Tripartite Consultation (International Labour Standards) Convention, 1976 (No. 144) - Mexico (Ratification: 1978)

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2022, published 111st ILC session (2023)

The Committee notes the observations of the Authentic Workers’ Confederation of the Republic of Mexico (CAT) and the Confederation of Workers of Mexico (CTM), communicated by the Government in its report. The Committee also notes the Government’s replies to the observations of the Confederation of Employers of the Mexican Republic (COPARMEX) in 2019, included in its report.

Articles 4 and 5 of the Convention. Effective tripartite consultations. The Committee notes with interest the detailed information provided by the Government on the tripartite consultations held during the period covered by the report on all matters related to international labour standards covered by Article 5(1) of the Convention. In this regard, the Government indicates that the social partners were consulted prior to the submission to the Senate of the Republic of the Violence and Harassment Convention, 2019 (No. 190) and its accompanying Recommendation (No. 206); as well as the Safety and Health in Agriculture Convention, 2001 (No. 184) and its accompanying Recommendation (No. 192). The Committee also notes that, in reply to the 2019 observations of COPARMEX, the Government indicates its agreement that dialogue and information are the basis for gathering more information for opinions and improving decision-making. In this regard, the Government expresses its willingness to continue working to ensure that the most relevant labour policy decisions are adopted using social dialogue mechanisms. With regard to tripartite consultations on unratified instruments (Article 5(1)(c) of the Convention), the CTM points out that these are not effective, as only the instruments are sent to the workers’ organizations, and the proposals are examined without taking into consideration their opinions during the discussions or when reports on the matter are drawn up. The CTM emphasizes that social dialogue mechanisms are needed that allow their comments, conclusions and responses to be heard. It also maintains that no support or financing is received for to the specialized training required for participants in these procedures, in accordance with Article 4(2) of the Convention. Therefore, intervention, where required, is spontaneous. It emphasizes the need for regular training for the tripartite partners with a view to ensuring their participation in consultations in a professional manner. The Committee also notes the Government’s indication that no consultations have been held with the social partners regarding the manner in which the functioning of the procedures required by the Convention might be improved, so that the social partners have all the necessary information far enough in advance to formulate their opinions before a final decision is taken on the matter under consultation. Lastly, the Committee notes the information provided by the Government regarding the tripartite consultations held prior to the adoption of various legislative initiatives and measures relating to labour, such as the reforms introduced to the legislation to regulate labour outsourcing and to transfer the jurisdictional function in labour matters from the conciliation and arbitration boards to labour courts attached to the federal judiciary and state departments judiciaries. The Committee requests the Government to continue providing detailed and updated information on the specific content, frequency and outcome of the tripartite consultations held on all issues relating to international labour standards covered by Article 5(1) of the Convention. In the light of the observations of the CTM, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the measures adopted or envisaged with a view to building the capacity of the tripartite partners and strengthening mechanisms and procedures, in accordance with Article 4 of the Convention and paragraphs 3(3) and 4 of Recommendation No. 152. It also encourages the Government to adopt the necessary measures to hold consultations with the social partners regarding the manner in which the functioning of the procedures required by the Convention might be improved, so that the social partners have all the necessary information far enough in advance to formulate their opinions before a final decision is taken on the matter under consultation, in particular concerning unratified instruments (Article 5(1)(c) of the Convention). Lastly, the Committee requests the Government to keep it informed of the result of the consultations held with the social partners relating to the possible ratification of Convention No. 184 and Convention No. 190.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2020, published 109th ILC session (2021)

The Committee takes note of the supplementary information provided by the Government in light of the decision adopted by the Governing Body at its 338th Session (June 2020). The Committee is examining the application of the Convention on the basis of the supplementary information received from the Government this year, as well as the information at its disposal in 2019.

The Committee notes the observations of the Employers' Confederation of the Mexican Republic (COPARMEX), included in the 2019 Government’s report. It also notes the observations of the Authentic Workers’ Confederation of the Republic of Mexico (CAT), communicated by the Government in its supplementary report, received in September 2020.

