Informe en el que el Comité pide que se le mantenga informado de la evolución de la situación - Informe núm. 217, Junio 1982

1. 390. The World Confederation of Organisations of the Teaching Profession (WCOTP) presented a complaint of violation of trade union rights in Brazil in a communication dated 26 March 1981. The Government replied on 16 February 1982.
2. 391. Brazil has not ratified the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87); it has ratified the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).

A. Allegations of the complainant organisation

1. 392. The WCOTP denounces the suspension of the activities of three teachers' trade union organisations in the State of Rio de Janeiro proclaimed by Decree No. 85 830 of 9 August 1979.
2. 393. The complainant organisation explains that under this. Decree its affiliated organisation received the order to close its premises and that the legal personality of the State Teachers Centre (CEP) which combines the following three organisations: the State Association of Teachers of Rio de Janeiro (SEPRJ), the Union of Teachers (of the primary sector) of Rio de Janeiro (UPRJ) and the Association of Teachers of the State of Rio de Janeiro (APERJ), was rescinded.
3. 394. The complainant organisation also communicates a memorandum of the Confederation of Teachers of Brazil (CPB) giving a detailed account of the reasons underlying the Government's action. It further specifies that, since the Decree was promulgated, the CPB, supported by the WCOTP and its affiliated organisation tried several times in vain to have the Government's decision rescinded in the name of the principles of freedom of association and collective bargaining.
4. 395. In the memorandum attached to the complaint, the Confederation of Teachers of Brazil (CPB) explains that state school teachers in the State and municipality of Rio de Janeiro have no statutes regulating their profession and that the civil service statutes which apply to them are inadequate.
5. 396. Describing the school situation, they explain that the reform resulting from Decree No. 5692/71 providing free education in primary-level schools made it necessary to recruit teachers for the last four years of that level. After following up-grading courses, primary-school teachers had to teach in secondary schools but continued to be officially regarded as primary school teachers. As their public servants' salaries were inadequate, most of them sought additional work or gave private lessons in private schools in order to meet their own needs overwork led to a deterioration in the quality of their work.
6. 397. A group of teachers therefore began to meet in Rio in 1977 to discuss these questions and also proposals relating to the drawing up of a Functions Classification Scheme in the state of Rio de Janeiro. That is how the State Association of Teachers of Rio De Janeiro (SEPRJ) was formed in October 1978 the general assembly at the Sao Bento College voted for a proposed salary claim which was transmitted to the government authorities, who in turn promised to transmit it to the State Governor, but no reply was received.
7. 398. Thus, when in February 1979, the Functions Classification Scheme was published, laying down, according to the complainants, unrealistic salary increases, excluding thousands of contract employees and accompanied by communications indicating that each teacher would have his number of teaching hours increased by 12 or 16, to 20 periods, dissatisfaction was complete.
8. 399. The teachers met in a general assembly on 3 March 1979 and decided to call a strike after a memorandum containing their claims had been sent to the State Governor. It included the salary demands mentioned above and other claims relating to working hours, benefits (extended to periods of leave and sick leave) to be granted to those who work in inconveniently located schools and to those contract staff nominated in accordance with their qualifications, and rules governing the working conditions of contract teachers.
9. 400. Faced with the Government's negative reply on all points of the memorandum, the general assembly of 11 March 1979 voted to strike until such time as their claims were met. The strike lasted two weeks since, although the strike had been declared illegal, the authorities recognised the justice of the claims and signed an official undertaking. They proposed to extend this undertaking to all the claims. This related to the new salary levels proposed and provided for them to be paid retroactively. The general assembly therefore decided to resume work. When the plan was adopted, a series of Committees was set up responsible for examining all the claims within 60 days on 29 April, the teachers' general assembly agreed to wait for the result of the work of these Committees.
10. 401. However, in July 1979 the deadlines fixed by the Government expired. In May and June the Government had several times let it be understood that there were no funds to meet the teachers' claims and it was publicly announced that a loan would be raised.
11. 402. The teachers learned through the press that the authorised loan would be made available by the Central Bank and that consequently they would probably not receive the new salary levels until January 1980. These declarations began to create a climate of insecurity when, in July, the payment of two steps as provided for by the previous Government's plan and rejected by the teachers' assembly was announced. Furthermore, the promised retroactive payment was hardly different from the increases provided for by the previous plan.
12. 403. Consequently, on 22 July 1979 the teachers' general assembly noted that the benefits were not yet regulated by decree, but decided not to resume the struggle and to wait for a reply from the Government. Although the Government did make rules governing the benefits, the assembly noted on 30 July that major claims had not been met, namely the retroactive payment of the new scales, the Committee responsible for the situation of unemployed teachers, the rules relating to contract teachers and the classification scheme providing for the training of teacher trainers.
13. 404. A strike was again called in August and the Government showed itself intransigent, stating that all that could be done had been done and that the teachers were already receiving the new salaries. These statements were accompanied by threats that repressive measures would be taken. In fact eight teachers were suspended and an administrative and police inquiry was instituted against them under the law on national security. Prison sentences were passed, more than 200 teachers were summoned by the political and social police, all the civil servants at the Secretariat of Education had their salaries suspended, general assemblies were forbidden and police were stationed in premises used for meetings and in schools.
14. 405. However, thanks to the intervention of several federal members of Parliament, the Secretary of State for Justice gave as assurance that if the teachers resumed work the above-mentioned sanctions would be lifted. On the basis of this promise, the general assembly decided on 22 August 1979 to call off the strike. Since then the penalties have been stepped up and some teachers have even been sent back from their original teaching establishment to other municipalities, the memorandum concludes.

