Observation (CEACR) - adoptée 2025, publiée 114ème session CIT (2026)

Convention (n° 87) sur la liberté syndicale et la protection du droit syndical, 1948 - Pérou (Ratification: 1960)

The Committee notes the observations of the Coordination of Trade Union Confederations of Peru (which groups together the General Confederation of Workers of Peru (CGTP), the Single Confederation of Workers of Peru (CUT-Peru), the Autonomous Workers’ Confederation of Peru (CATP) and the Workers’ Confederation of Peru (CTP)), received on 28 August 2025, and of the National Confederation of Private Business Institutions (CONFIEP), received on 29 August 2025, and those of the CATP received on 2 September 2025, which relate to matters examined by the Committee in the present comment.

Direct contacts mission. The Committee recalls that in 2023 the Committee on the Application of Standards of the International Labour Conference (hereinafter, the “Conference Committee”) invited the Government to accept a direct contacts mission to follow up on its recommendations. The Committee notes with interest that the mission visited the country from 20 to 23 May 2025. It also notes the report submitted by the mission, which expressed confidence that the initiatives recommended would contribute to the full application of the Convention.

Strengthening of social dialogue. Functioning of the National Labour and Employment Promotion Council (CNTPE). In its previous comment, the Committee encouraged the Government and all the parties concerned to make every possible effort to ensure that the CNTPE, a tripartite body, the purpose of which is to discuss and agree on policies in the fields of labour, employment promotion and social protection, continues to function and to fulfil a fundamental role as a tripartite social dialogue body. The Committee notes that the mission, in its report, took special note of the importance that the Government and the social partners attribute to the CNTPE. It also observed that, in recent years, the CNTPE had not met regularly, as it did not have an agreed agenda. The mission noted with interest the conclusion in 2024 of a Declaration of commitment to promote social and labour dialogue with results and determine a prioritized agenda for social and labour dialogue, and to promote the institutional strengthening of the CNTPE and its technical secretariat. The mission encouraged the parties to continue promoting the process of the strengthening of the CNTPE in the short, medium and long term and suggested that they consider: (i) forming, with ILO technical assistance, a tripartite group to agree on a agenda of work for the CNTPE; (ii) creating in the CNTPE a tripartite space to follow up on standards-related issues and the recommendations of the ILO supervisory bodies; and (iii) establishing clear rules to ensure the systematic and full consultation of the CNTPE prior to the adoption of social and labour provisions. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that: (i) the Ministry of Labour and Employment Promotion (MTPE) has promoted a series of measures to consolidate the institutional role of the CNTPE; and (ii) hopes that at a forthcoming plenary session of the CNTPE it will be possible to present the recommendations of the mission with a view to setting in motion the process of the institutional strengthening of social dialogue through the plenary meetings of the CNTPE with ILO technical assistance. The Committee notes that the Coordination of Trade Union Federations reiterates its commitment to social dialogue and considers that the Government’s statements in this regard have to be transformed into specific action to ensure and consolidate it. It adds that, apart from solely information meetings, it has not been convened to commence tripartite dialogue on how the Committee’s comments are to be addressed. CONFIEP indicates that the recall of the CNTPE has only been formal, as its sessions are not regular, its technical committees are not functioning and substantive issues are still not on the agenda. CONFIEP emphasizes that the effectiveness of the CNTPE depends on the confidence of the parties, which was demolished in 2022 when the Government imposed a series of high impact measures, undermining good faith and voiding dialogue of its content. The Committee takes due note of all the elements raised. The Committee earnestly encourages the Government and all the parties concerned to implement the recommendations made by the mission and to make every effort to ensure that the CNTPE continues to play its essential role as a tripartite social dialogue body. In the same way as the mission, the Committee also reminds the Government of the need and importance of ensuring the systematic and full consultation of the CNTPE prior to the adoption of any social and labour measures. It encourages the Government to have recourse to the technical assistance referred to and requests the Government to provide information on developments on all of the above.

