Suites données aux recommandations du comité et du Conseil d’administration - Rapport No. 359, Mars 2011

Cas no 2291 (Pologne) - Date de la plainte: 12-AOÛT -03 - Clos

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

1. 150. The Committee last examined this case, which concerns numerous acts of anti-union intimidation and discrimination, including dismissals, lengthy proceedings and nonexecution of judicial decisions, at its meeting in March 2010 [see 356th Report, paras 158–161]. On that occasion, the Committee had requested the Government to indicate whether Mr Jedrejek, member of the NSZZ “Solidarnosc” Inter-Enterprise Organization from SIPMA SA, was reinstated following the decision of the District Court and to provide information on the progress made in the case against 19 senior managers of SIPMA SA, as well as to transmit a copy of the judgment once handed down.
2. 151. With regard to the question of reinstatement of Mr Jedrejek, the Government indicates in its communication dated 31 August 2010 that neither the Ministry of Justice nor the labour courts collect the data on employers’ compliance with the legally binding decisions on the reinstatement of their employees. The Government also explains that if employers fail to comply voluntarily with the judicial order on reinstatement, the claims for judicial enforcement can be brought before a court. The Government states that no such claims have been registered in respect of this case.
3. 152. With regard to the case against 19 senior managers of SIMPA SA, the Government indicates that the case in the District Court in Lublin is still pending due to the necessity to get the additional evidentiary material, as well as due to the absence of parties and witnesses during the trial while their presence was compulsory (during the period from 24 August 2009 to 28 July 2010, 17 out of 37 trial dates were deferred due to the justified absence of persons whose presence was necessary for carrying out evidentiary procedures). The Government also indicates that the trial has been adjourned until 31 August 2010 due to the illness of the defendant. The Government also states that the preliminary date for the ending of the court proceedings was set for 19 September 2010 and that 20 and 27 September were reserved for closing speeches.
4. 153. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government. With regard to the issue of reinstatement of Mr Jedrejek, the Committee regrets that the Government provides no substantive information in this regard. The Committee recalls from its previous examination of the case that the District Court in Lublin ordered the reinstatement of Mr Jedrejek and that this decision became final after the appeal filed by the enterprise had been dismissed by the Regional Court. The Committee therefore once again urges the Government to indicate whether Mr Jedrejek was reinstated, and, if not, it urges the Government to take the necessary steps to ensure his full reinstatement pursuant to the Court’s decision.
5. 154. With regard to the case against 19 senior managers of SIMPA SA, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that the case in the District Court is still pending and that the preliminary date for ending the court proceedings was set for 19 September 2010. The Committee once again recalls with regret that this case has been pending since 2003 and emphasizes that justice delayed is justice denied [see Digest of decisions and principles of the Freedom of Association Committee, fifth edition, 2006, para. 105]. The Committee therefore firmly expects that the judicial proceedings in the case against 19 senior managers of SIMPA SA will be concluded without any further undue delay and once again requests the Government to keep it informed of its final outcome.