Informe provisional - Informe núm. 413, Marzo 2026

Caso núm. 3505 (Guatemala) - Fecha de presentación de la queja:: 11-JUN-25 - Activo

Allegations: the complainants allege government interference in the process of collective bargaining with the Ministry of Education, the judicialization of that process and acts of criminalization, stigmatization and violence against trade unionists

1. 194. The complaint is contained in a joint communication from Education International and the Union of Education Workers of Guatemala (STEG) dated 21 May 2025 and in additional communications from the STEG dated 20 August and 22 October 2025.
2. 195. The Government sent its observations in communications dated 25 September and 6 November 2025, as well as 21 January and 25 February 2026.
3. 196. Guatemala 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 Collective Bargaining Convention, 1981 (No. 154).

A. The complainants’ allegations

1. 197. In their communication dated 21 May 2025, Education International and the STEG allege that the process of negotiating the collective agreement on working conditions between the STEG and the Ministry of Education was infringed by several acts of interference and discrediting by the Government.
2. 198. The complainants allege that on 30 April 2025 the President of the Republic held a press conference to address exclusively the situation with the STEG and announced, unilaterally, a wage adjustment amounting to 5 per cent of the base salary of workers in the national teaching profession, a decision made away from the negotiating table and accompanied by disparaging comments towards the trade union leaders, constituting undue intervention in the collective bargaining process.
3. 199. They also allege that the Minister of Education declared publicly that the collective agreement in force contained illegal and unconstitutional provisions, illustrating, according to the complainants, a failure to recognize the institutional nature of collective agreements in line with national and international legislation. The complainants allege that several articles of the agreement signed in 2022 between the Government and the STEG and which the Government considers illegal, such as articles 20 and 21 on the quality of the services provided and training for Ministry of Education staff, are supported by the National Education Act. They state in that regard that it is neither unusual nor illegal for education sector trade union organizations to participate, together with the authorities, in the formulation of public policy and that, on the contrary, it is desirable for education systems to integrate teachers’ voices since their daily experience in the classroom is key to building relevant policies.
4. 200. The complainants go on to state that in May 2025 the Office of the Attorney General, at the Government’s request, lodged a constitutional challenge to several clauses of the collective agreement in force, and in that regard they denounce the judicialization of the collective bargaining process.
5. 201. Education International and the STEG also report a systematic campaign of criminalization and stigmatization against the trade union and its leaders, disseminated through anonymous social media accounts, government-funded media and other state media. They allege that, as well as hindering the legitimate participation of education sector organizations in the formulation of public policy, those actions jeopardize the physical and psychological integrity of trade union leaders and members in a context of violence that has been duly reported to the ILO supervisory bodies. In the complainants’ view, this demonstrates that the Government is failing to fulfil its commitments under the road map on freedom of association and the indicators agreed with the ILO as part of the follow-up to a complaint submitted against it under article 26 of the ILO Constitution and that, on the contrary, it is attempting to discredit the Guatemalan trade union movement.
6. 202. In its communication dated 20 August 2025, the STEG states that in July and August 2025, respectively: (i) the Constitutional Court decided not to order the temporary suspension of the disputed articles of the collective agreement; and (ii) the Supreme Court ruled that the collective bargaining process was confidential, contrary to the Government’s claims. The STEG alleges that, in the absence of legal outcomes in their favour, on two occasions the anti-riot forces of the National Civil Police hit, injured and stole from persons – mainly trade unionists – exercising their constitutional rights to protest and peaceful resistance in the Department of Izabal and in the Plaza de la Constitución in order to remove them without a court order. The STEG alleges that trade union persecution was also evident in several sanctions and dismissals and provides a provisional list in that regard.
7. 203. In its communication dated 22 October 2025, the STEG alleges that its headquarters was raided in September 2025; doors were forced, documents left in disarray and equipment destroyed in an act deemed premeditated and possibly linked to the negotiation of the collective agreement. The STEG also alleges that in addition to other attacks on trade unionists in Guatemala, on 30 September 2025 trade union leader Romelia Velásquez Funes, Secretary-General of the Pueblo Nuevo Municipal Trade Union in the municipality of Suchitepéquez, was murdered, and no significant progress has been made in the relevant investigations.