In the context of the COVID-19 global pandemic, the Committee recalls the extensive guidance provided by international labour standards. The Committee encourages the member States to participate in tripartite consultations and in a wider social dialogue as a sound basis for formulating and implementing effective responses to the profound socio-economic effects of the pandemic. The Committee invites the Government to provide in its next report updated information on the measures taken in this respect, in accordance with the guidance provided in Article 4 of the Convention, as well as paragraphs 3 and 4 of Recommendation no. 152, including the measures adopted to build the capacity of constituents and reinforce tripartite mechanisms and procedures, and also on the challenges and good practices that have been identified.

Article 5 of the Convention. Effective tripartite consultations. The Committee notes the detailed information provided by the Government on the tripartite consultations held during the period covered by the report on all matters related to international labour standards covered by Article 5(1) of the Convention. However, the Committee observes that the Government has not provided information on the outcome of these consultations. In this context, the Committee notes the observations made by COPARMEX, in which it asserts that it is necessary for the Government to supply more detailed information to the social partners regarding the reasons why the ratification of a specific Convention is or is not envisaged. COPARMEX adds that, in this way, the social partners could express opinions with greater precision and consistency in relation to the Convention in question and the country’s views on this matter. In this regard, the Committee recalls that “in order to be ‘effective’, consultations must take place before final decisions are taken, irrespective of the nature or form of the procedures adopted. […] The effectiveness of consultations thus presupposes in practice that employers’ and workers’ representatives have all the necessary information far enough in advance to formulate their own opinions” (see 2000 General Survey, Tripartite consultation, paragraph 31). The Committee notes the indication by the CAT that it has participated in various committees established within the framework of the International Labour Conference for the discussion of new Conventions and Recommendations. The CAT adds that it has participated in the preparation of reports on ratified Conventions and indicates its desire to also participate in tripartite consultations on the other matters covered by Article 5(1) of the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to provide detailed, up-to-date information on the specific content, frequency and outcome of tripartite consultations held on all matters related to international labour standards covered by Article 5(1) of the Convention. The Committee also requests the Government to send its reply to the observations made by COPARMEX. It further requests the Government to indicate whether consultations have been held with the social partners regarding the manner in which the functioning of the procedures required by the Convention might be improved, so that the social partners have all the necessary information far enough in advance to formulate their opinions before a final decision is taken on the matter under consultation, in particular concerning unratified instruments (Article 5(1)(c) of the Convention).

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2018, published 108th ILC session (2019)

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It hopes that the next report will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous comments initially made in 2015.

Repetition

The Committee notes the observations made by the National Union of Workers (UNT), received on 10 September 2015.

Article 5 of the Convention. Effective tripartite consultations. The Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that consultations are conducted through written communications which are sent to the workers’ and employers’ organizations, requesting their views so that they can be included in the Government’s positions. The Committee notes that three workers’ organizations (including the UNT) and two employers’ organizations are consulted. The Committee requests the Government to continue providing information on the consultations held on each of the matters relating to international labour standards set forth in Article 5(1) of the Convention.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2015, published 105th ILC session (2016)

The Committee notes the observations made by the National Union of Workers (UNT), received on 10 September 2015.

Article 5 of the Convention. Effective tripartite consultations. The Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that consultations are conducted through written communications which are sent to the workers’ and employers’ organizations, requesting their views so that they can be included in the Government’s positions. The Committee notes that three workers’ organizations (including the UNT) and two employers’ organizations are consulted. The Committee requests the Government to continue providing information on the consultations held on each of the matters relating to international labour standards set forth in Article 5(1) of the Convention.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2013, published 103rd ILC session (2014)

