Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 2023, Publication: 111st ILC session (2023)

Tripartite Consultation (International Labour Standards) Convention, 1976 (No. 144) - El Salvador (Ratification: 1995)

Discussion by the Committee

Government representative (Minister of Labour and Social Welfare) – From El Salvador, I send a fraternal greeting of solidarity to the whole of the working class throughout the world. As a founder country, we respect the ILO’s international Conventions and its supervisory mechanisms, such as the present Committee. We are convinced of the fundamental role that they play in achieving decent work and the construction of peace in the world.

Nevertheless, I wish to express my concern, disquiet and indignation that this supervisory body is being used today for political reasons. We are one of the Governments invited to provide information to the Committee, following negotiations with little transparency, imbued with misgivings and secrecy, far distant from the values promoted by this institution, in practices that call into question the leadership of the ILO, its honour, credibility and the transparency of its supervisory mechanisms.

It is strange that many of the cases of serious violations of labour rights are not even aired in this forum, and it raises the question of whether this is in response to the political or geopolitical manipulation of cases. Those who negotiate the cases need to search their consciences that, while they are engaging in political attacks on countries such as ours, in other latitudes there are trade unionists who are being murdered, tortured and silences for defending their rights or those of the great majority of persons.

May I make some reflections on the working methods of the Committee. It is to be supposed that the selection of cases corresponds to criteria of geographical balance and the seriousness of the cases.

With regard to geographical balance, the Central American subregion represents fewer than 1 per cent of the world population, but has 17 per cent of the cases under discussion. Demonstrating a clear lack of proportion, it would appear that the majority of the problems of the world are in this small subregion.

In relation to the seriousness of the situation, why are certain countries included in which there are violations of fundamental Conventions, where there is abundant evidence of the damage that is being wrought, not only against labour and union rights, but also against human rights, through labour exploitation, forced labour, child labour, discrimination, the murder of trade union leaders, unjustified detentions, among other practices. It should be noted in passing that these countries are not even included in the first negotiations or the final negotiation.

Why are countries not included where there has been a disproportionate use of the police to put down workers’ protests against labour reforms implemented without consultation?

On the other hand, we see countries with controversial cases relating to the violation of labour rights in which there have even been attempts to corrupt some of the leadership of the workers at the global level in order to obtain favourable opinions and to clean their image at the international level.

We see countries with cases of serious violations of the rights of indigenous peoples, which have not been called upon to answer for their acts as a result of their lobbying power, for which we are used as petty change in the negotiation process. And there is a hegemonic country, in which there are serious and well-known discriminatory acts and the violation of the rights of migrant workers, and yet it is a country that we have never yet seen called upon to answer for its acts, and it is certainly one of the major sources of financing for the Organization.

We would not like to think that the proportion of financial contributions could be an excuse for not being called upon for examination, while countries with lower economic potential are more likely to be selected in this group. For this reason, the negotiation of the list of cases has to be carried out transparently.

We would feel proud as a country to come before this Committee and present our situation, and to provide any reports deemed appropriate to all the Organization’s supervisory mechanisms, if the serious violations of fundamental Conventions were resolved in these major economic powers.

El Salvador is a small country with an honourable people which is redefining its future under the leadership of President Nayib Bukele. We have begun rebuilding our dignity, and this involves seeking our own identity and determination, without interference by other Governments. This creates resentment and discomfort in one of the most powerful States, which for many years determined the direction taken by our country.

In order to make progress in El Salvador, we have had to free ourselves from the power structures which were dominating our society, and these structures have lost their power of influence, which means that they are fighting to recuperate the privileges from which they benefited for decades.

Our Government has taken the firm decision to protect the lives of people, courageously standing up to criminality, one of the main problems which most afflicted our society. A security plan has been implemented which has had outstanding success, based on two priorities. On the one hand, the criminal and terrorist organizations which for decades brought pain and grief to our families have been neutralized and, on the other, investments are being made in education, health, the prevention of violence and the construction of a culture of peace.

As with any public policy there are winners and losers, and what we need to seek is the maximum social benefits for the great majority. And there are two types of reactions to this. On the one hand, there is broad and generalized support by the population which now has time to breathe and to hope, while, on the other, there is a small group who consider that the measures adopted are not sound. They mainly consist of those for whom insecurity was a business. And during these debates, what is clear is that we are rescuing generations of boys and girls from the claws of delinquency, and now they no longer dream of being a member of a gang, but of being a doctor, engineer, architect or teacher.

This opportunity to dream of a better future is something that we have long craved. The economic and social measures adopted by right-wing governments, in which the cabinet members came from the National Business Association (ANEP), left the country drowning in despair, poverty and exclusion. All while they profited and became rich.

I wish to emphasize that we are continuing to promote tripartite social dialogue in our country, for which reason we have institutionalized the National Prize for Decent Work and the Prize for Collective Bargaining, which seek to recognize good practices by enterprises in compliance with the national and international legal framework governing labour matters, and to promote good relations between workers and employers.

I wish to emphasize that, in accordance with the conclusions of this Committee, the Higher Labour Council (CST) was set up in 2021 and has held meetings, including more frequently than required by its rules. The operation of the CST was noted by the high-level tripartite mission that visited El Salvador, with broad participation by all the social partners. The mission was invited and accepted in the plenary of the CST.

Moreover, in accordance with the conclusions of the high-level mission and the conclusions of this Committee, the Government has submitted various Conventions, Protocols, Recommendations and reports for consultation with the CST.

In a paper issued on 19 May 2022, three international ILO Conventions and seven Recommendations were submitted to the CST for tripartite consultation.

In a paper issued on 1 September 2022, 17 ILO Conventions and one Protocol were submitted to the CST for tripartite consultation. In a paper issued on 13 March 2023, 13 reports on ILO Conventions were submitted to the CST for tripartite consultation.

All of these consultations were carried out with workers’ and employers’ representatives, and in the latter case through the President of the ANEP, Augustín Martínez, in his capacity as Vice-President of the CST. It should be emphasized that up to now there has been no response from the ANEP, although replies have been received from the workers. Due to the lack of a response from the ANEP, it has not been possible to make progress in the process of the ratification of other more important Conventions and to advance on other subjects.

Last year this Committee indicated in its conclusions, surprisingly and at the bidding of the ANEP, that it “regretted” that five ILO Conventions had been ratified without consulting the most representative employers’ organization. As a result, we proceeded to consult the ANEP on international labour standards, but we have not received any reply to the communications sent up to now. This is clear evidence that the ANEP is not seeking to be consulted or is not interested in tripartite social dialogue.

It is well demonstrated that its motives are eminently political so as to be able to play the role of victim in this forum, making use of this supervisory mechanism for its own ends.

Nevertheless, these consultation processes bear witness to the intense activity of the CST as a consultation body on international labour standards. All of the above has been indicated to the corresponding ILO bodies, but in addition we have today provided physical documents to this Committee in support of the indications provided above.

Moreover, the Government is open to hearing proposals from the social partners, just as it has been requested by workers’ representatives to submit a series of proposals on labour issues, which have been heeded with the establishment of a dialogue forum in which workers presented their projects, such as the increase in the minimum wage, the ratification of Conventions and proposals for the reform of the Labour Code, including on matters such as the extension of the validity of trade union credentials, on which we are working together.

The ANEP complains repeatedly of not being recognized, which is unfounded, as its President is the Vice-President of the CST representing employers. Employers are also represented on the bipartite and tripartite bodies in the country, and it is paradoxical that the ANEP has objected to bipartite bodies becoming tripartite, for which reason we do not understand the coherence of its complaint to this supervisory body.

Furthermore, within the framework of tripartite social dialogue, I can report that, as part of the commitments made by the State to improving the dignity of the working class, a new Act has been adopted on pensions, offering equity and justice to workers, which involved withdrawing certain privileges accorded to major entrepreneurs, which were costly for workers. The Act created a forum in the El Salvador Pensions Institute with tripartite composition (Government, workers and employers) for the administration and management of decisions in relation to the social insurance system in El Salvador, as a mechanism that had long been denied to all the social partners.

I wish to recall that the objective of the Convention, as indicated in Article 2(1), is that each Member of the ILO which ratifies the Convention undertakes to operate procedures which ensure effective consultations, with respect to matters concerning the activities of the ILO, between representatives of the Government, employers and workers.

