پيام‌كارفرمــــايــــان

BI-MONTHLY NEWSLETTER OF THE INTERNATIONAL ORGANISATION OF EMPLOYERS (IOE)

2010-01-09T12:11:45Z

MESSAGE FROM THE PRESIDENT

2010 marks the 90th anniversary of the IOE, a unique family of 148 national employer organisations from 141 countries from all over the world.

If a single theme were to capture the role and achievements of the IOE across its 90-year history, it would be meeting challenges.

Since 1920, the employers of the world, through their global representative organisations, have successfully met the challenges of war, recovery, depression and mass unemployment, and of the fundamental battle of ideologies which played out for much of the last 90 years. Employers have strived to balance the growing recognition of fundamental employment rights with the equally fundamental importance of genuine opportunity, free enterprise and the essential contribution private sector employment makes to all societies.

The IOE successfully globalised, well before the word became fashionable, uniting employers throughout the world, progressively welcoming new members from all regions, and operating across a diverse range of systems and cultures. This embodied the flexibility and realism, tempered with principle and resolve, which have been a hallmark of the organisation. A particular strength of the contemporary IOE is the quality and reach of its regional participation.

In 2010 the principal challenge remains the impact of the global economic and jobs crisis. Enterprises throughout the world continue to face levels of adversity and risk unseen for generations, and struggle to remain viable and maintain employment to the extent possible.

Building on significant successes during 2009, including the adoption of the ILO Global Jobs Pact which incorporates a number of fundamental principles for employers, the challenges of 2010 are equally significant. Through the IOE, the employers of the world will need to resist any retreat to protectionism, and will need to remain a strong voice in favour of governments supporting employers in creating jobs and trading the world out of crisis. Only employers can deliver long-term crisis recovery, and we need all possible support and reform to meet this goal.

2010 will see the IOE, through both its members and staff, participate in significant international forums to address these challenges, including discussions with the expanded G20, major regional and international groupings, and through the auspices of major international organisations such as the ILO.

A concurrent global challenge is the impact of climate change, and of climate change responses on employers and employment. Building on participation in the climate change discussions of recent years, as well as the Copenhagen Business Day which was held on 12th December and ran parallel to the UN Climate Change Conference, the IOE is well placed to strongly represent employer interests in responding to the next stage of climate change policy.

Another challenge which unites the contemporary IOE with its forebears is the critical importance of maintaining a highly effective world class organisation. A process of organisational renewal, commenced in 2009, will be progressed in 2010 to ensure the IOE is best equipped to remain the most effective possible voice of employers on the world stage.

We, as IOE office bearers, representatives, members and staff, should approach the fresh challenges of 2010 confident in the strength of our organisation and all those who participate in the global employer network, the continued relevance of the IOE's role and contribution to societies throughout the world, and with due reflection on the achievements of those who came before us.

I wish you all good health, happiness and prosperity in 2010, and look forward to working with all in the IOE family during 2010 in meeting the challenges of our times and adding our chapter to the IOE's long and proud history.

Wiseman NKUHLU

President

IOE ACTIVITIES

SPECIAL MEETINGS

Meeting of Ibero-American Employers' Organization Presidents

Held in Lisbon from 22 to 24 November, this meeting discussed the role of the business community and the new political reality in Latin America, the critical situation of the private sector in the region and employers' organization responses to the crisis, and concluded with the adoption of the Lisbon Declaration on Private Enterprises and Economic Crisis which highlights the fundamental role of private enterprises in achieving sustainable growth in Ibero-America as well as a number of key measures for crisis recovery. The Declaration was submitted to the Heads of State who met directly after the employers' meeting.

Also, to best promote and defend the values and principles of private enterprises before governments, trade unions and society at large, a regional agreement on employers' organization communication was adopted. In a follow-up mechanism jointly coordinated by the IOE and the ILO's ACT/EMP, a regional communication programme will be adopted in June 2010. (Maria Paz Anzorreguy)

Meeting of Ibero-American Social Partners

Under the leadership of the IOE, Ibero-American Employer Organizations met their Trade Union partners in a two-day meeting organized by the Ibero-American General Secretariat (SEGIB) to discuss issues related to Social Protection, Employment Creation and Collective Bargaining. A rich debate was followed by the adoption of a Joint Declaration which highlights the relevance of the Global Job Pact as a roadmap for crisis recovery and the fact that the Pact is the result of broad global social dialogue. The Declaration was subsequently submitted to the meeting of Heads of State. (Maria Paz Anzorreguy)

International labour migration : The Role of Employers' Organizations

(Alger, 6 - 9 December 2009)

International labour migration poses serious challenges to countries in West and North Africa with increased movement of young people across borders in search of employment opportunities. A number of countries have also become transit countries as migrants seek opportunities to move to Europe. Migrant workers have not been spared by the financial and economic crisis and a number have returned from Dubai and western Europe. In order to address these challenges, the IOE in collaboration with the ILO and the General Confederation of Algerian Enterprises, convened a sub-regional meeting bringing together employer representatives to discuss, among other issues, how to create more opportunities for young people in their countries of origin, how to benefit from the experience and expertise of migrants and how to build the capacity of employers' organizations so that they can contribute to their government's migration policies and practices.

The Government of Algeria presented measures taken to expand job opportunities for young people graduating from universities and training colleges in order to reduce emigration:

· Promotion of entrepreneurship development

· Skills development and employability

· Adapting training and education to the needs of the job market

· Building the capacity of labour market institutions

· Promoting investments in job rich sectors

· Promotion of youth employment programmes

· Support to SME development

Participants requested that youth employment programmes in the sub-region be documented and best practices shared, and called for “brain circulation” programmes to enable enterprises to tap into the experience and expertise of migrants.

(Frederick Muia)

Adriatic Employers discuss economic issues and SMEs

With the support of the IOE, the Adriatic Region Employers' Centre (AREC), of which the Association of Employers of Slovenia (ZDS) is a recent member, organized a workshop on 10/11 December to consider economic issues and SME development. AREC members discussed ways to improve the business environment for SMEs with representatives from the IFC Office in Belgrade and from the ILO Office in Budapest.

At the initiative of the IOE, the IFC had previously established direct contact with some IOE members in the region through training programmes. In addition, participants also discussed the challenges faced by SMEs in the fight against corruption – a major priority for business in the region. Presentations were made by the IOE on the guide prepared by the Secretariat and by Transparency International (TI) which introduced its Business Principles for SMEs. (http://www.transparency.org/global_priorities/private_sector/business_principles). TI and the IOE are discussing further activities in the region and elsewhere to promote good governance and increase business awareness of the need to fight corruption.

(Eric Oechslin)

Global Child Labour Conference in the Netherlands

The Dutch Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment is organizing a Global Conference on Child Labour on 10 and 11 May 2010 in close collaboration with the ILO for its tripartite constituents and a broad range of other relevant actors. The main objective of the Conference is to deliver a commitment to take immediate and effective measures to meet the challenge to eliminate the worst forms of child labour by 2016. To this end, a roadmap with concrete steps to achieve the goal would be adopted by the Global Conference. A Consultative Group has been set up to work on the direction and content of the roadmap. The IOE attended the first meeting of the Consultative Group which was held on 17 November 2009. The IOE shall nominate the 35 business representatives at this Conference. The next meeting will be held in Geneva in March 2010. (Maud Megevand)

IOE African Members lead support to the Global Jobs Pact

On the occasion of the second African Social Partners Forum and the first Decent Work symposium held back-to-back in Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso on 30 November - 2 December 2009, IOE members led strong regional support to the implementation of the Global Jobs Pact in Africa, noting that the global economic crisis had now spread to the continent through decreased export earnings, falling commodity prices, decreased remittances and fewer tourists. Moreover many countries were witnessing a decrease in Foreign Direct Investment and Overseas Development Assistance (ODA). The fall in export tax revenues was squeezing government budgets and threatening spending on basics such as health and education. With growth falling and recovery prospects fragile, jobs pick-up was likely to lag behind output, with youth and women the worst hit by the crisis.