B. The Government’s reply

1. 204. In its communication dated 25 September 2025, the Government states that the increase in teachers’ wages and bonuses was based on article 78 of the Constitution, which requires the State to encourage the improvement of the teaching workforce’s economic and social position. The increase was made official through government agreement No. 92-2025 and several ministerial agreements intended to adapt wages to the cost of living. According to the Government, this was a presidential decision applied by the competent ministries without consultation with the STEG since its aim was to benefit the teaching workforce directly.
2. 205. The Government indicates that after analysing the collective agreement on working conditions signed in 2022 between the previous Government and the STEG, the Ministry of Education found several provisions that could contradict the Constitution, mainly because they permit the STEG to interfere in decisions that fall exclusively under ministerial authority. It indicates in that regard that: (i) the Ministry of Education identified in articles 1, 20, 21, 45, 46, 47 and 62 of the agreement elements that grant the STEG the right to participate or make decisions in various processes relating to the determination of education programmes, Ministry of Education training and the regulation of joint boards as mechanisms to resolve matters arising from employment relations; (ii) during the negotiation of the new agreement, the Ministry of Education made several requests to harmonize these articles with the Constitution; (iii) since the STEG did not agree, the Minister of Education requested the intervention of the Office of the Attorney General; and (iv) on 6 May 2025, the Office of the Attorney General lodged a challenge to the constitutionality of the agreement in force with the Constitutional Court. The Government goes on to point out that: (i) its aim is to preserve the primacy of the Constitution and ensure that the managing role of the Ministry of Education is performed only by the highest authority, in line with article 23 of the Executive Branch Act; (ii) the challenge does not affect acquired rights or freedom of association and seeks simply to eliminate provisions that grant undue functions to the STEG; (iii) the challenge is pending in the Constitutional Court; and (iv) the lodging of the challenge has not halted collective negotiations on the new collective agreement, which are ongoing.
3. 206. The Government states that it has respected the trade union’s rights during the collective bargaining process and that its official communications do not contain anti-union messages or messages of criminalization. It indicates that the attempts at discrediting mentioned by the trade union originate in anonymous accounts that are out of its control. It also rejects the accusation that it has orchestrated campaigns on social media or government-funded media, indicating that there is no proof of such acts. The Government maintains that it fully respects the freedom of expression established in the Constitution and states that the STEG is making unfounded, offensive statements and mounting disinformation campaigns in relation to official education projects.
4. 207. The Government indicates that since 29 February 2024 there have been numerous negotiation sessions between the Ministry of Education and the STEG, resulting in 55 meeting records and the adoption of 70 articles, although some matters have yet to gain consensus. It indicates that the Ministry of Education has acted with transparency and respect and adhered to the legal framework, endeavouring to ensure that the collective agreement does not contravene the Constitution. It cites as an example meeting record No. 9, in which the Ministry of Education argued against certain content proposed for inclusion in article 20 of the collective agreement since it related to matters that, under the Constitution and the Labour Code, fall exclusively within the scope of the Ministry of Education’s administrative and technical functions. The Government points out that the STEG has not produced evidence of the arbitrariness and threats of which it is accusing the Ministry and that the meeting records signed by both parties demonstrate that such acts did not occur.
5. 208. The Government also states that during the negotiation of the collective agreement, the STEG acted in contravention of the Labour Code and regulations governing strikes: (i) on 19 May 2025 it convened a permanent assembly, which caused classes to be suspended for 50 days and affected the right to education of thousands of students, particularly in rural areas, as well as having additional consequences, such as preventing access to school meals; (ii) the STEG occupied public spaces in the Plaza de la Constitución and around the National Palace, obstructing freedom of movement and causing damage to a heritage building; and (iii) it blocked roads for four days, affecting mobility and the economy, even during an Orange Alert of seismic activity. The Government summarizes the applications for amparo (protection of constitutional rights) that it has lodged, indicating that many have been settled in its favour.
6. 209. In its communications dated 6 November 2025 and 21 January 2026, the Government states that its negotiators continue to analyse the STEG’s requests. It reiterates that the Office of the Attorney General has lodged constitutional challenges to several articles of the collective agreement in force and that the Constitutional Court has yet to render a decision, preventing these matters from being settled definitively. Moreover, the Government indicates that the trade union’s financial demands amount to more than double the Ministry of Education’s annual budget, and it is therefore impossible to address them in full. It considers that the accusations contained in the present complaint are unfounded and a distortion of reality, affecting the most vulnerable group and amounting to a strategy geared towards spreading disinformation and discrediting institutions. Lastly, the Government reaffirms its commitment to continuing to negotiate the collective agreement in accordance with the national legal framework and ratified international Conventions on freedom of association and collective bargaining.
7. 210. In its communication of 25 February 2026, the Government indicates that: (i) with regard to the dismissals carried out and documented by MINEDUC, it cannot be determined whether any of the 28 workers listed are actually members of an executive committee or belong to the STEG and the National Teachers' Assembly; (ii) with regard to the murder of union leader Romelia Velásquez Funes and the raid on the STEG union headquarters, based on information provided by the Public Prosecutor’s Office, it can be established that both cases are under investigation; and (iii) according to the information provided by the Ministry of the Interior, police action during the demonstrations in the Department of Izabal and in the Plaza de la Constitución was carried out in accordance with the law, current protocols of action and in accordance with orders issued by judicial resolutions, with only one exchange of actions between a demonstrator and the police, in which the individual was neutralized using proportional force.