Supreme Decree No. 014-2022-TR. In its previous comment, the Committee reiterated the hope that the implementation of Supreme Decree No. 014.2022-TR, amending the Regulations of the Collective Labour Relations Act which, according to the Government, had its origins in the worrying situation of freedom of association in the country, would contribute to ensuring the full enjoyment and exercise of the rights set out in the Convention. The Committee requested the Government to provide information on the impact of its implementation. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the Decree has made it possible to: (i) broaden the scope of application of the provisions on the collective relations of workers who are not in a dependent employment relationship; (ii) recognize the right to direct affiliation to federations and confederations; and (iii) include new forms of trade union organization, such as unions of groups of enterprises, production chains and subcontracting networks. The Government indicates that, during the period 2022–24, that is since the coming into force of the Decree: (i) the registration of trade unions has increased by 19 per cent in relation to the period 2019–21; and (ii) the registration of independent unions increased, with the registration of trade unions of workers in economic groups and subcontracting networks, and the unionization rate rose slightly in 2024. The Government adds that the Decree is being reviewed by judicial and administrative authorities, particularly as employers’ representatives have taken legal action (6 popular action procedures are being processed, as well as 78 appeals for the protection of rights (“amparo”) to the constitutional court (of which 70 are under examination and 8 have been definitively shelved in favour of the MTPE), as well as through administrative channels, with 54 complaints being lodged with the National Institute for the Defence of Competence and the Protection of Intellectual Property (INDECOPI). The Government indicates that, although the legality and constitutionality of the Decree are being challenged, it is being implemented in substance and the MTPE is awaiting the final decisions of the judicial bodies.

The Committee notes that, according to the Coordination of Trade Union Federations, although the adoption of the Decree has contributed to mitigating the lamentable situation of trade union rights in Peru, it is a positive but inadequate measure. It adds that, in March 2025, with a view to increasing employment, and only in consultation with employers’ representatives, the Government announced its intention of repealing the Decree, as well as Supreme Decree No. 001-2022, which establishes limits on subcontracting and which, according to the indications provided, together with Supreme Decree No. 014-2022-TR, opens the possibility to the establishment of unions for subcontracting networks. On the other hand, the Committee notes that CONFIEP: (i) reiterates that Decree No. 014-2022 was adopted unilaterally by the Government, in a demonstration of inflexibility which weakened trust between the social partners and was the reason behind the withdrawal of the employer participation in the CNTPE; (ii) maintains that the Decree has not had the effect of strengthening freedom of association, but of increasing conflict by making industrial relations massively more judicialized; (iii) indicates that the 19 per cent increase referred to by the Government is superficial as the indicator does not reflect the number of organizations established, but the number of workers who decide to become members; and (iv) considers that the Government’s own figures show that the unionization rate has not only not increased, but is below the level of previous years, and as such the Decree has not contributed to the greater exercise of the right to organize. The Committee observes, according to the information provided by the Government, that the unionization rate in the private sector rose from 4.91 per cent in 2022 to 4.92 per cent in 2024, in comparison with the rate of 5.41 per cent in 2018. It also notes that, according to the trade union confederations, during the decade of the 1990s, the unionization rate was nearly 20 per cent. The Committee takes due note of these various elements. Recalling that, in its examination in June 2023, the Conference Committee welcomed the legislative developments addressing certain previous observations of the Committee of Experts and once again expressing the hope that the implementation of the Supreme Decree will contribute to ensuring the full enjoyment and exercise of the rights set out in the Convention, the Committee: (i) trusts that the various authorities before which Decree No. 014-2022 has been challenged will take duly into account the relevant conclusions and observations of the Conference Committee and of this Committee ; (ii) requests the Government to provide updated information on the respective judicial and administrative proceedings; and (iii) also requests the Government to continue providing information on the impact of the application of Supreme Decree No. 014-2022-TR on the unionization of workers in the private sector, including statistical data.

