Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87) - Mauritius (Ratification: 2005)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

Article 3. Right of workers’ organizations to organize their activities and formulate their programmes. In its previous comments, the Committee had requested the Government to amend the following provisions of the Employment Relations Act (ERA) 2008 and bring them into full conformity with the Convention:

• – Section 78(3) of the ERA, which provided that a ballot shall be successful where it obtains an absolute majority of the workers concerned by the dispute in the bargaining unit. The Committee had requested the Government to ensure that account is taken only of the votes cast in determining the outcome of the strike ballot. The Committee takes note of the Government’s indication that the provision at issue was amended and that the revised section 78(3) of the ERA now provides that the secret ballot shall be successful where it obtains the support of the “majority of workers in the bargaining unit concerned by the labour dispute”, instead of an absolute majority. The Committee recalls that, so as not to unduly limit the right of workers’ organizations to organize their activities, the legislative provisions requiring a vote by workers before a strike should ensure that account is taken only of the votes cast by those deciding whether to have recourse to a strike – whether across the workplace as a whole or in a particular bargaining unit – and not of all workers who are entitled to vote in that workplace or bargaining unit, and that any quorum requirement is fixed at a reasonable level. The Committee requests the Government to clarify whether the majority requirement set out in the revised section 78(3) entails a simple majority of the votes cast, and if so to indicate if there is any quorum requirement; but if not, the Committee reiterates its request to the Government to take steps to amend section 78(3) of the ERA so that only votes cast are counted in reckoning the majority.
• – Section 82(1)(b) which allows compulsory arbitration to be introduced at the initiative of the authorities, including the courts and section 82(1)(a) and (2) which allows the Prime Minister to apply to the Tribunal for an order for the establishment of a minimum service in light of the duration of a strike or lockout. The Committee takes note of the Government’s indication that section 82 of the ERA has not been amended. The Government underlines that Mauritius is a small island with few natural resources and that it relies on its human resources. It further indicates that where a strike threatens to affect an industry or a service or employment, the Government may apply to the Employment Relation Tribunal for the establishment of a minimum service unless it is provided under section 81 of the ERA on procedure agreement. While taking note of these indications, the Committee recalls that a system of compulsory arbitration which makes it possible to prohibit virtually all strikes, is acceptable only at the request of both parties to a dispute, and in the case of disputes in the public service involving public servants exercising authority in the name of the state or in essential services in the strict sense of the term. The Committee recalls once again that the fact that a service, industry or employment may be affected by the duration of a strike does not in and of itself justify the introduction of a minimum service. The Committee reiterates its request to the Government to take the necessary measures to amend section 82(1)(b) of the ERA so that compulsory arbitration may only be imposed in the above-mentioned circumstances and to amend section 82(1)(a) and (2) of the ERA so that a minimum service may not be imposed for the mere reason that the duration of a strike may affect a service or industry or employment. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any developments in this respect.

In its previous comments, the Committee had noted that sections 67 and 77(b) of the ERA, as amended in 2013, provide that labour disputes may not be reported, nor recourse to strike allowed, when a collective agreement is in force, and had requested the Government to provide information on any existing or envisaged compensatory procedures. The Committee takes note of the Government’s indication that when a collective agreement is in force and the parties have a dispute related to issues covered in the collective agreement, they can apply for a variation of the collective agreement under section 58 of the ERA, as amended in 2019. The Committee observes that this section provides that the parties may jointly vary a collective agreement in the occurrence of circumstances provided for in the agreement, or if there is a substantial change of circumstances that warrants such variation. It further provides that if a party refuses a variation of the agreement, any party may apply to the Employment Relations Tribunal for a variation of the agreement. The Tribunal shall determine an application within 60 days and an order made by the Tribunal is binding on the parties to the collective agreement. The Committee also observes that, as provided for in section 86 of the ERA, as amended in 2019, the Employment Relations Tribunal is an arbitration tribunal that, among other functions, interprets collective agreements, make awards and orders in relation to recognition, check-off agreement, agency shop order, minimum service and any other issues under the Act. The Committee requests the Government to keep it informed of any practical application of the provisions referred to above.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

The Committee notes the observations made by the Confederation of Free Trade Unions and the State and Other Employees Federation, dated 26 August 2021, concerning matters examined by the Committee in the framework of the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).

Legislative developments. In its last comment, the Committee noted the Government’s indication that a revision of the Employment Rights Act (2008) and the Employment Relations Act 2008 (ERA 2008) was under way. The Committee takes note of the Government’s indication that: (i) the Employment Rights Act (2008) was replaced by the Worker’s Rights Act 2019 (Act N° 20) with effect as of 24 October 2019; and (ii) the ERA 2008 was amended by the Employment Relations (Amendment) Act 2019 (Act N° 21) with effect as of 23 August 2019.

The Committee further notes that section 28(j) of the ERA 2008, as amended in 2019, provides for the establishment of the National Tripartite Council, which aims at promoting social dialogue and consensus building on labour, industrial relations or socio-economic issues of national importance and other related labour and industrial relations issues. Observing that the Council shall make recommendations to the Government on issues relating, inter alia, to the review of the operation and enforcement of the labour legislation, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the recommendations made by the Council in relation to matters covered by the Convention, including any discussion and recommendations related to giving effect to the Committee’s comments.

Article 2 of the Convention. Right of workers to establish and join organizations without distinction whatsoever. Migrant workers. In its previous comment, the Committee observed that under section 13 of the ERA 2008 non-citizens needed to hold a work permit in order to be members of a trade union. Having noted the Government’s indication that a revision of the ERA 2008 was under way, the Committee requested the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that all migrant workers, whether in a regular or irregular situation, enjoy, in law and in practice, the right to establish as well as join organizations without distinction whatsoever. The Committee notes that the Government reiterates that non-citizens in irregular situations are allowed to join a trade union once they are in possession of a valid work permit. The Committee observes that section 13 of the ERA 2008, on eligibility to trade union membership, was not amended in 2019 by Act N°21 and that consequently the requirement of holding a work permit in order to be a member of a trade union remains in place. The Committee recalls in this regard that the right of workers, without distinction whatsoever, to establish and join organizations of their own choosing implies that any worker residing in the territory of a State, whether they have a work permit or not, benefits from the trade union rights provided for by the Convention. Regretting that the work permit requirement provided for under the ERA 2008 was not repealed by Act N°21, the Committee reiterates its request to the Government to take all measures in the near future to ensure the recognition of the right of all migrant workers to establish and join organizations of their own choosing. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any developments in this respect.

