Informe en el que el Comité pide que se le mantenga informado de la evolución de la situación - Informe núm. 413, Marzo 2026

Caso núm. 3403 (Guinea) - Fecha de presentación de la queja:: 02-MAR-21 - En seguimiento

Allegations: The complainant organization alleges acts of anti-union discrimination and harassment against union officials and members, and interference in or refusal to hold representative elections on the part of management in several hotels and, more generally, in the hotel industry. The complainant organization also alleges the Government’s failure to ensure respect for the right to freedom of association and collective bargaining in this case

1. 224. The Committee examined this case (presented in 2021) at its October 2024 meeting, when it presented an interim report to the Governing Body [see 408th Report, paras 433–453, approved by the Governing Body at its 352nd Session (October–November 2024)]. 
2. 225. The complainant organization sent additional information in a communication dated 14 November 2025.
3. 226. The Government sent its observations in a communication dated 29 January 2026.
4. 227. Guinea 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), and the Workers’ Representatives Convention, 1971 (No. 135).

A. Previous examination of the case

1. 228. During its previous examination of the case, in October 2024, the Committee made the following recommendations [see 408th Report, para. 453]:
   • (a) Noting that the employer has appealed against the labour court of Guinea’s ruling of 31 March 2023 in favour of the hotel’s trade union officials, Mr Amadou Diallo and Mr Alhassane Diallo, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the outcome of the proceedings and to inform it of the court of appeal’s ruling once it has been handed down.
   • (b) The Committee requests the Government to conduct an independent investigation into the conditions of the dismissal of Mr Alhassane Sylla and Mr Mory Soumaoro, in November 2019, and to provide information on any legal proceedings initiated in this regard.
   • (c) The Committee requests the Government and the complainant to provide information on Mr Sampil’s situation and to indicate whether an appeal has been lodged against the labour court’s ruling of 19 July 2021 concerning him.
   • (d) The Committee requests the Government to give all appropriate instructions to ensure that the police are not used as an instrument of intimidation or surveillance of trade union members and to keep it informed of the action taken or envisaged in this regard.
   • (e) The Committee requests the Government to take all necessary steps, in consultation with the social partners concerned, to ensure that the protection of trade union rights and protection against anti-union discrimination, in particular in the hotel sector, are fully guaranteed both in law and in practice. In this respect, the Committee urges the Government to ensure that, when Hotel 1 reopens, there is no anti-union discrimination in determining which employees may be recalled to work.
   • (f) The Committee requests the Government to provide without delay its observations in response to the additional information and allegations contained in the latest communication from the complainant.

B. Additional information and allegations from the complainant

1. 229. In its communication dated 14 November 2025, the complainant organization submits new allegations of the ongoing violations of freedom of association and effective recognition of collective bargaining. The complainant alleges that, despite the Committee’s previous recommendations, the Government has taken no specific measures to remedy the situation and that the labour inspectorate remains inactive in the face of the complaints filed.
2. 230. Situation at the Sheraton Grand Conakry (reopened under the Radisson BLU brand) (hereinafter Hotel 1). Regarding the situation at Hotel 1, the complainant alleges that the reopening of the establishment on 31 December 2024 was accompanied by systematic discriminatory practices aimed at preventing union members from returning to work. The complainant organization states that a list was drawn up identifying 30 members of the Federation of Hotel, Tourism, Restaurant and Catering, and Allied Workers Associations (FHTRC) for rehire, of which only two were hired, which it claims is evidence of a “blacklist” targeting unionized workers. Furthermore, the complainant organization reports that the last remaining union representative, Mr Faya Junior Mara, was dismissed in June 2025. Regarding the court proceedings relating to the 2022 dismissals, the complainant organization states that the employer is still refusing to pay the compensation owed to Mr Amadou Diallo and Mr Alhassane Diallo despite the court decisions on the subject, and that the appeal proceedings concerning Mr Ibrahima Kandet, Mr André Haba and Mr Mohammed Bangoura are still pending after the decisions in their favour in the first instance. The complainant organization emphasizes that only the case of Mr Sampil has been settled amicably.
3. 231. Situation at the Onomo Conakry Hotel (hereinafter Hotel 2). The complainant informs the Committee that 14 workers, who had previously been dismissed and forced to accept subcontracts because of their union membership, were reinstated to the hotel’s direct staff in September 2025. However, the complainant alleges that this reinstatement did not go hand in hand with the full restoration of their rights. In particular, it alleges that these workers had not received any pay rise since their initial recruitment, did not receive the bonuses provided for in the collective agreement for that sector, and were not paid for overtime or night work. The complainant adds that the labour inspectorate, although informed of these failings, has refrained from taking any enforcement measures to ensure compliance with the law.
4. 232. Situation at the Primus Kaloom Hotel (hereinafter Hotel 3). The complainant states that no progress has been made in respect of the request to hold union elections, which dates back to February 2022. It denounces the continued obstruction by management and the silence of the labour inspectorate, which, it claims, have allowed the employer to maintain a total absence of trade union representation within the establishment for several years.
5. 233. In conclusion, the complainant reiterates its request to the Committee to call on the Government to ensure respect for freedom of association, particularly in the context of projects receiving funding from international development institutions. It requests the Committee to urge the Government to take prompt action to end anti-union discrimination, to ensure that free elections are held and to guarantee that the court decisions in favour of the dismissed workers are enforced. The complainant organization expresses growing concern about the emergence of a blacklisting practice aimed at excluding unionized workers from being rehired. It therefore reiterates its request to the Committee to call on the Government to remedy these violations of freedom of association without delay.