Conducive environment for the exercise of trade union rights in practice.Workers with fixed-term contracts. The Committee notes that the mission, while noting the divergent positions of the CONFIEP and the trade union confederations on the impact of the frequent recourse to fixed-term contracts on the exercise of trade union rights, emphasized the importance of submitting this issue to tripartite consultation and for it to be taken into account in legislative reform processes. The Committee notes that the social partners maintain in their observations the positions expressed to the mission, as: (i) the trade union confederations consider that the generalized use of temporary contracts, which now affects seven out of every ten formal workers in the private sector, acts as a dissuasive factor for trade union membership, as the membership rate of temporary workers is half that of workers with permanent contracts (4 per cent compared with 8 per cent); and (ii) the CONFIEP indicates that the Act on labour productivity and competitiveness provides that temporary employment contracts do not restrict the collective rights of temporary workers and considers that there is no empirical evidence that temporary contracts are the cause of the low levels of unionization in the country. The Committee finally notes the Government’s indication that a Bill is being examined by the Congress of the Republic to amend the labour rules governing workers engaged in non-traditional exports. The Committee recalls that it has considered that some forms of precariousness can dissuade workers from trade union membership and that it has highlighted the importance of examining in all Member States, within a tripartite framework, the impact of these forms of employment on the exercise of trade union rights (General Survey of 2012 on the fundamental Conventions, paragraph 935). While referring to its comments on this subject in the context of the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98), the Committee invites the Government to ensure that this matter is the subject of consideration in tripartite consultations and in the reform processes of labour legislation. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any progress in this respect.

The Committee reiterates below the points that it has emphasized in its previous comment and which require the adoption of specific measures to bring the legislation into full conformity with the Convention.

Article 2 of the Convention. Right of all workers, without distinction whatsoever, to establish and join organizations. Workers engaged in training schemes. For several years, the Committee has been drawing the Government’s attention to the need to revise Act No. 28518, its implementing Regulations and the General Education Act in order to ensure the explicit recognition of freedom of association for persons engaged in vocational training schemes. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that: (i) the legislation does not establish restrictions on the exercise of freedom of association in activities related to apprenticeship and training schemes; and (ii) although at the national level no applications have been made for the registration of trade unions by persons covered by the Act on training schemes, ILO technical assistance is requested to identify good practices in this respect. The Committee also notes that the mission: (i) noted that, in accordance with the legislation that is in force, these arrangements are not considered to be labour relations, for which reason the legislative provisions respecting collective labour relations are not applicable to them; (ii) welcomed both the Government’s interest in receiving ILO technical assistance to address this matter and the readiness of the social partners to engage in tripartite dialogue on the practical arrangements for the exercise of the right to organize of workers engaged in training schemes who, according to the trade union confederations, numbered 60,000 in 2023, of whom 90 per cent are under 30 years of age; and (iii) recalled that in, accordance with Paragraph 16(g) of the Quality Apprenticeships Recommendation, 2023 (No. 208), ILO Members should take measures to ensure that apprentices are afforded freedom of association and the effective recognition of the right to collective bargaining. The Committee hopes that the technical assistance requested by the Government will be provided in the near future and expresses its firm confidence that it will contribute, in consultation with the social partners, to the legislation being revised in the near future so that the freedom of association of workers engaged in training schemes is explicitly recognized. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any progress achieved in this respect.

Exercise of the right to organize of judges and prosecutors, and of managerial personnel and employees in positions of trust in the public administration. In its previous comments, the Committee urged the Government to take the necessary measures to revise the relevant provisions of the legislation in order to secure the right to organize, in law and practice, of judges and prosecutors, as well as of managerial personnel and employees in positions of trust in the public administration. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that: (i) judges and prosecutors have the right to establish associations and to join them freely in order to exercise and defend their interests collectively; (ii) there exist associations of prosecutors and judges, which engage in action to represent their institutional, technical and occupational interests; and (iii) the Political Constitution explicitly recognizes the rights to organize and to strike of public servants, thereby ensuring their capacity to associate and engage in collective bargaining in defence of their labour interests (Article 42), and includes specific provisions limiting its scope in respect of officials with decision-making powers and who perform functions of management or trust, as it seeks an appropriate balance between the nature of the functions of such officials and the principles of impartiality, efficiency and representativity in the public administration. The Committee notes that, in its report, the mission indicated that it had noted the existence of associations of prosecutors and judges and had been informed by the judicial authorities that certain associations of judges were engaged in activities of a trade union nature. The Committee requests the Government to specify the manner in which, in practice, it is ensured that associations of prosecutors and judges and their leaders enjoy the protective prerogatives, facilities and mechanisms necessary to defend the interests of their members, and to provide information on any progress made in law and practice towards the full recognition of the freedom of association of these categories of public officials.