Self-employed workers. Having observed that there was no legal provision in the labour legislation granting trade union rights to self-employed workers, the Committee requested the Government to hold consultations with social partners and other interested parties with the aim of ensuring, within the framework of the revision of the Employment Rights Act and the ERA 2008, that all workers, including self-employed workers, enjoy the right to establish and join organizations without distinction whatsoever. The Committee takes note of the Government’s indication that workers have the right to join trade unions under section 13 of the ERA 2008 and that individuals other than these workers, such as the self-employed, may form associations under the Registration of Association Act. The Committee recalls that the guarantees of the Convention apply to all workers without distinction whatsoever, including self-employed workers; in this regard, the Committee regrets to note that no modification was undertaken in the latest labour review. The Committee therefore requests again the Government to hold consultations with social partners, including organizations representing self-employed workers if they exist, with the aim of ensuring that all workers, including self-employed workers, enjoy the right to establish and join organizations without distinction whatsoever. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the progress achieved in this respect.

The Committee reminds the Government that it may avail itself of the technical assistance of the Office with respect to all issues raised in its present comments.

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

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2017, published 107th ILC session (2018)

The Committee notes the communication received on 1 September 2017 from Business Mauritius and the International Organisation of Employers (IOE), which contains observations of a general nature as well as observations relating to issues examined by the Committee below. It also notes the Government’s comments thereon.

Article 2 of the Convention. Right of workers to join organizations of their own choosing. The Committee had previously noted that under section 29 of the Employment Relations Act 2008 (ERA) as amended in 2013, a worker has the right to join only one trade union of his or her own choice in the enterprise where he or she is employed, or his or her bargaining unit. It had requested the Government to specify whether workers were able to join more than one organization, if they so wished. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that there is nothing to prevent or forbid a worker who is engaged in more than one occupation (i.e. the case of a part-time worker who possibly works in more than one establishment) to belong to a bargaining unit in each of the establishments they work for and as such to be a member of the relevant trade union. The Committee also notes that, according to Business Mauritius, nothing in the relevant provision precludes the worker, even if not engaged in more than one occupation, from joining another workers’ organization outside the bargaining unit. The Committee takes due note of this information.

Article 3. Right of workers’ organizations to organize their activities and formulate their programmes. In its previous comments, the Committee had requested the Government to amend: (i) section 78(3) of the ERA to ensure that account is taken only of the votes cast in determining the outcome of the strike ballot; (ii) section 82(1)(b) of the ERA so that compulsory arbitration may only be imposed at the request of both parties to a dispute, in the case of disputes in the public service involving public servants exercising authority in the name of the state or in essential services in the strict sense of the term; and (iii) section 82(1)(a) and (2) of the ERA so that a minimum service may not be imposed for the mere reason that the duration of a strike may affect a service or industry or employment. Noting the Government’s indication that these issues are currently being re-examined in the context of the revision of the Employment Rights Act and the ERA, the Committee expresses the hope that the Government will take all necessary measures to bring the above provisions into full conformity with the Convention in the near future, and requests it to provide information on the progress achieved in this respect.

In its previous comment, the Committee had noted that sections 67 and 77(b) of the ERA, as amended in 2013, provide that labour disputes may not be reported, nor recourse to strike allowed, when a collective agreement is in force, and had requested the Government to provide information on any compensatory procedures. The Committee notes that the Government merely indicates that these issues are being re-examined in the context of the current revision of the Employment Rights Act and the ERA. The Committee reiterates that, if legislation prohibits strikes during the term of collective agreements, this major restriction on a basic right of workers’ organizations must be compensated by the right to have recourse to impartial and rapid arbitration machinery for individual or collective grievances concerning the interpretation or application of collective agreements. Such a procedure not only allows the inevitable difficulties of application and interpretation to be settled during the term of an agreement, but has the advantage of clearing the ground for subsequent bargaining rounds by identifying the problems which have arisen during the term of the agreement. The Committee requests the Government once again to provide details on any such existing or envisaged compensatory procedures.

The Committee had previously requested the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that workers and their organizations are able to use strike action to support their position in the search for solutions to problems posed by major social and economic policy trends with a direct impact on their members and on workers in general. The Committee had noted the Government request for technical assistance from the Office on the issue. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that these issues are being re examined in the context of the labour law review under way. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the progress made to ensure that workers and their organizations may have recourse to industrial action on matters of economic and social policy.

The Committee notes that, according to the 2016 observations of the Confederation of Private Sector Workers (CTSP) under the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98), only trade unions recognized by the employer voluntarily or through an order may have access to worksites with the express permission of management. Recalling that the right of organizations to organize their activities in full freedom encompasses the right of trade union officers to have access to places of work, the Committee requests the Government to provide its comments on the observations of the CTSP.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2017, published 107th ILC session (2018)

The Committee notes with interest the adoption of the Police (Membership of Trade Unions) Act 2016 granting police officers the right to organize.

Article 2 of the Convention. Right of workers to establish and join organizations without distinction whatsoever. Migrant workers. In its previous comment, the Committee had requested the Government to provide information on measures taken or envisaged to ensure that migrant workers may effectively exercise in practice the right to establish and join organizations of their own choosing. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government on the activities undertaken by the Special Migrant Workers’ Unit. It further notes the statistics provided by the Government on the membership of ten trade unions also operating in export processing zones (EPZs) and open for migrant workers to join, and notes the Government’s indication that no records are available with regard to the number of migrant workers who are union members, as trade unions are not bound by law to disclose the nationality of their members. The Committee observes in this regard that, under section 13 of the Employment Relations Act 2008 (ERA), both a citizen of Mauritius and a non-citizen holding a work permit are entitled to be a member of a trade union. Noting the Government’s indication that a revision of the Employment Rights Act and the ERA is under way, the Committee requests the Government to take necessary measures, within the framework of the current labour law review, to ensure that all migrant workers, whether in a regular or irregular situation, enjoy, in law and in practice, the right to establish as well as join organizations without distinction whatsoever. Noting from the information supplied by the Government that two out of ten trade unions operating in EPZs are in the process of dissolution, the Committee also requests the Government to provide information on the precise grounds therefor and the outcome of any related proceedings, and the impact on the rights of migrant workers to exercise their rights under Article 2 of the Convention.

