Demande directe (CEACR) - adoptée 1999, publiée 88ème session CIT (2000)

The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government in its report.

Article 1(d) of the Convention. The Committee previously noted the Government's indication that persons imprisoned for engaging in illegal strikes, who are jailed for contempt of court, are considered pre-trial detainees under United States law and practice and as such are not subject to prison labour. In its latest report, the Government indicates that it is not aware of any developments in law and practice in the past two years that would change that conclusion. In respect of the law regarding the distinction between criminal and civil contempt and its implications regarding an obligation to perform prison labour, the Government has supplied, inter alia, information on the Supreme Court finding in United Mineworkers v. Bagwell, 512 U.S. 821 (1994), that the union's failure to obey an injunction regarding unlawful strike-related activities constituted criminal contempt. The Government points out that the court does not appear to have sentenced any union members or officials in Bagwell to jail for contempt.

The Committee takes due note of these indications. It requests the Government to continue to supply information on the development of law and practice in this field, indicating, in particular, whether in law, union members or officials might be sentenced to jail for criminal contempt in circumstances comparable to Bagwell and, if so, whether these would be considered pre-trial detainees under United States law and practice or be granted on a different basis a comparable status exempting them from an obligation to perform prison labour.