C. The Government’s reply

1. 234. In its communication dated 29 January 2026, the Government starts by emphasizing its unwavering commitment to the principles of freedom of association and gives assurances that instructions have been conveyed to the labour inspection services to ensure compliance with ILO Conventions in the hospitality sector.
2. 235. Situation at Hotel 1. The Government states that the General Labour Inspectorate is diligently monitoring the dispute. It specifies that legal proceedings are ongoing before the competent authorities and that, in accordance with the principle of judicial independence, it cannot interfere in decisions on pending cases. The Government states that the recruitment process linked to the reopening of the establishment falls within the employer’s contractual freedom, and affirms that no evidence of anti-union discrimination has been formally presented by the inspection services. The Government also highlights its mediation efforts to facilitate the settlement of statutory compensation.
3. 236. Situation at Hotel 2. The Government states that the 14 workers affected by the use of subcontracts were officially reinstated to the establishment’s direct staff in September 2025. It claims that this regularization is the direct result of the intervention of the labour authorities, who demanded that the service-provider contracts be converted into permanent employment contracts. With regard to the claims relating to wages and the bonuses under the collective agreement, the Government affirms that a compliance audit is currently being carried out by the regional inspectorate to verify that all the wage supplements are correctly paid to those concerned.
4. 237. Situation at Hotel 3. The Government acknowledges that there has been a significant delay in organizing occupational elections. It attributes this situation to internal difficulties within the enterprise and to problems with the transmission of correspondence within the regional inspection services. The Government also states that a formal notice has been sent to the hotel management and that firm instructions have been given to the General Labour Inspectorate to immediately restart the pre-election process, in consultation with the social partners, with a view to setting a definitive election timetable and restoring worker representation within this establishment.

