Interim Report - Report No 41, 1960

Case No 172 (Argentina) - Complaint date: 05-FEB-58 - Closed

1. 105. On 5 February 1958 the International Federation of Christian Trade Unions addressed to the Director-General of the International Labour Office a letter containing allegations that freedom of association had been infringed in Argentina in connection with the bank strike that occurred in the months of February and March 1958. his complaint was communicated to the Government on 17 February 1958.
2. 106. On 30 January 1958 the organisation known as Argentine Trade Union Action (A.S.A.) put forward a series of allegations concerning the same strike. These allegations were communicated to the Government on 21 February 1958. Argentine Trade Union Action supplemented its complaint by a letter dated 16 March 1958, and the Government was informed of the contents of that letter on 28 March 1958.
3. 107. On 3 March 1958 the Postal, Telegraph and Telephone International submitted an extensive series of documents containing allegations that freedom of association had been infringed in connection with the disputes that broke out among telegraph and telephone workers in the months of September, October and November 1957. This complaint was forwarded to the Government by a letter dated 7 March 1958.
4. 108. By a communication dated 22 October 1958 the Government of the Argentine Republic submitted its observations regarding the various complaints that had been communicated to it.
5. 109. The case was submitted to the Committee at its November 1958 (20th) Session, and the Committee submitted to the Governing Body an interim report which was approved by the Governing Body at its 140th Session (Geneva, 18 to 21 November 1958).
6. 110. When it examined the case at its meeting in November 1958, the Committee dealt with certain of the allegations that had been put forward (allegations relating to the illegality of the strike of telegraph and telephone workers, the suspension of the registration of associations and the mobilisation of bank employees). On the other hand it took the view that on certain points it would be necessary, if the Committee was to be in a position to reach a decision based on a full knowledge of all the relevant factors, to obtain additional information from the Government with regard to the allegations relating to the prosecution and detention of trade unionists and the placing of certain trade union organisations under administrative control.
7. 111. The decisions taken by the Governing Body on the Committee's recommendation, together with the requests for additional information, were transmitted to the Government by a communication from the Director-General dated 27 November 1958.
8. 112. Since it had not received the additional information requested from the Government the Committee decided at its February 1959 (21st) Session to postpone consideration of the case until its next session. The Government was informed of this decision by a letter dated 13 March 1959.
9. 113. By a communication dated 17 April 1959, supplemented by another on 30 April, Argentine Trade Union Action lodged a new complaint with the I.L.O, this time with regard to the dispute between Argentine bank employees and their employers that had begun early in 1959. In addition this complaint was supported on 12 May 1959 by the International Federation of Christian Trade Unions.
10. 114. This further complaint by Argentine Trade Union Action and the additional information submitted in support of it were communicated to the Government for its observations in two letters dated 30 April and 13 May 1959 respectively.
11. 115. At its May 1959 (22nd) Session, and in the absence of the additional information previously requested from the Government and of the observations expected from it concerning the latest complaint by Argentine Trade Union Action, the Committee decided to postpone consideration of the case until its next session. The Government was informed of this decision of the Committee by letter dated 9 June 1959.
12. 116. In a communication dated 16 September 1959 the Argentine Government transmitted to the Office a further series of observations with regard to the complaints alleging violation of freedom of association that had been lodged against it.
13. 117. The following paragraphs related exclusively to the allegations consideration of which had been suspended since the 140th Session of the Governing Body (November 1958) and to those contained in the further complaint by Argentine Trade Union Action which has not yet been submitted to the Committee.
14. 118. Argentina has ratified the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98), but has not ratified the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87).

A. A. The complainants' allegations

• Strike of Telephone and Telegraph Workers
• Allegations relating to the Prosecution of Trade Unionists.
  119. 119 One of the reports among the documents submitted by the Postal, Telegraph and Telephone International, namely that prepared by the Argentine Union of Telegraph, Wireless and Allied Workers (A.A.T.R.A) alleges that the President and Secretary of that Organisation were arrested and charged with an offence under Articles 23 (2) and 20 of the Criminal Code. The Government stated in its reply, dated 22 October 1958, that the prosecution of the two trade union leaders was based on the contents of resolution No. 104 of the National Director of Labour and Direct Social Action.
