committee cannot but establish a link between the labour disputes involving the trade unions and the management of the undertaking and the dismissals which were subsequently announced. In this respect the Committee must point out that when trade union members and leaders are dismissed for having exercised their right to strike, which is one of the essential means whereby workers and workers' organisations can promote and defend their interests, there is reason to conclude that they have been penalised for their trade union activities and are subject to anti-union discrimination, contrary to the principle of freedom of association. Consequently, the Committee would recall that workers must enjoy adequate protection against any acts of anti-union discrimination both in law and in practice.
3. 511. As regards the new allegations concerning measures of arrest taken in respect of three persons in December 1981, the Committee must note that the fact that the persons concerned are trade union leaders has not been established by the complainants, any more than the connections between trade union activity and the measures of arrest. While regretting these measures which affect persons, one of whom seems to have been engaged in promoting and defending human rights, the Committee considers that these allegations do not come within its terms of reference. Moreover, it notes that they have been released.
4. 512. Finally, the Committee recalls that it wishes to be kept informed of developments in the area of trade union legislation and of the outcome of the judicial proceedings concerning the disappearance of trade unionists or former trade unionists.