Observation (CEACR) - adoptée 2024, publiée 113ème session CIT (2025)

Convention (n° 98) sur le droit d'organisation et de négociation collective, 1949 - Honduras (Ratification: 1956)

The Committee notes the Government’s reply to the observations of the Honduran National Business Council (COHEP) and the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) of 2021. The Committee also notes the observations of COHEP received on 30 August 2024 on the issues examined by the Committee in the present comment.

Article 1 of the Convention. Adequate protection against acts of anti-union discrimination. Noting the progress contained in the Labour Inspection Act (2017) and in the reform of the Penal Code (2019), the Committee requested the Government to provide information on the processing of complaints of anti-union acts and on the average duration of legal proceedings in cases of anti-union discrimination. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that: (i) the Labour Inspection Act has had a positive impact on the exercise of trade union rights, especially in the maquila sector; (ii) between 2019 and 2022, 44 complaints of acts of anti-union discrimination were filed and not 222 as previously indicated; (iii) 3 of these complaints concern dismissals of trade union leaders, one of whom was reinstated, while the other cases are pending; and (iv) between 2022 and 2024, 174 complaints of anti-union discrimination were filed. The Committee notes that in October 2023, the Committee on Freedom of Association examined Case No. 3368 and drew its attention to the aspects concerning the application in practice of the Act in question. The Committee observes that the Committee on Freedom of Association noted the particularly lengthy nature of the administrative procedures for anti-union dismissals of up to five years and observed that certain decisions of the labour inspectorate are allegedly not being enforced (see 404th Report). The Committee also notes that, under Agreements No. 342 of 2022 and No. 433 of 2023, attached by the Government, the Ministry of Labour and Social Security (SETRASS) decided, based on the cumulative increase in the inflation index, to increase the fines for violations of freedom of association from 312,660 lempiras in 2018 (approximately US$12,400) to 391,406 lempiras in 2023 (approximately US$15,522). The Committee further notes that COHEP indicates that SETRASS has allegedly indicated that it does not have a record of the payment of fines and does not know how many have been paid. In the light of the above, and recalling that the existence of legal provisions prohibiting acts of anti-union discrimination is not enough if they are not accompanied by effective and rapid procedures to ensure their application in practice (see the 2012 General Survey on the fundamental Conventions, paragraph 190), the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure the prompt and effective implementation of the sanctions and remedial measures applied. It also requests the Government to provide up-to-date and detailed information on the complaints filed, the number of sanctions imposed and the number and amount of fines paid. The Committee also invites the Government to provide information on the average duration of legal proceedings for anti-union discrimination (including appeals) and the outcomes of such proceedings.

In its previous comment, the Committee referred to the possibility of incorporating the content of Ministerial Agreement No. STSS-196-2015, which protects workers wishing to form trade unions, in the Labour Code reform process, which has been in the hands of the Committee for the Handling of Disputes referred to the ILO (MEPCOIT) since 2019. The Committee notes that, according to COHEP: (i) the MEPCOIT has been inactive since May 2021; (ii) in October 2023, it requested the revival of the MEPCOIT; and (iii) on 17 May 2024, its rules of operation were approved. The Committee notes that, according to the Government, the workers and employers have yet to reach an agreement on the Labour Code reforms. The Committee once again encourages the Government and the social partners to consider this matter in the context of the Labour Code reform and firmly hopes that all the parties concerned will make their utmost effort to ensure that the MEPCOIT resumes its activities on a regular basis as soon as possible. The Committee requests the Government to provide information in this regard and reminds the Government that it may avail itself of the technical assistance of the Office in relation to this and all the issues raised in this comment.

Article 2. Adequate protection against acts of interference. For more than a decade, the Committee has been requesting the Government to take the necessary measures to incorporate into the legislation explicit provisions that ensure effective protection against acts of interference by the employer, in accordance with Article 2 of the Convention. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that in order to guarantee freedom of association and prevent acts of interference, SETRASS issued the above-mentioned Agreements No. 342 of 2022 and No. 433 of 2023, adjusting fines to bring them in line with inflation and thus increasing them. While noting these indications, the Committee once again recalls that in order to ensure that effect is given to Article 2 of the Convention in practice, the legislation must make express provision for sufficiently dissuasive remedies and sanctions against acts of interference by employers against workers and their organizations, including against measures that are intended to promote the establishment of workers’ organizations under the domination of employers or employers’ organizations, or to support workers’ organizations by financial or other means with the objective of placing such organizations under the control of employers or employers’ organizations. The Committee once again requests the Government to take due note of this matter in the Labour Code reform process, and to provide information on the progress achieved in this respect.