C. The Committee’s conclusions

1. 211. The Committee observes that the present complaint refers to alleged violations of the right to collective bargaining in the public education sector, including the adoption of unilateral decisions by the executive branch outside the process of negotiating the new collective agreement on working conditions in the sector, the lodging of constitutional challenges to clauses of the collective agreement in force, public statements intended to discredit the leaders of the STEG and grave acts of violence against trade unionists. The Committee takes note that, for its part, the Government denies the alleged hindering of collective bargaining and highlights that it continues to be fully active in the process of negotiating the new collective agreement in the education sector and that it has not committed any act of anti-union violence.
2. 212. The Committee takes note that the process of renegotiating the 2022 collective agreement between the STEG and the Ministry of Education began at the beginning of 2024.
3. 213. The Committee notes that, according to the complainants, on 30 April 2025 the President of the Republic announced – unilaterally and separately from the negotiations with the STEG – a wage adjustment of 5 per cent applicable to teachers in the national teaching profession, and that on that occasion statements were made to discredit the STEG’s leaders. The Committee takes note that the Government, for its part, states that the increase in teachers’ wages and bonuses was based on article 78 of the Constitution, which requires the State to encourage the improvement of the teaching workforce’s economic and social position, and that, according to the Government, this was a presidential decision intended to adapt wages to the cost of living without the need for prior consultation with the trade union since its aim was to benefit the teaching workforce directly.
4. 214. The Committee also takes note of the Government’s statements to the effect that the STEG’s financial demands as part of the negotiation of the new collective agreement would amount to more than double the Ministry of Education’s annual budget, and it is therefore impossible to address them in full, and that negotiations are ongoing. In view of the difficulties in reaching agreement in that regard that have been encountered since January 2024, the Committee understands that it may have been necessary to undertake a rapid re-evaluation of the teaching workforce’s remuneration to address changes in the cost of living. The Committee highlights, however, that care must be taken to ensure that no unilateral action by the Government, while negotiations are under way, adversely affects the collective bargaining process.
5. 215. In that regard, the Committee wishes to recall the importance which it attaches to the obligation to negotiate in good faith for the maintenance of the harmonious development of labour relations [see Compilation of decisions of the Committee on Freedom of Association, sixth edition, 2018, para. 1327]. In view of the above, and taking due note that negotiations on the new collective agreement are ongoing, the Committee requests the Government to avoid unilateral initiatives that could affect the proper conduct of that process.
6. 216. The Committee goes on to note that in May 2025 the Office of the Attorney General, at the Government’s request, lodged a constitutional challenge to several provisions of the collective agreement in force, alleging that they grant to the STEG powers that should fall exclusively to the Ministry. The Committee notes that, according to the complainants, such a step disregards the institutional nature of collective agreements in line with national and international legislation, and all the more so given that several articles of the agreement which the Government deems illegal, such as articles 20 and 21 of the agreement on the quality of the services provided and on Ministry of Education staff training, are supported by the National Education Act. The Committee takes note that, in the view of the STEG, the courts’ examination of clauses of the collective agreements may have been used to exert pressure on or weaken the bargaining process. The Committee takes note that the Government, for its part, indicates that: (i) the Ministry identified phrases and provisions in articles, such as articles 1, 20, 21, 45, 46, 47 and 62, that grant the STEG the right to participate or make decisions in various processes relating, among others, to the determination of education programmes and Ministry of Education training; (ii) during the negotiation of the agreement, the Ministry of Education made several requests to harmonize these articles with the Constitution; and (iii) since the STEG did not agree, the Minister of Education requested the intervention of the Office of the Attorney General before the Constitutional Court. The Committee observes that the Government states in that regard that: (i) its aim is to preserve the primacy of the Constitution and ensure that the managing role of the Ministry of Education is performed only by the highest authority, in line with article 23 of the Executive Branch Act; (ii) the challenge does not affect acquired rights or freedom of association and seeks simply to eliminate provisions that grant undue functions to the STEG; (iii) the challenge is pending in the Constitutional Court.