The crisis has interrupted the recent improved economic growth performance of African countries which averaged more than 5% per annum over the previous five years. Employers supported the Global Jobs Pact as it promotes the need to create and sustain enterprises as the way to achieve productive employment, and also schemes to help firms get through the crisis. The focus on skills and education was particularly important for improving employment prospects and promoting future growth and productivity.

Important highlights of employer proposals that were read to the Heads of State who attended the symposium included the need to:

· promote regional economic integration

· support SME development through access to affordable credit

· promote an enabling business environment through implementing proposals in the World Bank Doing Business Reports

· promote tripartism and social dialogue

· provide support to African youth through skills development and entrepreneurship

· promote fundamental principles and rights at work

(Frederick Muia)

Human Rights and the Defence of Private Enterprises

The IOE is working in close collaboration with the OHCHR to identify the human rights bodies and mechanisms that can be best used to defend business interests and present abuses and violations of employers' human rights. The IOE will subsequently implement appropriate action to promote and defend a better and safer environment for private sector development internationally. (Maud Megevand)

GLOBAL INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS

Trends in Global Industrial Relations

In a series of seminars designed to enhance understanding amongst the United States Council for International Business (USCIB) members of significant trends likely to impact enterprises' interests in the future, the IOE recently updated a number of multinationals on global industrial relations issues, focussing on the development and increasing incidence of International Framework Agreements by Global Union Federations and work in the area of Business and Human Rights. The GIRN network continues to develop, with the first meeting of 2010 taking place in Brussels in April. (Brent Wilton)

CORPORATE SOCIAL REPONSIBILITY

CSR Regulation Trends around the World

The IOE continues to monitor and report on CSR developments and has learned that Mauritius recently adopted legislation requiring 2% of after-tax profit to be channelled into approved community development activities; Indonesia is currently developing regulations to support a law requiring companies whose operations rely on natural resources to implement CSR and environmental protection programmes, and in Nigeria consideration is being given to requiring companies to contribute a portion of profit as a CSR contribution to infrastructure development. Within the European Commission work is ongoing with regard to CSR reporting and transparencies.

Pressure on business by governments targeting CSR as a mechanism to provide funding for social and infrastructure programmes is likely to increase in the face of the recovery from the crisis. Members need to be vigilant and to ensure a strong voice in debates about the responsibilities of business. Members are reminded of the IOE papers on both CSR and the Role of Business in Society. (Brent Wilton)

THE GLOBAL OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH NETWORK 2009 (GOSH.net)

Following the successful second meeting hosted by Endesa in October in Madrid, a third meeting of the network will be held in London on 25 and 26 February 2010 hosted by BAE Systems plc. The agenda will cover the public reporting of OSH performance in CSR reports, the occupational safety and health implications of climate change and the global union priorities in OSH.

The following employers guides have been published on the IOE website (under OSH section):

· IOE Helping Employers: Manage vehicle and driver safety

· IOE Helping Employers: Emergency preparedness, business continuity and pandemics

(Janet Asherson)

OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH (OSH)

IOE work on emergency preparedness, business continuity and pandemics provided a considerable input to the ILO Technical Workshop on Business Continuity Planning held in October and to the continuing work of the ILO Task Force on Influenza and Pandemic Preparedness. The workplace is an effective entry point for information and practical advice on prevention and preparedness in the face of the pandemic.

IOE members, as well as members of the IOE GOSH, have provided invaluable assistance in making guidance on OSH more relevant and practical to enterprises. The IOE supported experts at ILO tripartite meetings in October and November:

· to revise the ILO list of occupational diseases that will harmonise global requirements for reporting work-related ill-health and provide a template for identifying future risks.

· to draft the Code of Practice on safety and health in agriculture to be a practical, reader-friendly text, which should complement Convention No. 184 on safety and health in agriculture. Further work will be required in 2010 to refine the draft suitable for adoption.

The IOE provided the employers' perspective for two sessions at the annual occupational safety and health conference in Düsseldorf at:

· the round table discussion on employer action to manage OSH during this time of crisis

· the IALI/ILO workshop on employers' organisations input to integrate labour inspection and OSH Strategies into the ILO Decent Work Country Programmes

See http://www.ilosafetyconference2009.org/index.html and https://webdev.ilo.org/labadmin/what/events/lang—en/docName—WCMS_118143/index.html

ENVIRONMENT AND CLIMATE CHANGE

ENVIRONMENT AND CLIMATE CHANGE

Janet Asherson delivered the IOE message to the Copenhagen climate change summit at the business day held on 11 and 12 December 2009 and organised by the Confederation of Danish Employers.

See the IOE Note: What next after Copenhagen?

The IOE represented employers' views at a meeting held in Geneva in November to progress the work of the ILO/UNEP/World Bank to provide an analysis of the likely employment impact of climate change at sectoral level. The Global Green New Deal was launched in March 2009 in New York and the sectoral report following this will be published in 2010. (Janet Asherson)

The ILO's Bureau for Employers' Activities (ACT/EMP) has prepared information to help employers' organizations and their members to understand and actively participate in the on-going Copenhagen climate change process. The key objective of this ACT/EMP site is to help employers' organizations and their members to increase their capacity to play a proactive and effective role in support of the design, development and implementation of policies and programmes aimed at achieving both climate change mitigation and adaptation objectives in the most economically and socially sustainable manner.

See here

THE ILO

Francis Blanchard, Former ILO Director-General, passed away on 9 december, 2009

Francis Blanchard, ILO Director-General from 1974 to 1989, died on 9 December 2009 at the age of 93. He served the ILO for 38 years, but he will be particularly remembered for his constructive and effective role during the last phase of the Cold War, placing the ILO in the forefront in the defence of freedom and democracy. He was also deeply committed to the development of appropriate international labour standards throughout the world.

Francis Blanchard directed the ILO with wisdom and strong leadership during East-West confrontation and his efforts in bringing international recognition and support to Solidarnosc continue to be recognised, as does his fundamental role in providing legitimacy to their cause.

In times of restricted freedom, with ILO fundamental principles as his guiding reference, Francis Blanchard never hesitated in lending his support to Employers' Organisations and Trade Unions alike whenever they were under attack. The IOE especially owes him deep gratitude as he generously gave his personal, as well as the ILO's, backing to the employers of Nicaragua when the communist Sandinista régime destabilized Central America during the 1980s.

Arab Employment Forum – Beirut

With the support of the IOE, Member federations in the Arab region participated in the ILO/ALO Arab Employment Forum in Beirut in the last quarter of 2009. This was one of the first regional considerations of the implementation of the Global Jobs Pact after its adoption in June. The forum conclusions reflect strong regional input from the participants as well as a number of particular employment priorities for the region. (Scott Barklamb)

High-Level Tripartite Meeting on Collective Bargaining

On 20 November 2009, 12 employer, worker and government representatives participated in an ILO High-Level Tripartite Meeting on Collective Bargaining. Facilitated by Professor Tom Kochan of MIT, the meeting heard presentations from major enterprises in the auto and health care industries, research on crisis responses and collective bargaining, and an update on legislative developments from various countries. The IOE anticipates further discussion on this meeting at the next ILO Governing Body session in March 2010. (Scott Barklamb)

ILO World of Work Report

On 7 December 2009, the ILO, through the International Institute for Labour Studies (IILS) released its World of Work Report 2009, which focuses on “The Global Jobs Crisis and beyond”. This is a detailed study of the Global Financial Crisis and its continuing impact, and the effectiveness of crisis remediation measures. The report addresses the jobs crisis, making finance work for the real economy, labour provisions in international trade arrangements, and the jobs implications of climate change policies. (Scott Barklamb)

ILO Global Wages Report – 2009 Update

In the lead up to the November 2009 Governing Body meeting, the ILO issued its 2009 Update to the Global Wages Report. Employers, through their ESP Committee spokesperson Ms Ronnie Goldberg of the USCIB, expressed concern with the technical foundations for the data and its analysis and in particular with the purported policy lessons said to flow from this information. The Office has been requested to remediate these concerns and work more closely with employers prior to publishing future information on wages, including the next full Global Wages Report for 2010. (Scott Barklamb)

ILO Workshop in Japan on the Automotive Industry

High-level tripartite delegations from eight Asian countries met in Tokyo from 7 to 9 December to discuss the impact of the global economic crisis on the automotive industry in the Asia-Pacific.