Self-employed workers. The Committee notes the Government’s indication in its 2016 report under the Right of Association (Agriculture) Convention, 1921 (No. 11), that there is no legal provision in the current labour legislation granting trade union rights to self-employed workers in the agricultural or any other sector in Mauritius. The Committee requests the Government to hold consultations with social partners and other interested parties with the aim of ensuring, within the framework of the current revision of the Employment Rights Act and the ERA, that all workers, including self-employed workers, enjoy the right to establish and join organizations without distinction whatsoever.

The Committee reminds the Government that it may avail itself of technical assistance from the Office with respect to all issues raised in its present comments.

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

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2014, published 104th ILC session (2015)

Article 2 of the Convention. Right to establish and join organizations. The Committee notes that the Government indicates that the Employment Relations (Amendment) Act 2013 introduced amendments to section 29 of the Employment Relations Act 2008 (ERA) so that a worker has the right to join only one trade union, of his or her own choice, in the enterprise where he or she is employed or his or her bargaining unit. The Committee requests the Government to specify whether all workers are able to join more than one organization, if they so wish, in order to be able to defend their occupational interests in cases where they are engaged in more than one occupation.

Article 3. Strike for matters of general economic policy. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that workers and their organizations are able to use strike action to support their position in the search for solutions to problems posed by major social and economic policy trends with a direct impact on their members and on workers in general. The Committee notes that the Government requests technical assistance from the Office in this regard, in light of the fact that matters of general economic policy do not fall under the control of an employer. The Committee hopes that technical assistance from the Office will be provided in the near future and requests the Government to provide information of progress made to ensure that workers and their organizations may have recourse to strike action on matters of economic policy.

Strike ballot, compulsory arbitration and minimum services. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to amend: (i) section 78(3) of the ERA to ensure that account is taken only of the votes cast in determining the outcome of the strike ballot; (ii) section 82(1)(b) of the ERA so that compulsory arbitration may only be imposed at the request of both parties to a dispute, in the case of disputes in the public service involving public servants exercising authority in the name of the state or in essential services in the strict sense of the term; and (iii) section 82(1)(a) and (2) of the ERA so that a minimum service may not be imposed for the mere reason that the duration of a strike may affect a service or industry or employment. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that it has been proposed that the Government re-examine these issues and come up with a policy decision as appropriate in light of the Committee’s comments. The Committee trusts that the Government will take the necessary legislative measures in the near future so as to ensure full conformity with the provisions of the Convention and requests it to provide information on any developments.

Prohibition on strike during course of collective agreement. The Committee notes that the Employment Relations (Amendment) Act 2013 amends sections 67 and 77(b) of the ERA so that labour disputes may not be reported, nor recourse to strike allowed, when a collective agreement is in force. The Committee further notes the observations of the General Workers Federation (GWF) and four unions of the sugar industry in this regard. The Committee recalls that if legislation prohibits strikes during the term of collective agreements, this major restriction on a basic right of workers’ organizations must be compensated by the right to have recourse to impartial and rapid arbitration machinery for individual or collective grievances concerning the interpretation or application of collective agreements. Such a procedure not only allows the inevitable difficulties of application and interpretation to be settled during the term of an agreement, but has the advantage of clearing the ground for subsequent bargaining rounds by identifying the problems which have arisen during the term of the agreement (General Survey on freedom of association and collective bargaining, 1994, paragraph 167). The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any compensatory procedures existing or envisaged.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2014, published 104th ILC session (2015)

The Committee notes the observations from the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) received on 1 September 2014 and the observations from the International Organisation of Employers (IOE) received on 1 September 2014. The Committee also notes the observations of the General Workers Federation (GWF) and four unions of the sugar industry received on 22 August 2013, as well as the reply of the Government thereon.

Article 2. Right to establish and join organizations. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to provide further information on the number of trade unions and the rate of unionization in export processing zones (EPZs), including vis-à-vis migrant workers, and on the activities undertaken by the Special Migrant Workers’ Unit. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government that the Special Migrant Workers’ Unit undertakes regular inspection visits to workplaces where migrant workers are employed to ensure compliance with contracts of employment and legislation. Officers of the Unit check whether migrant workers have copies of their contracts of employment, and inform workers of their rights and obligations. In cases of no-compliance, follow-up inspections are carried out to ensure that corrective measures were taken. For the period under review, a total of 976 routine inspections and 435 follow-up visits were undertaken. The Committee further notes the Government’s statistics on the membership of ten trade unions including EPZ workers, and observes that the membership of none of those trade unions includes migrant workers. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on measures taken or envisaged to ensure that migrant workers may effectively exercise in practice the right to establish and join organizations of their own choosing, as enshrined in the Convention.

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

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2010, published 100th ILC session (2011)

The Committee notes that the Employment Relations Act 2008 (ERA) was proclaimed and took effect from 2 February 2009. The Committee however notes that certain discrepancies remain between the ERA and the Convention.

Article 3. Strikes for matters of general economic policy. In its previous comment, the Committee requested the Government to specify the provisions which allow the staging of solidarity strikes, as well as strikes related to matters of general economic policy and strikes linked to negotiations above the enterprise level. The Committee notes that the Government indicates in its report that no specific provisions have been made in the ERA for negotiations to take place at the national level or strikes to be staged for matters of general economic policy. The Committee recalls that workers and their organizations should be able to use strike action to support their position in the search for solutions to problems posed by major social and economic policy trends which have a direct impact on their members and on workers in general. The Committee therefore requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure compliance with this principle and to provide information in its next report on any measures taken in this regard.