7. 217. The Committee takes note from the information provided that, in the complainants’ view, the examination by a court of provisions of a collective agreement risks compromising the parties’ autonomy and weakening the collective bargaining process (which they describe as the judicialization of collective bargaining), while in the Government’s view, the clauses of a collective agreement should not limit the Ministry’s authority in the sector, in line with article 23 of the Executive Branch Act, nor should they impose costs outside that sectoral framework, which would justify constitutional oversight. The Committee notes that in July 2025 the Constitutional Court decided not to order the temporary suspension of the disputed articles of the collective agreement, considering that the grounds set out in article 183 of the Act on Amparo, Habeas Corpus and Constitutionality (grave and irreparable harm) had not been met and that a decision on the substance of the matter by the Court remains pending.
8. 218. The Committee takes due note of the preceding information. The Committee recalls that it has considered that, as regards the education sector, a distinction may be made between matters that essentially concern the determination of the broad lines of educational policy, which may be excluded from collective bargaining, and matters relating to conditions of employment, which should be subject to collective bargaining [see Compilation, para. 1303]. The Committee also emphasizes that it is preferable to resolve the issues raised in relation to the content of collective agreements on working conditions to the extent possible through collective bargaining. Noting the ongoing efforts to reach agreement on regulations on collective bargaining in the public sector that were verified by a recent joint mission of the ILO, the International Organisation of Employers and the International Trade Union Confederation as part of the application of the road map on freedom of association, the Committee encourages the parties to step up their efforts to reach a middle ground on the aspects of the collective agreement that are pending before the Constitutional Court. The Committee asks the Government to keep it informed concerning any developments in the proceedings under way before the Constitutional Court.
9. 219. The Committee takes note of the allegations relating to campaigns to discredit the STEG’s leaders disseminated via state networks and media, aggression and abuse on the part of the police when ejecting individuals from public places without court orders, the raiding of the STEG’s headquarters in September 2025 and other acts of violence, including the murder of Ms Romelia Velásquez Funes, Secretary-General of the Pueblo Nuevo Municipal Trade Union in the municipality of Suchitepéquez, in September 2025. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the facts relating to the murder of trade union leader Romelia Velásquez Funes and the raid on the STEG headquarters are under investigation, and that according to the information provided by the Ministry of the Interior, the police action during the demonstrations in the Department of Izabal and in the Plaza de la Constitución was carried out in accordance with the law, the protocols in force and in accordance with orders issued by judicial resolutions.
10. 220. The Committee notes that the Government denies any campaign of stigmatization, attributes the attempted discrediting to unidentified accounts and considers that the trade union bears a share of the responsibility for its difficult relations with the Government (the suspension of classes for 50 days, blockages of roads and public spaces and failure to observe amparo orders). While observing the radically opposing views of the parties involved and that several investigations are currently under way, the Committee recalls that a climate of violence, such as that surrounding the murder or disappearance of trade union leaders, or one in which the premises and property of workers and employers are attacked, constitutes a serious obstacle to the exercise of trade union rights; such acts require severe measures to be taken by the authorities [see Compilation, para. 89]. Taking note of the action reported by the Government in that regard as part of the Governing Body’s examination of the complaint presented against the Government under article 26 of the ILO Constitution, the Committee requests the Government to redouble its efforts to guarantee an environment free from violence, stigmatization and threats against trade union members and to continue to provide information on the progress and results of the investigation into the raid on the STEG headquarters in 2025.
11. 221. Deploring the murder of the municipal trade union leader Ms Romelia Velásquez Funes, which joins the long list of murders reported as part of Case No. 2609 [see 411th Report], the Committee refers to its conclusions in that case and urges the Government and all the competent authorities to continue taking and intensifying the necessary measures to ensure the effective investigation of all acts of violence against trade union leaders and members and that the instigators and perpetrators of such acts are sanctioned. The Committee requests the Government to provide information in that regard under Case No. 2609.
12. 222. Lastly, the Committee takes note of the STEG’s allegations that trade union persecution also gave rise to several sanctions and dismissals and of the provisional list submitted in that regard. Noting that, according to the Government, it could not be determined whether any of the 28 workers listed were actually members of an executive committee or belonged to the STEG and the National Teachers’ Assembly, the Committee requests it to continue to provide information on the allegations relating to the numerous dismissals of workers affiliated to the STEG; the Committee also requests the STEG to provide additional information so as to gain greater clarity on the circumstances surrounding those allegations.