Initially part of an action programme planned before the crisis, the workshop was adapted to better respond to the crisis, take stock of the industry in the region and complement the global study of the impact of the crisis undertaken by the ILO.

The participating countries, representing both vehicle and parts manufacturing sectors from Japan, Republic of Korea, India, Thailand, Indonesia, Malaysia, Australia and The Philippines, account for eight of the 52 million cars produced worldwide annually. In all of these countries, the automotive industry is a corner stone of industrial production and employment and, in some, government policies promote this sector of the economy.

While an earlier ILO report had estimated that over 1.5 million of approximately 8.4 million light vehicle production jobs were at risk globally, long-term global demand is likely to sustain automotive employment growth in the region. Additionally, the rapid growth of new owners of motor vehicles in the region, and the potential impact on the environment, increases the need for more investment in research and development into more fuel-efficient vehicles. (Jean Dejardin)

WORKING WITH THE UN AND OTHER INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS

G20 Request Employer input into Global Training Strategy

At the G20 Pittsburgh summit last September, leaders invited the ILO to draft a global training strategy as a key element of the global response to the financial and jobs crisis. The IOE has initiated an internal project to inform the Office of employer expectations of such a strategy, and to inject employer views on skills and training policy into any global training strategy in conjunction with BIAC whose ELSA committee includes a number of IOE member organisations. (Eric Oechslin)

G20 Labour Ministers Meeting

Labour Ministers from G20 countries are to meet in Washington in April 2010 (dates to be confirmed). The ministerial meetings pave the way for leaders meetings during mid- and late 2010. The IOE is working closely with BIAC and members in preparation for the meeting, including drafting a joint IOE/BIAC statement, a practice which commenced with the previous G8 meetings. (Scott Barklamb)

Revised Guidelines for Cooperation between the UN and Business

The UN Secretary-General has issued revised “Guidelines on Cooperation between the United Nations and the Business Sector” (20 November, New York) in response to Member State requests for greater emphasis on impact assessment, transparency, accountability and sustainability of business partnerships. Chaired by the Deputy Secretary-General, the revision involved senior staff from over 30 UN Agencies, Funds and Programmes with experience of collaborating with business. More.

The UN Secretary-General's report on “Enhanced cooperation between the United Nations and all relevant partners, in particular the private sector” (A/64/337) was presented to the General Assembly's Second Committee (5 November, New York) and highlights the need for sustainable business practices and broader UN-private sector engagement in light of global challenges. The presentation of the report was followed by statements from representatives of several Member States and is expected to result in a General Assembly resolution that provides further support for the Global Compact's mandate. More. Download Report.

Partnership in Eastern Europe and Central Asia

Under the leadership of the European Commission the IOE was an active partner in the launch of the Eastern Partnership Civil Society Forum last November in Brussels. This forum provides a framework for future activities for civil society, including social partners, in EU neighbour countries. The IOE insisted on acknowledgement of a better role for social partners to strengthen social dialogue in these countries.

An IOE delegation also represented the business views at the UN Ministerial Conference on the social impact of the crisis in Eastern Europe, Central Asia and in Turkey held in Almaty (Kazakhstan) on 7/8 December.

See here

This meeting was a positive example of UN reform as many members of the UN family (ILO, UNDP, UNICEF, FAO, etc.) were present, as well as international financial institutions (IMF, WB, EBRD, etc.), to listen to ministers and social partners' contributions on employment, social protection and on food security. We can expect that DWCPs, UNDAF and follow-up activities will take into account the social partners' contributions. This was also the IOE's first official visit to Central Asia where it will be supporting ACT/EMP more in its efforts to assist recently-established new business structures. (Eric Oechslin)

CEATAL priorities for 2010-2011

The Organization of American States (OAS) Inter-American Conference of Ministers of Labour (IAMCL) 2009 Planning Meeting 2009 was held in Washington, DC on December 10 and 11. The main objective was to determine the IACML Calendar of Activities for 2010-2011. CEATAL was represented at the meeting by Brian Burkett (Canadian Employers' Council) and Maria Paz Anzorreguy (CEATAL Coordinator/IOE Senior Adviser).

Thanks to members' input, the following six CEATAL priorities were agreed for 2010-2011:

Sustainable Enterprise: support for micro, small, and medium-sized enterprises sustainability, and other production units; the labour dimension of globalization, regional integration processes and free trade agreements; strategies to maintain employment developed by governments, workers and employers to mitigate the effects of the economic crisis; Youth Employment strategies and initiatives; Labour informality and unregistered work; Development, enforcement and promotion of labour laws. CEATAL also requested that the issues of Sustainable Enterprises and Social Dialogue be cross-cutting in all the activities.

CEATAL priorities were well received by other participants who highlighted the fundamental role Sustainable Enterprises play in crisis recovery. In this regard, Working Group 1, composed of representatives of Ministers of Labour from the United States, Brazil and Guyana, committed to include the issue of Sustainable Enterprise within their subjects for analysis.

(Maria Paz Anzorreguy)

The World Health Organization

The IOE presented at two WHO meetings in Geneva in October on employers' perspectives on, and requirements of, the WHO which include:

· A global network for the Plan of Action on Workers' Health

· An initiative to provide information for enterprises on healthy workplaces

See http://www.who.int/occupational_health/en/

(Janet Asherson)

CALENDAR OF FORTHCOMING MAJOR MEETINGS

15 – 19 February 2010

Tripartite Meeting of Experts to Adopt Port State Control Guidelines for Implementation of the Work in Fishing Convention, 2007 (No. 188) (Geneva)

19 – 20 March 2010

IOE Management Board (Geneva)

11 – 26 March 2010 307th Session of the ILO Governing Body and its committees (Geneva)

25 – 26 February 2010 GOSH.net Meeting, hosted by BAE Systems plc (London)

9 – 10 April 2010

African Employers Conference on the G20 Summit (Johannesburg)

22 – 23 April 2010

GIRN Meeting, (Brussels)

1 June 2010

IOE General Council (Geneva)

2 – 18 June 2010

99th Session of the International Labour Conference (Geneva)

18 June 2010

308th Session of the ILO Governing Body (Geneva)

INTERNATIONAL ORGANISATION OF EMPLOYERS (IOE) www.ioe-emp.org

Death of Former IOE President Ashraf Tabani

2009-08-05T08:29:47Z

t is with deep sadness and regret that the IOE reports that Ashraf Tabani, President of the Employers' Federation of Pakistan (EFP), former President of the IOE and, since 1990, titular employer member of the Governing Body of the ILO, passed away peacefully at his home in Karachi yesterday evening, 16 July.

Ashraf Tabani was a pillar of the international employer community for over thirty years. Right up to his death, he was an extremely active global employer voice, leading a number of debates, most recently at the International Labour Conference held in June in Geneva.

In Pakistan, he was Minister of Finance and Industry in the Government of Sindh from May 1981 to April 1984. He subsequently became Governor of Sindh in 1987. During his long career, he was Chairman of the Industrial Development Bank of Pakistan, Export Promotion Bureau, the Cotton Board of Pakistan, Fisheries Board, Pakistan Silk and Rayon Mills Association. He was a successful businessman and Chairman of the Seri Sugar Mills Ltd.

In the Asia region, he was a former President and currently active member of the Confederation of Asia-Pacific Employers (CAPE). He represented the interests of Asian Employers at the regional and international level over a period of thirty years.

As a longstanding member of the Governing Body of the ILO, he chaired a range of policy committees and was employer spokesperson of the Employment and Social Policy Committee for a number of years. He was a strong advocate of the ILO's 1998 Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work, of which he was a key author, and recently became the employer spokesperson for the ILO's Annual Global Report. Additionally, he held the position of Employers' Vice-President of the International Labour Conference in 1993 and 2008. As former President and Honorary President of the IOE, he was a leading voice in the international global employer community, representing the Organisation in debates at regional and global levels. He was a key player, on behalf of the IOE, in launching the Global Compact where his role was widely acknowledged by former UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan.