Articles 4 and 6. Promotion of collective bargaining. Right of collective bargaining of public servants not engaged in the administration of the State. For more than a decade, the Committee has been referring to the need to amend sections 534 and 536 of the Labour Code so that the right to collective bargaining of public servants not engaged in the administration of the State is duly recognized in national law. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the sectors involved in the MEPCOIT have not yet reached an agreement on the points to be addressed in the Labour Code reform and encourages the workers and employers to reach an agreement in this regard. The Committee recalls noting that, while collective bargaining is in practice possible in certain public institutions through collective agreements, collective accords, special accords, memorandums of understanding and “respectful statements”, sections 534 and 536 of the Labour Code do not allow unions of public employees to submit lists of demands or conclude collective agreements. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that, while the above is true, the Constitution of the Republic establishes equal rights, including the right to collective bargaining. The Committee notes these indications and once again recalls that a system in which public employees not engaged in the administration of the State may only submit to the authorities “respectful statements”, a mechanism that does not allow for real negotiations to take place with regard to conditions of employment, is not in accordance with the Convention. The Committee once again requests the Government to take the necessary measures to amend sections 534 and 536 of the Labour Code so that the right to collective bargaining of public servants not engaged in the administration of the State is duly recognized in national law. It also encourages the Government, and all the parties concerned, to make efforts to ensure that this issue is addressed in the context of the Labour Code reform process and requests to be kept informed in this regard.

Article 4. Collective bargaining on trade union leave. The Committee noted that section 95(5) of the Labour Code provides that the employer is not obliged to grant more than 2 days of paid trade union leave in each calendar month, and in no case more than 15 days in the same year. The Committee requested the Government to take the necessary steps, in consultation with the representative workers’ and employers’ organizations, to review the legislation so that restrictions on the possibility of collective bargaining on remuneration for trade union leave be removed. The Committee notes that the Government reiterates that the Labour Code reform process has not begun. The Committee recalls that the payment of wages to full-time union officials should be up to the parties to determine, and the Government should authorize negotiation on the issue of whether trade union activity by full-time union officials should be treated as unpaid leave. The Committee once again requests the Government, in consultation with the representative workers’ and employers’ organizations and in the context of the Labour Code reform process, to take the necessary steps to review the legislation so that restrictions on the possibility of collective bargaining on remuneration for trade union leave be removed.

Application of the Convention in practice. Export processing zones.The Committee regrets that the Government has not provided the requested information and once again requests the Government to provide detailed information on the number of collective agreements concluded in export processing zones and the number of workers covered by them, as well as information on the inspections carried out in export processing zones following complaints of violations of trade union rights.

Collective bargaining in practice. The Committee encouraged the Government to continue to provide detailed information on collective bargaining in practice and the promotion thereof, especially in the agri-export and education sectors, in which numerous allegations of violations of freedom of association in practice had been made in previous years. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that between 2021 and 2024 a total of 75 collective agreements were signed and that 9 collective agreements were concluded with non-unionized workers. The Committee notes that both the Government and COHEP indicate that applications for the registration of collective agreements have decreased because workers avail themselves of the provisions of section 517 of the Labour Code, which grants them special protection from the State when they notify their employer of their intention to form a trade union. The Committee also notes that the Government reports that two requests for the submission of a preliminary draft list of demands in the agro-export sector were submitted in 2021. While noting the various information provided, the Committee again requests the Government to provide detailed information on: (i) the number of collective agreements signed and in force in the country, indicating the sectors concerned and the number of workers covered by them; and (ii) the measures taken, in accordance with Article 4 of the Convention, to promote collective bargaining. Noting that the Government does not report the conclusion of any collective agreements in the agri-export sector, the Committee requests the Government to make specific efforts to promote collective bargaining at all levels (enterprise, sector) in this branch of activity. The Committee requests the Government to provide specific information in this regard.