  120. 120 At its session of November 1958 the Committee had found that, according to the preamble to the said resolution No. 104, A.A.T.R.A had drawn up circulars in which it had rejected the amendment made to Decree No. 14954/46 (Telegraph Workers' Law) by Legislative Decree No. 10,774/57 and had decided, on the other hand, to continue working in accordance with the original text of the Telegraph Workers' Law. The Committee had observed that it was also stated in the report of A.A.T.R.A that the trade union had resolved not to recognise Legislative Decree No. 10,774/57 because it was impossible to comply with it ". The Committee had also noted that in the preamble to resolution No. 104 it was declared that the attitude adopted by A.A.T.R.A implied non-recognition and total defiance of provisions of a legal character issued by the competent authority.
  121. 121 Referring at that stage to section 230 of the Penal Code, contained in the chapter relating to " sedition ", the Committee had noted that under that article " any person shall be punishable with imprisonment for from one month to two years ... who publicly commits acts of defiance for the purpose of hindering the application of national or provincial laws or of resolutions issued by national or provincial public officials in cases in which such acts do not constitute an offence entailing more severe punishment under this Code ". The Committee had also noted that section 20 referred only to the special disabilities which might apply in the case of persons sentenced in respect of certain offences.
  122. 122 After noting that the documents before it contained no details as to the results of the proceedings instituted against the two trade union leaders the Committee had recalled that it had always followed the practice of not proceeding to examine matters which were the subject of pending judicial proceedings, provided that these proceedings were attended by proper guarantees of due process of law, because the pending judicial decision might make available information of assistance to the Committee in appreciating whether or not allegations were well founded. In these circumstances the Committee found that proceedings might be pending against the two trade union leaders ; it decided to adjourn its examination of this aspect of the case, and requested the Director-General to ask the Argentine Government to furnish information concerning the results of any judicial proceedings.
  123. 123 Since in its last communication, dated 16 September 1959, the Government does not supply the information which had been requested of it in this connection, the Committee has asked the Director-General to repeat the request on its behalf.
• Allegations relating to the Detention of Trade Unionists.
  124. 124 In another report in the series of documents of the Postal, Telegraph and Telephone International, namely that prepared by the Federation of Telephone Workers and Employees of the Argentine Republic (F.O.E.T.R.A) it was alleged that after the registration of F.O.E.T.R.A had been suspended there had been many arrests.
  125. 125 Having noted that in its observations dated 22 October 1958 the Government had made no comment on this, the Committee at its November 1958 Session instructed the Director-General to ask the Government to be good enough to supply information on this aspect of the case.
  126. 126 Since in its reply of 16 September 1959 the Government once more makes no mention of this question, the Committee has requested the Director-General to ask once more on its behalf for the information it requires on this point.
• Strike of Bank Employees (February-March 1958)
• Allegations relating to the Appointment of an Administrator of the Banking Association.
  127. 127 With regard to the bank employees' strike that occurred at the beginning of the year 1958 Argentine Trade Union Action and the International Federation of Christian Trade Unions alleged among other things that the Government had appointed an administrator to run the Argentine Banking Association, which is the bank employees' union. At its session of November 1958 the Committee had found that it was not clear from the documents available to it whether the appointment of a controller of the Bank Employees' Association had ended.
  128. 128 Accordingly the Committee had recommended the Governing Body to decide with respect to the appointment of a controller to the Argentine Bank Employees' Association to draw the attention of the Government to the importance which it attached to the generally accepted principle that the public authorities should refrain from any interference which would restrict the right of workers' organisations to elect their representatives in full freedom and to organise their administration and activities, and to request the Government to furnish information as to whether the appointment of the controller for this union had been cancelled.
  129. 129 Since in its latest communication, dated 16 September 1959, the Government does not supply any new information on this aspect of the case, the Committee has reached the same conclusion as that recalled in the preceding paragraph.
