Solicitud directa (CEACR) - Adopción: 2021, Publicación: 110ª reunión CIT (2022)

Convenio sobre la terminación de la relación de trabajo, 1982 (núm. 158) - República Centroafricana (Ratificación : 2006)

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It hopes that the next report will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous comments.

Repetition

Article 2(4) of the Convention. Exclusions. In its previous comments, the Committee invited the Government to provide information on the effective means of protection against unjustified termination envisaged for categories of workers excluded from the scope of the Labour Code of 2009. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that no categories of workers have been excluded from the application of the Convention. The Committee therefore reiterates its request to the Government to provide information with its next report on the situation of magistrates, public servants and members of the armed forces, as categories of workers who are excluded from the application of the Labour Code of 2009, and on the manner in which the Government ensures that they are afforded protection against unjustified termination which is at least equivalent to that set out in the Convention.

Article 5. Unjustified reasons for termination. The Government indicates that, under the terms of section 152 of the Labour Code of 2009, terminations without a valid reason and terminations for reasons of the opinions of the worker, the worker’s trade union activity, membership or not of a specific union, are considered abusive. The Committee notes that the lodging of a complaint by a worker or participation in proceedings against an employer arising out of alleged violations of the legislation or the lodging of a complaint with the competent administrative authorities is also considered to be an unjustified reason for termination. The Government adds that terminations on the basis of reasons which are not real and justified are null and void. The Committee reiterates its request to the Government to indicate the measures adopted or envisaged to ensure that the other reasons set out in clauses (d) and (e) of Article 5, including marital status and the family responsibilities of the worker, do not constitute valid reasons for termination. The Committee once again requests the Government to provide examples of court rulings relating to unjustified reasons for termination, as set out in the Labour Code of 2009.

Article 7. Procedure prior to termination. The Committee refers once again to Article 7 of the Convention, which provides that workers shall have an opportunity to defend themselves against the allegations made before being terminated for reasons relating to their conduct or performance. The Committee previously noted that the Labour Code of 2009 does not appear to envisage a procedure of this nature prior to or at the time of termination. The Committee once again requests the Government to indicate the manner in which national law or practice gives effect to this Article.

Article 8(3). Right of appeal to an impartial body. The Government reiterates in its report that the competent jurisdiction to examine appeals against terminations is either the regional labour inspectorate or the labour tribunal. The Government adds that, in the event of collective terminations authorized by a labour inspector, the worker or trade union concerned has a period of 30 days to lodge an appeal to the next hierarchical authority prior to the initiation of an adversarial appeal. The Committee once again requests the Government to indicate the manner in which national law or practice gives effect to Article 8(3), particularly the manner in which the right to appeal to an impartial body is guaranteed. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to indicate whether, in accordance with Article 8(3), national law or practice provides for a reasonable period of time after which a worker may be deemed to have waived the right to appeal against termination.

Article 9(2). Burden of proof. The Committee reiterates its request to the Government to indicate the manner in which the regulations and procedure ensure that the worker does not have to bear alone the burden of proof in the event of an individual or collective appeal against termination.

Article 11. Period of notice. The Government reiterates that, except in cases of serious misconduct, in the context of termination, workers are entitled to a period of notice, the duration of which varies depending on the professional category (from eight days for a manual labourer or guard to three months for a managerial level employee). The Government adds that, in the event that the employer is dispensed with the obligation to give a period of notice, this obligation takes the form of the payment of compensation. The Committee once again requests the Government to provide examples of court rulings illustrating the concept of serious misconduct.

Article 13(1). Information and consultation of workers’ representatives. The Government indicates that, under the terms of section 143 of the Labour Code of 2009, any employer envisaging a termination for economic reasons is required to convene the staff delegates, the members of the enterprise committee and trade union delegates with a view to exploring other possibilities with them, in the presence of the labour inspector. The Government adds that, when the matter is raised with the labour inspector in accordance with administrative practice, the inspector has a period of 15 days to respond. The Committee once again requests the Government to indicate the period of time before the envisaged termination that the relevant information has to be provided by the employer to the workers’ representatives when termination is contemplated, as required by the Convention, and to indicate the manner in which this period is calculated (working days or non-working days).

Application of the Convention in practice. The Government indicates that several court rulings relating to individual and collective terminations have been handed down. However, they have not been transmitted to the Government for technical reasons and due to resources. The Committee once again requests the Government to provide examples of court rulings involving questions of principle related to the application of the Convention, and particularly on personal and economic reasons for termination, as set out in section 142 of the Labour Code. It also once again requests the Government to provide statistics on the activities of the labour inspection services and the labour courts in relation to terminations, including the number, duration and outcome of appeals, the level of compensation for termination, and examples of situations examined by the labour inspection services in relation to collective dismissals.