Cooling-off period. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to indicate the requirements for the staging of a lawful strike in respect of the duration of the cooling-off period. The Committee takes due note that section 69(5) limits to 30 days the period of conciliation/mediation.

Strike ballot. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to take the necessary measures to amend its legislation so as to take account only of the votes cast in determining the outcome of a strike ballot. The Committee notes that section 78(3) of the ERA provides that a ballot shall be successful where it obtains an absolute majority of the workers concerned by a dispute in a bargaining unit. The Committee notes that the Government reiterates in its report that it does not intend to amend this provision. The Committee recalls that the requirement of a decision by the absolute majority of the workers concerned in a bargaining unit in order to declare a strike could excessively hinder the possibility of carrying out strikes, particularly in large enterprises, and emphasizes that if a member State deems it appropriate to establish in its legislation provisions which require a vote by workers before a strike can be held, it should ensure that account is taken only of the votes cast in determining the outcome of the strike ballot. The Committee therefore requests the Government to take the necessary measures to amend the legislation in keeping with the abovementioned principle and to provide information in its next report on any measures taken in this regard.

Compulsory arbitration. In its previous comments, the Committee noted the possibility for the Prime Minister to refer a dispute to compulsory arbitration where its duration threatened to affect an industry or service or employment. The Committee notes from the Government’s report that section 82(1)(b) of the ERA provides that where the duration of a strike or lockout, which is not unlawful, is such that an industry or a service is likely to be seriously affected, or employment is threatened, or where the Prime Minister is of the opinion that the continuance of the strike or lockout may result in a real danger to life, health or personal safety of the whole or part of the population, the Prime Minister may apply to the Supreme Court for an order prohibiting the continuation of the strike or lockout. It shall then be for the Supreme Court to refer the parties to the labour dispute to the Tribunal for arbitration (section 82(3)). The Committee notes that the Government indicates in its report that no measures have been taken to amend section 82(1(b)) on the ground that certain economic sectors are of such importance to the country (i.e. agriculture, manufacturing, tourism, financial and business services) that the Government shall be able to prohibit the continuation of a strike in these areas. The Committee considers that this provision allows compulsory arbitration to be introduced at the initiative of the authorities, including the courts. The Committee recalls that a system of compulsory arbitration would not be appropriate under the Convention on the ground that the duration of a strike threatens to affect an industry or service or employment. The Committee once again underlines that a system of compulsory arbitration which makes it possible to prohibit virtually all strikes, is acceptable only at the request of both parties to a dispute, in the case of disputes in the public service involving public servants exercising authority in the name of the state or in essential services in the strict sense of the term. The Committee therefore requests the Government to take the necessary measures to amend section 82(1)(b) of the ERA so that compulsory arbitration may only be imposed in the abovementioned circumstances.

Minimum services. The Committee’s previous comments concerned the possibility for the Prime Minister to apply to the Tribunal for an order for the establishment of a minimum service, where the duration of a strike or lockout is such that an industry or a service is likely to be seriously affected, or employment is threatened, or where the Prime Minister is of the opinion that the continuance of the strike or lockout may result in a real danger to life, health or personal safety of the whole or part of the population. In that case, the Tribunal shall, within 48 hours, make an order on the number and occupations and departments necessary for the maintenance of a minimum service (section 82(1)(a) and (2)) of the ERA). The Committee notes that the Government indicates in its report that no measures have been taken to amend section 82(1)(a) and (2), on the ground that certain economic sectors are of such importance to the country (i.e. agriculture, manufacturing, tourism (including hotels and restaurants), financial and business services) that the Government shall be able to establish a minimum service in these areas. The Committee recalls that it considers that a minimum service would be appropriate in services of public utility (services d’utilité publique) in order to avoid damages which are irreversible or out of all proportion to the occupational interests of the parties to the dispute, as well as damages to third parties, namely the users or consumers who suffer the economic effects of collective disputes (General Survey, op. cit., paragraph 160). The Committee recalls that the fact that a service, industry or employment may be threatened by the duration of a strike does not in and of itself justify the introduction of a minimum service; furthermore, hotel services and restaurants are not services of public utility. The Committee once again requests the Government to take the necessary measures to amend section 82(1)(a) and (2) of the ERA so that a minimum service may not be imposed for the mere reason that the duration of a strike may affect a service or industry or employment.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2010, published 100th ILC session (2011)

The Committee notes the comments submitted by the Mauritius Employers’ Federation dated 11 May 2010, by the Confederation of Private Sector Workers (CTSP) dated 7 June 2010 on the application of the Convention and by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) dated 24 August 2010. The Committee also notes the conclusions and recommendations of the Committee on Freedom of Association in Case No. 2685 (355th report).

The Committee notes with satisfaction that the Government indicates in its report that the Employment Relations Act 2008 (ERA) was proclaimed and took effect from 2 February 2009, addressing the following issues previously raised by the Committee: (i) section 5(1)(f) of the ERA establishes that the minimum membership requirement for the establishment of an employers’ organization is five employers; (ii) section 28 of the ERA provides that the registrar may investigate into any complaint against a trade union only if it is made by not less than 5 per cent of the members; (iii) section 45(c) of the ERA provides that the deduction of trade union fees from a workers’ wage shall cease to have effect in the manner provided for in the rules of the trade union; (iv) section 83(2) of the ERA provides that a worker shall not be entitled to any remuneration while on strike unless otherwise agreed by the parties; (v) sections 85(2), 87(2) and 90(5) of the ERA concerning the composition of the Employment Relations Tribunal, the Commission for Conciliation and Mediation and the National Remuneration Board, provide that the members of these bodies shall be appointed by the minister after consultation with the most representative organizations of workers and employers; and (vi) section 97 of the ERA lists the matters which “may” (instead of “shall”) be taken into account by the Tribunal, Commission or Board in the framework of their activities.

Nevertheless the Committee notes that certain discrepancies remain between certain provisions of the ERA and the Convention, especially in relation to the mechanism for the resolution of industrial disputes. The Committee examines these issues in a request directly addressed to the Government.

