Definitive Report - Report No 226, June 1983

Case No 1118 (Dominican Republic) - Complaint date: 15-FEB-82 - Closed

32. The Committee examined this case at its November 1982 meeting, when it reached a number of interim conclusions.

1. 32. The Committee examined this case at its November 1982 meeting, when it reached a number of interim conclusions.
2. 33. The National Trade Union of Telephone Workers (SNTT) subsequently submitted new allegations in a communication dated 20 January 1983. The Government replied in a communication dated 29 March 1983.
3. 34. The Dominican Republic has ratified both the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), and the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).

A. Previous examination of the case

1. 35. After examining the case at its November 1982 meeting, the Committee requested the Government to supply further information as to the way in which the reduction of staff came about in the Dominican Telephone Company (CODETEL), which the undertaking claims was due to the installation of a direct dialling system, and drew its attention to the fact that the five dismissed trade union delegates, Carlos Luis Asunción, Angely Toro, Dominga Lara, Bienvenido Michel and Daysi de Jiménez, ought to enjoy priority for reinstatement, as is provided for in the Workers' Representatives Recommendation, 1971 (No. 173).
2. 36. The Committee also requested the Government to send its observations on the allegations to which it had not replied, namely: the dismissal of the trade union leader Luis Polanco on the pretext of low production, the threats of dismissal against the SNTT executive committee, the ban on trade union leaders entering the so-called "restricted areas", the frequent refusal of time off for trade union matters, the transfer or moving of the trade union leaders José Luis Lara, Luis Gerónimo and Donar Augusto Saillant on the pretext of poor performance, to gain experience, etc., the denial of access to CODETEL installations and property for one week to the trade union leader José Pichardo for organising a work stoppage of 15 minutes (subsequently denied by the workers) and the loss by full-time trade union leaders of the benefits granted by the Dominican Social Security Institute.

B. New allegations

1. 37. In its communication dated 20 January 1983, the SNTT alleges that CODETEL unlawfully withheld a week's wages as a result of the change from a weekly to a two-weekly system of payment (i.e., every other Friday) and dismissed over 500 workers, including the members of the union's executive committee and a number of union delegates, for refusing to allow the undertaking to steal their money. CODETEL accuses the union of calling a strike but, in fact, the undertaking itself closed its plants to prevent the workers from entering, as has been established by the Secretariat of State for Labour itself through a public notary.
2. 38. The complainant encloses a document issued by the Secretariat of State for Labour stating that the withholding of wages by CODETEL is contrary to article 187 of the Labour Code.

C. The Government's reply

1. 39. With respect to the allegations still pending when the Committee examined the case at its November 1982 meeting, the Government has submitted a communication from CODETEL drawing attention to the following points:
   • - at the request of the trade union, the undertaking replaced employees who had indicated a desire to terminate their individual contracts by others who were keen to return to their jobs and who were in the group of 52 workers whose contracts had been terminated because of staff cuts following the introduction of a direct dialling system;
   • - none of the dismissed union delegates who were offered the opportunity to take advantage of this exchange showed any interest in returning to the undertaking, indicating that they were satisfied with the compensation they had received;
   • - at no time was in the undertaking's intention to eliminate the trade union;
   • - the undertaking has created restricted areas that are off limits to all members of the staff who have no official business there; if union leaders wish to contact employees in those areas, they may do so through the procedures laid down in the collective agreement currently in force and in other provisions;
   • - the dismissal of Luis Polanco was for low output and lack of dedication to his work in spite of the opportunities he was given to improve his performance, as documents signed by him in his file show; his dismissal was in no way connected with his trade union activities;
   • - the transfers of unions leaders Lara, Gerónimo and Saillant were carried out in accordance with the collective agreement currently in force, in which the union recognises that the undertaking "retains and will retain in future exclusive control over all matters connected with the management, operation and administration of its business";
   • - the undertaking suspended the union leader Pichardo from entering its premises for a week for having conducted himself on the day prior to his suspension in a manner totally incompatible with elementary standards of politeness and decent upbringing and for having used provocative and aggressive language against the undertaking and his supervisors which could have been grounds for justifiable dismissal;
   • - with regard to the exclusion of full-time trade union leaders from the Dominican Social Security Institute, the situation does not concern the undertaking but is the automatic result of the application of Social Security Act No. 1896.
2. 40. With regard to the new allegations, the Government states that the dispute between the SNTT and CODETEL which originally gave rise to the allegations has been satisfactorily resolved, thanks to the untiring mediation of the Secretariat of State for Labour, in an agreement signed on 25 February 1983.
3. 41. Under this agreement, 171 of the workers dismissed on 17 and 18 January 1983 will not be reinstated in their jobs but will receive compensation in accordance with the law and the collective agreement currently in force. The remaining workers are to return to work on 1 March 1983. The undertaking agrees specifically to reemploy 30 union leaders and delegates.
4. 42. As to the union leaders who will not be reinstated (Pichardo, Torres, Lara, Saillant, González, Hernández, Olivo, Terrero and Rodriguez), the agreement stipulates that, in addition to legal compensation, the undertaking will pay compensation for the period of their trade union immunity.

D. The Committee's conclusions

1. 43. The Committee notes the statements and explanations given by the Government regarding the various acts of anti-union discrimination alleged by the complainant. The Committee observes, in particular, that CODETEL offered the union delegates dismissed as a result of the introduction of a direct dialling system the opportunity to return to their jobs, that union leaders can contact employees working in the "restricted areas" although they must use the established procedures, and that union leader Luis Polanco was dismissed for reasons connected with his work.
2. 44. With regard to the allegations contained in the SNTT's communication of 20 January 1983, the Committee notes with interest that the dispute between the SNTT and CODETEI over the charge in the system of payment of the workers and the mass dismissal of over 500 workers following their protests has been settled through the mediation of the Secretariat of State for Labour, in an agreement signed on 25 February 1983. The Committee observes that the agreement provides for the reinstatement of all the dismissed workers except 171. The reinstated workers include 30 union leaders and delegates, but 9 union leaders have not been reinstated. However, the situation appears to have been accepted by the union since its agreement with CODETEL provides that the said union leaders will receive, in addition to legal compensation, compensation for the period of their trade union immunity.
3. 45. The Committee feels obliged to recall in this connection that it has on previous occasions considered cases of dismissal of union leaders in the Dominican Republic, and specifically involving CODETEL, from which it would appear that the legislation does not grant sufficient protection against acts of anti-union discrimination. As in its examination of Case No. 1053, the Committee urges the Government to consider the adoption of legislation to give effective protection to trade union leaders and workers against dismissals made on the basis of their trade union activities.
4. 46. Finally, regarding, the allegations concerning the transfer of trade union leaders, the denial of access to the undertaking's premises for a week to union leader Jose Pichardo and the loss by full-time trade union leaders of certain unspecified benefits, the Committee observes that the information submitted by the complainant and by the Government does not provide it with sufficient facts to judge the situation. Nevertheless, the Committee recalls in general terms that no person should suffer any prejudice because of his trade union functions or for having exercised legitimate trade union activities.

The Committee's recommendations

1. 47. In these circumstances, the Committee recommends the Governing Body to approve this report and, in particular, to recall in general terms that no person should suffer any prejudice because of his trade union functions or for having exercised legitimate trade union activities and to urge the Government to consider the adoption of legislation to give effective protection to trade union leaders and workers against dismissals made on the basis of their trade union activities.