Informe definitivo - Informe núm. 214, Marzo 1982

Caso núm. 1027 (Paraguay) - Fecha de presentación de la queja:: 06-FEB-81 - Cerrado

1. 46. The international Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) presented its complaint in a communication dated 6 February 1981, to which was attached a letter from the Paraguayan. Confederation of Workers in Exile (CPTE) addressed to the Director-General and dated 27 December 1980. The Government replied in a communication dated 7 September 1981.
2. 47. Paraguay 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. The complainant's allegations

1. 48. The complainant alleges that the workers engaged in the construction of the Itaipú hydroelectric dam have no trade union organisation and that every attempt to create one is repressed, in criminal violation of Conventions Nos. 87 and 98.
2. 49. The complainant adds that the labour standards governing safety and health contained in the ILO's Conventions are not applied and raises a series of issues regarding the workers' housing and the existence of hospitals, teaching institutions, nurseries and mother craft training centres.

B. The Government's reply

1. 50. In its lengthy communication of 7 September 1981, the Government categorically denies the allegations of the complainant and states that the working conditions afforded the workers concerned are perfectly decent and comprehensive. The Government goes on to refer to the relevant laws and regulations and describes in detail the conditions of work, safety and health under which the construction of the Itaipú hydroelectric dam is being conducted and the facilities that are available to the workers.
2. 51. With regard to the alleged violation of the Conventions relating to freedom of association, the Government states that freedom of association does exist and that the trade union rights of workers recruited in the country are embodied in Paraguay's Labour Code. The Government further points out that the employees in Itaipú have an association that is registered with the Ministry of Labour and that 24 trade unions of workers of various occupations with official union status, and the Regional Confederation of Workers of Alto Paraná and Caaguazú, operate in the area.
3. 52. Finally, the Government states that neither direct nor indirect means of repression have been employed to prevent the organisation of trade unions or to hinder their activities and that, if the complaint makes no reference to any specific instance of a violation of Conventions NOS. 87 and 98, it is because no such violation has occurred.

C. The Committee's conclusions

1. 53. The Committee observes that the complainant has referred inter alia to the violation of ILO Conventions relating to occupational safety and health and that the Government has categorically denied these allegations. However, as it is restricted by its terms of reference to the examination of complaints arising from the violation of trade union rights, the Committee considers that it is not within its purview to express an opinion on this point.
2. 54. As to the allegation concerning the violation of Conventions Nos. 87 and 98, the Committee observes that, although the complainant alleges in general terms that workers employed on the Itaipú hydroelectric dam do not have any trade union organisation and that any attempt to create one is repressed by criminal means, no indication has been given of any specific instances where such repression has occurred. Consequently, inasmuch as the complaint makes no mention of any specific instance of a violation of trade union rights in spite of the fact that the complainant was invited to submit additional information, and inasmuch as the Government denies the allegations and states that there is in fact a registered association for the Itaipú workers, the Committee considers that this case does not call for further examination.

The Committee's recommendations

1. 55. In these circumstances, the Committee recommends the Governing Body to decide that this case does not call for further examination.