Article 2 of the Convention. Right to organize. In its previous observation, the Committee requested the Government to indicate the measures taken to guarantee migrant workers their trade union rights both in law and in practice and to take the necessary measures for the collection of data on the unionization levels of migrant workers in the export processing zones and offshore companies. The Committee notes that the Government indicates in its report that: (i) section 13 of the ERA provides that every employee, citizen or not, holding a work permit, shall be entitled to be a member of a trade union and that sections 29 and 32 of the ERA provide for the rights, respectively, of workers and employers, to freedom of association; (ii) section 29 also applies to migrant workers; (iii) sensitization campaigns are being held by officers of the Special Migrant Workers Unit (set up at the Labour Division of the Ministry of Labour, Industrial Relations and Employment) to apprise migrant workers of the provisions of the ERA, inter alia, basic workers’ rights to freedom of association; (iv) the workforce in large establishments of the Export Oriented Enterprises sector was of 66,138 as at March 2007 (61 per cent women and 24 per cent migrants), of 66,782 as at March 2008 (59 per cent women and 27 per cent migrants) and of 57,107 as at March 2009 (58 per cent women and 29 per cent migrants); and that (v) steps are being taken by officers of the Special Migrant Workers’ Unit to collect information on the rate of unionization of migrant workers during the inspection visits that are carried out. The Committee requests the Government to provide further information in its next report on the activities undertaken by the Special Migrant Workers’ Unit, the number of trade unions and the rate of unionization in EPZs, including vis-à-vis migrant workers.

Finally the Committee notes that the Government has requested ILO technical assistance in relation with the application of Conventions Nos 87 and 98 and hopes that this assistance will be provided in the near future.

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

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2008, published 98th ILC session (2009)

The Committee notes with interest the adoption of the Employment Relations Act, 2008 (ERA), which once proclaimed, will replace the Industrial Relations Act 1973 (IRA).

The Committee notes that the full text of the ERA is not yet available as the Act is not yet in force (proclaimed) and the text posted on the site of the National Assembly does not contain the amendments proposed at the committee stage. As a result, while taking due note of the excerpts and information provided by the Government on the ERA, the Committee will only be in a position to fully examine the conformity of the ERA with the Convention once it has at its disposal the complete text. The Committee requests the Government to indicate in its next report progress made with regard to the proclamation of the ERA and to communicate the complete text as soon as it is available, so that the Committee may examine its conformity with the Convention.

The Committee notes from the Government’s report that the ERA has addressed the following issues previously raised in the Committee’s comments with regard to the Employment Relations Bill (ERB): (i) section 13(1)(c) guarantees the right to organize to all workers regardless of whether they have already worked “for an aggregate period of not less than 18 months”;
(ii) section 5(1)(f) lowered the minimum membership requirement for the establishment of an employers’ organization to five employers; (iii) section 28 of the ERA provides that the registrar may investigate into any complaint against a trade union only if it is made by not less than 5 per cent of the members; (iv) section 45(c) provides that the deduction of trade union fees from a workers’ wage shall cease to have effect in the manner provided for in the rules of the trade union; (v) section 83(2) of the ERA provides that a worker shall not be entitled to any remuneration while on strike unless otherwise agreed by the parties; (vi) sections 85(2), 87(2) and 90(5) of the ERA concerning the composition of the Employment Relations Tribunal, the Commission for Conciliation and Mediation and the National Remuneration Board provide that the members of these bodies shall be appointed by the minister after consultation with the most representative organizations of workers and employers; (vii) section 99 of the ERA lists the matters which “may” (instead of “shall”) be taken into account by the Tribunal, Commission or Board in the framework of their activities.

Article 3 of the Convention. Right to strike. The Committee further notes that on the basis of the excerpts and information communicated by the Government, certain discrepancies remain between the ERA and Article 3 of the Convention with regard to the right to strike. In this respect, the Committee also notes certain comments made by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) in a communication dated 29 August 2008.

Strikes for matters of general economic policy. The Committee’s previous comments related to the provisions of the ERB which made the staging of solidarity strikes, or strikes related to matters of general economic policy or strikes linked to negotiations above the enterprise level impossible. The Committee notes from the Government’s report that there is no specific provision in the new legislation prohibiting solidarity strikes and that provision has been made in section 37 of the ERA for recognition at industry level of federations or confederations which may engage in negotiations with any employer or groups of employers. The Committee notes that the Government does not address the possibility of negotiations at national level or strikes related to matters of general economic policy. While noting that these issues may be clarified once the Committee has the full text of the ERA at its disposal, the Committee requests the Government to specify the provisions which allow for negotiations to take place at the national level and strikes to be staged for matters of general economic policy.

Cooling-off period. The Committee’s previous comments concerned the excessive duration of the two month cooling-off period established in the ERB as well as the possibility to extend this period indefinitely at the initiative of one party to the dispute. The Committee notes from the Government’s report that a new labour dispute settlement mechanism has been established. However, the Government does not provide any information as to whether a cooling-off period is still required while the excerpts of the ERA communicated to the Committee do not concern the requirements for the staging of a lawful strike. The Committee further notes that according to the ITUC, the ERA imposes a 21 day cooling-off period before a strike can begin. The Committee requests the Government to indicate in its next report the requirements for the staging of a lawful strike and to transmit the full text of the ERA.

Prerequisites for lawful strikes. The Committee also notes that under section 69(6), “where the parties decline to refer the dispute for voluntary arbitration, the party having reported the labour dispute (to the Commission for Conciliation and Mediation) may have recourse to strike or lockout, as the case may be …”. The Committee observes that this provision introduces an additional requirement for the lawful staging of a strike, i.e., to have referred the dispute to conciliation. The Committee is of the view that if conciliation has failed, trade unions should be able to stage a strike regardless of whether they referred the dispute to conciliation in the first place. The Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate in its next report the measures taken to amend section 69(6) by omitting the words “having reported the labour dispute”.