Moreover, these matters are set out and defined clearly in Article 5(1) of the Convention, and include: (a) the agenda of the International Labour Conference; (b) the submission of ILO Conventions and Recommendations; (c) the re-examination of unratified Conventions; (d) the submission of reports on Conventions; and (e) the denunciation of ratified Conventions.

In the specific light of the Convention, and reviewing the recommendations made by the Committee last year, in which it called on El Salvador to repeal 23 legislative decrees, I raise the question of the legal basis for establishing such a conclusion, the provisions of the Convention that establish such power, and the methods of work of the Committee which require the repeal of national laws. We believe that this conclusion runs counter to the principles of non-interference, autonomy and the free determination of countries.

As I come almost to the end of my intervention, I reiterate my call to the leaders of the ILO to seek transparency and maintain these supervisory mechanisms outside the reach of political influences. The workers of the world must be protected and these mechanisms have been created for this purpose, for which reason it is necessary to engage in a process of profound reflection.

Finally, I reaffirm that our commitment to the values and principles of the ILO is unshakeable and we will continue working resolutely to strengthen tripartite social dialogue and decent work in El Salvador.

Worker members – This is the eighth consecutive occasion on which we have examined the case of El Salvador in the Committee, and the sixth consecutive time for the application of Convention No. 144. At the last session, we noted some progress made by the Government. We welcomed the fact that the CST had started operating again after many years of paralysis.

Moreover, we noted the ratification of various ILO Conventions which have entered into force this June in response to demands by our fraternal unions in El Salvador. We welcome the clarification by the Government that the social partners were consulted before the ratification of the Conventions.

The Government also accepted the visit of a high-level tripartite mission in May 2022. The mission made important recommendations, which had received tripartite agreement. Despite these undoubted steps forward, we cannot fail to indicate, as we did last year, that there remain certain challenges in relation to the application of the Convention.

First, we must repeat the indications that we have made on other occasions that legal obstacles persist which prevent trade unions from participating in tripartite bodies and even from freely exercising their rights to freedom of association and collective bargaining. In particular, these include the obligation set out in the Labour Code which requires workers’ organizations to renew the composition of their executive bodies every 12 months. This requirement constitutes a form of interference in the operation of trade unions. It should be recalled that Article 3 of the Convention provides that representatives shall be freely chosen and that the public authorities shall refrain from any interference which restricts or impedes the legitimate exercise of this right. As indicated by the Committee of Experts, the Government must adopt the necessary measures without delay to repeal the legal requirement for trade unions to request the renewal of their legal status every 12 months.

Moreover, we have been informed that the Government has recently introduced the payment of fees for the alleged services provided by the Ministry of Labour, including the provision of credentials to unions. This measure amounts to an additional obstacle in a process that was already in itself very onerous.

We also note that for organizations representing employers the period of renewal of their credentials is more reasonable, as it is a period of over two years.

We take careful note that the Government claims to have initiated a process of reflection to propose reforms to the Labour Code with a view to facilitating and accelerating procedures for the provision of credentials.

We also note the decision by the Ministry of Labour to establish a Trade Union Office in the General Directorate of Labour with a view to the provision of legal assistance to trade union representatives. We urge the Government to guarantee that this measure makes a specific contribution to full compliance with the Convention.

However, this latter measure is not a solution to the problem and therefore we are bound once again to urge the Government to repeal this legal requirement so as to be in full compliance with the provisions of the Convention.

We previously recognized the positive steps taken by the Government to restore the operation of the CST. However, we hear that the plenary of the CST has not met since the conclusions were adopted by this Committee last year and that there have not been meetings of its executive board since then.

This is a worrying indication, as the tripartite consultation promoted by the CST will ensure a more balanced approach to the decisions taken by the Government by taking into consideration the interests and concerns of all the parties involved.

In particular, the CST plays an essential role in the implementation of the recommendations of both the tripartite mission undertaken in 2022 and the conclusions adopted by this Committee.

One of these points is precisely the formulation and development of a road map agreed with the social partners for the application of all the recommendations made by the tripartite mission.

Finally, the Government must cease all acts of harassment, interference and hostility towards workers’ and employers’ organizations. The role of the Government is to facilitate and provide a platform for effective dialogue between the social partners, without exercising undue influence or control over their participation.

All of these considerations imply that, despite the significant progress achieved and assessed in the report, the Government is still not in full compliance with the requirements of the Convention.

Employer members – I wish to thank the Minister for the information provided to the Committee today, although we have to say that we do not agree with the content of several of his comments.

We regret today that the Employer delegate of the ANEP is not accredited to this Committee, by virtue of the decisions taken by the Government, and that therefore he will be in this gathering as a representative of the International Organisation of Employers (IOE).

I would therefore like to start by referring to this case, which involves Convention No. 144, and to emphasize our concern as employers’ representatives that it is the sixth successive occasion on which the same matter has arisen in relation to an issue which fundamentally remains practically the same and which, moreover, has deteriorated in certain respects.

We recall with concern that the Committee of Experts has been making comments since 2013, only interrupted in 2020, along the same lines on the grounds of the failure of El Salvador to comply with Convention No. 144 in law and practice, despite the fact that it is a governance Convention that is highly relevant to the ILO, and that it is continuing to fail to give effect to it in view of the erratic use of the CST, Government interference in the administration and operation of the ANEP, which is the most representative organization of employers, attacks against its representatives and serious deficiencies in the functioning of social dialogue and tripartite consultation, as well as delays in issuing credentials for members of workers’ organizations.

I will now provide specific information as evidence. The failure to comply with the Convention is very serious in the view of the Employers’ group, particularly in light of its links with the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), which is fundamental for this Organization. That is why we qualify this case as serious and urgent.

First, the reactivation and functioning of the CST and deficiencies in tripartite consultations. In the first place, we recall that the CST was established on a temporary basis in 2019, but more as a symbol than for any other purpose, as we saw last year. Subsequently, following the interruption for the pandemic and the post-pandemic, the Government once again re-established the CST in December 2021. The information provided by the Government suggests that progress is being made in social dialogue with the election of the representatives of workers, employers and the Government. The Government adds that the CST has since held five meetings, and ten of its executive board (which has met more frequently than set out in the rules), which served for the development of a tripartite strategy for the creation of decent work and benefited from the technical assistance of the ILO Regional Office.

However, it should be emphasized that the ILO undertook a direct contacts mission in May 2022. Although the mission noted that the CST had started to operate once again, both the ITUC and the IOE indicate anomalies in its operation which are not in compliance with the terms of the Convention. For example, following the end of the ILO mission, the CST has not met again. The only session that was convened did not have the necessary quorum as the President did not attend, nor the deputy. Furthermore, the Government made the commitment to the mission to hold consultations in the CST on the ratification of five Conventions, which did not happen.

This is having consequences for the processes of labour law reform in El Salvador, as neither the CST nor the social partners are being consulted. Proof of this is provided by the fact that, prior to the approval in two weeks of five ILO Conventions submitted to the National Assembly in May 2022, no consultations were held with the ANEP as the most representative employers’ organization, thereby showing clear disdain for social dialogue and tripartite consultation and being in violation of both national law and the provisions of the Convention. This was documented when we examined the case last year.

Although there is no question concerning the sovereign will of the Legislative Assembly of El Salvador, we consider it to be very serious that the Government disdains Article 5 of the Convention, without prejudice to the fact that appropriate compliance with treaties can only be achieved when exhaustive analyses have been undertaken of the implications in law and practice of the transposition of an international standard into internal law, on the basis of consultation with the most representative groups of employers and workers.

With reference to the road map that this Committee called for last year, we note that the CST has not met on this subject, nor has there been any consultation on the tripartite formulation of responses for the application of the recommendations made by the mission.

Second, Government interference. Since the IOE indicated that Government interference is continuing through the harassment of the ANEP and its member associations, on every occasion that representatives have to be elected for any institution, reference is made in the observation to the case of the El Salvador Vocational Training Institute (INSAFORP) as an example of interference and weakening, as well as a series of other examples in which employers’ representatives have not been elected: the Maritime Port Authority (AMP), the International Centre for Fairs and Conventions (CIFCO); the Independent Executive Committee for Ports (CAPA); the Salvadorean Tourism Corporation (CORSATUR); the Salvadorean Environmental Fund (FONAES) and the National Fund for Public Housing (FONAVIPO).

