Rapport définitif - Rapport No. 67, 1963

Cas no 241 (France) - Date de la plainte: 13-OCT. -60 - Clos

1. 20. The original complaint of the General Confederation of Independent Trade Unions (Paris) (C.G.S.I.) is contained in two communications dated 13 October and 22 November 1960. The texts of these communications were transmitted to the Government, which forwarded its observations thereon by two letters dated 27 December 1960 and 6 January 1961 respectively. In addition the Federal Union of the C.G.S.I.-C.F.T, by a communication dated 4 January 1961, submitted certain observations with respect to the matters raised in the complaint of the General Confederation of Independent Trade Unions. This latter communication was transmitted to the Government on 17 January 1961. Finally, the General Confederation of Independent Trade Unions furnished further information in support of its complaint by a communication dated 15 November 1961, which was transmitted to the Government on 27 November 1961; the Government replied by a letter dated 21 February 1962.
2. 21. The matter came before the Committee for the first time at its meeting in February 1961. When examining the case at that time the Committee observed that the allegations made-which are set forth in greater detail below-dealt essentially with the refusal to allocate to the complaining organisation seats on bodies on which it considered it was fully entitled to be represented, having been granted such entitlement by decree. The Committee further observed that this entitlement had been challenged by another trade union organisation, which had lodged an appeal with the Council of State with a view to the quashing, as being ultra vires, of the decree awarding to the complaining organisation a seat on one of the bodies referred to above.
3. 22. Following its constant practice, the Committee, taking the view that the verdict being awaited would in all probability provide it with information of assistance to it in evaluating the allegations made, decided to request the Government to forward the text of the decision of the Council of State as soon as it was given, and to adjourn its examination of the case as a whole pending receipt thereof.
4. 23. Not having received the further information expected from the Government, the Committee again adjourned its examination of the case when the matter came before it at its May 1961, November 1961, February 1962 and May 1962 Sessions.
5. 24. The Council of State pronounced its verdict on 11 April 1962, and the Government communicated its content to the Office by a letter dated 22 June 1962. The Committee is therefore now in a position to resume its examination of the case.
6. 25. France has ratified both 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. A. The complainants' allegations