Strike ballot. In its previous comments, the Committee had requested the Government to amend section 81(3) of the ERB so as to take account only of the votes cast in determining the outcome of a strike ballot. The Committee notes that according to the Government, this provision has not been amended in the ERA as the Government considers that the requirement for a majority of workers to be in favour of a strike is reasonable and, Mauritius, being a small island, factual elements such as the scattering or geographical isolation of work centres, which could render a strike difficult or impossible in practice, do not arise; thus, the unions can, without difficulty, convey the workers to a given place and carry out the ballot. The Committee observes that as a result, the ERA requires for a strike ballot to be successful, to obtain an absolute majority of the workers concerned by the dispute. The Committee once again emphasizes that if a member State deems it appropriate to establish in its legislation provisions which require a vote by workers before a strike can be held, it should ensure that account is taken only of the votes cast (see General Survey of 1994 on freedom of association and collective bargaining, paragraph 170). The Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate in its next report the measures taken to amend the provisions of the ERA concerning strike ballots so as to take account only of the votes cast in determining the outcome of a strike ballot.

Compulsory arbitration. The Committee’s previous comments concerned the possibility for the Prime Minister to refer a dispute to compulsory arbitration where its duration threatened to affect an industry or service or employment (section 85(1)(b) of the ERB). The Committee notes from the Government’s report that section 82(b) of the ERA provides that where the duration of a strike or lockout which is not unlawful is such that an industry or a service is likely to be seriously affected, or employment is threatened, or where the Prime Minister is of the opinion that the continuance of the strike or lockout may result in a real danger to life, health or personal safety of the whole or part of the population, the Prime Minister may apply to the Supreme Court for an order prohibiting the continuation of the strike or lockout. According to the Government, under the new legislation it will be for the Supreme Court to refer the parties to the labour dispute to the Tribunal for arbitration. The Committee considers that this amendment does not substantively change the fact that compulsory arbitration may be introduced at the initiative of the authorities, including the courts. The Committee once again notes that a system of compulsory arbitration which makes it possible to prohibit virtually all strikes, is acceptable only at the request of both parties to a dispute, in the case of disputes in the public service involving public servants exercising authority in the name of the state or in essential services in the strict sense of the term, namely, those services whose interruption would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population. Thus, a system of compulsory arbitration would not be appropriate under the Convention on the ground that the duration of a strike threatens to affect an industry or service or employment. The Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate in its next report the measures taken to amend section 82(b) of the ERA so that compulsory arbitration may be imposed by the Supreme Court only in the cases where this is acceptable under the Convention.

Minimum services. The Committee notes from the Government’s report that section 82(a) of the ERA provides that where the duration of a strike or lockout which is not unlawful is such that an industry or a service is likely to be seriously affected, or employment is threatened, or where the Prime Minister is of the opinion that the continuance of the strike or lockout may result in a real danger to life, health or personal safety of the whole or part of the population, the Prime Minister may apply to the Tribunal for an order for the establishment of a minimum service. The Committee also notes that the third schedule to the ERB contained a list of services requiring a minimum service and that hotel services figured on that list. The Committee considers that a minimum service would be appropriate in services of public utility (services d’utilité publique) in order to avoid damages which are irreversible or out of all proportion to the occupational interests of the parties to the dispute, as well as damages to third parties, namely the users or consumers who suffer the economic effects of collective disputes (General Survey, op.cit., paragraph 160). The Committee notes that the fact that a service, industry or employment may be threatened by the duration of a strike does not in and of itself justify the introduction of a minimum service; furthermore, hotel services are not services of public utility. The Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate in its next report the measures taken to amend section 82(a) so that a minimum service may not be imposed for the mere reason that the duration of a strike may affect a service or industry or employment. It also requests the Government to indicate whether hotels still figure on the list of services in which a minimum service may be imposed under the ERA and, if that is the case, to indicate in its next report the measures taken to remove the hotel services from the list of minimum services.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2008, published 98th ILC session (2009)

The Committee notes with interest the adoption of the Employment Relations Act 2008 (ERA) which, once proclaimed, will replace the Industrial Relations Act 1973 (IRA). The Committee notes that the ERA contains significant improvements in relation to the freedom of association provisions of the IRA, by recognizing among other things the right to organize of firefighters and prison officers and largely abolishing the discretionary powers of the registrar over the establishment and activities of trade unions. The Committee requests the Government to indicate in its next report progress made with regard to the proclamation of the ERA and to transmit the relevant text as soon as it enters into force.

The Committee also notes that certain discrepancies remain between some provisions of the ERA and the Convention, especially in relation to the mechanism for the resolution of industrial disputes. The Committee examines these issues in a request addressed directly to the Government.

The Committee further takes note of the comments of the Federation of Parastatal Bodies and other Unions (FPBOU) transmitted with the Government’s report, as well as the comments made by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) in a communication dated 29 August 2008, concerning the application of the Convention. In particular, the Committee would like to draw the Government’s attention to the following issues raised by the ITUC.

Article 2 of the Convention. Right to organize. The Committee notes the serious issues raised by the ITUC with regard to the vulnerability of migrant workers to trade union rights violations and the specific cases mentioned by the ITUC as an illustration of coordinated action by the Government and employers in order to send (mostly women) migrant workers back to their country of origin on the grounds of “breach of contract” for having staged a strike. The ITUC also refers to hostility to trade unions by employers in the export processing zones (EPZs) and difficulties to make contact with migrant workers as trade unionists do not have access to the workplace; as a result, union density in the EPZs is below 12 per cent. The Committee takes note of the Government’s reply according to which the work stoppages to which the ITUC refers were all illegal strikes as a result of which certain workers were repatriated by their employer. The Government adds that migrant workers have the same rights as other workers and regular inspection visits are carried out at workplaces where migrant workers are employed.

The Committee recalls that in a previous direct request it had requested the Government to provide statistical information on the unionization levels of migrant workers in the EPZs and offshore companies. It notes that according to the Government, section 13 of the ERA provides that any non-citizen shall be entitled to be a member of a trade union provided they hold a work permit. According to the Government, it is difficult to provide statistical information on the unionization levels of migrant workers in the EPZs and offshore companies, since there is no specific trade union catering exclusively for migrant workers and they are free to join any trade union of their choice. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures taken in order to guarantee migrant workers their trade union rights both in law and in practice. The Committee notes that an appropriate measure in this regard could be to allow for the organization of awareness-raising activities in the EPZs to apprise migrant workers of the advantages of unionization. The Committee also requests the Government to take the necessary measures for the collection of data on unionization levels of migrant workers in the EPZs and offshore companies.