Between April and July 2022, the Government proceeded to the election of employers’ representatives on the National Minimum Wage Council, for which the organizations affiliated to the ANEP put forward candidates. However, over four months following the elections, those elected have not taken their oaths.

The Government claims that it is working in a harmonious, professional and technical tripartite manner. Nevertheless, the case of the greatest and most serious interference has been the reform of 23 laws, under which employers’ representatives no longer elect their representatives to the executive boards of the 23 tripartite and joint bodies covered by these laws. This power has been transferred to the President of the Republic, who not only elects employers’ representatives, but also has the discretional and arbitrary power to remove employers’ directors from the executive boards of these 23 institutions.

Finally, I wish to indicate that the Ministry of Labour recently announced that it would not be inviting the ANEP to the Conference on the grounds that the ANEP had worked to have El Salvador included on the short list for this Committee. This cannot be left to the arbitrary decision of the Government, as it is an obligation assumed by the State as a Member of this Organization and through ratification of the Convention. Moreover, the situation has also been used to create pressure on certain employer delegates to leave the ANEP umbrella organization.

This situation that we are denouncing is extremely serious and, in addition to being in violation of the Convention, is also in violation of Convention No. 87, as explained.

Finally, we share the observations made by workers’ representatives concerning the obstacles faced by trade union members, authorities and federations in obtaining the credentials required every year in an appropriate and flexible manner, which also amounts to undue interference in trade union activities in El Salvador.

Worker member, El Salvador – I wish to refer to freedom of association in the country where, although there are clearly significant challenges, we now have a forum for the strengthening of the trade union movement, the promotion of collective bargaining and decent work, and to reduce the stigmatization of trade unions, which has been inherited from right-wing governments.

With reference to tripartite consultation, I wish to indicate that, as representatives of workers, we are fully represented on tripartite bodies, and we have elected our representatives without interference by the State, as we have asserted our independence and autonomy. We have won spaces for dialogue and we have been heard in relation to the development of public policies that are of benefit to our people.

For example, the recent pension reform took into consideration the proposals made by workers, and a new tripartite body has been created in the El Salvador Pensions Institute for the governance of the social insurance system with the participation of workers and employers, in accordance with the Social Security (Minimum Standards) Convention, 1952 (No. 102), which has recently been ratified. In the past, workers did not have access to influencing the administration of pensions, which was the exclusive domain of private enterprise.

Over the past three years, the trade union movement has grown by 65 new unions and four workers’ federations. Moreover, 58 collective contracts have been concluded, 35 in the private sector, 11 in autonomous institutions and 12 in the public sector.

We also recognize that progress has been made in reducing the delay in issuing credentials, and many unions have made use of the advice provided by the trade union office which was created in 2022 in the Ministry of Labour, substantially reducing the waiting time to obtain our credentials.

As a trade union movement, we have made a series of proposals to the Government on labour matters. Through the establishment of technical committees in the Ministry of Labour, these proposals are aimed at increasing the minimum wage, the ratification of Conventions, unemployment insurance and the reform of the Labour Code, in which we have called for the validity of trade union credentials to be extended to three years. This would undoubtedly amount to substantive progress, and we therefore call on the Government to forward this reform to the national Congress as soon as possible.

As workers’ representatives, we have also participated actively in the CST, both in the meetings that have been held, and in the consultation processes that have been undertaken with our representatives in relation to the submission of Conventions and the preparation of reports on Conventions, which we have reviewed and discussed, and provided comments and proposals through the worker Vice-President of the CST.

Certain organizations have claimed today that freedom of association does not exist in El Salvador. It should be recalled that, for many years, under the right-wing governments, the trade union movement was attacked, reduced and stigmatized. They privatized the national bank, the pensions system, telecommunications, energy distribution, and they banded together with gangs and criminal groups and did many other things that they shared, and never engaged in tripartite consultation on any of them

They even attempted to privatize health and education, and the only things that prevented such privatization were the marches and the struggle by the authentic trade union movement, in the face of repression and violence by the Government of the time, in which many trade union companions lost their lives.

As a representative of trade unions, I wish to give my assessment of the ANEP, the institution that made the complaint to this Committee. My country was for decades sullied and corrupted by the power structures, which took over the State and its institutions for their own benefit. These power structures were always in line with the ANEP.

(Point of order.)

Employer members – I believe that the intervention that is being made is going beyond the objective of today’s discussion and is outside the limits of our dialogue, particular as it has identified, commented upon and described an organization using its name, which is not what we came here to discuss today. I therefore call for the discussion to be brought back to the purpose of our meeting and, of course, that any reference identifying the employers’ organization in question is removed from the record.

Worker member, El Salvador – It was such that it was a political platform to put forward presidential candidates and, as is public knowledge, one of the former Presidents is now imprisoned for serious crimes of corruption and embezzlement of the State. It is for this reason that, as workers, we view with indignation the hypocritical attitude of claiming to be the victim of a system when for years they have harmed the rights of millions of workers.

For 20 years, the ANEP governed through its political party, ARENA. At that time, the ILO did not register problems of tripartite social dialogue in El Salvador, not because there was genuine tripartite social dialogue, but because it was the ANEP that decided everything and because it corrupted false trade union representatives, offering them privileges provided that supported its interests, without concern for the burden visited upon the working class. It should be added in passing that some of the false trade unionists have been engaged in extortion against enterprises and continue to defend the ANEP, including within these walls.

It is for that reason that, in view of the loss of these privileges, they are making use of the ILO supervisory mechanisms to raise issues that are solely political, under the false argument of social dialogue and democracy. And they never engaged in dialogue, they just imposed their will.

Now that they cannot impose anything, and have lost the role of telling the Government what it has to do, they consider themselves to be injured and prejudiced. During their governments, when they were repressing and killing trade unionists, when they adopted hundreds of laws for their own benefit without consultation, they never came to the ILO with complaints, and they even blocked the access of the genuine trade union movement to the mechanisms of the Organization.

They are including the country in the list of individual cases for a subject on which progress is being made at the national level, while our brother trade unionists in other countries are harassed, murdered and disappeared. We believe that those are the cases that should be discussed in this Committee. In this regard, I also wish to refer to the manner in which the countries are chosen which are called before the Committee.

It appears to me that there is a lack of transparency in the process of negotiation and that to ensure objectivity and impartiality in the decisions taken by the Committee it is necessary for the representatives of each country to participate, because the views of the genuine representatives of workers have not been taken into account. Moreover, the meetings are not even public, and it is not known where and when negotiations are held on the countries included on the short list. We cannot deny that there are interests of powerful countries, which are making use of these procedures as mechanisms for exerting geopolitical pressure, as is the case of the imperial power.

We have many challenges to face in our country, which we have to confront, and the trade union movement in El Salvador is committed to making progress towards a society that is more just and equitable.

Third, we welcome the fact that there is freedom of enterprise in the country, with the promotion of private investment, which can be seen in the large number of new enterprises created, which is a fundamental pillar for the generation of decent employment and national development.

However, we regret the scarce recognition given to the information provided by the genuine trade union movement in the country, and instead the opinions of a minuscule group of pseudo-trade unionists who are still linked to the ANEP are taken as the general view.

Finally, we call on the Government not to take a backwards step in the public policies that are being implemented, not to give in to ANEP pressure, which would be tantamount to reducing the influence of the authentic and genuine trade union movement, and not to go back on the protection policies for millions of workers in El Salvador.

(Point of order.)

Employer members – I wish to record that the Employers totally reject anything said that involves any assessment of the ANEP as being outside the mandate of the Committee and we therefore want any reference made to the ANEP by the speaker to be kept out of the record. We came here with an objective on the agenda which is to discuss compliance, or possibly the lack of compliance with the Convention, and we are open and ready to enter into dialogue in this respect. We also call for effect to be given to the demand made by the Employers’ group.

Government member, Sweden – I have the honour to speak on behalf of the European Union (EU) and its Member States. The candidate countries Bosnia and Herzegovina, North Macedonia, Republic of Moldova, Montenegro and Serbia, and the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) country, Norway, Member of the European Economic Area (EEA), align themselves with this statement.

The EU and its Member States are committed to the promotion, protection, respect and fulfilment of human rights, including labour rights. We actively promote the universal ratification and implementation of the fundamental international labour standards. We support the ILO in its indispensable role to develop, promote and supervise the effective implementation of ratified international labour standards and of fundamental Conventions in particular. We firmly believe that compliance with ILO Conventions is essential for social and economic stability and that an environment conducive to dialogue, consultation and trust between employers, workers and governments is the basis for solid and sustainable growth and inclusive societies.

