Interim Report - Report No 387, October 2018

Case No 3081 (Liberia) - Complaint date: 27-MAY-14 - Follow-up cases closed due to the absence of information from either the complainant or the Government in the last 18 months since the Committee examined the cases

Allegations: Unilateral cancellation by the employer of the collective bargaining agreement and unfair dismissal of trade union leaders

1. 512. The Committee last examined this case at its October 2017 meeting, when it presented an interim report to the Governing Body [see 383rd Report, paras 417–438, approved by the Governing Body at its 331st Session (October–November 2017)].
2. 513. As the Government has not replied, the Committee has been obliged to adjourn its examination of this case on several occasions. At its June 2018 meeting [see the Committee’s 386th Report, para. 7], the Committee made an urgent appeal to the Government, indicating that, in accordance with the procedural rules set out in paragraph 17 of its 127th Report, approved by the Governing Body, it could present a report on the substance of the case at its next meeting, even if the observations or information requested had not been received in due time. To date, the Government has not sent any information.
3. 514. Liberia has ratified the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), and the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).

A. Previous examination of the case

1. 515. In its previous examination of the case in October 2017, the Committee made the following recommendations [see 383rd Report, para. 438]:
   • (a) The Committee invites the complainant to provide its observations on the information provided in the Government’s communication relating to the disassociation of the RIAWU from the NBT and its understood effect on the CBA and to indicate whether it has had judicial recourse in this regard. The Committee again requests the Government to indicate the measures taken to ensure that the RIAWU can continue to fulfil its functions in representing the workers and defending their occupational interests without fear of intimidation or reprisal.
   • (b) Once again expressing its concern at the employer’s alleged statements with regard to the remittance of union dues and at the impact that such statements might have on the exercise of trade union rights at the airport, the Committee requests the Government to reply in full to these allegations.
   • (c) The Committee requests the Government to keep it informed of the outcome of the investigation by the Labour Standards Division of the Ministry of Labour into Mr Weh’s dismissal. It further requests the Government to indicate whether Mr Garniah’s dismissal is covered by the same investigation and, if not, to conduct an immediate inquiry into the grounds for his dismissal and keep it informed of developments. If it is found that Mr Weh and Mr Garniah were dismissed for the exercise of legitimate trade union activities, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary steps to ensure that they are fully reinstated, without loss of pay. In the event that reinstatement is not possible, for objective and compelling reasons, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that they are paid adequate compensation which would represent a sufficiently dissuasive sanction for anti-union dismissals.
   • (d) Emphasizing that workers’ and employers’ organizations should not be subject to retaliatory measures for having lodged a complaint with the Committee on Freedom of Association, the Committee requests the Government to provide further information in response to the allegations that the Ministry of Labour has denied workers the right to join the union and has refused to process documents in relation to organizing submitted by the complainant. The Committee also invites the complainant to provide additional information with respect to this allegation.
   • (e) The Committee encourages the Government to consider availing itself of the technical assistance of the Office with a view to addressing the Committee’s recommendations and strengthening the capacity of the Government and the social partners.

B. The Committee’s conclusions

1. 516. The Committee regrets that, despite the time that has elapsed since the last examination of the complaint, the Government has once again not replied to the complainant’s allegations even though it has been requested several times, including through an urgent appeal. The Committee urges the Government to be more cooperative in the future and reminds the Government of the possibility to avail itself of the technical assistance of the Office.
2. 517. Hence, in accordance with the applicable procedural rules [see 127th Report, para. 17, approved by the Governing Body at its 184th Session (1971)], the Committee is obliged to present a report on the substance of the case without being able to take account of the information which it had hoped to receive from the Government.
3. 518. The Committee reminds the Government that the purpose of the whole procedure established by the International Labour Organization for the examination of allegations of violations of freedom of association is to promote respect for this freedom in law and in fact. The Committee remains confident that, if the procedure protects governments from unreasonable accusations, governments, in turn, will recognize the importance of presenting, for objective examination, detailed replies concerning allegations made against them [see First Report, 1952, para. 31].
4. 519. The Committee recalls that this case concerns allegations of the unilateral cancellation by the employer of a collective bargaining agreement (CBA) signed between the management of the airport and the workers’ union; the anti-union dismissal of the President and the Secretary-General of the Roberts International Airport Workers Union (RIAWU); and interference in trade union affairs.
5. 520. With respect to the alleged unilateral cancellations of the CBA, the Committee recalls that in its previous examination of the case it had noted the apparent difference in interpretation concerning the CBA’s application following disassociation of the RIAWU from the national union and invited the complainant to provide its observations on the information provided by the Government in this regard and to indicate whether it has had judicial recourse on this matter. In light of the time that has elapsed without any information from the complainant in reply to its request, the Committee, while expressing its firm expectation that the RIAWU has been able to continue to fulfil its functions in representing the workers and defending their occupational interests without fear of intimidation or reprisal, will not pursue its examination of this aspect of the case.
6. 521. The Committee regrets that the Government has not provided any information in respect of its previous recommendations and finds itself obliged to call on the Government to provide its observations with respect to the recommendations below without delay. The Committee once again encourages the Government to consider availing itself of the technical assistance of the Office with a view to addressing the outstanding matters in this case and strengthening the capacity of the Government and the social partners.

C. The Committee’s recommendations

1. 522. In the light of its foregoing interim conclusions, the Committee invites the Governing Body to approve the following recommendations:
   • (a) The Committee regrets that, despite the time that has elapsed, the Government has still not replied to the Committee’s previous recommendations. The Committee urges the Government to be more cooperative in the future and to provide its observations on the complainant’s allegations without further delay.
   • (b) The Committee requests the Government to reply in full to the allegations that statements were made by the employer with regard to the remittance of union dues and at the impact that such statements might have on the exercise of trade union rights at the airport.
   • (c) The Committee requests the Government to keep it informed of the outcome of the investigation by the Labour Standards Division of the Ministry of Labour into Mr Weh’s dismissal. It further requests the Government to indicate whether Mr Garniah’s dismissal is covered by the same investigation and, if not, to conduct an immediate inquiry into the grounds for his dismissal and keep it informed of developments. If it is found that Mr Weh and Mr Garniah were dismissed for the exercise of legitimate trade union activities, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary steps to ensure that they are fully reinstated, without loss of pay. In the event that reinstatement is not possible, for objective and compelling reasons, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that they are paid adequate compensation which would represent a sufficiently dissuasive sanction for anti-union dismissals.
   • (d) Emphasizing that workers’ and employers’ organizations should not be subject to retaliatory measures for having lodged a complaint with the Committee on Freedom of Association, the Committee requests the Government to provide further information in response to the allegations that the Ministry of Labour has denied workers the right to join the union and has refused to process documents in relation to organizing submitted by the complainant. The Committee also invites the complainant to provide additional information to the Government with respect to this allegation.
   • (e) The Committee encourages the Government to consider availing itself of the technical assistance of the Office with a view to addressing the Committee’s recommendations and strengthening the capacity of the Government and the social partners.