Seguimiento dado a las recomendaciones del Comité y del Consejo de Administración - Informe núm. 335, Noviembre 2004

Caso núm. 2243 (Marruecos) - Fecha de presentación de la queja:: 18-DIC-02 - Cerrado

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

1. 148. The Committee last examined this case at its March 2004 session [see 333rd Report, paras. 92-95]. It recalls that this case concerns a complaint by the Democratic Confederation of Labour (CDT) regarding the refusal by the Societé central des boissons gazeuses (SCBG) to recognize its workers’ trade union executive, which is affiliated to it, as well as acts of anti-union discrimination committed by the SCBG comprising “pressure on the trade unionists for them to resign from the union, through the application of unlawful sanctions against trade unionists, and, finally, the dismissal of two trade unionists, Mr. Najahi Mohamed and Mr. Chahrabane Azzedine” [see 331st Report, para. 596]. When it last examined the case, the Committee had asked the Government to continue with its initiatives – and to keep it informed of developments – with a view to allowing the trade union executive affiliated to the CDT to carry out freely its activities within the SCGB; to ensure that inquiries were promptly opened to determine whether the individual measures – including the dismissals of Mr. Mohamed and Mr. Azzedine – taken against the 20 workers, members or leaders of the trade union executive, were due to their trade union activities and, if so, to take the necessary steps to ensure that those measures were lifted.
2. 149. In a communication dated 17 May 2004, the Government transmitted two letters: the first, dated 4 December 2003, is from the general manager of the SCBG and the second, undated, from an official of the Ministry of Employment. Both these letters refer, with respect to follow-up to the initiatives taken by the Government concerning the freedom of action of the trade union executive of the CDT within the SCBG, to a vote held on 17 September 2003 to elect the staff representatives of the SCBG. On that occasion, the candidates affiliated to the central CDT trade union won 22.72 per cent of the votes cast and won five out of a possible 22 representative positions. The Committee notes that the letter from the Ministry of Employment representative indicates that: “the staff representatives elected under the CDT banner, some of whom are concurrently members of the trade union executive, exercise freely their duties as representatives and enjoy the prerogatives and the means accorded to them by the legislation”. Moreover, the letter of the general manager of the SCBG indicates that “as the central CDT trade union did not obtain the 35 per cent necessary in order to be able to claim the status of most-representative trade union, we continue to negotiate collectively with all the CDT and SAS representatives elected by the staff, in the framework of a common collegiate that represents the workers of the SCBG”.
3. 150. The letter from the official of the Ministry of Employment indicates that the labour inspectorate reported SCBG for failure to respect the dismissal procedure with regard to the dismissal of Mr. Mohamed and Mr. Azzedine. This letter also indicates that “the two persons concerned who had been given, at their request, a certificate by the labour inspectorate attesting to their position as staff representatives, had been invited to take the ‘unlawful’ dismissal to court, but had declined”. Regarding the other measures taken against 20 workers – dismissals, transfers from one workplace to another, and demotions [see 331st Report, para. 600] – the letter from the official of the Ministry of Employment indicates that “the labour inspectorate took action against the management that eventually produced favourable responses to the requests of those of the employees concerned who wished to be reinstated to sales positions”. The Committee notes that the letter from the general manager of the SCBG supports this information.
4. 151. The Committee takes note of the information submitted by the Government. The Committee notes in particular that initiatives taken by the Government had contributed to the individual measures that had been imposed on the 20 workers who were members or leaders of the trade union executive being lifted. The Committee emphasizes, in this respect, the report made by the labour inspectorate concerning the dismissals of Mr. Mohammed and Mr. Azzedine and the acceptance, by the SCBG, of the requests for reinstatement of the 20 workers concerned. However, the Committee notes with regret that the communication from the Government does not contain any information that made it possible to determine whether the conclusions of the report or the lifting of the sanctions implied confirmation that those measures had been taken due to the trade union activities of the workers concerned. The Committee recalls that no person shall be prejudiced in his employment by reason of his trade union membership or legitimate trade union activities, whether past or present [see Digest of decisions and principles of the Freedom of Association Committee, 4th edition, 1996, para. 690]. Consequently, the Committee requests the Government to draw the attention of the SCBG to this principle. The Committee hopes that in future the employees of the SCBG will be able to exercise freely, within the company, their trade union rights and freedoms.