Effect given to the recommendations of the committee and the Governing Body - Report No 401, March 2023

Case No 3026 (Peru) - Complaint date: 22-MAY-13 - Closed

Effect given to the recommendations of the committee and the Governing Body

1. 41. The Committee last examined this case, in which the complainant organizations alleged restrictions in legislation and in the practice of collective bargaining in the public sector, at its March 2015 meeting [see 374th Report, paras 627–672]. On that occasion, the Committee made the following recommendations:
   • The Committee highlights that the Government is obliged to bring its legislation into conformity with Conventions that it has ratified in respect of the collective bargaining of wages in the public (state, regional and local) sector; the Committee requests the Government to promote collective bargaining in the spheres in which the complainant organizations operate (forensic medicine, agrarian innovation and electricity).
   • The Committee firmly expects that in future the Government will guarantee that, in practice, trade unions participate in the consultations on any issue or proposed legislation affecting the rights of the workers they represent.
   • The Committee requests the Government to provide its observations in reply to the allegations of the CTE-Peru of 17 October and 5 December 2014 calling into question the provisions of the new regulations on the Civil Service Act having an impact on the exercise of trade union rights, the allegations of the FNTPJ of 13 October 2014 concerning the impact of the Civil Service Act on the judicial employees, as well as the allegations of the CATP of 26 December 2014.
   • The Committee regrets that the Government has not requested the technical assistance from the ILO that it announced it would request in 2013 and invites the Government to avail itself of ILO assistance in relation to this case.
2. 42. In their communications dated 26 February 2015, the complainant organizations submitted additional information reaffirming the allegations previously submitted. Likewise, in its communications dated 14 and 19 November 2018, General Confederation of Workers of Peru (CGTP) submitted additional information on behalf of 15 other trade union organizations in relation to the same allegations in the present case. The CGTP added that Legislative Decree No. 1442 on the fiscal management of human resources in the public sector prohibited the possibility of granting pay increases to public sector workers through collective bargaining or through an arbitration process.
3. 43. The Government sent additional information in its communications dated 25 September 2015, 29 November 2016, 5 and 6 April and 6 May 2019, in response to the Committee’s recommendations. In these communications, the Government indicated that Legislative Decree No. 1442 on the fiscal management of human resources in the public sector does not refer to collective bargaining in the public sector, does not limit this right, and does not affect the labour rights of workers in the public administration. Moreover, in these communications, the Government also included a draft law on collective bargaining in the State sector aimed at revising the provisions of the Civil Service Law (2013) relating to collective bargaining.
4. 44. In its communications received on 4 and 27 January 2023, the Government requested that the case is closed, without, however, providing new elements as to the follow-up given to the Committee’s recommendations.
5. 45. The Committee takes due note of the various elements provided by the parties. The Committee further notes that, in the framework of another case (Case No. 2816, 401st Report, paras 35–40) the Government had informed the Committee of the adoption of the State Sector Collective Bargaining Act (published on 2 May 2021). The Committee notes that the Act indicates that: (i) bargaining may cover all types of working and employment conditions, including remuneration and other conditions of work with an economic impact; and (ii) it repeals various provisions of the Civil Service Act of 2013 (No. 30057) which completely excluded the determination of wages or matters with economic impact in the public sector through collective bargaining (sections 42, 43 and 44). In this respect, the Committee also notes that the CEACR, in its observations published in 2023 concerning Convention Nos 98 and 151, noted the information provided by the Government, according to which: (i) the Presidential Decree No. 008-2022-PCM was published on 20 January 2022, approving guidance for the implementation of Act No. 31188; (ii) the Act on the budget for the public sector for the 2022 financial year admits the financial increase agreed collectively; and (iii) the Centralized Collective Agreement 2022–2023 was concluded on 3 June 2022, and it included important benefits for all State workers (with the exception of public servants on special careers paths in health and education, who will engage in decentralized sectoral bargaining).
6. 46. The Committee notes with satisfaction the above-mentioned legislative reform and the signing of the Centralized Collective Agreement 2022–2023. In light of the above, the Committee trusts that the Government will continue to take the necessary measures to promote collective bargaining in the spheres in which the complainant organizations operate (forensic medicine, agricultural innovation, electricity).
7. 47. The Committee firmly expects that in the future the Government will guarantee that, in practice, trade unions participate in the consultations on any issue or proposed legislation affecting the rights of the workers they represent.
8. 48. Finally, taking into consideration that the legislative issues raised by the complainant organizations have been and will continue to be examined by the CEACR in relation to the respective Conventions, the Committee considers that this case is closed and will not pursue its examination.