D. The Committee’s conclusions

1. 238. The Committee recalls that this case concerns alleged acts of anti-union discrimination and harassment by the management of several hotel establishments targeting both the officials of the Federation of Hotel, Tourism, Restaurant and Catering, and Allied Workers Associations (FHTRC) and workers who have expressed support for the union. The Committee also recalls that the complainant organization alleges that the Government has failed to ensure respect for the right to freedom of association and collective bargaining in this case.
2. 239. The Committee takes note of the additional information provided by the complainant in November 2025, as well as the observations submitted by the Government in January 2026. The Committee recalls in this regard that the purpose of the entire procedure is to ensure respect for freedom of association, both in law and in practice, and that, while this procedure protects governments against unfounded accusations, they must in turn recognize the importance of providing detailed replies to the allegations made against them in order to allow for an objective examination by the Committee. The Committee therefore welcomes the Government’s reply and trusts that it will continue to cooperate fully, in line with its stated intention.
3. 240. With regard to the situation at Hotel 1, the Committee notes with concern the complainant’s allegations that a “blacklist” was drawn up to prevent the rehiring of unionized workers when the establishment reopened on 31 December 2024. The Committee notes in particular the allegation that, from a list that was drawn up identifying 30 union members for rehire, only two were hired, and that the last union representative, Mr Faya Junior Mara, was dismissed in June 2025. With regard to the legal proceedings relating to the 2022 dismissals, the Committee notes with concern the allegations that the employer is still refusing to pay the compensation owed to Mr Amadou Diallo and Mr Alhassane Diallo despite the court decisions on the subject, and that the appeal proceedings concerning Mr Ibrahima Kandet, Mr André Haba and Mr Mohammed Bangoura are still pending after decisions in their favour in the first instance. Furthermore, the Committee notes that the Government, for its part, invokes the employer’s freedom of choice in hiring and states that the labour inspectorate has not provided any formal evidence of discrimination. In this regard, the Committee has already expressed the view that all practices involving the blacklisting of trade union officials or members constitute a serious threat to the free exercise of trade union rights and, in general, governments should take stringent measures to combat such practices. Furthermore, it recalls that workers face many practical difficulties in proving the real nature of their dismissal or denial of employment, especially when seen in the context of blacklisting, which is a practice whose very strength lies in its secrecy. While it is true that it is important for employers to obtain information about prospective employees, it is equally true that employees with past trade union membership or activities should be informed about the information held on them and given a chance to challenge it, especially if it is erroneous and obtained from an unreliable source. Moreover, in these conditions, the employees concerned would be more inclined to institute legal proceedings since they would be in a better position to prove the real nature of their dismissal or denial of employment (see Compilation of decisions of the Committee on Freedom of Association, sixth edition, 2018, paras 1121 and 1089). The Committee observes that employers have freedom of choice in hiring, provided no person shall be prejudiced in employment by reason of trade union membership or legitimate trade union activities, whether past or present. All acts of anti-union discrimination against workers in employment matters must be prohibited, and this protection is particularly necessary in this case. Consequently, the Committee urges the Government to exercise its authority to ensure that the General Labour Inspectorate conducts an investigation into the allegations of discrimination in hiring at the new hotel establishment presented to it.
4. 241. Regarding the legal proceedings relating to the 2022 dismissals (cases of Mr Amadou Diallo, Mr Alhassane Diallo, Mr Ibrahima Kandet, Mr André Haba and Mr Mohammed Bangoura), the Committee observes that, according to the complainant, the employer is refusing to comply with the court decisions in this regard and appeal proceedings are still pending. The Committee recalls once again that cases concerning anti-union discrimination should be examined rapidly, so that the necessary remedies can be really effective, and that an excessive delay in processing such cases constitutes a serious attack on the trade union rights of those concerned. It also recalls that justice delayed is justice denied (see Compilation, paras 1139 and 170). Consequently, the Committee urges the Government to ensure the swift and complete enforcement of the court decisions concerning the dismissed workers and to keep it informed of any developments in this regard (cases of Mr Amadou Diallo and Mr Alhassane Diallo). Furthermore, the Committee expects the pending court proceedings to conclude without further delay and the Government to keep it informed of their outcome (cases of Mr Ibrahima Kandet, Mr André Haba and Mr Mohammed Bangoura).
5. 242. With regard to Hotel 2, the Committee notes with interest the information provided by the complainant and the Government confirming the reinstatement, in September 2025, of 14 workers who had previously been forced to accept subcontracts. The Committee observes that the Government attributes this regularization to the intervention of the General Labour Inspectorate. However, the Committee notes that the complainant alleges that these workers are still suffering financial losses, having received neither a pay rise since their initial recruitment, nor the bonuses provided for in the collective agreement, nor overtime pay. The Committee takes note of the Government’s indication that a compliance audit is under way to verify these payments. The Committee recalls that, if it appears that the dismissals occurred as a result of involvement by the workers concerned in the activities of a union, the Government must ensure that those workers are reinstated in their jobs without loss of pay. In many cases, the Committee has requested the Government to ensure that the persons in question are reinstated in their jobs without loss of pay or compensation (see Compilation, paras 1169 and 1168). The Committee expects that the audit announced by the Government will quickly resolve the outstanding wage issues and urges the Government to keep it informed of the outcome of this audit and, if applicable, of the payments of the wages and benefits owed.
6. 243. With regard to Hotel 3, the Committee notes with deep concern the continuing absence of trade union elections, despite the request made in February 2022. The Committee notes that the Government acknowledges the delay in this process and reports that a formal notice has been sent to the hotel management to organize the elections. The Committee recalls that the free choice of workers to establish and join organizations is so fundamental to freedom of association as a whole that it cannot be compromised by delays (see Compilation, para. 476). The Committee expects the Government to keep it informed of any new developments regarding the holding of union elections at Hotel 3, and the results thereof.
7. 244. Generally speaking, while noting the mediation efforts mentioned by the Government, the Committee is concerned about the repeated allegations by the complainant organization regarding the inaction of the General Labour Inspectorate in response to complaints of anti-union discrimination in the hotel sector. In this regard, the Committee wishes to strongly reiterate that the basic regulations that exist in the national legislation prohibiting acts of anti-union discrimination are inadequate when they are not accompanied by procedures to ensure that effective protection against such acts is guaranteed. Where cases of alleged anti-union discrimination are involved, the competent authorities dealing with labour issues should begin an inquiry immediately and take suitable measures to remedy any effects of anti-union discrimination brought to their attention (see Compilation, paras 1140 and 1159). The Committee expects the Government to take prompt and appropriate measures to address the allegations of anti-union discrimination in the matter.

The Committee’s recommendations

1. 245. In the light of its foregoing conclusions, the Committee requests the Governing Body to approve the following recommendations:
   • (a) The Committee urges the Government to exercise its authority to ensure that the General Labour Inspectorate conducts an investigation into the allegations of discrimination in hiring at the new hotel establishment presented to it, .
   • (b) The Committee urges the Government to ensure the swift and complete enforcement of the court decisions concerning the dismissed workers and to keep it informed of any developments in this regard (cases of Mr Amadou Diallo and Mr Alhassane Diallo). Furthermore, the Committee expects the pending court proceedings to conclude without further delay and the Government to keep it informed of their outcome (cases of Mr Ibrahima Kandet, Mr André Haba and Mr Mohammed Bangoura).
   • (c) The Committee expects that the audit announced by the Government will quickly resolve the outstanding wage issues at Hotel 2 and urges the Government to keep it informed of the outcome of this audit and, if applicable, of the payments of the wages and benefits owed.
   • (d) The Committee expects the Government to keep it informed of any developments regarding the holding of union elections at Hotel 3, and the results thereof.
   • (e) The Committee again requests the Government to take all necessary steps, in consultation with the social partners concerned, to ensure that the protection of trade union rights and protection against anti-union discrimination, in particular in the hotel sector, are fully guaranteed both in law and in practice.