The Committee’s recommendations

1. 223. In the light of its foregoing interim conclusions, the Committee invites the Governing Body to approve the following recommendations:
   • (a) While it understands the importance of responding rapidly to changes in the cost of living, and taking due note that negotiations on the new collective agreement in the education sector are ongoing, the Committee requests the Government to avoid unilateral initiatives that affect the proper conduct of those negotiations; the Committee also requests the Government to report on the outcome of those negotiations.
   • (b) Recalling that it is preferable to resolve the issues raised in relation to the content of collective agreements on working conditions to the extent possible through collective bargaining, the Committee encourages the parties to step up their efforts to reach a middle ground on the aspects of the collective agreement that are pending before the Constitutional Court. The Committee asks the Government to keep it informed concerning any developments in the proceedings under way before the Constitutional Court.
   • (c) Taking note of the action reported by the Government in that regard as part of the Governing Body’s examination of the complaint presented against the Government under article 26 of the ILO Constitution, the Committee requests the Government to redouble its efforts to guarantee an environment free from violence, stigmatization and threats against trade union members and to provide information on the progress and outcome of the investigation into the raiding of the headquarters of the Union of Education Workers of Guatemala (STEG) in 2025.
   • (d) Deploring the murder of the municipal trade union leader Ms Romelia Velásquez Funes, which joins the long list of murders reported as part of Case No. 2609, the Committee refers to its conclusions in that case and urges the Government and all the competent authorities to continue taking and intensifying the necessary measures to ensure the effective investigation of all acts of violence against trade union leaders and members; the Committee requests the Government to provide information in that regard under Case No. 2609.
   • (e) The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the allegations relating to the numerous dismissals of workers affiliated to the STEG; the Committee also requests the STEG to provide additional information so as to gain greater clarity on the circumstances surrounding those allegations.