• Bank Employees' Dispute (1959)
  130. 130 In a communication dated 17 April 1959, which was later supplemented by a letter dated 30 April 1959, the Argentine Trade Union Action alleges that there were a number of violations of freedom of association by the public authorities in connection with the current bank strike in Argentina. The complainants make the following chronological statements of events.
  131. 131 Owing to the considerable increase in the cost of living by comparison with the cost-of-living index for August 1958 (the commencement date of the bank employees' collective agreement), the Banking Association, which is a union affiliated to the complainant organisation, requested an emergency increase from the employers, and accordingly on 2 February 1959 it sent letters to the Banking Federation (employers' organisation of which private banks of the federal capital are members), the Association of Inland Banks (employers' organisation of which the private inland banks are members), the managers of the official banks and the Ministry of Labour and Social Security. The only reply to this demand was received from the Banking Federation, which made an offer that was rejected by the Banking Association.
  132. 132 On 18 February 1959 the Banking Association called for the convening of the inter-ministerial committee which had been set up to deal with all matters relating to the problems of the banking profession, so that the representatives of all the employers might jointly examine on that committee the claim put forward by the union.
  133. 133 At the first meeting of the inter-ministerial committee, which was held on 9 March 1959, the representatives of the official banks said that they had no authority to discuss wage matters. Negotiations continued until 18 March, on which date, by reason of the official banks' refusal to negotiate, the union decided to retaliate ; there were accordingly a number of partial stoppages of work in banks between 18 and 25 March.
  134. 134 On 13 March 1959 the Ministry of Labour and Social Security decided to convene the National Joint Negotiating Committee for the banking profession. At the first meeting of that Committee, which took place on 6 April 1959, the representative of the official banks made the following statement: " In view of the restrictions of a statutory and Constitutional nature, particularly those which affect the autonomy of the official banks in budgetary matters, the representatives of [a list of banks is appended] state that they are attending the meeting with the intention of assisting in the examination of the submissions in this case, reserving the right to refer back to their principals for instructions in accordance with the statutory provisions governing those banks."
  135. 135 In view of this statement, which according to the complainants ran counter to the nature of a collective bargaining conference at which all the parties must be in a position to negotiate and commit the associations they represent, the Ministry of Labour, at the request of the union representatives, requested the representatives of the official banks to obtain the necessary powers to take part in collective bargaining in accordance with the notice summoning the joint meeting.
  136. 136 In the opening speech at the next meeting of the Committee, which was held on 9 April 1959, the representatives of the official banks announced that the Ministry of Labour had been consulted and had stated that the official banks could not take part in collective bargaining. In other words, the complainants state, the self-same person who convened the official banks to the collective bargaining conference now prevented them from taking part in it.
  137. 137 It is alleged that on 10 April 1959 the Minister of Labour granted leaders of the Banking Association an interview. At this meeting he is alleged to have made the following statement: " Our conduct must be regulated not by legalistic formality but by the facts of economic life, and it is this that motivated the Government's refusal." The complainants state that at the same interview the Government's representative announced the cancellation of section 31 of Decree No. 3133/58 which granted statutory authority for the renegotiation of salary scales in banks by means of collective bargaining. He is further alleged to have announced that not only would there be no special salary increase but there would not be any collective bargaining within the inter-ministerial committee either, although the Government itself had convened it.
  138. 138 In view of this attitude on the part of the Government, and after consulting the membership, the union is said to have decided on a 24-hour strike for 14 April 1959 and on a general strike if no solution was reached.
  139. 139 The complainant stated that on that same 14 April the Ministry of Labour and Social Security placed the bank employees' union under the direct control of the Government, that the union's headquarters were searched and subsequently occupied by the constabulary and that the police arrested certain trade union leaders and began to round up a number of others. In addition the Ministry of Labour is alleged to have declared the strike illegal and to have announced that those who did not report for work would be dismissed and their posts filled with civil service personnel.