The EU and its Member States stand with the people of El Salvador and we are committed to strengthening our cooperation through political and trade ties as well as our important cooperation portfolio. The EU-Central America Political Dialogue and Cooperation Agreement (PDCA) and the provisional application of the trade pillar of the EU-Central America Association Agreement provide a framework for further developing our partnership, including through cooperation on trade, sustainable development and the effective implementation, in law and practice, of the fundamental ILO Conventions. Furthermore, we are currently discussing the establishment of a Memorandum of Understanding on Bilateral Consultations that will allow for intensifying our bilateral engagement and dialogue with El Salvador.

Last year, the EU welcomed the steps taken by the Government towards compliance with the Convention, including the re-establishment of the Higher Labour Council for the biennium 2021–2023 and the creation of a tripartite technical commission to operationalize the Council agenda. However, we take note with concern of the ITUC and IOE observations regarding the complexity of the current administrative process for designating employers’ and workers’ representatives, the numbers of empty seats on the body hindering the representativeness of the Higher Labour Council, the legal obstacles and complex process of appointment and the inactivity of the Council itself.

We are deeply concerned by the human rights’ situation in the country, not least by the new allegations of acts of interference and harassment against and marginalization of activities of employers’ and workers’ organizations, including on social networks. We regret that 23 decrees adopted in 2021 prevent employers’ organizations from electing their representatives in 23 tripartite and joint bodies and we call on the Government to repeal them. The obligation on trade unions to request renewal of their legal status every 12 months should also be repealed.

We sadly take note of the steps backwards that have been taken with regard to the expectations of past years, namely that social dialogue and tripartite consultations would become fully functional in the country. We note that the case has already been discussed at the last five sessions of the Committee, including as a serious case in 2017.

We urge the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure the effective and immediate operation of the Higher Labour Council and other tripartite entities, respecting the independence of the social partners, including in the appointment of their representatives.

We reiterate the Committee of Experts’ call urging the Government to fully respect the autonomy of the employers’ and workers’ organizations, both in law and in practice. We call on the Government to implement essential measures to ensure without delay the repeal of any legal provisions that allow for any interference in the autonomy of these organizations, in conformity with the instruments ratified by the country. This also includes that the Government takes the necessary measures to guarantee the prompt delivery of credentials for all organizations.

We echo the Committee of Experts’ urgent call for the Government to provide detailed and updated information on the content and outcome of tripartite consultations, including within the Higher Labour Council. We expect the Government to comply with these reporting obligations.

We recall the importance of ILO technical assistance in facilitating compliance with all ratified ILO Conventions and the promotion of tripartism. We also emphasize that the extent and content of such assistance should be defined through social dialogue, for example within the framework of the Higher Labour Council.

We expect to see progress in achieving full and sustained compliance with the Convention as soon as possible, given the long-standing issues and the crucial importance of well-functioning social dialogue. In this regard, we recall that the Government should elaborate, in a tripartite manner, a road map to implement, without delay, the recommendations formulated by the ILO high-level tripartite mission, as requested by this Committee last year.

The EU and its Member States remain committed to joint constructive engagement with El Salvador with the aim of strengthening the Government’s capacity to address the issues raised in the Committee of Experts’ report.

(Point of order.)

Government representative – I believe that this is the best way for all those present to be able to have the opportunity of putting forward their views. It is precisely the action that has just been taken by the employers’ representative, which is the essence, as illustrated on this occasion, of not wishing to allow freedom of expression by the genuine working class. I only ask that everyone can intervene in a normal and calm environment, that we let everything proceed normally with the meeting and that we allow the free participation of all representatives.

Government member, Colombia, speaking on behalf of a substantial majority of countries of Latin America and the Caribbean – We appreciate the hindsight offered by the Government, through the Minister of Labour and Social Welfare, Rolando Castro, concerning compliance with the Convention.

We have been informed of the significant progress made in El Salvador in promoting tripartite social dialogue. As provided in section 11 of the Statute of the CST, it has to meet at least twice a year in ordinary plenary session and each occasion that it is convened by the President or upon the application of one of the Vice-Presidents, who in this case are the social partners.

In 2022, as indicated by the Government, the CST held five meetings, during which important subjects were discussed, such as the Act on growing together for the comprehensive protection of infants, children and young persons, which was submitted for discussion in the CST and received proposals from both workers and employers, and finally entered into force in January 2023.

A tripartite technical committee was set up for the examination of the Bill and the formulation in consultation of the National Strategy for the Generation of Decent Employment. We note the Government’s indication that the committee was also given the task of following up the submission of international Conventions, Protocols and Recommendation, and accordingly, as required in the submission process, three ILO Conventions and seven Recommendations were submitted for consultation.

We note that in May 2022 a high-level tripartite mission chaired by the Mexican delegation visited El Salvador and was able to verify the functioning of this body. It is also important to emphasize that legally constituted tripartite institutions in El Salvador are in operation and meet regularly, which is an illustration of respect for tripartite social dialogue.

All of this is in contrast with the inclusion of El Salvador once again in the list of 24 countries called upon to provide information to the Committee. We therefore welcome the commitment of the Government to the application of the Convention and we encourage the ILO to continue providing technical cooperation to the Government and to all the tripartite constituents.

Employer member, Colombia – In the first place, it is important to bear in mind that this is the sixth time that the application of the Convention has been examined by the Committee. In 2022, the Committee adopted a series of conclusions, although regrettably the Government has not given effect to any of them. In this regard, I wish to refer to two fundamental aspects of the case.

In Article 2, the Convention refers to the commitment to hold effective consultations and is based on the principle of social dialogue, which is an essential tool for the development of joint proposals by workers, employers and the Government with a view to promoting growth, peace and general well-being.

It is therefore a matter of concern that, despite these reiterated calls by the ILO supervisory mechanisms, the CST has continued to be inactive since May 2022, thereby denying tripartite social dialogue with the most representative organizations.

We reiterate that it is of the greatest importance for consultations to be held in good faith and trust and for employers and workers to be allowed to express their views, analysis and proposals with a view to achieving genuine consensus and making progress in seeking improvements in industrial relations through social dialogue.

Secondly, with reference workers’ and employers’ representatives, it is necessary to recall that they have to be elected freely and be represented on an equal footing, in accordance with Conventions Nos 87 and 144, in Article 3. The Committee of Experts has indicated on repeated occasions that it is the responsibility of workers’ and employers’ organizations to establish the conditions for the election of their leaders and that the authorities should refrain from any undue interference in the exercise of this right.

For these reasons, we note with concern that the Government, on the one hand, continues to disregard the ANEP as the most representative organization of employers in El Salvador and, on the other, has not accredited the employers selected by the ANEP to participate in this Conference. This is in complete disregard for the spirit of the ILO Constitution and denies the right of the most representative employers’ organization to appoint its delegates. This violation forms part of an environment in El Salvador that is opposed to freedoms, and in particular freedom of association.

In conclusion, we request the Government, in compliance with and respect for the Convention, to recognize the ANEP as the most representative organization of employers, to reactivate the CST as soon as possible to advance with tripartite social dialogue and to engage in effective consultations on matters relating to the ILO and all issues regarding labour and social policies in the country.

Government member, Panama – The fundamental ILO process of promoting peace in the world through a spirit of collaboration with a view to protecting labour rights is based on tripartite social dialogue.

Within the context of the discussion of this individual case, we recall that the objective of the Convention, ratified by El Salvador in 1995, is tripartite consultation on matters concerning the activities of the ILO, which are set out in Articles 2 and 5. Let us therefore consider in this respect the commitment of El Salvador to the supervisory bodies of this Organization as set out in the report of the high-level tripartite mission which visited the country in 2022 as a follow-up to the conclusions adopted by this Committee.

According to the information provided, the high-level mission was invited and received by the plenary of the CST in El Salvador and noted its establishment and operation, while making certain recommendations on progress to be made in the development of tripartite social dialogue.

In light of the information reported, we recognize that the establishment of the CST in itself constitutes important progress, as it had not been in operation in El Salvador for many years.

We also note the communications sent by the Government to workers and employers concerning the submission for tripartite consultation of: 20 ILO Conventions, seven Recommendations and a Protocol, as well as 13 reports on Conventions, which were submitted to the Vice-Presidents of the CST, taking into account its substantial workload and in line with the recommendations of this Committee and the provisions of the Convention.

