Definitive Report - Report No 265, June 1989

Case No 1453 (Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of)) - Complaint date: 27-MAY-88 - Closed

1. 21. The complaint is contained in a communication from the National Trade
   • Union of Press Workers (SNTP) of 27 May 1988. The Government replied in a
   • communication dated 26 January 1989.
2. 22. Venezuela has ratified 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. The complainant's allegations

1. 23. In its communication of 27 May 1988, the National Trade Union of Press
2. Workers (SNTP) alleges that on 30 October 1987, it submitted a draft
3. collective agreement to regulate labour relations between the enterprise "The
4. Daily Journal C.A." and its workers (represented by the SNTP). Four days
5. later, the enterprise dismissed the workers Heather Scott and Beatriz
6. Jaramillo (the latter is an SNTP union official).
7. 24. The SNTP adds that on 5 November 1987, the Labour Inspectorate summoned
8. the parties with a view to starting conciliatory talks but, on this occasion,
9. the enterprise raised objections. On 7 January 1988, the Labour Inspectorate
10. issued an administrative decision in which it pronounced in favour of the
11. trade union and ordered the enterprise to discuss the draft collective
12. agreement. On 12 January 1988 the enterprise appealed against this decision
13. and subsequently, on 25 February 1988, requested the National Labour
14. Directorate to carry out a "reinspection", which was ordered in a decision of
15. 12 April 1988.
16. 25. According to the complainant organisation, this constitutes an
17. infringement of legal guarantees and a clear obstruction of collective
18. bargaining, especially when the administrative authorities allow the use of
19. legal concepts that do not exist in legislation, such as in the case of
20. "reinspection", for which no specific body is competent.
21. B. The Government's reply
22. 26. In its communication of 26 January 1989, the Government states that in
23. accordance with the provisions contained in section 369 of the Labour Act,
24. concerning trade union immunity, the Labour Inspectorate ordered the
25. reinstatement of the dismissed workers.
26. 27. The Government adds that in resolution No. 7275 of 1 June 1988, the
27. Ministry of Labour reached a decision on the appeal lodged by the enterprise
28. "The Daily Journal C.A." against the ruling of the Labour Inspectorate,
29. ordering the enterprise to discuss the draft collective agreement. This
30. resolution states the following:
31. ... In accordance with the legal powers vested in it, this Ministry rejects,
32. for the reasons given above, the appeal and upholds the decision handed down
33. by the Labour Inspectorate in the Libertador Municipality of the Federal
34. District, dated 7 January 1988, in which it ordered the enterprise "The Daily
35. Journal C.A." to discuss the draft collective agreement submitted on 30
36. October 1987 by the National Trade Union of Press Workers (SNTP).

C. The Committee's conclusions

1. 28. The Committee notes with interest that the Labour Inspectorate ordered
   • the reinstatement of the two trade unionists dismissed by the enterprise "The
   • Daily Journal C.A." because of the commencement of collective bargaining by
   • the National Trade Union of Press Workers. The Committee hopes that the
   • decision of the Labour Inspectorate will be followed in practice and that it
   • will receive confirmation that the two workers in question have been
   • reinstated. The Committee also notes with interest that the administrative
   • authority, in the second instance, upheld the order that the above-mentioned
   • enterprise should discuss the collective agreement submitted by the trade
   • union.

The Committee's recommendations

1. 29. In the light of its foregoing conclusions, the Committee invites the Governing Body to decide that this case does not call for further examination.