Participation in consultations. In its 2012 direct request, the Committee asked the Government to send its comments in 2013 on the observations of the United Trade Union of Government Workers of the Federal District (SUTGDF) and the National Union of Workers (UNT). In August 2012, the UNT asked the Ministry of Labour and Social Security for copies of the reports sent to the ILO. The Committee notes with interest the Government’s indication in its report received in September 2013 that copies of the reports submitted this year to the ILO were sent to the UNT. The Committee recalls that the SUTGDF indicated that it is the majority trade union of workers in Mexico City and wished to be consulted by the Government on the subjects covered by the Convention. With regard to the request from the SUTGDF, the Government indicates that its practice, in accordance with Article 2 of the Convention, is to hold consultations with the federations and confederations of employers’ and workers’ organizations, not with individual trade unions, so that consultations are more effective. In its General Survey of 2000 on tripartite consultation, the Committee referred to a memorandum from the Office in reply to a request for an interpretation from the Government of Sweden concerning the term “the most representative organizations of employers and workers”, as provided for in Article 1 of the Convention (Official Bulletin, Vol. LXI, 1978, Series A, No. 3, pages 193–198, paragraph 16). Paragraph 34 of the 2000 General Survey states that the abovementioned term [most representative organizations] “does not mean only the largest organization of employers and the largest organization of workers. If in a particular country there are two or more organizations of employers or workers which represent a significant body of opinion, even though one of them may be larger than the others, they may all be considered to be ‘most representative organizations’ for the purpose of the Convention. The Government should endeavour to secure an agreement of all the organizations concerned in establishing the consultative procedures provided for by the Convention, but if this is not possible it is in the last resort for the Government to decide, in good faith in the light of the national circumstances, which organizations are to be considered as the most representative”. The Committee notes that the Government of Mexico refers to Article 2 of the Convention, paragraph 1, which lays down the obligation to establish procedures which ensure effective consultations between representatives of the government, of employers and of workers, and paragraph 2, which adds that the nature and form of such procedures shall be determined in accordance with national practice, after consultation with the representative organizations. The Committee invites the Government to indicate in its next report whether the representative organizations of employers and workers have been consulted on the operation of the procedures required by the Convention.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2012, published 102nd ILC session (2013)

Communications from the United Trade Union of Government Workers of the Federal District (SUTGDF) and the National Union of Workers (UNT). The Committee notes the detailed report sent by the Government for the period from July 2010 to May 2012. It notes the comments from the SUTGDF and the UNT sent to the Government in September 2012. The observations of the SUTGDF were received by the International Trade Union Confederation and sent to the Government by the ILO. The SUTGDF indicates that it is the majority trade union of workers in Mexico City and would like to be consulted by the Government on the subjects covered by the Convention. In August 2012 the UNT wrote to the Ministry of Labour and Social Security asking for copies of the reports sent to the ILO. The Committee requests the Government to send its comments on the observations of the SUTGDF and the UNT.

[The Government is asked to reply in detail to the present comments in 2013.]

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

Tripartite consultations required by the Convention. The Committee notes the Government’s report containing detailed tables of the subjects covered by tripartite consultations between July 2004 and June 2006. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide information in its next report on the frequency of the consultations held and indicate the nature of any reports or recommendations made as a result of the consultations, in accordance with the report form for Article 5 of the Convention.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1997, published 86th ILC session (1998)

Further to its previous direct request, the Committee notes the brief information provided in the Government's report on the tripartite consultations which took place concerning the matters provided for in Article 5, paragraph 1(a), (b) and (d), of the Convention.

It would be grateful if the Government would provide, in its future reports, detailed information on the consultations which have also taken place on the other matters provided for in paragraph 1, in particular with regard to the re-examination of unratified Conventions and Recommendations to which effect has not yet been given (paragraph 1(c)).

Please also provide information on the frequency of these consultations and specify the nature of any reports or recommendations resulting from them, as requested in the report form.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1995, published 82nd ILC session (1995)

The Committee notes the Government's report. It asks the Government to provide information on the consultations held during the period covered by the next report on each of the questions set out in Article 5, paragraph 1, of the Convention and to state the nature of any reports and recommendations resulting from such consultations.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1995, published 83rd ILC session (1996)

The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government in its report relating particularly to consultations held on the matters referred to in Article 5, paragraph 1(a), (b) and (d) of the Convention.

It would be grateful if the Government would also continue to supply in its subsequent reports information on internal consultations on the other matters listed in paragraph 1, especially in relation to the re-examination of unratified conventions and of recommendations which have not yet been given effect (paragraph 1(c)).

Please supply information also on the frequency of these consultations and specify the nature of all reports or recommendations resulting from them as requested in the report form.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1991, published 78th ILC session (1991)

The Committee takes note of the report supplied by the Government. It requests the Government to provide information on consultations held during the period covered by the next report concerning each of the points set out at Article 5, paragraph 1, of the Convention.