Panama has a long history of tripartite social dialogue. At the present time, we are in the process of setting up the Higher Labour Council. It is therefore important to note that, if the objective of consultations is limited to international labour standards, not all the issues that arise in each country have to be submitted for tripartite consultation, but only those relating to the world of work, without disregarding the important value placed on social dialogue in our countries.

We therefore encourage the tripartite partners in El Salvador to go forward on the road of dialogue, and we urge the social partners to provide their response to the consultations undertaken by the Government for the promotion of social peace and social, labour and economic well-being.

Employer member, Honduras – We are currently reviewing a governance Convention of our Organization, in respect of which the Government has failed to give effect to the provisions of the Convention, to the detriment of social dialogue and the most representative organization of employers in the country, the ANEP.

It will be recalled that the Government issued 23 laws removing the ANEP from representation of the same number of bipartite and tripartite dialogue bodies, even though this Committee had issued its observations and conclusions calling for the repeal of the laws and due respect for the employers’ organization, which has not happened up to now. Moreover, the Government has been appointing employers’ representatives directly, leaving aside employers’ organizations. The road map for the re-establishment of dialogue and tripartite consultation was not drawn up on a tripartite basis.

Attacks are continuing on the leaders and organizations affiliated to the ANEP with a view to exerting pressure on the organization and its members to give up their positions, especially those with work or contracts with the State. This is unacceptable and must not be tolerated by this Organization.

In its desire to disregard and with clear contempt for the representative organization of El Salvador, the Government accredited an employer representative for this Conference who had not been proposed by the ANEP and without listening to the views of the ANEP, as part of its attack on employers in El Salvador and in violation of the Convention and the ILO Constitution.

We wish to emphasize the clear contradiction in the documents provided by the Government, as it first recognizes that the ANEP is the most representative organization of employers and then removes its rights of consultation and representation, and in so doing ignores the provisions of ILO Conventions Nos. 87 and 144.

Worker member, Argentina – I am speaking to you on behalf of the three Argentinian trade union confederations. In this case, the IOE is denouncing the Government for alleged violations of Conventions Nos 87 and 144.

While this case is being examined in the light of Convention No 144, the connection with Convention No. 87 made by the IOE is fitting because there cannot be tripartite consultation mechanisms for the application of international labour standards without the organizations that represent employers and workers. In this regard, we remind the IOE that Convention No. 87 is not limited to the right to organize, but also covers the principle and exercise of freedom of association which, although it is not explicitly set out, includes the right to strike. The right to strike is essential to freedom of association, just as the right to organize is essential to tripartite consultation under Convention No. 144.

In addition, the IOE and ANEP make a series of claims denouncing the failure of the Government to implement the Convention, which do not reflect what is really happening in El Salvador, which is surely why they wish to remain anonymous.

While the IOE and ANEP report the lack of social dialogue in El Salvador, the ANEP regularly participates in five social dialogue forums, and notably presides over one of them, namely the Vocational Training Institute.

With respect to the CST, five plenary meetings and ten meetings of its executive board have been held, in accordance with section 11 of its Statute, which sets out that it must hold at least two meetings a year. ANEP participated in those meetings.

When the CST was established (2021–2023), the workers’ and employers’ representatives were elected freely and independently, in accordance with section 4 of its Statute.

The CST is operational and, in a tripartite manner, addresses issues within its competence, such as the agreement to, through tripartism, develop a strategy to generate decent work.

Nevertheless, and in the light of the workers’ claims, we request the Government to adopt without delay the road map requested by the Conference relating to the delivery of credentials. We welcome the establishment of the Trade Union Office that provides legal assistance to representatives to streamline the processes for the delivery credentials, the extension of their period of validity and the reform of the Labour Code.

Thus, the Government is making efforts with regard to the obligation under the Convention, convoking and promoting forums for consultation and dialogue, ensuring the enjoyment of freedom of association for workers’ and employers’ representatives in accordance with Conventions Nos 87 and 144.

Government member, Dominican Republic - We welcome the efforts the Government is making through the Ministry of Labour, which has shown its firm commitment to strengthening the implementation of the standards being discussed in this forum. We welcome the progress indicated by the Government, which shows that the main intention is the commitment to find solutions to any event brought to light by the social partners in this country.

In addition, it is hopeful to know that the Government is showing a keen interest in enforcing labour legislation and the ILO’s international labour standards. We invite El Salvador to continue these good practices and encourage it to enhance the work that is under way.

Employer member, Costa Rica – The employers of Costa Rica note with deep concern the case of the violation of the Convention by the Government, as it is a matter that has been under discussion for several years – concerning an ILO governance Convention.

These types of Conventions are priority, given their importance in the functioning of the international labour standards system. A society that does not permit social dialogue and that does not ensure, at the domestic level of the country, the free and independent participation of workers and employers, is not a full democracy and will not achieve equitable employment conditions, decent working conditions, occupational safety and health, and development for the benefit of all.

The purpose of the participation of various social partners on the boards, committees and other bodies in the autonomous and decentralized institutions of the State is to contribute to national development through social oversight and increased transparency, thereby enriching the discussions and proposed solutions.

Disregarding the role of ANEP and forcing its members to give up their membership by annulling routine and special authorizations which are administered in public offices, such as permits for construction, export and import, and health certificates, among others, are coercive and abusive practices that violate freedom of association.

In order for there to be social dialogue and tripartism, solid and independent workers’ and employers’ organizations must exist, with technical capacity, access to the necessary information, political will and the commitment of all the parties concerned, in compliance with the fundamental rights of freedom of association and collective bargaining.

We reiterate our observation from previous discussions concerning the bad precedent at the international level represented by the interference of the authorities of El Salvador in the processes for the appointment of representatives to public tripartite and joint bodies. Nor can we overlook the terrible situation that arose this year, where the Government did not communicate or authorize ANEP to appoint the employer delegate who would participate in this Conference.

We urge the Government to respect the provisions of the Convention it has ratified on the understanding that, in accordance with its own Constitution, the Convention has the status of law and, where its conflicts with other laws, it prevails over them.

It is important that the most representative organization of employers in El Salvador, the ANEP, is allowed to participate in the respective social dialogue forums to strengthen democracy and fight against authoritarianism, to the benefit of national development.

Worker member, Peru – With reference to the case being discussed, we wish to focus on the legal obstacle constituted by section 203 of the Labour Code, which makes it mandatory to renew the appointment of executive boards every year or the equivalent of every 12 months. It should be noted that employers’ organizations have a longer time period for the renewal of their executive boards, which is every two years.

This requirement, which to date has not been amended, constitutes an interference in the freedom of workers’ organizations to draw up their constitutions and elect their representatives in full freedom, that is, the power to establish the term of office of their executive boards. With this rule, the Government is failing to comply with the provisions of Article 3 of ILO Convention No. 87.

Although the amendment of the Labour Code is being discussed, due to the implications of section 203, the Government’s measures must be immediate because as long as the executive boards are not active or are not renewed in time, the trade unions remain without leaders and their leaders are without trade union rights, due to the delay in the delivery of credentials. In addition to this act of interference, the Government has now introduced the payment of fees for services reportedly provided by the Ministry of Labour, including the delivery of credentials to trade union organizations. This measure represents an additional obstacle in an already very onerous process. In our view, this process should be free of charge.

Both the period of validity and the procedure for the delivery of credentials mean that the representation of workers in the CST has been made complicated, which prevents its proper functioning.

To this end, as a matter of urgency, the Government should streamline and facilitate the procedure for the appointment of workers’ representatives, and reform the provision of the Labour Code that provides for the annual renewal of trade union executive boards.

Government member, Guatemala – We appreciate the information shared by the Minister of Labour and Social Welfare of El Salvador regarding the implementation of Convention. We encourage the parties to spare no effort to ensure the continued operation of the CST. Our own experience allows us to note that these spaces for privileged dialogue facilitate tripartite consensus-building, a foundational pillar of this Organization. We endorse the request by the Government to the Office for the continued provision of technical cooperation, where needed.

Employer member, Plurinational State of Bolivia – The discussion of the implementation of the Convention in El Salvador is not new because in reality, since 2017 over the previous five sessions, the Committee has been discussing precisely this case, which is directly related to a governance Convention.

