Rapport définitif - Rapport No. 337, Juin 2005

Cas no 2269 (Uruguay) - Date de la plainte: 03-JUIN -03 - Clos

Allegations: Discount of sums from two days’ wages from the salaries of trade union members Ms. Leonor Quefan and Ms. Anahí Oldán for having participated in trade union activities, as well as the launching of disciplinary procedures against workers affiliated to the Association of Workers of the National Transport Directorate of the Ministry of Transport and Public Works

1378. The Committee examined this case at its June 2004 meeting and presented an interim report to the Governing Body [see 334th Report, paras. 763-796, approved by the Governing Body at its 290th Session (June 2004)].

1. 1379. The Government sent new observations in communications dated 28 December 2004 and 11 January 2005.
2. 1380. Uruguay has ratified the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98), the Labour Relations (Public Service) Convention, 1978 (No. 151), and the Collective Bargaining Convention, 1981 (No. 154).

A. Previous examination of the case

1. 1381. In its examination of the case in May-June 2004, the Committee made the following recommendation [see 334th Report, para. 796, approved by the Governing Body at its 290th Session (June 2004)].
2. With regard to the alleged acts of anti-union discrimination relating to the salary reductions imposed on union officials Ms. Leonor Quefan and Ms. Anahí Oldán, and the disciplinary measures taken against workers affiliated to the Association of Workers of the National Transport Directorate of the Ministry of Transport and Public Works, after its assembly had resolved to undertake industrial action, the Committee, observing that the allegations refer to events which occurred in the central public administration more than eight months ago, regrets the absence of observations from the Government and requests it to send its observations in this respect as soon as possible.
3. B. The Government’s new observations
4. 1382. In its communications dated 28 December 2004 and 11 January 2005, the Government states in relation to the disciplinary measures taken against the civil servant, Ms. Leonor Quefan, that on 25 and 26 March 1999, the trade union organizations “Departmental Association of Public Employees” (ADEOM) and “Confederation of Civil Service Trade Unions” (COFE) organized a “Latin American Confederation of State Employees (CLATE) Southern Cone Regional Seminar on Social Security” in Montevideo. The Government states that Ms. Leonor Quefan attended the abovementioned seminar as the representative of the Association of Civil Servants of the Ministry of Industry and Energy (AFMIE) which informed the director-general of the secretariat of this fact through a note. The Government adds that, although the General Directorate did not recognize such an activity as being covered by trade union immunity (protection of trade unions), the civil servant did not sign in at her place of work on those days (25 and 26 March 1999). This meant that the Human Resources Department recorded the fact that she had been absent from work on those days and the consequent salary reductions were imposed. The Government confirms that the civil servant believed her attendance at the abovementioned seminar constituted an activity covered by trade union immunity and therefore lodged an appeal to have the decision reversed and an administrative appeal. In a ruling dated 19 July 1999, the director-general of the secretariat rejected the appeal for reversal. This ruling was confirmed on 5 August by the Ministry of Industry, Energy and Mines which rejected the administrative appeal. Both rulings were based on the opinion issued by the Legal Counsel Department, one of the recitals of which goes on to say: “compliance with legislation, and especially trade union immunity, has been a constant concern for this Ministry, as can be seen by the various precedents cited by the civil servant herself, but attendance of a seminar, in this particular case regarding social security, does not, in the eyes of this Ministry, constitute a trade union activity, rather her participation should be viewed as having been undertaken in a personal capacity, and she should therefore have followed the regulations set out in Law No. 16.104 of 23 January 1990, regarding leave for civil servants”.
5. 1383. The Government, however, declares that on 3 April 2002, the Administrative Court ruled in favour of the request submitted by the abovementioned trade union member and revoked the administrative act in question. As a consequence of the abovementioned ruling of the Administrative Court, the Ministry issued a ruling dated 26 September 2002 modifying that dated 3 December 1999 in that the civil servant was paid the sums discounted from her wages corresponding to 25 and 26 March 1999.
6. 1384. The Government states that in relation to the case of Ms. Anahí Oldán, a civil servant working for the Official Service for Broadcasting, Radio, Television and Public Performances (SODRE) (Ministry of Education and Culture) that, on 20 January 2003, members of the executive board of the Association of Civil Servants of the Official Service for Broadcasting, Radio, Television and Public Performances (AFUSODRE) informed the Executive Committee of SODRE that the Social Forum would be held in the Republic of Brazil from 22 to 28 January and that the civil servant Ms. Anahí Oldán had been appointed to attend and, as a consequence, a request was made for the corresponding trade union leave. On 12 March 2003, the Executive Committee of SODRE checked on the civil servant’s work attendance record for 22 to 29 January and imposed a salary reduction in accordance with the advice given by its legal counsel department. Once the civil servant had been notified on 21 March, she lodged an appeal for reversal and an administrative appeal on 2 April 2003. On 6 August, the Executive Committee issued a ruling on the appeal for reversal, revoking the decision to impose a salary reduction concerning her absence owing to her presence at the Social Forum. Notification of this decision took place on 19 August 2003. The Government adds that there was no need to make any repayment to the abovementioned civil servant given that no salary reduction was imposed following the adoption of the first administrative ruling.
7. 1385. As to the launching of an administrative investigation within the Transport Directorate concerning workers affiliated to the Association of Workers of the National Transport Directorate of the Ministry of Transport and Public Works and the refusal of a group of civil servants to cooperate with regard to proceedings initiated by the governing body of Professional Cargo Transport, the Government states that this issue was dealt with during a meeting of the Deputy Minister for Transport and Public Works and various trade union delegates, as well as two signatories of the complaint sent to the ILO.

D. The Committee’s conclusions

1. 1386. The Committee observes that the pending issues refer to the alleged salary reduction affecting two days for the carrying out of trade union activities by trade unionists, Ms. Leonor Quefan and Ms. Anahí Oldán, as well as the launching of disciplinary procedures against workers affiliated to the Association of Workers of the National Transport Directorate of the Ministry of Transport and Public Works.
2. 1387. The Committee notes with interest that the Government states that the salary reductions imposed on the trade unionist, Ms. Leonor Quefan, were repaid following a ruling by the judicial authority as a result of an appeal, presented by the abovementioned trade unionist, against the administrative rulings which gave rise to the reductions. The Committee also observes that no reduction was implemented either regarding the salary or the benefits of trade unionist, Ms. Anahí Oldán, as the Executive Committee of SODRE ruled in favour of the administrative appeal lodged by the abovementioned trade unionist against the ruling imposing a salary reduction concerning two working days.
3. 1388. As to the allegation that disciplinary measures were taken against workers affiliated to the Association of Workers of the National Transport Directorate of the Ministry of Transport and Public Works after its assembly had resolved to undertake industrial action, the Committee notes that the Government states that this issue was dealt with during a meeting involving the Deputy Minister for Transport and Public Works and various trade union delegates, as well as two signatories of the complaint sent to the ILO.

The Committee's recommendations

1. 1389. In the light of its foregoing conclusions, the Committee invites the Governing Body to decide that this case does not call for further examination.