Above all, Ashraf Tabani was a gentleman. He always sought to understand all sides of the argument, to respect the views of others and to strive for consensus in policy debates. He will be sadly missed, both as a powerful leader of the employer community and a passionate advocate for the role of social and economic development in achieving social justice.

May his soul rest in peace!

Geneva, 17 July 2009

Letter to Director of International Relations Department, Ministry of Labor and Social Affairs

2009-06-08T16:00:44Z

H.E.Mr. Hossein Noori
Director of Internatinoal Relations Department
Ministry of Labor and Social Affairs,I.R. of Iran

Subject: Dispatching the delegation of employers to the International Conference of Labor

Dear Sir,

First of all, I would like to thank you for your invitation letter of No.183940 dated 20 May .2009, and for the following meetimg we had which was held on 25 May, in your office at the venue of Ministry of Labor and Social Affairs, attended also by Ms.Shohreh Tasdighi, Advisor on Internatioanl Affairs of Iranian Confederation of Employers' Associations -ICEA.

May I remind you that during the meeting, your proposal on including only one person from ICEA, as an Advisor, in the composition of the Iranian employers' deligation to the 2009 ILC was heard and not accepted by ICEA.

The meeting was held at the condition that:

1. There was only one week remaining to the opening of the Session. In addition, the deadlin of 19 May 2009, set by the ILO, for the submissiom of credential forms of the Iranian delegation to the ILC was expired.

2. The members of the employers' delegation had already been designated as well as introduced to the Office, and the whole delegation was dispatched to Geneva on 29 May 2009.

3. In the appointment of the mentioned delegation, the ICEA had no role or share and was not even consulted with. At the same time, according to the formal certificate issued by the concerned court investigating the ongoing dispute no judicial decision has yet been made with regard to the dissolution of ICEA.

You are well aware that according to our national law, as long as ICEA has legally existed, the existence of any other employers' organization lacks the legitimacy. In this line, the dispatched employers' delegation to the 2009 ILC should have been designated in consultaion with ICEA. Naturally, the employers' delegate to Session should have been designated from ICEA and not from ICE. In the mean time. as you are aware, in the last two years. unfortunately, the dispached delegation of employers were also introduced by taht ministery under the name of ICEA, as included in the ILC list of deligations.

As mentioned in the above-mentioned meeting, ICEA in two separate communications, (No.10408-310 dated 11 April,2009) and (No.10472-310 dated 25 April, 2009), addressed to the labor minister, while forwarding the judicial court certificate, introduced the respective individuals in order to be dispatched to the International Conference 2009. At the same time, we requested a meeting in order to discuss and explore a rational solution to solve the current problem. Regretfully, like our previous communications, these two letters were not responded. In the meeting, the copies of the two mentioned letters were also submitted to you for your further information.

Henc. we would like to, once again, express ICEA preparedness for holding a joint general assembely ellection (ICEA and ICE), while emphasizing on our willingness for discussion to explore a negotiated solution in this area. In response, you promised that you will discuss with the minister and inform us accordingly.

I thank you, again, and will be looking forward to hearing from you on the outcome.

Truly yours,

Mohammad Otaredian
Secretary General

The ILO's 90th Anniversary

2009-04-20T15:28:12Z

Mr. Juan Somavia
Director-General,
International Labour Organization-ILO
Geneva-Switzerland

The ILO's 90th Anniversary
Dear Mr. Director-General,

Please receive, hereby, the ICEA greetings on the 90th anniversary of the International Labor Organization.

The 90th anniversary is certainly the time to look back and assess the great achievements made, many of them for the first time in human history, in creating a dignified and worthy life for all human beings.

At the same time, the 90th anniversary comes at a time when financial Tsunami and economic turmoil, sweeping through rich countries, have also left their adverse affects on other countries. Yes, we all will experience a terrible difficult 2009, in which no country will be immune.

Governments are looking under every rock to cut costs and explore a balanced and coordinated response to the global economic and social crisis. It must be hard not to get discouraged when to see so many signs of recession.

We should, however, see the challenges of 2009 as opportunities for collaborative international action. We all share an enormous responsibility for redressing the situation and bringing a balance to the world. We can fulfill that mandate, but to do so will require a more active level of exchange and rich cooperation that we have heretofore been able to establish.

On this commemorative occasion of the ILO 90th anniversary, let us collectively renew our vows and jointly take on to the road with all that hard-won gains and more.

We also are hoping that ILO will galvanize the political will and continue to push the pace in order for the fundamental principles of social justice, based on the decent work agenda, will be more valued, respected and realizes.

Please accept, Sir, the assurances of my highest esteem.

Sincerely,

Mohammad Otaredian
Secretary-General

ILO Governing Body concludes discussions on policy responses to globaleconomic and jobs crisis

ILO — 2009-04-03T17:13:28Z

GENEVA (ILO News) – The International Labour Office (ILO) Governing Body concluded its discussions on the financial and economic global crisis, recommending a series of measures aimed at mitigating its impact and shaping a sustainable recovery.

In a report on the high-level tripartite discussions on the crisis, the ILO listed a series of next steps, including:

• Calling on the upcoming Group of 20 meeting in London to increase its focus on the jobs and social dimensions of the global economic crisis, including a proposal for a Global Jobs Pact;

• Making the economic crisis the main theme of the ILO's International Labour Conference that will gather more than 4,000 worker, employer and government representatives in Geneva in June;

• The programme of the Conference itself, on 3 - 19 June 2009, will be adapted to give high priority to the ways to overcome the employment and social policy effects of the crisis, including through high-level presentations and panel discussions and working out joint conclusions on action to exit the crisis.

• Participating actively in all relevant international forums addressing the crisis, advocating increased focus on its employment and social aspects, as well as stepping up its policy advice service to meet constituents' requests.

“The way forward is to work for a new vision of open market economies with a strong social dimension in which a competitive, efficient and socially responsible private sector and an active and accountable public sector generate decent work for all and a cleaner, fairer and more stable globalization,” the ILO statement said. (GB.304/4)

During the high-level discussion, ILO Director-General Juan Somavia called for a prompt response to the jobs crisis, describing international coordination to tackle the crisis as weak, and adding “the financial, trade, economic, employment and social roots of the global crisis are interlinked and so must be the policy responses We need to implement a coherent and coordinated job-oriented recovery strategy, based on sustainable enterprises, as soon as possible”.

The Governing body also adopted the implementation plan of the "ILO Declaration on Social Justice for a Fair Globalization" GB.304/7, which it said “sets out the role of the ILO in realizing such a vision”. The International Labour Conference adopted the Declaration last year to strengthen the ILO's capacity to promote its Decent Work Agenda and respond to the challenges of globalization.

The high-level meeting also heard remarks by International Monetary Fund Managing Director Dominique Strauss-Kahn, who called for increased cooperation between the IMF and the ILO. Guy Ryder, General Secretary of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC); Alexander Shokhin, President of the Russian Union of Industrialists and Entrepreneurs; and Jonathan Shaw, Minister for Disabled People and for the South East of the UK Department for Work and Pensions and others also addressed the ILO meeting.

Nobel prize-winning economist, Professor Joseph Stiglitz, addressed a special sitting of the Governing Body on the impact of the global financial and economic crisis on 18 March, during which he also was presented with the 2008 ILO Decent Work Research Prize by Mr. Somavia.

Faced with the social and labour implications of the global crisis, and building on the Declaration on Social Justice for a Fair Globalization, the Governing Body supported the Director-General's proposals for the Programme and Budget for 2010-11. The Governing Body recommended to the International Labour Conference a provisional regular budget of $665.1 million for the biennium which maintained the same level of resources as 2008-09. The Programme and Budget includes estimates for an expanded programme of extra-budgetary technical cooperation, rising from $350 million to $425 million, and a doubling of voluntary supplementary funding to the regular budget from $45 to $90 million.

Governing body members spoke of the need to reinforce action to deliver decent jobs and to reinforce services to the ILO's government, employer and worker constituents. They welcomed the more focussed, results-based proposals to ensure a balanced approach based on the four strategic objectives of employment, protection, dialogue and rights.

