Suites données aux recommandations du comité et du Conseil d’administration - Rapport No. 343, Novembre 2006

Cas no 1962 (Colombie) - Date de la plainte: 06-MARS -98 - Clos

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

1. 53. The Committee last examined this case at its June 2003 meeting [see 331st Report, paras. 20-25]. On that occasion, the Committee requested the Government to speed up the inquiry that had been reportedly initiated into the dismissal of all the workers and members of the Public Servants and Employees’ Trade Union of Pitalito-Huila by the Municipality of Pitalito and, if it were concluded that the dismissals occurred for anti-union reasons, to take measures to ensure that the injured parties were reinstated in their jobs without loss of earnings.
2. 54. The Committee notes that, in its communication of 1 December 2005, the trade union states that the Ministry of Labour and Social Security expedited the inquiry against the municipality and sentenced it to a fine for violation of the collective agreement (clause 14 concerning job stability). The Committee takes note of the Government’s reply, dated 30 October 2006, by which it indicates that the Supreme Court has ordered compensation payment, given the physical and legal impossibility of reinstating the workers. It observes nonetheless that the payment receipts the Government refers to have yet to be received. In these circumstances, the Committee asks the complainant organization to confirm whether the compensation has been received.
3. 55. Regarding the workers dismissed at the Municipality of Neiva in violation of the collective labour agreement, concerning whom the Committee requested the Government to ensure that full compensation was paid immediately to the workers dismissed [see 329th Report, para. 417], the Committee notes that, in its communication of 26 May 2006, the Public Employees’ Trade Union of the Municipality of Neiva states that it filed amparo proceedings before the Constitutional Court, which were rejected, as was the nullity appeal brought against the ruling rejecting the proceedings. In its communications of 15 May and 24 July 2006, the Government confirms the Court’s rejection of the amparo proceedings and nullity appeal. Given that these two actions do not by their nature have a bearing on the substance of the matter at issue, i.e. payment of full compensation to the workers, and that the court ruling provides that “it is not incompatible with the need for the Government and the trade unions to proceed in such a way as to secure adequate compliance with the recommendations of the Committee on Freedom of Association ...”, the Committee invites the Government and the trade union to make a joint effort to seek a solution to the dispute so that the dismissed workers are duly compensated.