Visualizar en: Francés - Español
Effect given to the recommendations of the Committee and the Governing Body
Effect given to the recommendations of the Committee and the Governing Body
- 43. The Committee last examined this case at its November 2009 meeting, when it made the following recommendations [see 355th Report, para. 400]:
- (a) As regards the declaration as illegal of a strike called at ECOPETROL on 22 April 2004, the Committee, while reiterating its considerations expressed on many occasions, must again urge the Government, in consultation with the representatives of workers’ and employers’ organizations, to take steps without delay to send a proposal to the legislative authority with a view to amending the legislation (section 430(h) of the Substantive Labour Code) in order to define the conditions for the exercise of the right to strike in the petroleum sector with the possibility of providing for the establishment of a negotiated minimum service involving the participation of the trade unions, the employer and the public authorities concerned. The Committee requests the Government to keep it informed of all the relevant developments in the legislation.
- (b) As regards the allegations presented by SINCOPETROL relating to the dismissal of the trade union officials Messrs Ariel Corzo Díaz, Moisés Barón Cárdenas, Alexander Domínguez Vargas, Héctor Rojas Aguilar, Wilson Ferrer Díaz, Fredys Jesús Rueda Uribe, Fredys Elpidio Nieves Acevedo, Genincer Parada Torres, Braulio Mosquera Uribe, Jimmy Alexander Patiño Reyes, Jair Ricardo Chávez, Ramón Mantuano Urrutia, Germán Luis Alvarino, Sergio Luis Peinado Barranco, Olga Lucía Amaya and Jaime Pachón Mejía, also in the context of the stoppage of 22 April 2004, in disregard of trade union immunity, the Committee requests the Government and the trade union to indicate if these workers are covered by the agreement signed between the USO and ECOPETROL on 22 August 2009.
- (c) As regards the allegations presented by ADECO on ECOPETROL’s refusal to bargain collectively, observing that the trade union has submitted a new list of claims in 2009, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary steps to ensure that the company bargains collectively with the trade union in representation of its members and expects that in the framework of that collective bargaining it will be possible to resolve the outstanding matters. The Committee requests the Government to keep it informed in this respect.
- (d) The Committee invites the complainant organization to provide the Government with all the information in its possession concerning the allegations that ECOPETROL grants benefits, better working conditions or bonuses individually to non-unionized workers, encouraging them to give up trade union membership, and requests the Government to take the necessary steps, as a matter of urgency, to carry out an independent investigation in order to determine on the basis of complete information whether the allegations are true. The Committee requests the Government to keep it informed in this respect.
- (e) As regards the allegations relating to the refusal of Chevron Petroleum Company to bargain collectively with the trade union, the appointment of a Compulsory Arbitration Tribunal and the appeal for annulment of the arbitral award lodged by the company and the trade union in the Supreme Court of Justice, the Committee requests the Government to keep it informed of the pending administrative investigation into the company.
- 44. In a communication dated 19 January 2010 the Government states that Messrs Ariel Corzo Díaz, Moisés Barón Cárdenas, Alexander Domínguez Vargas, Héctor Rojas Aguilar, Fredys Elpidio Nieves Acevedo, Genincer Parada Torres, Braulio Mosquera Uribe, Jimmy Alexander Patiño Reyes, Jair Ricardo Chávez, Ramón Mantuano Urrutia, Germán Luis Alvarino and Jaime Pachón Mejía (recommendation (b)), are covered by an agreement reached on 22 August 2009, known as the “Agreement concerning workers dismissed in the collective labour dispute of 2002–04”, which ended the dispute between the company and the Workers’ Trade Union that began on 22 May 2009. Moreover, Mr Fredys Jesús Rueda Uribe was reinstated in his post and, on 25 July 2008, Mr Wilson Ferrer Díaz applied for his retirement pension, which was agreed to by the company. The Committee notes the information. The Committee has also been informed of the ruling handed down by the Higher Court of Cúcuta on 22 July 2010 regarding the request for judicial protection presented by the former employees of ECOPETROL, whereby a total of 104 workers were dismissed for taking part in a strike in 2004. The ruling: (1) revokes in its entirety the ruling handed down on 4 June 2010 by the Third Labour Court of the Cúcuta Circuit and accords the plaintiffs the Court’s protection in respect of their fundamental right to work, to freedom of association, to join trade unions and to strike action which ECOPETROL infringed by refusing to comply with the recommendations of the ILO Committee on Freedom of Association; and (2) orders ECOPETROL, through its legal representative and within 48 hours of notification of the Court’s ruling, to proceed to the reinstatement of the plaintiffs, who had been dismissed for taking part in the 22 April 2004 strike, in the same posts as they had held previously, or in posts of an equal or higher grade, and to grant them the wages and benefits that they had ceased to receive. The Committee, observing that the ruling orders the reinstatement of some of the workers cited in recommendation (b), requests the Government to keep it informed of its implementation.
- 45. In a communication dated 27 May 2010 the Government states, with respect to ADECO’s allegation that ECOPETROL refused to bargain collectively (recommendation (c)), that the company and the trade unions operating within the company have concluded a new collective labour agreement for the period from 1 July 2009 to 30 June 2014. The Committee takes note of the information with interest.
- 46. Finally, the Committee observes that the Government has not sent the information it requested in recommendations (a), (d) and (e) and it requests it to do so without delay.
