Observación (CEACR) - Adopción: 2009, Publicación: 99ª reunión CIT (2010)

Convenio sobre la libertad sindical y la protección del derecho de sindicación, 1948 (núm. 87) - Honduras (Ratificación : 1956)

The Committee notes the Government’s reply to the comments sent by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) dated 28 August 2007 concerning the drawing up of a draft Act to reform the Code of Criminal Procedure, which establishes harsher penalties for actions on public thoroughfares (blockages of roads, bridges and streets, for example), which may affect the activities of trade unions, and concerning the detention of trade union members in the banking sector when they wished to participate in a wage claim. The Committee notes the Government’s statement that no reforms are under way to introduce tougher penalties for illicit meetings or demonstrations and that section 331 of the Penal Code concerning “street actions”, incorporated in the legislation by means of Decree No. 59-97 of 8 May 1997, remains in force. As regards the alleged detention of union members of the Banking Association for participating in a pay claim, the Government has no knowledge of the existence of that trade union and therefore considers it unlikely that the complaint referred to in the comment was brought before the Honduran courts. The Committee also notes the comments from the Honduran National Business Council (COHEP) of 22 May 2008 on the application of the Convention. The COHEP also refers to the comments of the ITUC of 2007 and in particular the Committee notes its indication that it had no knowledge of the detention of union members belonging to the banking sector and gives the assurance that the Honduran Association of Banking Institutions (AHIBA) is unaware of and rejects such allegations.

Finally, the Committee notes the comments from the ITUC dated 26 August 2009 referring to pending legislative issues and also to the murder of the general secretary and another official of the Workers’ Confederation of Honduras (CTH) on 24 April 2008, the murder of an official of the National Peasant Farmers’ Association of Honduras (ANACH) in May 2008, armed attacks against the president and vice-president of the AFL Workers’ Union of Honduras (SITRAFLH) and the raiding of the headquarters of the Single Workers’ Confederation of Honduras (CUTH) in September 2008. The Committee recalls that freedom of association can only be exercised in a situation in which fundamental human rights are respected and fully guaranteed, particularly with regard to human life and safety, and where there have been attacks on physical or psychological integrity, an independent judicial inquiry should be conducted without delay, as this is a particularly suitable method for fully determining the facts, attributing responsibility, penalizing the perpetrators and preventing the repetition of such actions. The Committee requests the Government to send its observations in this respect.

The Committee also notes the comments from COHEP dated 6 October 2009. The Committee requests the Government to send its observations in this respect.

The Committee recalls that it has been referring for a number of years to the need to reform various sections of the Labour Code in order to bring them into conformity with the Convention. The Committee’s comments refer to:

–      the exclusion from the scope of the Labour Code, and consequently from the rights and guarantees of the Convention, of workers in agricultural and stock-raising enterprises which do not permanently employ more than ten workers (section 2(1));

–      the prohibition of more than one trade union in a single enterprise, institution or establishment (section 472 of the Labour Code);

–      the requirement of more than 30 workers to establish a trade union (section 475 of the Labour Code);

–      the requirement that the officers of a trade union, federation or confederation must be of Honduran nationality (sections 510(a) and 541(a) of the Labour Code), be engaged in the corresponding activity (sections 510(c) and 541(c) of the Labour Code) and be able to read and write (sections 510(d) and 541(d) of the Labour Code);

–      the following restrictions on the right to strike:

–          the ban on strikes being called by federations and confederations (section 537 of the Labour Code). The Committee however notes the Government’s indication that in practice the CUTH, the General Federation of Workers (CGT) and the CTH have repeatedly called for collective suspension of work;

–          the requirement of a two-thirds majority of the votes of the total membership of the trade union organization in order to call a strike (sections 495 and 563 of the Labour Code);

–          the power of the Ministry of Labour and Social Security to end disputes in oil production, refining, transport and distribution services (section 555(2) of the Labour Code);

–          the need for Government authorization or a six-month period of notice for any suspension or stoppage of work in public services that do not depend directly or indirectly on the State (section 558 of the Labour Code);

–          the submission to compulsory arbitration, without the possibility of calling a strike for as long as the arbitration award is in force (two years), of collective disputes in public services that are not essential in the strict sense of the term, that is those the interruption of which would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population (sections 554(2) and (7), 820 and 826 of the Labour Code).

The Committee recalls that in its previous observations it noted the drawing up of a draft Act to reform the Labour Code, which incorporated various amendments requested by the Committee. The Committee notes the Government’s statement that it has been impossible to hold discussions on the reform of the Labour Code because of the strong opposition of the three major workers’ federations operating in the country. The Committee further notes the statement by COHEP that, although a preliminary draft reform of the Labour Code was drawn up in 1995 and was the product of social dialogue, it was not adopted and various preliminary drafts were drawn up without agreement being reached in the stricter tripartite context and are due to be discussed in the National Congress.

The Committee reminds the Government that it is responsible for ensuring the application of freely ratified international labour Conventions relating to freedom of association. The Committee requests the Government to take the necessary steps to bring the Labour Code into conformity with the Convention and trusts that all the issues highlighted by the Committee will be taken into account. The Committee requests the Government to provide information in its next report on all measures taken in this respect and reminds it that it may seek technical assistance from the Office.