1. 26. The complainants allege that the French Government has struck deliberate blows at the freedom of determination of the executive bodies and assemblies of the C.G.S.I. These blows, said to have been designed to stifle the C.G.S.I, consisted of a series of measures which the complaining organisation sets forth in great detail. The facts as described by the complainants are summarised in the paragraphs which follow, which also contain an analysis of the observations submitted by the Government and of the comments of the Federal Union of the C.G.S.I.-C.F.T.
2. 27. The allegations may be grouped under three major headings: allegations relating to the non-representation of the complaining organisation on the Central Collective Agreements Board, allegations relating to its non-representation on the National Advisory Committee, and allegations relating to its non-representation on the Economic and Social Council. These allegations are closely bound up with one another, and by and large-as may be seen from the observations of the Government-are really three aspects of the same problem. For the sake of clarity they are analysed below separately, but conclusions will not be drawn for each case separately; the Committee's conclusions will be in respect of the whole situation which has been brought to its attention.
   • Allegations relating to the Non-Representation of the Complaining Organisation on the Central Collective Agreements Board
3. 28. In virtue of Decree No. 59-164 of 7 January 1959 the C.G.S.I obtained recognition of its status as a national representative organisation by being awarded a seat on the Central Collective Agreements Board. In compliance with a request from the Minister of Labour the C.G.S.I submitted to the Minister the names of Messrs. Leys and Rouet, chosen by the Administrative Committee of the complaining organisation to fill the places of regular and substitute representative on the Central Collective Agreements Board. When the C.G.S.I, having received no reply to its communication, made inquiries as to what was being done about it, it was allegedly " unofficially informed that a member of the Cabinet of the Presidency of the Republic, Mr. Guichard, had instructed the Ministry of Labour that these seats should be assigned to two others whose names he gave as Mr. Jacquet and Mr. Fiorentino ". These two men, allege the complainants, had been put forward jointly by the management of the SIMCA car firm and the U.N.R. (Government party). Since then, declare the complainants, the Decree of 7 January 1959 has remained a dead letter; in other words, the C.G.S.I continues to be unrepresented on the Central Collective Agreements Board.
4. 29. In its observations the Government acknowledges the fact that the C.G.S.I has not yet been given a seat on the Central Collective Agreements Board. It declares, however, that, since the signing of the decree in question, a split-the result of serious internal dissension has occurred within the C.G.S.I, and that this split has called in question the representative character of the complaining organisation, this being an essential condition of the granting of a seat on the Central Collective Agreements Board.
5. 30. The long memoranda addressed by the complaining organisation to the I.L.O reveal, in effect, that there has been dissension within the organisation. Throughout these memoranda, indeed, there are descriptions of bitter struggles between persons each claiming himself to be the only one qualified to bear the title of general secretary, of lawsuits which these persons have brought against one another, of quarrels over who really represented the organisation or who was entitled to use its premises, of manoeuvring carried out in the hope of causing one viewpoint to triumph over another, of allegedly faked or improperly conducted elections, of the expulsion of members, of splits in the union and of abortive attempts to merge dissident groups. As for the split referred to by the Government-to which the complainants themselves admit-the communication sent to the I.L.O by the Federal Union of the C.G.S.I.-C.F.T. (splinter group) would suffice to prove that it really exists.
6. 31. When the case came before it at its meeting in February 1961 the Committee felt that on the basis of the information at its disposal, and given a situation which still appeared far from being stabilised, it would be difficult for it to assess the degree of representativeness of the complaining organisation as compared with the other organisations involved, and hence to appreciate whether there had, in fact, been an attack on the free exercise of trade union rights. The Committee observed, moreover, that that was the reason given by the Government for not yet having given effect to Decree No. 59-164 of 7 January 1959, for it declared itself that in the then prevailing state of affairs it was not in a position to see clearly what was going on.
7. 32. In its observations the Government also stated-as mentioned in paragraph 21 above, and as confirmed by the complainants in their communication of 15 November 1961 that on 24 January 1959 the French Confederation of Christian Workers lodged an appeal with the Council of State against the Decree of 7 January 1959 awarding to the complaining organisation a seat on the Central Collective Agreements Board; the Government stated at that time that the Council of State had not yet announced its decision.
8. 33. As stated above (see paragraph 22), at its meeting in February 1961 the Committee, having noted that these proceedings seemed to be attended by all the guarantees of due process of law, requested the Government to communicate to it the text of the decision of the Council of State when it was announced, together with the reasons leading to the said decision.
   • Allegations relating to the Non-Representation of the Complaining Organisation on the National Advisory Committee
9. 34. The complainants declare that Decree No. 59-540 of 17 April 1959 establishing the composition of the National Advisory Committee, set up under a previous ordinance to encourage workers to become associated with or acquire an interest in undertakings, stipulates in section 1 that " it shall be composed of two members for each representative workers' organisation at the national level ". However, allege the complainants, " the C.G.S.I, the only workers' Confederation in France whose fundamental programme is action with a view to doing away with the wages and contract-of-hire system and replacing it by an association of producers, has not been admitted to this National Advisory Committee ".
