Effect given to the recommendations of the committee and the Governing Body - Report No 353, March 2009

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

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

1. 55. 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 March 2008 meeting. On that occasion, the Committee, deeply regretting that the Government had again failed to give any follow-up action to its recommendations, once again urged the Government to take steps immediately for the prompt registration of the Immaculate (Pvt.) Ltd Sramik Union. The Committee also once again requested 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 were taken in response to any conclusions reached in relation to these allegations of anti-union discrimination. The Committee further requested the reinstatement of the workers concerned without loss of pay, if it appeared in the independent inquiry that the dismissals did occur as a result of their involvement in the establishment of the union and, if reinstatement was not possible, to ensure that adequate compensation so as to constitute sufficiently dissuasive sanctions was paid to the workers [see 349th Report, paras 18–21].
2. 56. In a communication dated 4 September 2008, the Government indicates that the appeal filed by the complainant union regarding the refusal of registration was dismissed on 30 September 2007 by the First Labour Court. It attaches a copy of the Court’s decision, a one-page document indicating simply that the union’s appeal was dismissed for default.
3. 57. The Committee takes note of the 30 September 2007 decision of the First Labour Court dismissing the union’s appeal of the Registrar’s refusal of registration. That judgement notwithstanding, the Committee recalls that throughout the period in which the appeal had been pending – a period of four years – it had repeatedly urged the Government to take steps for the immediate registration of the union, given the concerns it had raised over the obstacles posed to the formation of workers’ organizations by the minimum membership regulation [see 337th Report, para. 237, and 340th Report, para. 40]. It had also requested the Government to rapidly convene an independent inquiry into the allegation that seven union members were dismissed by the company upon it learning that a union was being established. In these circumstances, the Committee can only express its deep regret that the Government has once again failed to give any follow-up action to its recommendations. Recalling once again that justice delayed is justice denied, the Committee urges the Government to institute an independent inquiry into the serious allegations of anti-union discrimination in this case and, if the allegations are proven true, to take all necessary steps to remedy the situation in relation to these allegations. The Committee requests to be kept informed in this regard.