Effect given to the recommendations of the committee and the Governing Body - Report No 349, March 2008

Case No 2236 (Indonesia) - Complaint date: 25-NOV-02 - Closed

Effect given to the recommendations of the Committee and the Governing Body

1. 139. The Committee last examined this case, which concerns allegations of anti-union discrimination by the Bridgestone Tyre Indonesia Company against four trade union officers suspended without pay, at its May–June 2007 meeting. On that occasion, the Committee noted with concern that more than four years had elapsed since the complaint of anti-union discrimination was first made, without any reported progress. In light of the apparent impasse in these proceedings due to the absence of the former Director-President, the Committee requested the Government to institute an independent investigation at the enterprise and with the workers concerned to determine whether they had been the subject of anti-union discrimination and, if the allegations were found to be true, but the trade union officers had already received formal notification of their dismissals, to ensure, in cooperation with the employer concerned, that the trade union officers were reinstated or, if reinstatement was not possible, that they were paid adequate compensation such as to constitute sufficiently dissuasive sanctions, taking into account the damage caused and the need to avoid the repetition of such acts in the future. In addition, with regard to the two proceedings regarding anti-union discrimination and dismissal of four trade union officers, the Committee once again requested the Government to inform it of the decision of the Supreme Court with respect to the appeal made by these trade union officers on the decision of the National Administrative High Court, as well as to transmit all relevant texts. Finally, noting the Government’s indication that a collective labour agreement had been entered into between a new bargaining team and the company, the Committee requested the Government to transmit a copy of the agreement without delay, as well as a copy of the decision of the Central Committee for Labour Dispute Settlement which had apparently replaced the union’s old bargaining team.
2. 140. In a communication of 21 September 2007, the Government indicates that it informally approached the Supreme Court to request that the case be decided as soon as possible. The Government adds that the career and ad hoc judges of the Supreme Court responsible for industrial relations dispute settlement need capacity building through training in order to understand the issues relevant to international labour standards and labour and employment matters.
3. 141. The Committee notes with regret that the Government provides no information with regard to the Committee’s request for an independent investigation at the enterprise and with the workers concerned in order to determine whether they have been the subject of anti-union discrimination. The Committee recalls once again that there is no real prospect of having the complainant’s grievance of anti-union discrimination examined by the courts; five years have elapsed since this complaint was first brought to the courts without any reported progress on the proceedings. The Committee recalls that respect for the principles of freedom of association clearly requires that workers who consider that they have been prejudiced because of their trade union activities should have access to means of redress which are expeditious, inexpensive and fully impartial [see Digest of decisions and principles of the Freedom of Association Committee, fifth edition, 2006, para. 820]. The Committee once again requests the Government to institute an independent investigation at the enterprise and with the workers concerned to determine whether they have been the subject of anti-union discrimination and, if the allegations are found to be true, but the trade union officers have already received formal notification of their dismissals, to ensure, in cooperation with the employer concerned, that the trade union officers are reinstated or, if reinstatement is not possible, that they are paid adequate compensation such as to constitute sufficiently dissuasive sanctions, taking into account the damage caused and the need to avoid the repetition of such acts in the future. The Committee requests to be kept informed of developments in this respect.
4. 142. With respect to the proceedings concerning the dismissal of the four trade union officers, the Committee notes that the Government approached the Supreme Court informally to ensure that a decision will be rendered soon on the appeal lodged by the trade union officers against the decision of the National Administrative High Court. The Committee hopes that the Supreme Court will issue its decision without further delay and requests the Government to keep it informed in this respect, and to transmit all relevant texts. The Committee also recalls that it has expressed regret at the fact that the two court proceedings – on anti-union discrimination and dismissal – went ahead simultaneously and once again requests the Government to confirm that no decision in favour of dismissal will be enforced prior to the resolution of the question of anti-union discrimination.
5. 143. With regard to the Government’s comments concerning the need for training of the newly appointed judges, the Committee reminds the Government that the technical assistance of the Office is at its disposal in this regard should it so desire.
6. 144. Finally, the Committee notes with regret that the Government does not provide any further information on the decision of the Central Committee for Labour Dispute Settlement to replace the union’s old bargaining team, which led to the adoption of a new collective labour agreement. The Committee once again requests the Government to transmit a copy of the collective bargaining agreement and the Central Committee decision without delay.