ILO-en-strap
NORMLEX
Information System on International Labour Standards

Observación (CEACR) - Adopción: 2001, Publicación: 90ª reunión CIT (2002)

Convenio sobre la libertad sindical y la protección del derecho de sindicación, 1948 (núm. 87) - Eswatini (Ratificación : 1978)

Visualizar en: Francés - EspañolVisualizar todo

The Committee takes note of the statement made by the Government representative to the Conference Committee in 2000 and the discussion that followed. It also notes the adoption of Act No. 8 of 2000, modifying sections 29, 40 and 52 of the Industrial Relations Act (IRA) of 2000. The Committee further notes the Swaziland Employers Federation’s comment concerning certain discrepancies between Decree No. 2 (King’s Proclamation) of 2001 and the provisions of the Convention, and the Government’s transmittal of Decree No. 3 of 2001, which repeals Decree No. 2 in its entirety.

In its previous comments, the Committee had noted the lengthy procedure and excessive balloting requirements to hold a peaceful protest action under section 40 of the Act, and the withdrawal of all immunity for civil liability for those involved in such a protest. The Committee notes with interest that Act No. 8 of 2000 has amended section 40 of the IRA, so as to reduce the waiting period before such protest action may take place. Regarding the balloting requirements, the Committee further notes with interest the amendments made to section 40(8) of the Act. Regarding the question of civil liability, the Committee notes that amended section 40(13) of the Act has been amended to provide that federations, unions and individuals involved in protest action may only be subject to civil liability for criminal, malicious or negligent acts. The Committee requests the Government to keep it informed in future reports of any practical application of section 40 and, in particular, as concerns any charges brought by virtue of section 40(13).

Article 2 of the Convention. The Committee had noted in its previous comments that His Majesty’s Correctional Services were specifically excluded from the scope of the Act, and had requested the Government to provide information as to whether and to what extent they were entitled to organize. According to the statement made by the Government representative, prison staff form an integral part of the armed forces of Swaziland, and thus their exclusion from the scope of the Act is justified. The Committee recalls that the functions exercised by prison staff do not justify their exclusion from the right to organize under Article 9 of the Convention. However, restrictions may be imposed on those workers in respect of their right to strike. The Committee requests the Government to amend its legislation so that prison staff are granted the right to organize in defence of their economic and social interests and to keep it informed of the measures taken or envisaged in this respect.

Article 3. In its previous comments, the Committee had noted the lengthy procedure required before strike action could be taken legally, and had requested the Government to inform it of any measures taken or proposed to decrease the length of this compulsory dispute settlement procedure. The Committee recalls that provisions which require workers’ organizations to observe certain procedural rules before launching a strike are admissible, provided they do not make the exercise of the right to strike impossible or very difficult in practice (see General Survey on freedom of association and collective bargaining, 1994, paragraph 179). The Committee requests the Government to amend its legislation in order to decrease the length of the compulsory dispute settlement procedure provided for in sections 85 and 86, read with sections 70 to 82, of the IRA.

The Committee is also addressing a request on other points directly to the Government.

© Copyright and permissions 1996-2024 International Labour Organization (ILO) | Privacy policy | Disclaimer