Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2019, published 109th ILC session (2021)

Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98) - Rwanda (Ratification: 1988)

The Committee notes the adoption of the new Labour Code (Law No. 66/2018 of 30 August 2018).

Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention. Adequate protection against anti-union discrimination and interference. In its previous comments, the Committee had noted that, according to the provisions of section 114 of the Labour Code (Law No. 13/2009), any act which infringed the provisions granting protection against acts of discrimination and interference was considered abusive and incurred the payment of damages, and had noted that the amount of damages, however, was not specified in the Labour Code 2009. The Committee had requested the Government to take measures to establish sufficiently dissuasive sanctions against acts of anti-union discrimination and interference, in particular with respect to the amount of damages awarded to trade union members. While taking note of the Government’s statement that the amount of compensation applicable in cases of anti-union discrimination must be determined according to the damage suffered by the victim, in consonance with section 258 of the Civil Code, Book III, the Committee notes with regret that with the adoption of the Labour Code 2018, the above-mentioned section 114 was repealed and the new legislation does not contain, beyond the dismissal of trade union representatives, specific provisions prohibiting and punishing acts of anti-union discrimination and interference. The Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that the new legislation in force provides adequate and specific protection against all acts of anti-union discrimination and interference, including the imposition of effective and sufficiently dissuasive sanctions. The Committee requests the Government to provide information in its next report on any progress made in this regard.

Article 4. Promotion of collective bargaining. In its previous comments, the Committee had noted that the collective bargaining dispute settlement procedure provided for in section 143 ff. of the Labour Code 2009 culminated, in cases of non-conciliation, in referral, at the initiative of the labour administration, to an arbitration committee whose decisions could be the subject of an appeal to the competent jurisdiction, whose decision shall be binding. The Committee had recalled that, in order to preserve the principle of voluntary negotiation recognized by the Convention, compulsory arbitration is only acceptable in certain specific conditions, such as in essential services in the strict sense of the term, in the case of disputes involving public servants engaged in the administration of the State (Article 6 of the Convention), or in the case of an acute national crisis. The Committee therefore had requested the Government to take the necessary measures to amend the legislation so as to ensure that a collective labour dispute in the context of collective bargaining may be submitted to arbitration or to the competent legal authority only with the agreement of both parties, except in the circumstances referred to above. The Committee takes due note of the Government’s indication that: (i) the new Labour Code removed the mandatory requirement for the parties involved in a collective labour dispute to resort to arbitration; and (ii) it may intervene in the settlement of collective labour disputes, within limits established by an Order of the Minister in charge of labour, which, under section 103 of the new Labour Code, determines the organization, functioning of labour inspection and procedure for labour disputes settlements. While it welcomes the removal by the new Labour Code of the mandatory requirement for the parties involved in a collective labour dispute to resort to arbitration, the Committee, in order to ensure that the new rules applicable to the settlement of collective disputes are fully in line with the principle of free and voluntary collective bargaining established by the Convention, requests the Government to provide a copy of the above-mentioned Order and to communicate detailed information on the new procedure for collective labour disputes settlement.

Furthermore, in its previous comments, the Committee had noted that section 121 of the Labour Code 2009 provided that, at the request of a representative organization of workers or employers, the collective agreement shall be negotiated within a joint committee convened by the Minister of Labour or his or her delegate or representatives of the labour inspection participating as advisers. The Committee had recalled that such provision may restrict the principle of free and voluntary negotiation of the parties established by the Convention, and had requested the Government take the necessary measures to amend the legislation so as to ensure that the parties can freely determine the modalities of collective bargaining and in particular that they can decide as to whether or not a representative of the labour administration may be present. The Committee notes with interest the Government’s statement that the participation of a labour administration representative in the collective bargaining process is no longer required under the new Labour Code and that, as a consequence, parties can now convene and negotiate freely without the presence of the Minister, his/her delegate or representative of labour inspection.

In its previous comments, the Committee had also noted that, under section 133 of the Labour Code 2009, at the request of a representative workers’ or employers’ organization, whether or not it is a party to the agreement or on its own initiative, the Minister of Labour may make all or some of the provisions of a collective agreement binding on all employers and workers covered by the occupational and territorial scope of the agreement. The Committee had requested the Government to indicate the institutional framework in which these tripartite consultations take place and to provide information on recent extension procedures. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the recent extension procedure is set forth in the new Labour Code in its section 95, which provides that a collective agreement applicable to at least to two-thirds (2/3) of the number of employees or employers representing the category of the concerned professionals may, at the request of the parties, be extended to the entire sector. The Committee welcomes these elements and requests the Government to provide information on the application in practice of section 95 of the new Labour Code.

The Committee is raising other matters in a request addressed directly to the Government.