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
- 80. The Committee last examined this case at its March 2007 meeting [see the Committee’s 344th Report, paras 897–913] and on that occasion made the following recommendations:
- (a) The Committee requests the Government to continue to promote the reinstatement of the union officials César Antonio Familia and Rabel Novas in their jobs with SEMMA. The Committee requests the Government to keep it informed of any measures adopted in this respect, and of the outcome of the appeal against the dismissals lodged with the Higher Administrative Court.
- (b) With regard to the allegations concerning interference by SEMMA in the activities of ASOESEMMA and the non-remittance of the dues payable by the union members for March, April and May 2006, the Committee urges the Government, if the judicial authorities are not seized with these issues, to take measures without delay to undertake an inquiry into this matter and, if the allegations are corroborated, to ensure that steps are taken to put an immediate end to the acts of interference and to transfer to ASOESEMMA all the union dues withheld during the period indicated in the allegations.
- 81. In communications dated 30 May, 15 June, 10 October and 3 November 2007, the Association of Teachers’ Health Insurance Employees (ASOESEMMA) reports that the Government has not taken steps to implement the Committee’s recommendations. The association states that on 2 November 2007, it lodged an appeal with the Supreme Court against the substance of ruling No. 035-2007 given on 29 October 2007 by the Second Chamber of the Fiscal and Administrative Disputes Tribunal.
- 82. In communications dated 31 August and 28 October 2007, the Government states that the Ministry of Labour has taken steps to follow up the dispute. In an initial phase, this involved the participation of the National Department of Inspection which used all the means at its disposal to resolve the case; and subsequently the participation of the Minister of Labour through the intermediary of the Director-General for Labour. The Ministry of Labour, and in this case the Government of the Dominican Republic, cannot involve themselves in matters that are subject to litigation (section 426 of the Labour Code) or at least must refrain from expressing any opinion on cases that are the subject of litigation. The Government states that it is persisting in its efforts to find a consensual solution to the dispute that will comply with labour law, since in the Dominican Republic the principle of the separation of powers prevails. The Government adds that the General Labour Directorate received trade union representatives and communicated with representatives of the Ministry of Education in a concerted manner, and in a way that duly respected judicial procedure, in order to seek a settlement to the dispute, but must, in accordance with the law, await the Tribunal’s decision. Lastly, the Government states that it regrets that this case has arisen and is closely monitoring the dispute.
- 83. The Committee takes note of this information. It requests the Government and the ASOESEMMA to communicate the text of ruling No. 035-2007 of 29 October 2007 handed down by the Fiscal and Administrative Disputes Tribunal and to inform it of the outcome of the appeal lodged against that ruling. The Committee hopes that the court will hand down a ruling in the near future. Lastly, the Committee once again urges the Government to send it the information requested in its recommendation in paragraph 913(b) quoted above concerning allegations of interference by the SEMMA in the activities of the ASOESEMMA and the withholding of union membership dues in March, April and May 2006. The new communication recently received from the Government will be examined at the Committee’s next meeting.