Article 3. Right of organizations to organize their activities and formulate their programmes. Determining the unlawful nature of strikes. In its previous comments, the Committee observed that the Civil Service Support Commission was competent to decide whether a strike is inappropriate and unlawful and, as it had not yet been established, the Committee urged the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that the authority to determine the unlawful nature of strikes in the public and private sectors did not lie with the labour administration, but rather with an independent and truly impartial body that has the confidence of all the parties. It also urged the Government to take all the necessary measures to establish the Civil Service Support Commission without further delay and expressed the firm hope that it would be a genuinely independent body. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that: (i) the responsibility for declaring strikes appropriate or inappropriate and declaring them unlawful is vested with the Labour Administrative Authority (AAT), which acts as an impartial and independent body, with the role of resolving calls for strike action, and verifying that they comply with the requirements and conditions set out in law; (ii) the AAT is decentralized in a series of regional bodies that are under the responsibility of regional governments, and are independent bodies supporting the impartial action of the public administration; and (iii) verification of the factors for which strikes are considered to be unlawful is principally the function of the National Labour Inspection Authority (SUNAFIL), in which the inspectors enjoy technical and functional independence, which contributes to the impartial nature of the decisions imposed. The Government indicates that the decisions of the AAT can be challenged before judicial bodies through administrative dispute procedures and that on average only 1.9 per cent of administrative decisions have been challenged in the courts. The Committee notes that, according to the information provided by the Government, between 2022 and 2025, of 102 calls for strikes in the private sector, 73 were considered inadmissible and 21 unlawful. The Committee also notes that the trade union confederations consider that many declarations that strikes are inadmissible or unlawful are based on excessively restrictive and discretionary criteria, giving rise to legal insecurity. The Committee therefore observes that, in a situation characterized by a unionization rate in the private sector that is below 5 per cent, 92 per cent of calls for strike action were declared inadmissible or unlawful by the labour administration. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the grounds most frequently invoked for strike calls being declared inadmissible are the failure to submit, or the defective submission of the list of workers required to guarantee indispensable activities or essential public services, and the records of assemblies and of ballots. The Committee notes the concern expressed by the trade union confederations at the persistence of restrictions on the exercise of the right to strike and their indication that: (i) the complexity of the process for the determination of minimum services and the fact that they are also determined by government authorities is creating an obstacle to the exercise of the right to strike; (ii) in general, when determining minimum services (in January each year), enterprises tend to designate a high number of jobs, precisely for the purpose of preventing the greatest number possible of workers from going on strike; and (iii) trade unions often lack the resources to register their disagreement with the decisions taken by the enterprise, as this requires the preparation of a technical report challenging the decisions of the employer and, in the event that the intervention of an impartial body is required, it is necessary to cover its costs. The Committee notes the indication by CONFIEP that: (i) the decentralization of the functions of the AAT does not in itself ensure the impartiality of the system, as the legislative framework within which it operates is basically unbalanced; (ii) the low rate of challenges does not reflect the agreement of the parties, but is frequently the product of constraints relating to the time, cost and complexity of taking an administrative case to court in Peru; and (iii) the central issue is not solely related to whether or not the decision lies with an administrative or judicial authority, but that the law was changed unilaterally.

With reference to the public service, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that the Civil Service Support Commission is on the point of being established and that, under the terms of the tenth supplementary transitional provision of the Regulations of the Civil Service Act, the AAT is the administrative authority that is assuming the functions of the Support Commission. The Committee notes the Government’s request for technical assistance concerning the institutional and functional structure of the Support Commission. The Committee once again urges the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that the authority to determine the unlawful nature of strikes in the private sector is not vested in the labour administration, but in an independent and genuinely impartial body that has the confidence of all the parties. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any measures adopted in this respect. The Committee also hopes that the technical assistance requested by the Government will be provided in the near future and that it will contribute to the establishment in the near future of the Civil Service Support Commission and ensure that it is structured as a genuinely independent body. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any progress achieved in this regard.