The Governing Body approved the report of the Committee on Freedom of Association that draws special attention to the cases of Colombia, the Republic of Korea, Ethiopia and the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela. (GB.304/6).

The Governing Body discussed the extension of the arrangements for treating complaints on forced labour in Myanmar. It noted the recent steps to increase information on the availability of the complaints mechanism, which is run by the ILO Liaison Officer. It also expressed concern that acts of harassment against those who use this mechanism can weaken it and affect its credibility."

The Governing Body is the executive body of the International Labour Office (the Office is the secretariat of the Organization). It meets three times a year, in March, June and November and takes decisions on ILO policy, the agenda of the International Labour Conference and the draft Programme and Budget of the Organization for submission to the Conference.

It is composed of 56 titular members (28 Governments, 14 Employers and 14 Workers) and 66 deputy members (28 Governments, 19 Employers and 19 Workers). Ten of the titular government seats are permanently held by States of chief industrial importance (Brazil, China, France, Germany, India, Italy, Japan, the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom and the United States). The other Government members are elected by the Conference every three years.

ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles

2008-09-24T09:08:03Z

Whereas the ILO was founded in the conviction that social justice is essential to universal and lasting peace;

Whereas economic growth is essential but not sufficient to ensure equity, social progress and the eradication of poverty, confirming the need for the ILO to promote strong social policies, justice and democratic institutions;

Whereas the ILO should, now more than ever, draw upon all its standard-setting, technical cooperation and research resources in all its areas of competence, in particular employment, vocational training and working conditions, to ensure that, in the context of a global strategy for economic and social development, economic and social policies are mutually reinforcing components in order to create broad-based sustainable development;

Whereas the ILO should give special attention to the problems of persons with special social needs, particularly the unemployed and migrant workers, and mobilize and encourage international, regional and national efforts aimed at resolving their problems, and promote effective policies aimed at job creation;

Whereas, in seeking to maintain the link between social progress and economic growth, the guarantee of fundamental principles and rights at work is of particular significance in that it enables the persons concerned, to claim freely and on the basis of equality of opportunity, their fair share of the wealth which they have helped to generate, and to achieve fully their human potential;

Whereas the ILO is the constitutionally mandated international organization and the competent body to set and deal with international labour standards, and enjoys universal support and acknowledgement in promoting Fundamental Rights at Work as the expression of its constitutional principles;

Whereas it is urgent, in a situation of growing economic interdependence, to reaffirm the immutable nature of the fundamental principles and rights embodied in the Constitution of the Organization and to promote their universal application;

[ TOP ]

The International Labour Conference

1. Recalls:

(a) that in freely joining the ILO, all Members have endorsed the principles and rights set out in its Constitution and in the Declaration of Philadelphia, and have undertaken to work towards attaining the overall objectives of the Organization to the best of their resources and fully in line with their specific circumstances;

(b) that these principles and rights have been expressed and developed in the form of specific rights and obligations in Conventions recognized as fundamental both inside and outside the Organization.

2. Declares that all Members, even if they have not ratified the Conventions in question, have an obligation arising from the very fact of membership in the Organization to respect, to promote and to realize, in good faith and in accordance with the Constitution, the principles concerning the fundamental rights which are the subject of those Conventions, namely:

(a) freedom of association and the effective recognition of the right to collective bargaining;

(b) the elimination of all forms of forced or compulsory labour;

(d) the elimination of discrimination in respect of employment and occupation.

3. Recognizes the obligation on the Organization to assist its Members, in response to their established and expressed needs, in order to attain these objectives by making full use of its constitutional, operational and budgetary resources, including, by the mobilization of external resources and support, as well as by encouraging other international organizations with which the ILO has established relations, pursuant to article 12 of its Constitution, to support these efforts:

(a) by offering technical cooperation and advisory services to promote the ratification and implementation of the fundamental Conventions;

(b) by assisting those Members not yet in a position to ratify some or all of these Conventions in their efforts to respect, to promote and to realize the principles concerning fundamental rights which are the subject of these Conventions; and

4. Decides that, to give full effect to this Declaration, a promotional follow-up, which is meaningful and effective, shall be implemented in accordance with the measures specified in the annex hereto, which shall be considered as an integral part of this Declaration.

5. Stresses that labour standards should not be used for protectionist trade purposes, and that nothing in this Declaration and its follow-up shall be invoked or otherwise used for such purposes; in addition, the comparative advantage of any country should in no way be called into question by this Declaration and its follow-up.

Parliamentary Procedures at a Glance

2008-09-08T15:50:50Z

Parliamentary law is a system of maintaining order in organizations. It provides an approved and uniform method of conducting meetings in a fair, orderly, and expeditious manner.

Respect for law is a basic characteristic of democratic government. This respect is clearly shown by a willingness to practice an orderly method of procedure in organizations so as to follow the will of the majority, to protect the rights of the minority, and to protect the interests of those absent.

The use of parliamentary procedure in itself, however, does not insure that these ideals will be met. Everyone involved with an organization must also work to create an atmosphere of trust, mutual respect, and shared purpose.

Robert's Rules of Order was written by General Henry M. Robert, a U.S. Army engineer, and published in 1876. His work is still regarded as the basic authority on the subject of parliamentary law. The most recent edition of the work, Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised (l970), is the accepted authority for almost all organizations today. This pamphlet, Fundamentals of Parliamentary Procedure, is based on that book.

COLIFORNIA STATE UNIVERCITY ,CHOCAGO
STUDENT ACTIVITIES OFFICE
Bell Memorial Union 213
Chico, CA 95929-755
530-898-5396

I. PARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURE-ITS PURPOSE AND USE

Parliamentary law is a system of maintaining order in organizations. It provides an approved and uniform method of conducting meetings in a fair, orderly, and expeditious manner.

II. GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF PARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURE

Every member of an organization should be familiar with the following simple rules and customs:

All members have equal rights, privileges, and obligations; rules must be administered impartially.

The minority has rights which must be protected.

Full and free discussion of all motions, reports, and other items of business is a right of all members.

In doing business the simplest and most direct procedure should be used.

Logical precedence governs introduction and disposition of motions. Only one question can be considered at a time.

Members may not make a motion or speak in debate until they have risen and been recognized by the chair and thus have obtained the floor. No one may speak more than twice on the same question on the same day without permission of the assembly. No member may speak a second time on the same question if anyone who has not spoken on that question wishes to do so.

Members must not attack or question the motives of other members. Customarily, all remarks are addressed to the presiding officer.

In voting, members have the right to know at all times what motion is before the assembly and what affirmative and negative votes mean.

III. PARLIAMENTARY TERMS

Addressing the Chair: Getting the chair's attention by saying, e.g., "Madam Chairwoman," "Mr. Chairman," "Madam President," or "Mr. Moderator."

Agenda: Order of business; program of a business meeting.

Ad Hoc Committee: Committee established for a specific purpose, for a particular case.

Adjourn: To end a meeting.

Announcing the Vote: In announcing the vote on a motion, the chair should:

(1)report on the voting itself, stating which side has prevailed;

(2)declare that the motion is adopted or lost; and

(3)state the effect of the vote or order its execution.

For a voice or rising vote in which no exact count is taken, the chair might say, forexample, "The ayes have it, the motion carries, and the brochure will be published." For a vote in which an exact count is taken, the chair might say, "There are 14 in the affirmative and 15 in the negative. The negative has it and the motion is lost. No additional funds will be spent on publicity this semester."

Ballots: Slips of paper for voting.

Carried: Passed or adopted; used in referring to affirmative action on a motion.

Caucus: Private session in advance of a scheduled meeting.

Chair: the Chair, Chairman, Chairwoman: To preside over; the presiding officer.

Chairman/Chairwoman Pro Tem: Presiding officer for the time being. Commit: To refer to a committee.

Committee of the Whole: Designation of all of the members of an assembly present at a meeting as members of an ad hoc committee; working as a committee of the whole allows an assembly to function informally (e.g., to have unlimited debate).