  140. 140 It is alleged that since then the Argentine Government has continued its arrests of leaders and rank and file members of the union and that those arrested include Mr. Horacio José Ramón, a leader of the Banking Association (CRIBA). The arrested persons are alleged to be held " at the disposal of the executive power " on the strength of the state of emergency existing in the country. Applications for writs of habeas corpus lodged by the union on behalf of the arrested men are alleged to have been rejected by the courts, which stated that the matter lay outside their jurisdiction.
  141. 141 It is alleged that at the same time the Government has continued to interfere with the business of the Banking Association and has appointed an official of the Ministry of Labour and Social Security to act as official controller. Various government officials are alleged to have offered their services as mediators, but to no avail, because the Government maintains that " it will not negotiate with unions that are on strike ".
  142. 142 The complainants state that appeals " for the protection of their Constitutional rights " were lodged with the labour courts to prevail on the Government to bring the unions before the courts. A judge of first instance is said to be now examining the position.
  143. 143 In its reply dated 16 September 1959 the Government asserts that the charges levelled against it by the complainant organisation are not in accordance with the facts, and in reply to the statements of Argentine Trade Union Action it puts forward a different account of what took place.
  144. 144 First of all it states that salaries in banking were fixed by Government Decree No. 3133/58 for a minimum period of two years running from 1 May 1958. This duration is prescribed by Article 31 of the decree in question, which provides in particular that its provisions may " be amended by collective agreement one year before the expiry of its term of validity if according to the figures in the Monthly Bulletin of Statistics published by the Ministry of Finance the cost of living has risen by 20 per cent in relation to the indices for the month of August 1958 ". The Government states that this means that in principle the validity of the decree, without any alteration of the rates laid down in it, ran until at least 30 April 1960 ; that clauses relating to remuneration could be revised only from 1 May 1959 onward, on condition that a 20 per cent rise in the cost of living had been recorded ; and that any such revision was to be carried out through a collective agreement.
  145. 145 The Government states that on 18 February 1959 the Banking Association submitted to the Chairman of the Inter-Ministerial Committee a request for the immediate convocation of the Committee for the purpose of giving consideration to an urgent claim for a salary increase. The Government states that by taking this course the Banking Association was already disregarding the terms of Decree No. 3313/58, since nowhere in that decree was there any mention of the possibility of obtaining or discussing such an increase. However-and this shows how well disposed the Ministry was with regard to the applicants-the Inter-Ministerial Committee was convened on 9 March 1959.
  146. 146 The Government states that on 13 March the official banks announced that they could take no decision on a question of conditions of work that fell within the scope of the Government's general policy according to Article 10 of Act No. 14794. The private banks for their part argued that the Inter-Ministerial Committee was not competent to deal with such an issue.
  147. 147 The Government states that it would have been both logical and proper to await a ruling on the question of the competence of the Committee before taking up any sort of stand. This, however, was not the course adopted by the Banking Association, which, according to the Government, took a series of forcible measures by launching a number of strikes. In the Government's opinion the attitude of the Banking Association in this case is indefensible, for according to the Government it is quite unacceptable to have recourse to force, which is a negation of any attempt at conciliation, as long as negotiations are still proceeding.
  148. 148 In view of the attitude of the Banking Association the Ministry of Labour and Social Security, which has the necessary competence and authority to intervene with a view to the settlement of such disputes, took the matter in hand and declared the strike illegal because the compulsory statutory waiting period for conciliation had not expired.
  149. 149 Since the circumstances were still the same the declaration of illegality was renewed when the Banking Association called further stoppages without ever complying with the compulsory conciliation procedure.
  150. 150 To cope with difficulties due to the fact that the competence of the Inter-Ministerial Committee had been challenged the Directorate-General of Labour Relations, acting on a request by the union leaders, convened the collective bargaining body provided for in Act No. 14,250. The Government states that this constituted a return to the normal procedure for the review of collective agreements (Article 31 of Decree No. 3133/58). The Government considers that in its dealings with the Banking Association the Ministry of Labour and Social Security could not have been more conciliatory than it was since it agreed to enter into discussions concerning an immediate salary increase for which no provision whatever was made in the decree cited above. The Government states that this " gave the leaders of the Association the possibility of abandoning without loss of face the use of force to which they had committed the Association by the use of illegal methods."
