Suites données aux recommandations du comité et du Conseil d’administration - Rapport No. 324, Mars 2001

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

1. 56. At its November 2000 meeting, the Committee last examined this case concerning the dismissal of Mr. Laximan Malwankar, President of the Fort Aguada Beach Resort Employees' Union (FABREU), the suspension or transfer of 15 FABREU members following strike action, and refusal to recognize the most representative workers' organization for collective bargaining purposes [see 323rd Report, paras. 65-67].
2. 57. In a communication dated 9 January 2001, the Government repeats its previous information according to which out of the three inquiries which were in progress in respect of Shri Ashok Deulkar, Sitaram Ruthod and Shyam Kerkar, the case of Mr. Deulkar was settled amicably and thus two inquiries are still in progress. With regard to the second group of seven workers suspended pending inquiry, the Government indicates that only two inquiries are still in progress and that a further report will follow. As regards the case of Mr. Malwankar, the Government indicates that the adjudication proceedings are in progress and the case pending for arguments on preliminary issues. The hearings are adjourned at the instance of Mr. Malwankar and the next date for hearing is fixed for 20 February 2001. As for the Charter of Demands served by Fort Aguada Beach Resort Employees' Union, the Government indicates that the Industrial Tribunal of Goa has already given award to it and ruled that the workers of the said union were entitled to the benefits of the settlements agreed upon in 1995 and 1998.
3. 58. The Committee takes note of the information provided by the Government. It recalls that this case related to various acts of harassment and anti-union discrimination carried out against the President of FABREU, Mr. Malwankar, from 1992 to 1994, which culminated in the dismissal of this trade union leader in January 1995 and the suspension or transferral of FABREU members in April 1995 following a strike action in the hotel industry which was declared a public utility service and thus referred to the Industrial Tribunal contrary to the principles of freedom of association since the hotel industry is in no way an essential service in which strikes can be prohibited [see 307th Report, paras. 366-375]. The Committee once again must deeply deplore the fact that the events to which the various proceedings and inquiries are related occurred in 1995 and earlier. With respect to Mr. Malwankar, the Committee expresses the firm hope that the court proceedings will be expedited and requests the Government to continue to keep it informed of the outcome of the proceedings, including forwarding copies of the preliminary and final decisions. Furthermore, the Committee requests the Government to continue to keep it informed of all the other pending issues related to this case.