Informe provisional - Informe núm. 218, Noviembre 1982

1. 722. The complaint is contained in a communication from the National Trade Union of Telephone Workers (SNTT) of 15 February 1982. The Government replied in a communication of 18 May 1982. The SNTT sent further information in a communication of 20 July 1982.
2. 723. The Dominican. Republic has ratified the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), and the right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98 ).

A. The complainant's allegations

1. 724. The SNTT alleges in its communication of 15 February 1982 that, on the twelfth of that month, the Dominican Telephone Company (CODETEL) carried out a mass dismissal of 52 operators in the Long Distance Calls Department, including the trade union delegates Carlos Luis Asunción, Angely Toro, Dominga Lara, Bienvenido Michel and Daysi de Jiménez. According to the complainant, although the Company justifies these dismissals by referring to the economic crisis and the need to reduce labour costs, what it is really seeking is the destruction of the Union, as witnessed by the fact that, in contravention of article 58 of the collective agreement in force, it did not make the slightest effort to relocate the staff concerned in another department, that the list of persons dismissed did not take into account a large number of workers who had allegedly agreed to leave their jobs, accepting the benefits offered by the Company, and that 12 new supervisors had been appointed to the Department. The SNTT adds that the management of the CODETEL undertaking has stated publicly that it would dismiss the entire Union executive if a campaign were undertaken to obtain the reinstatement of the dismissed workers.
2. 725. In its communication of 20 July 1982, the SNTT alleges that, in breach of the trade union immunity established in article 5 of the collective agreement, the trade union leader Luis Polanco, President of the Disciplinary Tribunal, was dismissed on the pretext of low production.
3. 726. The complainant adds that CODETEL forbids trade union leaders to enter so-called "restricted areas" and makes "disciplinary reports" on those who contravene this bar, and that it frequently refuses to grant time off for trade union matters.
4. 727. The SNTT points out, further, that on the pretext of poor performance, to gain experience, etc., José Luis Lara, Education Secretary, was transferred to the Administration Department, and Luis Gerónimo, deputy member of the Union Committee, to the Stores Department, and also that Donar Augusto Saillant, International Affairs Secretary, was transferred to another work centre.
5. 728. The complainant also alleges that the undertaking denied José Pichardo, General Secretary of the union, access to CODETEL installations and property for a period of a week, arguing that he had organised a work stoppage of 15 minutes in the Department of Cable Construction; this, however, has been denied by the workers in the Department.
6. 729. Finally, the SNTT points out that, with the object of reducing the Union's activities to the minimum, CODETEL has arbitrarily and illegally made it impossible for full-time Union leaders to receive the benefits granted by the Dominican Social Security Institute by excluding them from the payroll on the basis of a supposed suspension of those leaders' contracts.

B. The Government's reply

1. 730. The Government states in its communication of 18 May 1982 that, because of the introduction of the direct dialling system, electronic exchanges need to be tended by only a minimum staff, and that this was why the Dominican Telephone Company (CODETEL) dispensed with the services of the workers it considered unnecessary, paying them the appropriate social benefits. The Government adds that, according to the CODETEL undertaking, because of the economic crisis it is experiencing, it has applied the second paragraph of article 58 of the collective agreement in force, whereby, if the relocation of the dismissed persons in another department of the Company is not practicable, it will pay the appropriate compensation. Moreover, the collective agreement in force has not been infringed as regards trade union immunity since this only covers trade union leaders.
2. 731. Finally, the Government states that the Union and the undertaking have the possibility of applying to the courts to settle disputes which arise in relation to the interpretation or application of the labour laws and collective labour agreements.

C. The Committee's conclusions

1. 732. The present complaint refers to various acts of antiunion discrimination or the placing of obstacles in the way of trade union activities which are alleged to have taken place at the CODETEL undertaking.
2. 733. With regard to the dismissal of 52 operators of the Long Distance Calls Department, including the trade union delegates Carlos Luis Asunción, Angely Toro, Dominga Lara, Bienvenido Michel and Daysi de Jiménez, the Committee takes note that, according to the Government, the CODETEL undertaking dismissed workers because of the installation of the direct dialling system, which needs only a minimum staff to tend the electronic exchanges. The Committee also notes that the Government's statements indicate that it was not possible to relocate the dismissed persons in ether departments of the company and that those affected by this staff reduction will receive the appropriate compensation.
3. 734. The Committee notes, however, that the complainant asserts that not the slightest effort was made to relocate the dismissed persons in another department and places the dismissals in a context of anti-union discrimination, indicating in support of its assertion that the dismissals have fallen on five union delegates and that 12 new supervisors have been appointed in the department concerned. Since the Government has not sent its observations on the new appointments, the Committee does not rule out the possibility that the trade union status or activities of the five trade union delegates may have played a decisive role in the selection of the workers to be dismissed. In this respect, the Committee must recall that on previous occasions it has pointed out that while it does not fall within its competence to decide on the desirability of resorting to dismissals for economic or administrative reasons, acts of anti-union discrimination should not take place under the pretext of such circumstances, and also that protection against acts of anti-union discrimination is particularly necessary in the case of workers representatives. In these circumstances, the Committee requests the Government to supply further information as to the way in which the reduction of staff came about and calls the Government's attention to the fact that the five trade union leaders in question ought to enjoy priority for reinstatement, as provided for in the Workers Representatives Recommendation, 1971 (No. 143).
4. 735. Finally, the Committee notes that the Government has not replied to the allegations dating from February 1982 relating to the dismissal of the trade union leader Luis Polanco, to the threats of dismissal to which the SNTT executive was subjected, the ban on trade union leaders entering so-called "restricted areas", the frequent refusal of time off for trade union matters, the transfer or moving of the trade union leaders José Luis Lara, Luis Gerónimo and Donar Augusto Saillant, the denial of access to CODETEL installations and property for one week to the trade union leader José Pichardo and the loss by full-time trade union leaders of the benefits granted by the Dominican Social Security Institute. The Committee requests the Government to send its observations on these matters.