  151. 151 When purportedly peaceful talks had been resumed the Banking Association launched a campaign of intimidation and threatened to call a strike if its claim for a special increase was not accepted by 10 April. The Government states that this amounted to setting the Association once more above the law. In spite of the union's attitude the talks were not broken off, but this conciliatory behaviour served no purpose since the Banking Association called a number of partial work stoppages which were converted on its initiative into a general strike of unlimited duration.
  152. 152 Although this strike was illegal the Ministry made a last attempt to settle the dispute ; it convened the banking leaders and offered an official increase of 800 pesos with a possibility of discussing the question of a higher increase on the basis of increased productivity, although the Government points out that this offer imperilled the achievement of the economic plan. Despite the manifest good faith of the authorities, however, the offer was categorically rejected by the leaders of the Banking Association and the strike has continued ever since.
  153. 153 This strike, caused such anarchy in the banking profession and involved such serious dangers for the national economy that the Government was compelled to intervene by virtue of its powers under the Constitutional provisions relating to a state of emergency and to take over the administration of the Banking Association until order was restored.
• Question of the Legality of the Bank Strike.
  154. 154 The complainants allege that the strike called by the Banking Association was arbitrarily declared illegal by the Government although it was genuinely designed to obtain satisfaction of claims of an economic and occupational nature. Although it does not deny that the strike had the character alleged by the complainants, the Government recognises that it nevertheless considered this strike as being illegal because in view of the circumstances in which it was launched it did not comply with the statutory conditions laid down by legislation for recognition as a legal one.
  155. 155 First of all, the Government states, salaries in this occupation had been fixed on l May 1958 for two years and it was provided that an increase could be considered only after one year had elapsed and if the cost of living were to rise by 20 per cent according to the official statistics (see paragraph 144 above). Since these conditions had not been met the bank employees' organisation was not entitled to put forward a claim for a salary increase and was even less entitled to support such a claim by strike action.
  156. 156 The Government then states that the Banking Association did not observe the compulsory waiting period for conciliation laid down by law, that it never even submitted to compulsory conciliation and that it had recourse to force while negotiations were under way. The Government points out that these negotiations continued in spite of the union's improper and intransigent attitude (see paragraphs 147-152 above).
  157. 157 As the Committee noted on a previous occasion the mere fact that a strike is regarded as unlawful in any country would not be sufficient to cause the Committee to refrain from examining the merits of a case ; it would also be necessary for the conditions that had to be fulfilled under the law in order to render a strike lawful to be reasonable conditions and in any event not such as to place a substantial limitation on the means of action open to trade union organisations. In this connection the Committee has recognised in a number of cases, for example, that prior notification to the administrative authority and utilisation of compulsory conciliation and arbitration in industrial disputes before a strike is called are provided for in the laws or regulations of a considerable number of countries, and that reasonable provisions of this type cannot be regarded as an infringement of freedom of association.
  158. 158 It would seem that in this particular case the trade union organisation concerned did not observe the provisions relating to conciliation, and even that by going on strike it broke off negotiations which the Government seems to have wished to bring to a successful conclusion. In these circumstances the Committee recommends the Governing Body to decide that this aspect of the case does not call for further examination.
• Question of the Appointment of a Controller of the Banking Association.
  159. 159 The complainants allege that as a result of the strike called by the Banking Association the Government placed that organisation under the direct administrative control of the authorities. The Government does not deny this but explains it by the economic seriousness of the situation caused by the strike.
  160. 160 The Committee has already considered a similar situation in connection with this same case when it examined allegations relating to the bank strike that occurred in the spring of 1958 (see paragraphs 127-129 above).
  161. 161 Since the circumstances in the present case are the same the Committee makes the same observations as it did in the previous case and recommends the Governing Body to draw the attention of the Government to the importance it attaches to the generally accepted principle that the public authorities should refrain from any interference which would restrict the right of workers' organisations to elect their representatives in full freedom and to organise their administration and activities.