Definition of minimum services in essential public services. The Committee previously observed that the Regulations of the Consolidated Single Text of the Collective Labour Relations Act provides that the Civil Service Support Commission is the competent body to determine the minimum services required during strikes affecting essential services. In its previous comment, the Committee noted the indication by the trade union confederations that section 68 of the Regulations of the Collective Labour Relation Act, as amended by Supreme Decree No. 014-2022-TR, provided that, while the AAT may avail itself of the support of an independent body to resolve any disagreement concerning minimum services in essential public services, it is the responsibility of the AAT to determine the matter on the basis of the report of the independent body. The Committee recalls once again that disagreements between the parties on the number and functions of workers should not only be examined, but also resolved by an independent body. The Committee hopes that the technical assistance requested by the Government will be provided and that it will contribute to the establishment in the near future of the Civil Service Support Commission as an independent body with the competence to determine minimum services in essential public services. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any progress achieved in this regard.

Right of trade unions to hold meetings and access workplaces. The Committee previously requested the Government to revise the final provisions of Supreme Decree No. 017-2007-ED, which defines as serious offences by head teachers and deputy head teachers in schools the acts of providing school premises for trade union meetings and allowing political and/or trade union advocacy in educational institutions, in order to enable head teachers of schools to determine with the trade unions arrangements for access to workplaces that do not jeopardize the efficient operation of those institutions. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that trade unions can coordinate with the Educational Management Unit or the Regional Education Directorate/Management for the use of administrative spaces and that, during collective bargaining between 2022 and 2024, there were no specific claims for the use of physical spaces. The Committee notes the indication by the trade union confederations that the single supplementary and final provision of Supreme Decree No. 017-2007-ED explicitly prohibits educational authorities from granting access to workplaces for trade union activities, and the fact that facilities for access to workplaces are not covered by draft collective agreements does not take away from the Government’s obligation to ensure the compatibility of the national legislation with the Convention. The Committee once again recalls that Article 3 of the Convention protects the right of trade unions to hold meetings and to be able to access workplaces to communicate with workers with a view to the organization of their activities. The Committee requests the Government, in consultation with the trade union organizations concerned, to assess and revise the provisions in force in the education sector to guarantee a flexible mechanism for the access of trade unions to workplaces which also ensures the efficient operation of educational establishments. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any measures taken in this regard.

In its previous comment, the Committee noted that the Committee on Freedom of Association had referred to it the legislative aspects of Case No. 3245 concerning the determination by means of Regulations of which trade union authority appoints the regional representatives of teachers’ unions who are granted paid leave. The Committee invited the Government, in full consultation with the representative trade unions in the sector, to consider how to revise the current regulations such that it is the organizations of education workers themselves who determine the internal mechanisms by which the representatives that will receive union leave are named (403rd Report, June 2023). The Committee notes the Government’s indication that: (i) section 194.2 of Act No. 29944 to reform teaching, approved by Supreme Decree No. 004-2013-ED, has been amended by Supreme Decree No. 018-2023-MINEDU, published on 23 November 2023, to allow regional unions that are not affiliated with national trade union organizations, to nominate their representatives through their own general secretary at the regional level; and (ii) Ministerial Decision No. 081-2023-MINEDU established clear and equitable procedures for the granting of trade union leave. The Committee notes these measures with interest.

The Committee further notes that the Committee on Freedom of Association has also referred to it the legislative aspects of Case No. 3435, in which it requested the Government, in consultation with the representative organizations of workers and employers, to take the necessary measures, including legislative measures if necessary, to ensure that federations and confederations of both workers and employers have, in accordance with their statutes, the capacity to defend the interests of their members, including in individual actions (409th Report, March 2025). The Committee requests the Government to report any measures taken in this respect.

The Committee is raising other matters in a request addressed directly to the Government.

[The Government is asked to reply in full to the present comments in 2027 .]