Suites données aux recommandations du comité et du Conseil d’administration - Rapport No. 400, Octobre 2022

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

1. 57. The Committee last examined this case at its October 2015 meeting [see 376th Report, paras 897–927]. On that occasion, the Committee encouraged the Government to continue promoting social dialogue in relation to the measures taken to deal with the crisis and other issues relating to workers’ rights outlined in the complaint, with a view to finding, to the fullest possible extent, solutions agreed by the most representative employers’ and workers’ organizations. It further invited the Government to carry out a joint evaluation with the most representative employers’ and workers’ organizations on the impact of the legislative provisions adopted, regarding wages and other allowances and benefits, on the exercise of trade union rights and in particular the right to collective bargaining, with a view to ensuring that exceptional measures adopted in the context of a crisis are not perpetuated.
2. 58. The Government has sent follow-up information in communications dated 19 May 2017 and 29 October 2021. The Committee notes that in its 2017 communication, the Government refers to a number of laws and regulations governing working time, wages, promotions and regularization of precarious contracts in the public sector that were adopted after the first examination of the complaint. The Government indicates that working time was reduced back to 7 hours a day (35 hours a week) and wage reductions were progressively annulled. With regard to the procedure established in the regulation governing regularizations, the Government indicates that it is based on social dialogue, as Evaluation Committees that will be established in accordance with the regulation have a bipartite composition that includes members of the trade unions representing workers in public service.
3. 59. With regard to the measures adopted in the State Budgets Laws for 2011, 2012 and 2013, the Government once again indicates that they had a transitory and exceptional character. It further adds that Law No. 42/2016, of 28 December, which approved the State Budget for 2017, amended Decree-Law No. 133/2013, of 3 October, which regulates the legal regime applicable to the public corporate sector, repealing section 18(4) of the Decree-Law, which provided for the mandatory nature of the regime fixed by law as regards meal allowances, daily subsistence allowances, overtime and night work. Thus, the prevalence of the law over collective bargaining agreements was removed and collective autonomy restored concerning these matters. With regard to public administration workers governed by General Law on Work in Public Administration and its regulations (both approved by Law No. 59/2008 of 11 December), the Government indicates that two channels for collective bargaining are provided in application of Article 7 of the Labour Relations (Public Service) Convention, 1978 (No. 151): (a) collective bargaining that aims at reaching agreement on matters to be incorporated into legislative acts or regulations applicable to public administration workers; and (b) collective bargaining that aims at concluding a collective bargaining agreement that would be applicable to workers with a public administration employment contract. The Government finally indicates the following numbers of collective agreements concluded in the public sector governed by the General Law on Work in Public Administration: 159 in 2014; 337 in 2015 and 424 in 2016. According to the Government the main purpose of these collective bargaining agreements was to reduce regular working time (from 8 hours a day (40 hours a week) provided in law to 7 hours a day (35 hours a week)).
4. 60. In its 2021 communication, the Government refers to the increase in the national minimum wage, the increase in the salary mass of public administration, and the updating of wage base for public administration resulting in an increase in the lowest wages. It further indicates that in 2020 normal career development has resumed after the progressive unfreezing that started in 2018. The Governments adds that the Law on State Budget for 2018, provides expressly in its section 23 that as of 1 January 2018, in public corporate sector, the provisions of collective labour agreements, when they exist, are fully applicable with regard to the acquired rights. According to the Government, thus the prevalence of law over collective bargaining agreements was clearly repealed and collective autonomy restored in the corporate public sector. Furthermore, with regard to overtime in public administration, the Law on State Budget for 2018 reinstated the original legal regime concerning the increase in hourly wage, repealing the restrictions provided in budget laws of 2015–17. Thus, with regard to this matter as well, provisions of collective bargaining agreements became applicable.
5. 61. The Government further adds that the Law on State Budget for 2019, lifted the restrictions on the applicability of collective bargaining agreements applicable to workers in public foundations governed by public law, public foundations governed by private law and public establishments in matters concerning per diem regimes, overtime and night work. With regard to these matters the legal regime will apply only in absence of collective bargaining agreements. Finally, the Government indicates that the Law on State Budget for 2019 also re-established the prevalence of collective bargaining agreements, when they exist, with regard to the issue of wage increase of the employees of legal persons of public law endowed with independence resulting from their integration in areas of regulation, supervision or control, as well as to office holders and other staff integrated in the public corporate sector.
6. 62. The Committee notes that according to the information submitted by the Government, restrictions imposed on areas that could be regulated by collective bargaining agreements have been progressively removed. Therefore, the Committee considers this case closed and will not pursue its examination.