Effect given to the recommendations of the committee and the Governing Body - Report No 344, March 2007

Case No 2371 (Bangladesh) - Complaint date: 15-JUL-04 - Closed

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

1. 31. The Committee last examined this case, which concerns a refusal to register the Immaculate (Pvt.) Ltd Sramik Union and the dismissal of seven of its most active members, at its May–June 2006 meeting [see 340th Report, paras 35–41]. On this occasion, the Committee once again urged the Government to take steps immediately for the prompt registration of the Immaculate (Pvt.) Ltd Sramik Union, and further urged the Government to rapidly convene an independent inquiry into the serious allegations that seven members of the union were dismissed by the company upon it learning that a union was being established and to keep it informed of the progress made in this regard.
2. 32. In its communication of 7 September 2006, the Government indicates that Case No. 1 of 2004 filed by the complainant union before the First Labour Court, Dhaka, regarding the refusal of registration, is still pending. The last hearing date was on 23 August 2006 and the next hearing date was fixed for 27 September 2006. Without the decision of the Court on the matter, the Government cannot take any steps regarding the registration. Furthermore, the Government indicates that the national legislation of Bangladesh relative to labour matters gives sufficient protection against anti-union discrimination. Workers dismissed for trade union activities under section 17/18 of the Employment of Labour (Standing Order) Act, 1965, are guaranteed the right to submit grievance petitions to the employer. If the employer fails to give a decision or if the worker is dissatisfied with such decision, a complaint may be made to the Labour Court for legal protection under section 25(b) of the Employment of Labour (Standing Order) Act, 1965. As workers may avail themselves of the legal protection from a Labour Court when aggrieved for any action of the employer due to trade union activities, it is not necessary to convene an independent inquiry on the matter.
3. 33. The Committee observes with deep regret that the Government has failed to give any follow-up action to its recommendations. It notes that, although the facts of this case date back to 2003, the issue of the registration of the Immaculate (Pvt.) Ltd Sramik Union is still pending before the national courts, a fact which unavoidably has an impact on the prospect of resolving this case. The Committee recalls that justice delayed is justice denied and once again urges the Government to take steps immediately for the prompt registration of the Immaculate (Pvt.) Ltd Sramik Union.
4. 34. The Committee also notes with deep regret the Government’s statement that there is no need to implement the Committee’s recommendation for an independent inquiry into the allegations of anti-union discrimination in this case, given that any aggrieved party has the possibility to avail itself of the legal protection of the Labour Court. The Committee understands from the facts of this case that the workers who have been allegedly discriminated might not be able to avail themselves of national legal procedures so long as the issue of registration of their trade union is still pending. The Committee therefore once again requests the Government to convene an independent inquiry to thoroughly and promptly consider the allegation that seven members of the union were dismissed by the company upon it learning that a union was being established and to ensure that appropriate measures are taken in response to any conclusions reached in relation to these allegations of anti-union discrimination. The Committee requests the Government to ensure that, if it appears in the independent inquiry that the dismissals did occur as a result of involvement by the workers concerned in the establishment of a union, those workers will be reinstated in their jobs, without loss of pay. If the independent inquiry finds that reinstatement is not possible, the Committee requests the Government to ensure that adequate compensation so as to constitute sufficiently dissuasive sanctions is paid to the workers.