Thus, we should be concerned about the fact that, despite the observations made in all of the previous sessions, the Government authorities still continue to fail to implement the essential element of tripartite consultation, and particularly that they are systematically disregarding the representation of the ANEP, as the most representative organization of employers in El Salvador.

In this regard, it should be recalled that, as has been the tradition in this house, social dialogue and the capacity to develop tripartism have always been promoted as a way of seeking comprehensive solutions to the different problems and legitimate interests of all stakeholders, both the employers’ and workers’ groups.

In this context, it is unreasonable that the participation has been disregarded of any groups, whether employers or workers, in essential decision-making regarding labour relations, such as the approval of ILO Conventions or Labour Code reforms. Direct interference by the Government in the institutional life of workers’ and employers’ organizations is also unacceptable. This represents a direct breach of the right of self-determination of these organizations, as in this context ANEP’s legitimacy as the most representative organization of employers in El Salvador cannot be disregarded. This institution is being subjected to abuse through political pressure on its members, who clearly should not be overlooked, which is an outright violation of the right to freedom of association, to which they are entitled.

Based on the foregoing, the Government authorities must be called upon, as a matter of urgency, to comply with all the observations made by this Committee and to urgently request ILO technical assistance for the full restoration of social dialogue within the framework of the Convention.

Employer member, Mexico – The employers’ delegation of Mexico expresses its deep concern at the development and conduct of the Government of El Salvador. It should be noted and emphasized that this case has been discussed on several occasions, as already mentioned, the last time in 2022. It should also be emphasized that the Committee of Experts has issued nine observations since 2013, the latest in 2022.

It should be noted that global human rights reports in 2023 indicate that the Government and its allies, the Legislative Assembly, have systematically dismantled the system of democratic checks and balances. In addition, in May this year, Reporters without Borders indicated that the Government applies a special system to limit constitutional guarantees, such as the confidentiality of private correspondence.

While the Committee noted the high-level tripartite mission accepted by the Government, which took place in May 2022, it is also true that, regrettably in El Salvador that five ILO Conventions have been ratified without consultation with the most representative employers’ organizations.

In the same vein, we note with deep concern the continuation of multiple acts of interference by the authorities in the appointment of employers’ representatives to public tripartite and joint bodies. We therefore call for the Committee’s conclusions to once again request the Government to:

- refrain from any aggression and from interfering in the establishment and activities of employers’ and workers’ organizations, in particular the ANEP;

- ensure the effective operation of the CST and other tripartite entities, respecting the full autonomy of the most representative employers’ organizations and guaranteeing through social dialogue their full functioning without any interference;

- refrain from unilaterally appointing employers’ representatives for tripartite consultations and institutions, and develop, in full consultation with the social partners, the procedures for the appointment of those representatives;

- develop a time-bound road map to implement without delay all the recommendations made by the ILO high-level tripartite mission.

In our view, the reactivation of the CST is undoubtedly one of the important objectives that should appear in the conclusions, in order that. With respect to the road map that has been requested, it is noted that to date all the decisions taken by the Government to the detriment of employers’ organizations in El Salvador have not been subject to tripartite discussion or consultation.

Observer, International Organisation of Employers (IOE) – It is to be regretted that the Government is once again being evaluated for non-compliance with the Convention. According to the indications in the report of the Committee of Experts, social dialogue has deteriorated in El Salvador. Effect has not in fact been given to any of the conclusions adopted by this Committee in 2022, nor to the recommendations of the 2022 high-level tripartite mission.

Let me explain on the basis of facts. First, the CST has continued to be inactive since 5 May 2022, when the tripartite mission came to an end, and it has not met since that date to review any Conventions. In practice, 11 days later the Government ratified five Conventions without consultation and without having convened any sessions of the CST.

Second, the Government is refusing to recognize the ANEP as the most representative organization of employers in El Salvador. One illustration is the absence of consultation with the ANEP for the nomination of the Employer delegates to this Conference. Nor was the ANEP consulted on the appointment of the employer representative to the Pensions Institute.

Third, the 23 laws have not been repealed which remove the power of employers to nominate representatives for tripartite and joint public bodies, thereby denying social dialogue. As a result, the Government is continuing to make these appointments, as was the case for the Social Housing Fund, while two years have passed without nominating employer representatives to the El Salvador Social Security Institute and the Minimum Wage Council has not met since September 2022.

Fourth, interference and attacks against the ANEP have continued. However, in El Salvador, it is still possible to return to the path of tripartite social dialogue. The ANEP reiterates the proposal made last year of developing on a tripartite basis a road map with the objective not only of giving effect to the conclusions and recommendations of the ILO supervisory bodies, but also of creating an environment of trust to attract more investment and generate more and better jobs.

The benefits of tripartite social dialogue must be tangible, including the greater well-being of families in El Salvador, and we therefore call on the Government to develop, on a tripartite basis and with ILO technical assistance, a road map for the benefit of the citizens of El Salvador.

Observer, Public Services International (PSI) – I am making this intervention on behalf of PSI and its four affiliates in El Salvador. This is a case in which, as indicated in the report of the Committee of Experts, cases of “interference” by the public authorities are alleged in the appointment of employers’ representatives on tripartite and joint public bodies. Without intending to minimize these allegations, we believe that it is also necessary to take into account the context and situation of labour rights as a whole.

El Salvador has ratified a significant number of ILO Conventions, including nine of the ten fundamental Conventions and all the governance Conventions. Moreover, last year, the Government deposited five new ratifications.

We are also aware that the CST, on 1 September 2022, requested the view of the social partners who are represented here on the ratification of 18 other Conventions, in accordance with article 19 of the ILO Constitution, the list of which also includes the Maritime Labour Convention, 2006 (No. 187). With the ratification of this Convention, El Salvador will have ratified all of the fundamental Conventions over a short period. We believe that this is positive and gives grounds for satisfaction. After all, the ILO adopts international standards which then have to be respected and applied.

It therefore appears somewhat contradictory to us and even paradoxical that this Committee has regretted, as it did last year, that five ILO Conventions have been ratified by a Member State, when it would be right to encourage and commend those that do so and which submit to the supervisory mechanisms. This is much more than what has been done by the Member State to which we have generously offered the presidency of this Conference, which has only ratified six Conventions and where, among other matters, there are not even workers’ organizations.

We have heard the word “terrible” with reference to the designation of the Employer delegate of El Salvador to the Conference, who was not designated by the most representative employers’ organization. Please allow me to differ. Terrible denotes, for example, war, violence and the persecution of innocent people because of differences of views, or the enslavement of children to make greater profits. In El Salvador, the representatives of workers and employers are not persecuted, imprisoned, deported or murdered solely because they belong to an organization that represents and protects the rights of its members.

We therefore consider that it is necessary to be more scrupulous and coherent in the selection of individual cases, of which there are only 24 each session of the Conference, so as to be able to address situations of serious non-compliance which merit the work and efforts of this Committee.

Observer, International Organisation of Employers (IOE) – It is very common in this distinguished Committee to deal with cases related to violations of the provisions of the Convention. Intimidating, threatening, bypassing and ignoring the role of the most representative organizations of both employers and workers is a common form of behaviour by Governments that do not believe in either the principles or the fundamental rights of the ILO, nor in the value of tripartism nor, much less, the value of social dialogue.

The lack of respect for and interference in the independence of representative and independent employers’ organizations, and I repeat representative and independent, and in this case the ANEP, has been a constant practice of a Government, that of El Salvador, which is known on the international scene for its attitude of confrontation, and indeed aggressivity, towards those with dissident or critical views. I wish to recall that the former President of the ANEP is currently in exile and, contrary to what was said by the previous speaker, the persecution and intimidation of representative organizations does exist. The objective is clear, namely to weaken the organization, in this case the employers’ organization, and all organizations that defend legitimate interests, but which are not necessarily aligned with the interests of the Government.

Our comments on this case are not new, as it is the sixth occasion on which we have discussed it in this Committee, but what is new is the level of intimidation and the degree of oppression experienced in the country. Freedom of association and expression have never been so endangered in El Salvador, along with the rule of law.

The affiliates of the ANEP and their enterprises are threatened if they decide to continue their membership of the organization. The ANEP is not invited to participate in tripartite bodies. Its leaders, as I have said, are the victims of direct or indirect pressure, or the Government, and this is nothing new for a Government of this type, assigns representative functions to organizations that are close to it or to individual employers. This is very standard behaviour for Governments that do not believe in social dialogue or tripartism.