Convene: To open a session. Division of the Assembly; a Division: A vote retaken for the purpose of verifying a voice vote or show of hands; a division may be ordered by the chair or by a single member.

Division of the Question: A motion to divide a pending motion into two or more separate questions in order that they may be considered separately.

Election by Acclamation: Election by unanimous consent; used when only one person has been nominated for an office. Ex-officio: By right of office.

Expunge: To eliminate part of a motion by crossing out or drawing a line around words; one never erases, since the original text may be needed for the minutes.

Germane: Closely related, relevant; amendments and debate must be germane to the question at hand.

Having the Floor: Having been recognized by the chair to speak.

Immediately Pending Question: The last motion stated by the chair.

In Order: Correct according to rules of parliamentary procedure.

Main Motion: A motion which brings before the assembly some new subject upon which action of the assembly is desired.

Majority: More than half of the votes cast by persons legally entitled to vote, excluding abstentions.

Minutes: Written records of business transacted.

Motion: A proposal by a member, in a meeting, that the assembly take a particular action.

Nominate: To propose an individual for office.

Obtaining the Floor: Securing permission to speak.

Orders of the Day: Agenda for a meeting.

Parliamentarian: Parliamentary adviser to the presiding officer.

Pending Question: A motion awaiting decision.

Plurality: In an election, the largest number of votes given a candidate when three or more candidates are running; a plurality that is not a majority never elects anyone to office except by virtue of a special rule previously adopted.

Point of Information: Request for information concerning a motion.

Precedence: Take Precedence: Priority in rank; to outrank.

Previous Question: Motion which, if adopted, orders an immediate vote. Proxy: A person authorized to vote for another.

Question of Privilege: A device that permits a request or main motion relating to the rights and privileges of the assembly or any of its members to be brought up for immediate consideration because of its urgency, e.g., a motion to turn the air conditioner up or a motion to close the windows so that people can hear.

Quorum: The minimum number of members who must be present at a meeting for business to be legally transacted.

Recess: A short intermission.

Recognize: To allow someone to obtain the floor in order to speak. Rescind: To repeal, annul, cancel, or revoke formally.

Resolution: Motion used to express the sentiment of a group, usually beginning with the words "resolved that...."

Rising Vote: A vote taken by having members stand. Roll Call Vote: A procedure by which the vote of each member is formally recorded in the minutes.

Second: To indicate support for consideration of a motion by saying: "I second the motion."

Slate: List of candidates.

Unanimous (or General) Consent: A means of taking action on a motion without a formal vote. When a presiding officer perceives that there is little or no opposition to a motion before the assembly, business can often be expedited by the chair's simply calling for objections, if any. If no objection is heard, the motion is adopted; if even one member objects, the motion is brought to a formal vote by the usual procedure.

Voice Vote: A vote taken by having members call out "aye" or "no" at the chair's direction.

Yield: To give the floor to the chair, to another speaker, or to a motion taking precedence over that being considered.

IV. A STANDARD AGENDA

If an organization's established rules do not specify an order of business, parliamentary law provides the following standard agenda for a meeting:

Call to order - Reading and approval of minutes - Reports of officers and standing committees - Reports of ad hoc committees - Unfinished business - New business - Announcements H. Adjournment -

V. TRANSACTING BUSINESS AT A MEETING

A. Quorum:

A quorum is the minimum number of members who must be present at a meeting for business to be legally transacted.

An organization, in its established rules, may define its own quorum. In the absence of such a provision, the quorum is a majority of the entire membership.

B. Obtaining the Floor:

Before a member in an assembly can make a motion or speak in debate, he or she must obtain the floor; that is, the member must be recognized by the chair as having the exclusive right to be heard at that time. If two or more members rise to seek recognition at the same time, the member who rose and addressed the chair first after the floor was yielded is usually entitled to be recognized. A member cannot establish "prior claim" to the floor by rising before it has been yielded.

C. Introducing Business (Making Motions):

Business may be introduced by an individual member or by a committee. Business is always introduced in the form of a motion.

D. Seconding a Motion:

After a motion has been made, another member, without rising and obtaining the floor, may second the motion. A second merely implies that the seconder agrees that the motion should come before the assembly and not that he or she necessarily favors the motion.

A motion made by a committee requires no second, since its introduction into the assembly has been approved by a majority of the committee. The purpose of a second is to prevent time from being consumed by the assembly having to dispose of a motion that only one person wants to see introduced.

E. Placing a Motion Before the Assembly:

After a motion has been made and seconded, the chair repeats the motion verbatim, thus placing it before the assembly for debate and action.

During the brief interval between the making of a motion and the time when the chair places it before the assembly by restating it, the maker of a motion may modify or withdraw it simply by stating the intention to do so; after the motion has been restated by the chair, it is officially before the assembly and must be dealt with appropriately (e.g., adopted, rejected, postponed).

F. Debate:

Every member of the assembly has the right to speak on every debatable motion before it is finally acted upon; this right cannot be interfered with except by a motion to limit debate.

All discussion must be confined to the immediately pending question and to whether or not it should be adopted.

While debate is in progress, amendments or other secondary motions can be introduced and disposed of accordingly.

In an organization that has no special rule relating to the length of speeches, a member can speak no longer than 10 minutes unless he or she obtains the consent of the assembly; such permission can be given by unanimous consent or by means of a motion to extend debate. Likewise, debate may be curtailed by a motion to limit debate.

No member may speak twice on the same motion at the same meeting as long as any other member who has not spoken on the motion desires to do so.

Unless the rules are suspended, a member who has spoken twice on a particular question on the same day has exhausted his or her right to debate that question for that day.

During debate, no member can attack or question the motives of another member.

The maker of a motion, although allowed to vote against it, is not allowed to speak against it.

G. Amendments:

As noted above, before a motion has been restated by the chair, the maker has the right to modify his or her motion or to withdraw it entirely. After it has been restated by the chair, however, a motion may be modified only by means of an amendment.

There are six ways to amend a motion:

a. Add words, phrases, or sentences at the end of a motion- b. Insert words, phrases, or sentences- c. Strike words, phrases, or sentences- d. Strike and insert words, phrases, or sentences- e. Strike and add words, phrases, or sentences; and- f. Substitute whole paragraphs or an entire text -

Only two amendments (primary and secondary) may be pending on a main motion at any time.

Discussion of an amendment must relate only to the amendment, unless the whole motion is involved by substitution.

An amendment must be germane to the question under consideration.

H. Voting:

Unless special rules apply, a majority decides. A majority is more than half of the votes cast by persons legally entitled to vote, excluding blank ballots or abstentions.

Unless otherwise provided for, voting is by voice vote.

If the presiding officer is a member of the assembly, he or she can vote as any other member does when the vote is by ballot. In other cases, the presiding officer, if a member of the assembly, can ( but is not obliged to ) vote whenever his or her vote will affect the result; i.e., he or she can vote either to break or to create a tie.

A member has no right to explain his or her vote" during voting since that would be the same as debate at such a time.

Any member may request a division of the assembly if there is uncertainty as to the true result of the vote.

I. Announcing a Vote:

In announcing the vote on a motion, the chair should: a. report on the voting itself, stating which side has prevailed; 1 . declare that the motion is adopted or lost; and c. state the effect of the vote or order its execution.

For a voice or rising vote in which no exact count is taken, the chair might say, for example, "The ayes have it, the motion carries, and the brochure will be published." For a vote in which an exact count is taken, the chair might say, "There are 14 in the affirmative and 15 in the negative. The negative has it and the motion is lost. No additional funds will be spent on publicity this semester."

J. Adjournment:

A motion to adjourn may be made by any member. It may be made during the consideration of other business, although it may not interrupt a speaker.

A motion to adjourn is not in order when the assembly is engaged in voting or verifying a vote.

If the motion to adjourn is voted down, it may be made again only after the disposition of some business.

The motion to adjourn is out of order when the assembly is arranging for the time and place of the next meeting.

When it appears that there is no further business to be brought before the assembly, the chair, instead of waiting for a motion, may simply adjourn the meeting.

VI. SUMMARY OF STEPS IN HANDLING A MOTION

A member rises and addresses the presiding officer.