10. 35. The complainants allow it to be inferred that the reason for which the Government has up to now put off its decision concerning the participation of the C.G.S.I in the National Advisory Committee lies in the fact that the organisation has refused to accept the imposition of " stooges " sponsored both by certain employers' groups and by certain political circles.
11. 36. On this question the Government claims that Decree No. 59-540 of 17 April 1959 establishing the composition of the National Advisory Committee set up under the Minister of Labour by Ordinance No. 59-126 of 7 January 1959 expressly provides that this committee shall consist, inter alia, of " equal numbers of representatives of the most representative national employers' and workers' organisations, who are to be appointed by the Minister of Labour on the proposal of the said organisations, two members to be appointed for each of the above-mentioned workers' organisations ". The Government stated in its observations that, being no longer able to determine who were the qualified legal representatives of the C.G.S.I, nor which of the various organisations which had entered the ring could be considered as the most representative, it had not been able to allocate the seats in question on the National Advisory Committee.
12. 37. With this allegation, as with the previous one, the Committee took the view, at its meeting in February 1961, that the decision of the Council of State mentioned above was likely to throw valuable light on the question, without which it would not be in a position to give an opinion in full knowledge of the facts.
    • Allegations relating to the Non-Representation of the Complaining Organisation on the Economic and Social Council
13. 38. The complainants allege that when the question came up of the reappointment of the members of the Economic and Social Council-on which the C.G.S.I had had one seat since 1951- they were informed that in virtue of the recognition of their national representative status the Government had decided to allot them four seats. This was, however, on condition that three of these seats be given to selected persons who did not meet with the approval of the C.G.S.I, which refused to accept such a condition. Since then, allege the complainants, their organisation has been unrepresented on the Economic and Social Council.
14. 39. In its observations the Government recalls that there has been a split in the C.G.S.I and declares that the remarks it made in respect of the non-representation of the C.G.S.I on the National Advisory Committee (doubt as to its representative character) are equally applicable in the case of its non-representation on the Economic and Social Council.
15. 40. Here again, since all the allegations in the case are bound up with one another, the Committee decided at its meeting in February 1961 to wait until it was in possession of the information specified in paragraph 33 above before making definite recommendations to the Governing Body.
16. 41. The Government forwarded the information requested by a communication dated 22 June 1962. In this reply the Government states that, following a plea of ultra vires submitted by the French Confederation of Christian Workers, the Council of State made an order on 11 April 1962 repealing Decree No. 59-164 of 7 January 1959 relating to the composition of the Central Collective Agreements Board in so far as this decree allocates to the C.G.S.I the extra seat on the Board awarded to the workers under Decree No. 59-162 of 7 January 1959.
17. 42. The Council of State based its decision primarily on the fact that-to quote the order-" according to section 31 (w) of Book I of the Labour Code as amended by the aforementioned Decree No. 59-162 of 7 January 1959, the Central Collective Agreements Board is composed, inter alia, of 16 representatives of the workers, such representation being divided by decree among all the most representative national trade union organisations ", and that " it has been revealed by these proceedings, and is moreover not contested by the Minister of Labour, that the General Confederation of Independent Trade Unions represents a proportion of trade union members which is small both in itself and in comparison with the other most representative national organisations, and that the members of the unions affiliated to it are far too few in number for it to claim to be able truly to represent the workers on the Central Collective Agreements Board; and that in consequence it cannot be deemed to have sufficient members to merit recognition as one of the most representative organisations ". The order concludes that " the French Confederation of Christian Workers has grounds for maintaining that the decree in question has improperly interpreted the abovementioned provisions in awarding to the General Confederation of Independent Trade Unions the sixteenth workers' seat on the Central Collective Agreements Board ".
18. 43. This ruling demonstrates that the reason for which entitlement to sit on the Central Collective Agreements Board was withdrawn from the complaining organisation lies in the fact that in the view of the Council of State it does not fulfil the requirements as to representativeness which must be met in order to have membership of this body as of right. The Government's remarks would seem to show that the same criteria are applied in respect of participation in the other bodies from which the complaining organisation claims to have been excluded, namely the National Advisory Committee and the Economic and Social Council; and there are grounds for concluding that it was by reason of its non-representative character that the complaining organisation was denied admission to the bodies in question.
19. 44. In a previous case the Committee took the view that it was not called upon to express an opinion as to the right of a particular organisation to be invited to take part in consultative bodies unless its exclusion constituted a clear case of discrimination affecting the principle of freedom of association, and that this was a matter to be determined by the Committee in the light of the facts of each given case.
20. 45. In the present case the Committee considers that the criteria governing the determination of the representative character of an organisation are not such as to constitute an infringement of the principle of freedom of association; as defined in section 31 (f) of Book I of the Labour Code these criteria are the " membership, independence, dues, experience and seniority of the union, and the patriotism shown by it during the occupation ". There is, moreover, no question of the Committee casting doubt upon the competence and independence of the body which has here had the task of interpreting these criteria, namely the Council of State.

The Committee's recommendations

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