The Minister who has just spoken admits on social media to not having accredited the ANEP for this Conference. I invite all the participants in this discussion to read the tweet posted by the Minister a few days before the session opened, which speaks for itself. This attitude of discrediting those who are critical is well known among the various international organizations of which the Government is critical and which it confronts in a notorious and very aggressive manner.

We agree with the representative of the Workers’ group in our concern at the lack of progress. Despite the tripartite mission that visited the country last year and the road map that was agreed upon, the Government is continuing to ignore its duties as an ILO constituent and in this case the duties deriving from the Convention.

We do not come here for the pleasure, but in hope, and we urge the Government to follow the path of respect for dialogue, in the first place, and then towards representative employers’ organizations and unions. If it does not do so, you may be sure that we, as the most representative global organization of employers, will use all the means available to us to ensure that the Government complies with its obligation to give effect in law and practice to the requirements that it has assumed voluntarily through its ratification of the Convention.

Government representative – I would like to begin by responding to certain issues raised, especially by the Employer members, who indicated that the CST started to function in 2021, paraphrasing exactly what was said, and that there are “anomalies in its functioning”, which were the actual words used by the representative of the employers.

He is reaffirming clearly and categorically that the CST is functioning. Even if there are some anomalies, irregularities or procedures that have to be improved, every process can be improved over time. But there is clear acceptance that the CST is functioning and therefore that this issue has nothing to do with the application of the Convention in our country, as we are in full development.

The other issue that was raised is the need to open tripartite involvement so that the ANEP can participate in the FONAES, the Maritime Port Authority and the International Centre for Fairs and Conventions (CIFCO). I wish to clarify and I must insist that the representative of employers at the international level has not been correctly informed: these are not tripartite bodies, they are bipartite, and only the ANEP and the Government participated in them for decades.

We understand that the transversal basis of the Convention is tripartite social dialogue, and yet these are bodies in which there is only bipartism. In our case, all the tripartite bodies that we have in the country are functioning, absolutely all of them.

The other issue concerns the documentation that we provided, and here are the documents that we are providing physically today in this meeting in which we can see the seals of the ANEP indicating that it received the documents in due time, received the information and was taken into account, but the ANEP did not reply.

We are talking about last year, as well as this year and on other occasions. We had a proposal, put forward by workers’ representatives, to ratify another five Conventions on 1 May in commemoration of International Workers’ Day. We could not proceed with the ratification of additional Conventions because the ANEP did not reply and has not replied up to now, and we have the documentation here to prove this, and for this reason we do not understand why this issue has been raised with regard to the Convention.

With regard to the issue of the two-year time period accorded to employer representatives and the one year to the trade union movement, this is the best historical illustration that there has not been due balance and even-handedness in the treatment of workers in general terms. There was no type of balance in the treatment of the two sectors. This was determined during the period when the ANEP managed the ARENA party and adopted legislation which favoured it with a two-year period, to the prejudice of the workers. But when they call on me to take immediate action to change the time limit and extend the period of validity of the credentials of trade union leaders, I cannot go ahead unless I have agreement through tripartite social dialogue. We already have a forum established in which the trade union movement is proposing the extension of the time period to two or three years, and I will respect the wishes of the trade union movement. I will respect the will of tripartite social dialogue, in accordance with the Convention, to ensure the amendment of the Labour Code in the coming days, when we will propose to the trade union movement that the period of validity of their credentials must be much longer.

Similarly, we have established a specific office so that procedures that previously lasted five, three, four or even up to eight months, now take a week. We are issuing the credentials for the trade union movement in eight days through an office which provides guidance to the trade union movement. It is one of the institutions that is most interested in strengthening the trade union movement, giving priority to tripartite social dialogue, which is our political will with all the actors and sectors of society. Now, as certain employers’ organizations have come out publicly indicating that they are no longer affiliated with the ANEP, these are internal matters that can arise and we cannot intervene in any way in this regard, either for them to go or to remain, because these are decisions that are the responsibility of each and every actor in the world of employers.

All workers today, including at the level of the trade union movement, are seeing this event, they all have links and they can see what is happening. What is most important is to ensure that the people and society are duly informed. All the unions in El Salvador are watching directly what is happening in the ILO, and this is painful, because only two social partners, and in this case two representatives, determine the make up of the preliminary and other lists, behind the backs of the genuine working class, behind the backs of the people who give them legitimacy, because a trade union leader, irrespective of whether the office held is at the national or international level, is the genuine spokesperson of the views of the working class, But, taking up a position and engaging in negotiations that are not transparent, unclear and not in line with public opinion, and doing so behind the backs of the working class, is a very complex situation for representatives at the international level, who come to an agreement, it is not known where, to determine who is included or not on the list.

We have taken upon ourselves the task of reviewing the preliminary list, and there were around six countries included in relation to fundamental Conventions, which is where the restrictions on the freedom of the trade union movement can be seen, with violations of various international fundamental, governance and technical Conventions, but which are not included on the list, or are included on the list. It is paradoxical, and history will be the judge.

And, as founders of the ILO, we urge the ILO’s leaders, because we believe sincerely in the ILO, because we trust the genuine leadership of the ILO, that they have to be more transparent and determine established criteria on how these lists are drawn up and defined. Because it is being done behind the backs of the working class. One of the fundamental aspects that has been demonstrated in this international forum is the manner in which the employers of El Salvador and their international representatives are acting.

There were two interventions by employer representatives to try and silence the genuine voice of the working class. All we have done in El Salvador is to democratize the country, opening up institutions, playing the role of the State, which is precisely to ensure balance between the social partners, but under equal conditions, which have never previously existed in the country.

The ANEP is one of the institutions that has enjoyed enormous privileges in the country, and on many occasions even took over the State apparatus, as demonstrated by the fact that the principal platform used even by presidential candidates was the employers’ organization. They have every right to be able to express their views and take political action, but party politics are one thing, while another is access to any elected position, which is the right of everyone, but not taking advantage of employers’ organizations. With the greatest of goodwill, with respect for ILO institutions, and aware of the leadership of the ILO, we have to guarantee and strengthen it every day.

We are totally willing to take on all the recommendations that are necessary and we will give effect to all recommendations.

It is a country that belongs to all the citizens of El Salvador, without distinction. We are the Government and we are bound to support and give our backing to all organizations of all types, irrespective of whether they criticize or judge us.

A Government has to be criticized, has to accept critical views. These are the basis of democracy, and we are therefore totally open. But what we consider to be wrong is to encourage lies, misrepresenting the real situation of a country at the international level, and solely to recover the privileges that were historically theirs through their use of the apparatus of the State.

President Bukele has now made it clear that the apparatus of the State is for the whole of the people of El Salvador under equal conditions. Employers will always be represented and workers will also always enjoy equal conditions. The arm of the State must ensure clear rules for everyone, with guarantees and oversight for everyone, under equality of conditions.

We have insisted to the ANEP that the bipartite bodies, which number around 20 or 30, in which only the ANEP and the Government participate, that we should open them to become tripartite, but it opposes and continues to oppose this.

In conclusion, as the people of El Salvador, as the representative of the State on behalf of President Nayib Bukele, we consider that the ILO is the instrument that guarantees the elementary rights of the whole of society throughout the planet, and we must ensure its strengthening with every day that goes by.

I believe that, as the ILO, we will have to review the procedures for inclusion on the list. Sometimes, the Worker spokesperson says things that are different from what is felt and said by workers in a country.

We believe that negotiation is valid in every part of the world, but it has to be transparent negotiation, negotiation that not only guarantees legality, because the two of them determine who is on the list, but must also benefit from legitimacy, based on the genuine views of the working class that they claim to represent.

This is my conclusion, and we will be unshakeable in our support for the principles of ILO standards. We will comply with absolutely everything and we are fully ready as a Government to continue receiving recommendations from any ILO body.

Employer members – We have listened carefully to all the interventions made during the present discussion, and particularly to the intervention by the representative of the Government of El Salvador.

We wish to indicate that, in our view, it is fully established that there are various tripartite bodies that are not functioning in El Salvador, including the CST and the Minimum Wage Council, while the tripartite mechanisms are not functioning in the National Housing Fund, where it was the Government that appointed the employer representatives, nor the Social Security Institute, where employer representatives have not been nominated.

