Display in: French - Spanish
Effect given to the recommendations of the Committee and the Governing Body
Effect given to the recommendations of the Committee and the Governing Body
- 15. The Committee last examined this case at its March 2009 meeting [see 353rd Report, paras 32–34] and on that occasion it expressed the expectation that the appeals relating to the administrative proceedings against members of the SIJUPU executive committee and the amparo (protection of constitutional rights) application relating to the dismissal of the SIJUPU General Secretary would be settled in the very near future and requested the Government to keep it informed in that regard and to send its observations on the alleged lack of participation of SIJUPU in the organization of the Judicial Training Institute.
- 16. In its communication of 6 October 2009, SIJUPU alleges that: (1) it faces discrimination in that it is prevented from putting posters or announcements on the walls at the entrance to the courthouse, while the Bar Association is allowed to do so; (2) the administrative proceedings and the amparo application mentioned in the original complaint have not yet been settled; (3) SIJUPU requested a pay review and, in the absence of a response, it called a strike from 1 June 2009 and the striking workers had wages deducted for nine strike days to dissuade them from exercising their constitutional right to strike; and (4) a 15 per cent pay increase was finally agreed upon, but at the time of the complaint the workers had still not received it.
- 17. In its communication of 27 June 2010, the Government indicates that, according to the relevant information that was gathered, the High Court of San Luis:
- – categorically denies the allegation concerning the ban on assembly and on putting up posters and indicates that the union was simply told to do these things in the places that are specifically designated for union communications. In this regard, the Court states that it has taken into consideration the Labour Relations (Public Service) Convention, 1978 (No. 151), Part III, Articles 6 and 7, in relation to the facilities to be afforded to public employees’ organizations;
- – categorically denies the existence of irregularities (to which the complainant refers only in general terms, without identifying the specific offence) in the administrative proceedings. The Court reports that: (i) the proceedings “Dr Luis Burroni – Justice of the Peace – San Luis concerning the application for administrative proceedings on behalf of Ms Lidia I. Ávila (Case No. 6-B-07)” have been pending settlement since 5 April this year, further to the completion of their preliminary examination and their referral to the Attorney-General, who handed down a decision on 31 March advising that no sanctions be applied; (ii) with regard to the case of Mr Juan Manuel González, General Secretary, neither has any evidence been added to the submission to demonstrate that the case has not progressed in any way. In this regard, the Administrative Secretary of the High Court indicates that the case was referred to the Office of the State Prosecutor;
- – with regard to the mentioned orders to deduct pay for strike days, these have been issued by a court and fall beyond the competence of the High Court, as both the amparo applications that are pending decision have been brought by the same entity; and
- – finally, as mentioned by the complainant organization, a 15 per cent pay increase was agreed upon, and the Court indicates that at a meeting with the union there was a willingness to settle the disputes in a climate of collaboration and respect.
- 18. The Committee takes note of this information. With regard to salary deductions for strike days, while the Committee notes that legal action has been taken in this regard, it recalls that “salary deductions for days of strike give rise to no objection from the point of view of freedom of association principles” [see Digest of decisions and principles of the Freedom of Association Committee, fifth (revised) edition, 2006, para. 654]. With regard to the proceedings and the amparo application concerning the SIJUPU leaders, the Committee expects that these will conclude in the very near future and requests the Government to keep it informed of the outcome. The Committee also asks the Government to send its observations regarding the alleged lack of participation of SIJUPU in the organization of the Judicial Training Institute. Lastly, the Committee notes that the Government confirms the complainant organization’s claim that an agreement has been reached on a pay increase and that at a meeting with the trade union there was a willingness to settle the disputes in a climate of collaboration and respect.