The presiding officer recognizes the member.

The member states the motion.

Another member seconds the motion.

The presiding officer restates the motion, thus placing it before the assembly for consideration.

The assembly may discuss the motion if it is debatable and amend the motion if it is amendable.

The presiding officer takes the vote.

The presiding officer announces the result.

VII. TYPES OF MOTIONS—DEFINITIONS AND EXAMPLES

A. Privileged Motions: Motions which do not relate to the pending question but have to do with matters of such urgency or importance that, without debate, they are allowed to interrupt the consideration of anything else.

Adjourn: Terminates the meeting. "I move that we adjourn." Recess: Permits a short intermission in a meeting. "I move that we recess for 10 minutes" or ". . . until 2:00" or ". . . until called to order by the chair."

Raise a question of privilege: Permits a request or main motion relating to the rights and privileges of the assembly or any of its members to be brought up for immediate consideration because of its urgency. "I rise to a question of privilege affecting the assembly."

Call for the orders of the day: Requires that the adopted agenda or order of business be followed. "Mr. Chairman, I call for the orders of the day" or "Madam President, l demand the regular order."

B. Subsidiary Motions: Motions which assist the assembly in treating or disposing of a main motion. They have the effect of hastening action upon, delaying action upon, or modifying the main motion.

Lay on the table: Lays a pending question aside temporarily when something more urgent has arisen. "I move to lay the question on the table" or "I move that the motion be laid on the table."

Previous question: Ends debate and orders an immediate vote. "I move the previous question" or "I move we vote immediately on the motion." Limit or extend debate: Modifies debate by limiting or extending the number or length of speeches. "I move that debate be limited to one speech of two minutes for each member" or "I move that the speaker's time be extended three minutes. " Postpone to a certain time: Defers consideration to a definite day, meeting, or hour, or until after some particular event. "I move that the question be postponed until the next meeting" or "I move to postpone the motion until after the address by our guest speaker."

Refer to a committee: Gives a motion more detailed attention or permits it to be handled in privacy. "I move to refer the matter to the Program Committee."

Amend: Modifies a main motion by inserting, adding, striking, striking and inserting, striking and adding, or substituting some specific language. "I move to amend by adding the words . . ." or "by striking . . ." or "I move to substitute for the pending motion the following: ...." Postpone indefinitely: Disposes of a question without bringing it to a direct vote. "I move that the motion be postponed indefinitely."

C. Main Motion

: A motion which brings business before the assembly and which can be made only while no other motion is pending. "I move we have a banquet."

D. Motions that Bring a Question Again Before the Assembly:

Motions which bring up a previously considered question.

Reconsider: Allows a question previously disposed of to come again before the assembly as if it had not previously been considered. The motion to reconsider can be made only by a member who voted on the prevailing side and only on the same day the original vote was taken. The motion is debatable only if the motion to be reconsidered is itself debatable. "I move to reconsider the vote on the motion relating to the annual banquet."

Discharge a committee: Takes a matter out of a committee's hands and places it again before the assembly as a whole. "I move that the committee considering what band to hire for the benefit dance be discharged."

Rescind a motion previously adopted: Voids a motion previously passed. "I move to rescind the motion passed at the last meeting relating to where we will go on the ski trip."

Take from the table: Allows the assembly to resume consideration of a motion previously laid on the table. "I move to take from the table the motion relating to presenting plaques to graduating members."

E. Incidental Motions:

Motions which deal with questions of procedure and arise out of another pending motion or item of business. With the exception of the motion to appeal from the ruling of the chair, they are not debatable. Point of information: Inquires as to the facts affecting the business at hand and is directed to the chair or, through the chair, to a member. "I rise to a point of information" or "A point of information, please."

Parliamentary inquiry: Requests the chair's opinion-not a ruling-on a matter of parliamentary procedure as it relates to the business at hand. "I rise to a parliamentary inquiry" or "A parliamentary inquiry, please."

Division of the assembly: Calls for a verification when a member doubts the accuracy of a voice vote or show of hands. "Division!" or "I call for a division." Division of a question: Permits a motion to be divided into two or more parts in order that they may be considered separately. "I move to divide the motion so that the question of purchasing decorations can be considered separately."

Withdraw a motion: Permits a member to remove his or her question from consideration even after the motion has been restated by the chair. "Mr. Chairman, I move that I be allowed to withdraw the motion."

Objection to consideration: Suppresses business that is undesirable or that might prove damaging to the organization. "Madam President, I object to the consideration of the question."

: Temporarily sets aside a rule to permit the assembly to take an action it could not otherwise take. "I move to suspend the rules which interfere with considering the motion to hold a get-acquainted happy hour for new members."

Appeal from the ruling of the chair: Challenges a ruling of the chair. A majority vote sustains the ruling. "I appeal from the decision of the chair."

Point of order: Challenges an error in procedure and requires a ruling by the chair. "I rise to a point of order" or "Point of order!"

VIII. PRECEDENCE OF MOTIONS

Since only one question may be considered at a time, the sequence in which motions may be taken up is fixed by parliamentary law.

The main motion is the basic motion and all other legitimate motions are taken up and acted upon before the main motion is finally disposed of. Any privileged motions introduced are of such urgency or importance that they must be promptly acted upon. Subsidiary and incidental motions which are introduced must be given priority so that the action finally taken on the main motion will accurately reflect the will of the assembly.

Motions that bring a question again before the assembly are similar in status to main motions in that they can be considered only when no other business is pending.

Privileged and subsidiary motions have the highest status and are arranged in an explicit order of precedence. Privileged motions come first in the order of precedence and among themselves have the following ranking: (1) adjourn, (2) recess, (3) raise a question of privilege, and (4) call for the orders of the day. Subsidiary motions follow in the order of precedence and have the following ranking among themselves: (5) lay on the table, (6) previous question, (7) limit or extend debate, (8) postpone to a certain time, (9) refer to a committee, (l0) amend, and (11) postpone indefinitely.

Incidental motions are not ranked in the formal order of precedence. Since they arise out of—are "incidental" to—some other pending question, the incidental motions are decided as they arise. An incidental motion would be out of order, however, if it were not legitimately related to the business at hand.

IX. OTHER RULES GOVERNING THE CONSIDERATION OF MOTIONS

Not all motions require recognition or a second. Not all motions are debatable or amendable. Some motions do not require a vote or permit reconsideration. The following table summaries the rules related to each of the types of motions defined in Part VII.

**RULES GOVERNING THE CONSIDERATION OF MOTIONS**
Name of Motion	Requires Recognition?	Requires Second?	Debatable	Amendable	Vote Required	May Be Reconsidered
1. Adjourn	yes	yes	no	no	majority	no
2. Recess	yes	yes	no	yes	majority	no
3. Raise a question of privilege	no	no	no	no	—	no
4. Call for the orders of the day	no	no	no	no	2/3	[1].	no

Subsidiary Motions: (1)

5. Lay on the table	yes	yes	no	no	majority	no
6. Previous question	yes	yes	no	no	2/3	yes
7. Limit or extend debate	yes	yes	no	yes	2/3	yes
8. Postpone to a certain time	yes	yes	yes	yes	majority	yes
9. Refer to a committee	yes	yes	yes	yes	majority	yes
10. Amend	yes	yes	yes	yes	majority	yes
11. Postpone indefinitely	yes	yes	yes	no	majority

aff.(3)

Main Motions- yes - yes - yes - yes - majority - yes -

Motions that Bring a Question Again Before the Assembly:

Reconsider no yes yes(4) no majority no

Discharge a committee yes yes yes yes maj. or 2/3(5) negative(6)

Rescind yes yes yes yes maj. or 2/3(5) negative(6)

Take from the table yes yes no no majority no

Incidental Motions:

Point of information no no no no — no

Parliamentary inquiry no no no no — —

Division of the assembly no no no no — no

Division of a question yes yes no yes majority no

Withdraw a motion yes yes no no majority negative(6)

Objection to consideration no no no no 2/3 negative(6)

Suspend the rules no no no no 2/3 no

Appeal from the chair's ruling no yes yes no maj. or tie yes

Point of order no no no no — no

Note 1: .