Accordingly, in our view, it is clear that the words of the Government representative, Mr Castro, do not correspond to any intention by the Government of El Salvador to give effect to the requirements of the Convention which, as we are well aware, is intended to promote governability and the proper functioning of industrial relations at the national level.

The facts described show disregard for the appropriate application in law and practice of all the provisions of the Convention, which was ratified voluntarily by El Salvador. And all that despite the conclusions adopted by this Committee in 2017, 2018, 2019, 2021 and 2022; despite the eight observations published by the Committee of Experts; despite the numerous urgent interventions that the ANEP and the IOE have requested from the ILO; despite ILO technical assistance and the offers made in the high-level tripartite mission which recently visited the country.

The situation of failure to comply with the Convention in El Salvador is continuous, serious and urgent for employers’ representatives. We have dealt in this Committee over the past few days with cases of Governments which have dissolved by administrative decision the most representative organizations in those States. We do not wish to be doomsayers and suggest that something similar could happen in El Salvador.

In this regard, employers’ representatives and employers, in their belief in social dialogue, in the functionality of tripartite consultation, and that it cannot be merely a face-saving exercise, we will urge the Government with our best will, and despite prolonged non-compliance, to refrain from interfering in the establishment of both workers’ and employers’ organizations and to facilitate compliance with national and international law, voluntarily ratified by El Salvador, and to ensure their due representation by issuing the corresponding credentials in an appropriate and flexible manner.

The Government of El Salvador should cease attacking and discrediting the ANEP, which is the most representative employers’ organization, and its leaders.

The Government should draw up, in consultation with the most representative organizations of employers and workers, clear, objective, predictable and legally binding rules for the real and constant reactivation and full functioning of the CST.

The Government of El Salvador should reactivate without delay effective consultation in the CST, once again with clear, objective and predictable rules, as well as the functioning of the other tripartite bodies, respecting the autonomy of the most representative organizations of workers and employers through social dialogue, with a view to guaranteeing their full operation without any interference.

The Government of El Salvador must understand that the appointment by the President of the Republic of employer delegates is not in accordance with the procedures required by the ILO’s fundamental labour Conventions, which have been ratified voluntarily by El Salvador.

Moreover, in consultation with the social partners, it must take all the necessary measures without delay to amend the 23 decrees adopted on 3 June 2021 so that they are in compliance with the guarantees set out in the ILO Conventions ratified by El Salvador.

Of course, much of this may be difficult to do in isolation, and so we therefore suggest that it continues to avail itself of ILO technical assistance.

It should provide the Committee of Experts with a detailed report on the application of the Convention in law and practice before its next session this year.

We call for a new direct contacts mission to ascertain the true operation of tripartism in El Salvador and, in view of its seriousness and the continued non-compliance, for the inclusion of this case in a special paragraph of the Committee’s report.

Worker members – El Salvador has taken certain steps in some cases to re-establish tripartite social dialogue. We have been informed that recently the trade unions, including those affiliated to IndustriALL, have proposed an action agenda to promote various matters of interest to workers, such as the reform of the Labour Code, and that it contains a proposal, in accordance with the commitment given, to increase the period of validity of trade union credentials in El Salvador. It is important that this reform guarantees and improves the right to organize freely and establishes collective bargaining as a principle of basic law.

Nevertheless, there are still certain problems for the achievement of full compliance with the Convention.

We previously noted that the CST had been re-established and was functioning. It is important for our group that the CST does not remain inactive, or that its functioning is activated.

Moreover, the Government needs to find an appropriate solution to the unreasonable obstacles and rules that exist for the delivery of credentials to trade unions.

We are therefore bound to reiterate some of the same requests that we made to the Government last year. With one reservation before we set out our three requests.

In the first place, it is necessary to respect the methods of our Committee, to which the Government above all has referred, and we consider that this is not the occasion to discuss the matter. However, we also recognize that the intensity of the discussions in this case shows the pertinence of having discussed it in this Committee. We therefore believe that it is important to listen to us and to have been able to respond, as El Salvador is on the list.

There are three measures that we consider that the Workers’ group can contribute. In the first place, the Government should ensure that the CST is fully operational and can hold plenary meetings, particularly regarding decisions that relate to both labour legislation and any public policy that has an impact on the social partners.

Second, El Salvador should draw up a road map with firm timelines, in consultation with the social partners, with a view to the application without delay of the recommendations made by the ILO high-level tripartite mission and the conclusions of our Committee.

Third, and perhaps most importantly, is the adoption without delay of the necessary measures to repeal the legal requirement, to modify the legal requirement, for the renewal of the legal status of trade unions every twelve months.

In more general terms, we call on the Government to give full effect to the recommendations of the tripartite mission.

With a view to the supervision of all these elements, we request the Government to report to the Committee of Experts at its next session, and we also suggest that it continues to avail itself of ILO technical assistance.

And finally, I inform the Government that this group maintains permanent communications not only for the purposes of information, but also support and action in solidarity with compliance with the labour rights of women and men workers in our countries. We are proud to know and to feel that we represent everybody and that, accordingly, although there may be some differences, our representation is genuine.

The Committee’s conclusions

The Committee took note of the oral information provided by the Government and the discussion that followed.

The Committee noted the allegations of serious and repeated violations of the Convention by the Government.

The Committee noted with deep concern the multiple allegations of interference by the authorities in the appointment of employers’ and workers’ representatives in public tripartite and joint bodies.

Taking the discussion into account, the Committee urges the Government, in consultation with the social partners, to:

- immediately cease all acts of violence, threats, persecution, stigmatization, intimidation or any other form of aggression against individuals or organizations in connection with both the exercise of legitimate trade union activities and the activities of employers’ organizations, and adopt measures to ensure that such acts are not repeated, in particular for the National Business Association (ANEP) and its members;

- refrain from any interference in the exercise of freedom of association of employers and workers, including in the constitution of workers’ and employers’ organizations;

- put a stop to the delays in issuing the credentials of workers’ and employers’ organizations, including for ANEP, in line with their right to representation;

- ensure that all workers’ and employers’ organizations, including ANEP, enjoy the rights and freedoms under the Convention and are fully included in tripartite consultation and social dialogue;

- reactivate, without delay, the full operation of the Higher Labour Council (CST) and other tripartite bodies as well as ensure the development and adoption, in consultation with social partners, of clear, objective, predictable and legally binding rules to ensure their effective and independent functioning, without any external interference;

- take without delay all necessary measures to repeal the legal obligation on trade unions to request renewal of their legal status every 12 months;

- amend the 23 decrees adopted on 3 June 2021 to ensure that employers’ organizations are able to exercise their right to freely elect their representatives without any external interference; and

- develop a time-bound road map to implement without delay all the recommendations made by the 2022 ILO high-level tripartite mission and the Committee’s recommendations.

The Committee requests the Government to accept a direct contact mission to ensure full compliance with the Convention.

The Committee further requests the Government to submit a detailed report on the implementation of the Convention in law and practice, including information on the content and outcome of tripartite consultations, to the Committee of Experts by 1 September 2023.

Government representative – On behalf of the delegation of El Salvador, I take note of the conclusions indicated by this Committee. I take advantage of the occasion to recall that El Salvador respects the supervisory bodies of this Organization.

However, we regret that the Committee has not taken into account the written and oral information that we have provided on various occasions, responding officially to the Committee of Experts. We deeply regret that, in its conclusions, the Committee has not recognized any indication of progress in El Salvador. We note with surprise that the Committee is once again calling for the repeal of the 23 decrees.

During the discussion of the case, a question was raised for the Committee in light of the provisions of Convention No. 144. What is the legal basis for this conclusion? What Articles of Convention No. 144 establish this power? What are the methods of work of this Committee that establish the obligation to repeal or require countries to change laws that are not related to international labour standards? These questions were also raised with the Committee of Experts in our communication, although no reply was received. We call for it to be acknowledged that, during and after the discussion of the case, we have not received a reply to this question. Nevertheless, the conclusions have been adopted.

We regret that our views and the information provided have been disregarded without giving reasons. The conclusions do not appear to respond to the discussion or the information provided, but are just a product of their negotiation. This is something that we think must be the subject of necessary and urgent reflection.

Nevertheless, we reaffirm our commitment to the principles and values of the ILO, which is unshakeable, and for which reason we will continue working to achieve decent work, giving priority to social dialogue with all partners and actors, for which we welcome the valuable cooperation and technical assistance of the ILO.