Suites données aux recommandations du comité et du Conseil d’administration - Rapport No. 333, Mars 2004

Cas no 1996 (Ouganda) - Date de la plainte: 24-NOV. -98 - Clos

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

1. 96. The Committee last examined this case at its May-June 2003 session. It requested the Government to speed up the process concerning the recognition of the Uganda Textile, Garments, Leather and Allied Workers’ Union (UTGLAWU) at the Nytil Picfare company, later taken over by Southern Range Nyanza Ltd. and to keep it informed of any progress achieved. It further requested the Government to provide information on various legal proceedings filed by UTGLAWU against a number of companies to obtain recognition for collective bargaining purposes, and on the adoption of two draft bills (elaborated with ILO technical assistance) amending provisions of the Trade Unions Decree inconsistent with freedom of association principles [see 331st Report, para. 63].
2. 97. In a communication dated 16 January 2004, the Government indicates that the negotiation between the management of Southern Range Nyanza Ltd. and the UTGLAWU has not yielded fruitful results and the matter is now being handled at a political level and in accordance with sections 17(2) and (3), respectively, of the Trade Unions Act 2000, Cap 223 (formerly section 19(2) and (3) of the Trade Unions Decree No. 20 of 1976). Section 17(2) provides that “[…] whenever an employer refuses to deal with a registered trade union as therein provided, the trade union shall report the facts to the Minister who shall call upon the employer to show cause in writing within twenty-eight days why the trade union is not being so recognized”. And section 17(3) provides that “[…] where the Minister is not satisfied with the cause shown by the employer under subsection (2) or the Minister considers that the public interest so requires, the Minister may, by statutory order and after informing the parties concerned, declare that the registered trade union shall deal in respect of all matters relating to the relations of the employer with those of his or her employees who fall within the scope of membership of that trade union”.
3. 98. The Committee takes note of the Government’s reply. The Committee notes however that the Government has not provided information on certain matters previously raised. The Committee deplores that, more than four years after the first examination of the case and after repeated demands, some issues are still pending. The Committee has recalled that it has always taken the view that nothing in Article 4 of Convention No. 98 places a duty on the Government to enforce collective bargaining by compulsory means with a given organization; such an intervention would clearly alter the nature of bargaining [see Digest of decisions and principles of the Freedom of Association Committee, 4th edition, 1996, para. 846]. On the other hand, it has also taken the view that employers should recognize, for collective bargaining purposes, the representative organizations of the workers employed by them or organizations that are representative of workers in a particular industry. If the union concerned is found to be the majority union, the authorities should take appropriate conciliatory measures to obtain the employer’s recognition of that union for collective bargaining purposes [see Digest, op. cit., paras. 821, 823 and 824]. In the situation at hand, the Committee recalls once again that the UTGLAWU is the most representative, if not the sole, organization of workers in the textile sector in Uganda. The Committee further observes that the Government appears to have taken certain conciliatory measures to obtain the concerned employers’ recognition of the UTGLAWU for collective bargaining purposes but, regretfully, to no avail. The Committee deplores that the employer in question has still not recognized the UTGLAWU for the purposes of collective bargaining, which constitutes a flagrant violation of Article 4 of Convention No. 98, ratified by Uganda [see 316th Report, para. 667]. It requests the Government to take the necessary measures to remedy this situation.
4. 99. The Committee therefore takes note of the procedure provided by section 17(2) and (3) of the Trade Unions Act 2000 and requests the Government to indicate whether the employer has already presented its written statement to the Minister and to keep it informed of any development with regard to the recognition of UTGLAWU by Southern Range Nyanza Ltd.
5. 100. The Committee recalls that the UTGLAWU had filed legal proceedings against a number of companies, namely Vitafoam Ltd., Leather Industries of Uganda, Kimkoa Industry Ltd., Tuf Foam (Uganda) Ltd. and Marine and Agro Export Processing Co. Ltd. in order to obtain recognition for collective bargaining purposes. The Committee urges the Government to provide without delay information on these legal proceedings.
6. 101. Finally, the Committee urges the Government to provide, without delay, information on the adoption of the two draft bills amending provisions of the Trade Unions Decree.