Rapport intérimaire - Rapport No. 386, Juin 2018

1. 341. The complaint in this case is contained in a communication from the Confederation of Public and Private Sector Workers (CTSP) dated 31 August 2016.
2. 342. In the absence of a reply from the Government, the Committee has been obliged to postpone consideration of this case on several occasions. At its October–November 2017 meeting, the Committee made an urgent appeal to the Government, drawing its attention to the fact that, in accordance with the procedural rules set out in paragraph 17 of its 127th Report, approved by the Governing Body, it could present a report on the substance of the case at its next meeting if the information or observations of the Government had not been sent in time [see 383rd Report, para. 6]. At its March 2018 meeting, the Committee expressed its regret with regard to the continuing lack of cooperation and indicated to the Government that it would present a report on the substance of the case at its next meeting, even if the information or observations requested were not received on time. To date, the Government has not sent its observations.
3. 343. Haiti 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. Allegations of the complainant organization

1. 344. In its communication of 31 August 2016, the complainant organization alleges that on 8 October 2012, eight union officials who are members of the Executive Committee of the Haiti Postal Workers Union (SPH), a union affiliated to the CTSP, were laid off after a meeting with the Directorate-General of the Post Office of Haiti on the grounds that the Post Office did not recognize the legitimacy of the union. The officials concerned are Messrs Daniel Dantes, Fely Desire, Jean Estima Fils, Petit-Maitre Jean-Jacques, Ronald Joseph, Harold Colson Lazarre, Amos Musac and Guito Phadael. The Directorate General of the Post Office claims that these individuals have not submitted any official document “formalizing” the union in question. The complainant organization considers this decision to be illegal and that lay-offs should not exceed 90 days in accordance with the Decree of 17 May 2005 amending the general civil service regulations, whereas the union officials concerned have still not been reinstated in their posts. According to the organization, this [response] constitutes retaliation against the officials concerned merely for belonging to a union; moreover, it has led to the dissolution of the union, which has been in existence for more than 25 years, and forms part of the general drive to dismantle unions, in violation of the ILO Conventions ratified by Haiti.
2. 345. The complainant organization indicates that the Office of the Ombudsperson, a constitutional State body responsible for the protection of citizens, has formally recommended that the Directorate-General of the Post Office should reinstate the union representatives, although no action has been taken to give effect to this recommendation. All avenues of redress in terms of mediation and negotiation have ended in failure.

B. The Committee’s conclusions

1. 346. The Committee deeply regrets the fact that, despite the time which has elapsed since the submission of the complaint, the Government has not provided the observations and information requested in due time, although it has been invited to communicate these on several occasions, including through an urgent appeal (November 2017). Under these circumstances and in accordance with the applicable procedural rule, the Committee is required to submit a report on the substance of the case, without being able to take account of the observations that it was hoping to receive from the Government.
2. 347. The Committee reminds the Government that the entire procedure established by the International Labour Organization for the examination of alleged violations of freedom of association aims to ensure respect for this freedom, both in law and in fact. The Committee remains confident that if the procedure protects governments from unreasonable accusations, governments in their turn should recognize the importance of presenting, for objective examination, detailed replies concerning allegations made against them [see First Report, para. 31]. The Committee calls on the Government to demonstrate greater cooperation in future.
3. 348. The Committee observes that the allegations in this case concern the automatic laying off of union officials working in the postal sector, their non-reinstatement in their posts and the dissolution of their union.
4. 349. The Committee observes, on the basis of the documents provided by the CTSP in support of the complaint (individual lay-off notices dated 8 October 2012), that the Directorate-General of the Post Office contends that the representatives of the SPH, affiliated to the CTSP, had not presented any official document “formalizing” the union at a meeting of the Executive Office on 13 September 2012 and that, consequently, it did not recognize the legitimacy of the union. In contrast, the Committee notes that, according to the CTSP, the union in question has engaged in union activities for more than 25 years. In this regard, the Committee wishes to recall that, although the founders of a trade union should comply with the formalities prescribed by legislation, these formalities should not be of such a nature as to impair the free establishment of organizations [see Compilation of decisions of the Committee on Freedom of Association, sixth edition, 2018, para. 424]. Lastly, the Committee takes note of the allegations of the CTSP that the union was dissolved after having existed for many years while the conditions of its dissolution have not been stated clearly. In the light of the scant and contradictory information brought to its attention, the Committee calls on the Government and the complainant organization to provide precise information concerning the establishment of the SPH (date of establishment, registration procedure, statutes …) as well as the conditions of its alleged dissolution.
5. 350. With regard to the allegations concerning the automatic laying off and non-reinstatement of the union officials concerned, the Committee notes that, according to the aforementioned individual notices, the Directorate-General criticizes the latter for “having sown discord at the Post Office of Haiti, encouraged employees to rebel against management and […] disrupted the proper functioning of the institution, to the point of mobilizing people to stop work on the basis of false allegations.”. In the absence of other indications from the Government, the Committee considers that sanctions such as these could seriously undermine the exercise of trade union rights. It draws the attention of the Government to the provisions of the Workers’ Representatives Recommendation, 1971 (No. 143) in which it is expressly established that workers’ representatives should enjoy effective protection against any act prejudicial to them, including dismissal, based on their status or activities as workers’ representatives or on union membership, or participation in union activities in so far as they act in conformity with existing laws or collective agreements or other jointly agreed arrangements. The Committee also notes the communication of the Office of the Ombudsperson, addressed to the Directorate-General of the Post Office in December 2015, which refers to promises to “regularize” the workers concerned and recommends that the Directorate-General should respect its commitments with regard to those concerned. Lastly, the Committee notes that according to article 140 of the Decree of 17 May 2005 amending the general civil service regulations, staff may be automatically laid off as a disciplinary measure for a period not exceeding three months. Under these circumstances, the Committee calls on the Government to expedite an independent inquiry into the allegations concerning the automatic laying off of the union representatives concerned, namely Messrs Daniel Dantes, Fely Desire, Jean Estima Fils, Petit-Maitre Jean-Jacques, Ronald Joseph, Harold Colson Lazarre, Amos Musac and Guito Phadael, and to provide information on their present situation. If it is found that acts of anti-union discrimination have been committed by the Directorate-General of the Post Office, the Committee calls on the Government to take the necessary measures of redress, including ensuring that the workers concerned are reinstated without loss of pay. The Committee requests the Government to keep it informed of all measures taken in this regard and the results of such measures, and to indicate whether any court rulings have been issued in these cases.
6. 351. In light of the issues raised in this complaint, the Committee invites the Government to avail itself of the technical assistance of the Office.