• Allegations relating to the Arrest of Leaders and Members of the Rank and File of the Banking Association.
  162. 162 The complainants allege in fairly general terms that a number of leaders and members of the rank and file of the Banking Association, including Mr. Horacio José Ramón, a leader of the CRIBA, have been arrested and are "at the disposal of the executive powers " on the strength of the state of emergency that has been proclaimed in the country.
  163. 163 In its reply the Government does not refer to this aspect of the case. In these circumstances the Committee has postponed consideration of it and has requested the Director-General to ask the Government to be good enough to submit its observations on it.
  164. 164 The complainant organisation states that appeals " for the protection of their Constitutional rights " have been lodged with the labour courts on behalf of the arrested trade unionists " to prevail on the Government to bring the union before the courts ", and that a judge of first instance is now looking into the matter.
  165. 165 It has always been the practice of the Committee not to examine matters which are the subject of pending legal proceedings, on the ground that the pending judicial decision may make available information of assistance to the Committee in appreciating whether or not allegations are well founded. In accordance with that practice the Committee has asked the Director-General to request the Government to inform him of the result of the proceedings mentioned in the preceding paragraph, as well as of the grounds for any decision taken.
• General Position of the Trade Union Movement
  166. 166 In its second communication, dated 30 April 1959, the complaining organisation also makes certain general observations with regard to the position of the trade union movement in Argentina.
  167. 167 According to the complainants the Argentine working class is completely deprived of trade union freedom, and this situation is reflected in government interference in the affairs of the following trade unions : the Metal Workers' Union, the Textile Workers' Union, the Federation of Construction Workers, the Federation of Workers in the Timber Industry, the Banking Association, the Association of Workers in the Meat and Allied Trades, the Railwaymen's Union and the Consolidated Union of State Petroleum Workers.
  168. 168 " In short ", the complainants state, " half the workers in Argentina are currently under government control, this being the culminating point in the Government's actions to abolish freedom which began with the passing of the Occupational Associations Act ".
  169. 169 The complaining organisation also alleges that the members of the Railwaymen's Union and the Motor Transport Federation have been drafted and brought under the Code of Military Justice, thus being denied access to their natural judges.
  170. 170 In its reply the Government states that administrators of unions are no longer in control of the following organisations : the Textile Workers' Union, the Railwaymen's Union, the Metal Workers' Union, the Consolidated Union of State Petroleum Workers, the Urban Transport Workers' Union and the Association of Workers in the Meat and Allied Trades-in other words about all the organisations mentioned by the complainants.
  171. 171 The Government also states that Decree No. 8197 cancelled as from 30 June 1959 the mobilisation of the personnel of the Argentine Government Railways and its various departments, as well as of the personnel of the General Transport Administration (National Transport Corporation).
  172. 172 In these circumstances, since the situation denounced by the complainants has practically ceased to exist, the Committee recommends the Governing Body to decide that it would be purposeless to consider this aspect of the case further.

The Committee's recommendations

1. 173. In these circumstances the Committee recommends the Governing Body:
   • (a) to decide, as regards the placing of the Banking Association under administrative control, to draw the Government's attention to the importance which it attaches to the generally accepted principle that the public authorities should refrain from any interference which would restrict the right of workers' organisations to elect their representatives in full freedom and to organise their administration and activities, and to ask the Government to be good enough to inform it whether the control of the trade union organisation in question has been ended ;
   • (b) to decide, with regard to the question of the legality of the banking strike of 1959, that, for the reasons stated in paragraphs 154 to 158 above, this aspect of the case does not call for further examination ;
   • (c) to decide, with regard to the allegations relating to the general position of the trade union movement, that, for the reasons stated in paragraphs 166 to 172 above, it would be purposeless to consider this aspect of the case further ; and
   • (d) to take note of the present interim report, it being understood that the Committee will report further on the aspects of the case which are still outstanding when it has received the information requested from the Government.