The Committee further notes that the ITUC refers in its comments to the prosecution of the President of the Fédération des Syndicats du Service Civil (FSSC) and the President of the Government Servants Association (GSA), for contravening the Public Gathering Act. The Committee notes that this issue is currently under examination by the Committee on Freedom of Association in the framework of Case No. 2616 and the Government has been requested to facilitate a speedy resolution of this case which is pending on appeal, and raise with the competent authorities the possibility of giving a favourable review to this matter (351st Report, paragraphs 990–1015).

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2007, published 97th ILC session (2008)

The Committee takes note of the Government’s first report as well as the comments of the Federation of Parastatal Bodies and other Unions (FPBOU) transmitted with the Government’s report.

The Committee also notes the comments of the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) dated 10 August 2006, concerning practical obstacles to the organization of workers – especially migrant workers – in export processing zones and the offshore business sector, as well as police repression of a demonstration by Chinese migrant workers in the EPZ/textile sector. The Committee notes the Government’s reply thereto, according to which on the one hand, migrant workers have the same freedom of association rights as local workers and on the other hand, the police showed great restraint in the face of fierce and violent attacks from disgruntled workers and gas and minimum force were used only as a last resort to restore law and order. The Committee requests the Government to provide in its next report statistical information on the unionization levels of migrant workers in EPZs and offshore companies.

The Committee recalls that in its previous direct request it referred to the need to revise the Industrial Relations Act (IRA) in order to bring it into line with the Convention. In this respect, it notes with interest the text of the Employment Relations Bill, 2007 which contains significant improvements in relation to the freedom of association provisions of the IRA, currently in the process of amendment. Trusting that the Government will make every effort for the swift passage of the Bill into law, the Committee will confine its comments to the provisions of the Bill. The Committee requests the Government to indicate in its next report made progress with regard to the introduction of the Bill to Parliament and its adoption.

The Committee notes with interest that the Employment Relations Bill, 2007, recognizes among other things the right to organize of firefighters and prison officers and largely abolishes the discretionary powers of the Registrar over the establishment and activities of trade unions. However, certain discrepancies remain between some provisions of the Bill and the Convention, especially in relation to the mechanism for the resolution of industrial disputes.

Article 2 of the Convention. Right to organize. The Committee observes that section 13(1)(b) and (c) of the Employment Relations Bill provides that trade union members should be either engaged in any undertaking, business or occupation or have been a worker at any time for an aggregate period of not less that 18 months. The Committee recalls that Article 2 of Convention No. 87 provides that workers without distinction whatsoever should have the right to establish and join organizations and observes that as it stands, section 13(1)(c) prevents workers with less than 18 months of employment from joining trade unions. The Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate in its next report the measures taken so as to lift the phrase “for an aggregate period of not less than 18 months” in section 13(1)(c) of the Bill.

The Committee further observes that section 5(1)(f) of the Employment Relations Bill requires ten employers in order to establish a “trade union of employers”. Considering this requirement excessively high, (see General Survey of 1994 on freedom of association and collective bargaining, paragraph 81 footnote 71), the Committee requests the Government to indicate in its next report the measures taken to lower this requirement.

Article 3. Right of trade unions to draw up their constitutions and rules and to organize their administration and activities. The Committee notes that section 22 of the Employment Relations Bill provides that the Registrar may, upon a complaint from a member of a trade union, conduct an inquiry into a possible misapplication of funds and make an application to a district court which might order appropriate remedies. In addition to this, section 29 provides that the Registrar may investigate into the affairs and finances of the trade union, inspect its books and require information from trade union officers, either upon a complaint by a member, or if he/she has reasonable grounds to suspect that mismanagement is taking place upon examination of the union’s annual return. The Committee recalls that Article 3 guarantees the right of workers’ organizations to organize their administration and activities without interference from the public authorities. The Committee considers that in order to avoid the risk of interference in trade union activities, the requirement of a complaint by a single member should be raised to a certain percentage of members and requests the Government to indicate in its next report the measures taken so as to amend the provisions of the Bill in accordance with the above.

The Committee observes that section 47(1)(c) of the Employment Relations Bill provides that where a worker gives written notice of the intention to cease payment of trade union fees, this notice shall take effect on the last day of the sixth month following the month in which the notice was given. The Committee recalls that Article 3 guarantees the right of trade unions to draw up their constitutions and rules without interference. It thus requests the Government to indicate in its next report the measures taken to amend section 47(1)(c) so as to allow for the matter of cessation of trade union fees to be determined in accordance with the trade union rules.

Article 3. Right to strike. The Committee observes that section 79(1)(a) of the Employment Relations Bill indicates that every worker has the right to strike in relation to a labour dispute and section 80 provides that no person shall take part in a strike where the labour dispute does not relate to the collective interest of a group of workers. Section 2 of the Employment Relations Bill defines a labour dispute as a dispute between a trade union and an employer which relates wholly or mainly to wages, terms and conditions of employment, promotion, etc. as well as procedural matters and facilities. The Committee observes that these provisions do not allow for solidarity strikes, or strikes related to matters of general economic policy, or strikes linked to negotiations above the enterprise level. The Committee has repeatedly noted in the past that, while purely political strikes do not fall within the scope of freedom of association, organizations responsible for defending workers’ socio-economic and occupational interests should, in principle, be able to use strike action to support their position in the search for solutions to problems posed by major social and economic policy trends which have a direct impact on their members and on workers in general, in particular as regards employment, social protection and the standard of living (see General Survey, op. cit., paragraph 165). Thus, workers’ organizations, including federations and confederations, should be able to call for industrial action at levels above that of the enterprise. Moreover, a general prohibition of sympathy strikes could lead to abuse and workers should be able to take such action provided the initial strike they are supporting is itself lawful (see General Survey, op. cit., paragraph 168). The Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate the measures taken so as to amend the definition of labour dispute in section 2 and the provisions of section 79 and 80 of the Employment Relations Bill, so as not to exclude the possibility of staging strikes in relation to general economic policy, negotiations above the enterprise level and sympathy strikes.