B. The Government's reply

1. 406. In its communication of 16 February 1982, the Government states that the President of the Republic did, in fact, suspend the activities of the associations in question by Decree No. 83.350 of 9 August 1979, at the request of the Governor of the State of Rio de Janeiro and by virtue of article 162 of the Federal Constitution and Legislative Decree No. 1632 of 4 August 1978, the latter forbidding strikes in the public services and in activities essential for the maintenance of national security.

C. The Committee's conclusions

1. 407. In this complaint the Committee has before it cases of suspension of the trade union activities of three teachers' organisations by a decision of the President of the Republic and allegations of persecution against certain members of the teaching profession for taking part in strikes in the context of occupational claims.
2. 408. As regards the suspension of the activities of three trade union organisations by an administrative ruling, the Committee must emphasise the great importance it attaches to the principle that workers' organisations should not be suspended or dissolved by administrative decision. Dissolution by the Executive under a decree giving it full powers, like administrative dissolution, does not permit of the exercise of the rights of defence which can be guaranteed only by normal judicial procedure, a procedure which the Committee regards as essential. In these circumstances the Committee considers it necessary that the legal personality of the occupational associations of the teachers of the state of Rio de Janeiro, which has been suspended, should be restored. The Committee therefore requests the Government to take the measures necessary to this effect and to keep it informed of the measures so taken.
3. 409. As regards the labour dispute between the teachers of the state of Rio de Janeiro and the state and municipal authorities, and which led the workers to call a strike, first in March and then in August 1979, the Committee notes that the Government makes no observation on the background of the case and states only that strikes in the public services and activities essential for the maintenance of national security are forbidden under legislative Decree No. 1632 of 4 August 1978. It emerges from the detailed information provided by the complainant that the repression experienced by the teachers originated in their participation in the strikes which were called as a result of the failure of the collective bargaining in which they were engaged with the public authorities.
4. 410. On this question of the teachers' right to strike, the Committee has repeatedly pointed out that the right of workers and their organisations to strike is generally acknowledged to be a legitimate means of defending their occupational interests and that, where this right is restricted or prohibited in the public service or essential services, adequate guarantees should be given to protect the workers thus deprived of an essential means of defending their occupational interests. The Committee has also indicated that restrictions should be compensated for by adequate, impartial and speedy conciliation and arbitration procedures, in which the parties can take part at every stage and in which the awards should be binding in all cases on both parties; once made, such awards should be fully and promptly implemented. Furthermore, the Committee considers it useful to recall that under the terms of Convention No. 151 concerning conditions of employment in the public service, adopted by the International Labour Conference in 1978 (Article 7) "measures appropriate to national conditions shall be taken, where necessary, to encourage and promote the full development and utilisation of machinery for negotiation of terms and conditions of employment between the public authorities concerned and public employees' organisations, or of such other methods as will allow representatives of public employees to participate in the determination of these matters".
5. 411. In this case, it appears from the information provided by the complainants on the negotiations which started before the strike that their claims were not met, since the Government has not replied on these points. In these circumstances, it is difficult to determine whether the workers and their organisations have enjoyed the guarantees aimed at compensating for the prohibition on the right to strike. The Committee generally considers that recourse to procedures of conciliation and arbitration would have helped considerably in preventing the conflict and creating more favourable conditions for the development of labour relations.
6. 412. The Committee also feels bound to point out, as it has in other cases, that arrests of and sanctions against strikers involve serious risks of abuse and serious threats to freedom of association. Moreover, as on other occasions, it holds the view that an inflexible attitude in the application of severe penalties to workers for going on strike can impair the development of labour relations. The Committee notes that, in the present case, the work stoppages were relatively short and that the information supplied by the Government does not mention any acts of violence or other such infringements of law and order committed by the strikers. In view of these considerations and those expressed in the previous paragraph, the Committee considers it desirable that steps should be taken to re-examine the situation of the sanctioned workers.