The Committee observes that sections 72, 73 and 82 of the Employment Relations Bill provide for an aggregate two-month “cooling off” period between the time when negotiations fail and the time when a trade union may stage a strike. This period comprises two successive rounds of conciliation/meditation (20 days and 30 days, respectively) and ten days of strike notification. The Committee considers that the requirement of exhaustion of conciliation and mediation procedures before a strike may be called should not be so complex or slow that a lawful strike becomes impossible in practice or loses its effectiveness (see General Survey, op. cit., paragraph 171). The Committee also notes from sections 72 and 73 of the Bill that the conciliation/mediation periods may be extended at the request of the party which reports the dispute and considers that this provision entails the risk of postponing a strike indefinitely, thus rendering it impossible in practice. Such extensions should only be possible with the agreement of both parties to the dispute. The Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate in its next report measures taken to amend sections 72 and 73 of the Bill, so as to shorten the conciliation/mediation period to a reasonable level and ensure that the conciliation/mediation period may be extended only with the agreement of both parties to the dispute.

The Committee observes that sections 73(5)(b)(i) and 79(1)(c) of the Employment Relations Bill provide that, where conciliation fails, the party which reported the dispute to the authorities has the option to bring it before the tribunal for final determination. In addition to this, section 85(1)(b) provides that the Prime Minister may apply to the Supreme Court for an injunction prohibiting the continuation of a lawful strike where the duration of the strike threatens to affect an industry or service or employment and then may refer the dispute to compulsory arbitration. The Committee observes that this system of compulsory arbitration, at the initiative of the authorities or one of the parties to the dispute, makes it possible to prohibit virtually all strikes and can seriously limit the means available to trade unions to further and defend the interests of their members, organize their activities and to formulate their programmes, thus raising problems with regard to Article 3 of the Convention (see General Survey, op. cit., paragraph 153). The Committee recalls that compulsory arbitration is acceptable only if it is at the request of both parties to a dispute, or in the case of disputes in the public service involving public servants exercising authority in the name of the State or in essential services in the strict sense of the term, namely, those services whose interruption would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population. The Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate in its next report the measures taken to amend sections 73(5)(b)(i), 79(c) and 85, so as to ensure that compulsory arbitration may be imposed only in the cases noted above.

The Committee further notes that section 81(3) of the Employment Relations Bill provides that a strike ballot shall be successful where it obtains an absolute majority of the workers concerned by the dispute. The Committee considers that although a requirement of strike ballot does not, in principle, raise problems of compatibility with the Convention, the ballot method, the quorum and the majority required should not be such that the exercise of the right to strike becomes very difficult, or even impossible in practice; if a member State deems it appropriate to establish in its legislation provisions which require a vote by workers before a strike can be held, it should ensure that account is taken only of the votes cast, and that the required quorum and majority are fixed at a reasonable level (see General Survey, op. cit., paragraph 170). The Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate, in its next report, the measures taken to amend section 81(3) of the Bill so as to take account only of the votes cast in determining the outcome of a strike ballot.

The Committee observes that section 86(2) of the Employment Relations Bill provides that a worker shall not be entitled to any remuneration while he/she is on strike. The Committee considers that while workers may not have a claim to remuneration for the period of absence from work due to a strike, this payment might become the subject of negotiations in the framework of collective bargaining and the law should not preclude the outcome of such negotiations. Such a restriction would constitute interference with the right of trade unions to organize their activities and formulate their programmes. The Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate the measures taken in order to amend section 86(2) in a manner that allows for the possibility of agreement between the parties on the payment of remuneration for days on strike.

The Committee observes that sections 88(2)(b), 90(3) and 93(3) of the Employment Relations Bill concerning the composition of the Employment Relations Tribunal, the Commission for Conciliation and Mediation and the National Remuneration Board, respectively, provide that these bodies shall be composed, inter alia, by “such organizations representing workers and employers as [the Minister] thinks fit”. The Committee considers that in mediation and arbitration proceedings it is essential that all the members of the bodies entrusted with such functions should not only be strictly impartial but, if the confidence of both sides, on which the successful outcome even of compulsory arbitration (where applicable) really depends, is to be gained and maintained, they should also appear to be impartial both to the employers and to the workers concerned. The Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate in its next report the measures taken to amend sections 88(2)(b), 90(3) and 93(3) so as to make reference to the “most representative” organizations.

The Committee observes that section 99 of the Employment Relations Bill lists the matters which “shall” be taken into account by the tribunal, commission or board in the framework of their activities (conciliation, mediation and arbitration). These matters include the need to maintain a favourable balance of trade and balance of payments, increase the rate of economic growth, etc. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures taken to amend this provision by replacing the verb “shall” with “may”, so that these elements do not exclude other considerations.

The Committee observes that section 33 of the Employment Relations Bill provides that no person who refuses to participate in any unlawful strike or lockout should be subject to disciplinary measures. The Committee considers that this matter should be left to be determined in conformity with trade union rules and the provision in question could be seen as interfering with the right of trade unions to freely draw up their constitutions and rules and organize their administrations and activities. The Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate in its next report the measures taken to amend section 33, so as to allow this matter to be regulated solely on the basis of trade union rules.

The Committee trusts that the Government will be in a position to indicate progress on all of the above points in its next report.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2006, published 96th ILC session (2007)

The Committee notes the comments of 10 August 2006 of the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) reporting restrictions in the law on the right to strike, practical obstacles to the organization of workers in export processing zones and to the organization of migrant workers and of workers in the offshore business sector. The ICFTU also refers to police repression of a demonstration of textile workers in 2005. The Committee further notes the conclusions concerning Case No. 2281, examined by the Committee on Freedom of Association at its session of June 2006, in which the abovementioned Committee refers to the need to revise the Industrial Relations Act in order to align it with the principles of freedom of association. The Committee requests the Government to keep it informed of all developments in this matter and to respond to the ICFTU’s comments in its first report on the application of the Convention due in 2007.