Note 2:

Note 3: 0nly an affirmative vote may be reconsidered.

Note 4: The motion to reconsider is debatable only if the motion to be reconsidered is itself debatable.

Note 5: Requires either a simple majority (with prior notice), or a two-thirds vote, or a majority of the entire membership.

Note 6: 0nly a negative vote may be reconsidered.

X. TIPS ON PARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURE

Since the secretary is responsible for keeping accurate records of business transacted, the chair may require that main motions, amendments, or instructions to a committee be in writing. It is a general rule that no member should be present in the assembly when any matter relating to himself or herself is under consideration. A question cannot be postponed beyond the next regular meeting. Calls of "Question! Question!" by members from their seats are not motions for the previous question and are simply informal expressions of individual members' desires to proceed to a vote; these calls are disorderly if made while another member is speaking or seeking recognition.

A question laid on the table remains there until taken from the table or until the close of the next regular meeting. If not taken up by that time, the question dies.

Abstentions do not count in tallying the vote; when members abstain, they are in effect only attending the meeting to aid in constituting a quorum.

Working as a committee of the whole enables the full assembly to give detailed consideration to a matter under conditions of freedom approximating those of an ad hoc committee. In such a committee, the results of votes taken are not final decisions of the assembly but are taken up by the assembly as committee recommendations. The proceedings of a committee of the whole are not entered in the minutes of the assembly.

Motions are out of order that present essentially the same question as a motion already considered at the same meeting.

All persons present at a meeting have an obligation to obey the legitimate orders of the presiding officer. Members, however, can appeal from the decision of the chair, move to suspend the rules, or move a reconsideration- depending on the circumstances of the chair's ruling. A member can make such an appeal or motion whether or not the order involved applies to him or her personally.

XI. COMMITTEES

A. While committees are not necessarily limited as to membership, most committees are composed of from five to nine members. When the committee is small, formal parliamentary procedure is abandoned in doing the group's business. That is, during a committee meeting, a formal motion, a second, formal debate, and a vote are not necessary since decisions can often be reached quickly by unanimous consent. However, even in a committee meeting, if a subject is controversial and spirits rise, the chair may resort to using formal procedure in order to facilitate the committee's work.

Report of the Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations (2008)

Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations — 2008-07-24T17:51:54Z

CEACR: Individual Observation concerning Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1958 (No. 111) Islamic Republic of Iran (ratification: 1964) Published: 2008 Description:(CEACR Individual Observation) Convention:C111 Country:(Iran) Document No. (ilolex): 062008IRN111

1. The Committee notes the Government's report, as well as the discussion that took place in the Conference Committee on the Application of Standards in June 2006, the resulting conclusions of the Conference Committee, and the report of the technical assistance mission that took place in October 2007.

2. National equality policy. The Committee notes the Conference Committee's request that the Government provide a mid-term assessment in its report to this Committee on the steps taken to bring all its relevant legislation and practice into line with the Convention by no later than 2010, as this would mark the end of the period covered by the Fourth Economic, Social and Cultural Development Plan (the Plan). The Plan provides guiding principles for the drafting of laws and policies. Articles 100 and 101 stress the importance of human rights. Article 100 requires the Government to formulate a “Charter of Citizenry Rights”, encompassing a number of principles, including “securing freedom and security needed for the development of the social organizations in the area of preservation of the rights of women and children” and “propagating the unification and respectability concepts toward social groups and different ethnic groups in the national culture”. Article 101 requires the Government to prepare a national plan for the development of “meritorious work” on the basis of a number of principles, including “prohibition of discrimination in employment and profession”. Article 130 empowers the judiciary to take measures towards the elimination “of all types of discrimination - gender, ethnic and group - in the legal and judicial field”.

3. The Committee also notes the findings of the technical assistance mission that annual monitoring and evaluation reports required under article 157 of the Plan have been prepared, and that translated summaries will be provided to the Committee. The mission also notes that the Plan does not seem to have been well publicized as there was generally little awareness of its contents beyond certain government departments. The Government also refers to the Charter of Women's Rights adopted in 2004. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the status of the adoption of the Charter of Citizenry Rights and of the National Plan foreseen under articles 100 and 101, and any measures taken to implement article 130. The Committee looks forward to receiving the translated summaries of the evaluation reports prepared, and any other information on the implementation of the Plan in practice, and the results achieved with respect to furthering equality in employment and occupation. Please also provide information on any measures taken or envisaged to raise awareness of the Plan, in particular with respect to equality rights. The Committee also requests the Government to provide a copy of the Charter of Women's Rights, to clarify how the Charter and the Plan interrelate, and to provide information on any measures taken to implement the provisions of the Charter.

4. Equal opportunity and treatment for men and women. The Committee notes the various initiatives to which the Government refers in its report aimed at improving women's access to employment and occupation, in particular through increasing access to universities and technical and vocational training, establishing women's cooperatives, and promoting women's entrepreneurship. The Government emphasizes the importance of supporting women's entrepreneurship, and to this end refers to a number of measures, including the establishment of the Women's Entrepreneurship Guild, easing requirements for women to access loans and grants to start a business, designing a data bank for women's entrepreneurship, and technical assistance provided by the ILO. The various initiatives of the Centre for Women and Family Affairs regarding skill development, women's cooperatives and entrepreneurship are also enumerated. According to the figures provided in the Government's report, in 2006, 55 per cent of the new students admitted to state universities were women, with representation in all faculties. Women's participation in vocational and technical training has also increased. In the public Technical and Vocational Training Organization (TVTO), in 2006, a number of women undertook training in financial and business affairs, “wood industries” and civil engineering, though the largest proportion of women were concentrated in the area of information technology. The Committee welcomes the information regarding the number of women trained through the TVTO in a range of disciplines, and requests the Government to continue providing updated information in this regard. Given that the large majority of women are trained through private institutes, please also provide information on the participation rate of women and men in the various disciplines of technical and vocational training in institutes that are privately run. The Committee would also like to receive information regarding how the education and training received by women translates into employment opportunities once they have completed the courses. The Committee also requests information on the activities of the Women's Entrepreneurship Guild, as well as other initiatives to promote women's entrepreneurship. The Committee would also appreciate continuing to receive information on the activities of the Centre for Women and Family Affairs.

5. The Committee notes that while the level of women's participation in the labour market remains low, it has increased from 12.2 per cent in 2003 to 13.8 per cent in 2006, and the unemployment rate for women has decreased from 19.6 per cent in 2002 to 17 per cent in 2006, according to official government figures collected by the ILO. The Government has provided some general statistics in the report regarding the rate of employment of women and men. The Committee understands from the report of the technical assistance mission that the national statistical centre and the bureau of statistics have considerable data available, disaggregated by sex, on the employment situation in the country, but that much of it is not available to the public. However, the relevant tables have been requested by the mission team. The Committee hopes that detailed statistics on the number of women and men in public and private sector employment, disaggregated by category and level of employment, will be provided without delay, to allow the Committee to make an accurate assessment of the extent of progress made in the situation of women in accessing higher level and non-traditional jobs.

6. The Government acknowledges that the existing imbalance in women's participation in the labour market in comparison with that of men, “is a direct result of cultural, religious, economic and historical factors”. The Government also raises the issue of the difficulty of women balancing work and family responsibilities. The Committee notes the findings of the mission also pointing to the difficulty for women in taking on increasing work responsibilities, without any decrease in their family responsibilities. Some measures exist, such as a legal requirement for childcare facilities at or near the workplace, and a reduced working day. They are, however, available only to women, thus reinforcing the assumption that women are solely responsible for caring for children. Many women are unable to benefit from the measures because they are often not provided in practice, and also due to the fact that a large proportion of women are hired under temporary contracts. With respect to awareness raising, the Committee notes that the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs has held a number of workshops in labour offices since 2005, on the issue of discrimination, addressing over 1,000 participants, and on “women's labour”, with over 19,000 participants. The Committee requests the Government to continue providing information on measures taken to improve awareness, access and enforcement of equality and non-discrimination rights and policies, as well as on protections and benefits aimed at balancing work and family responsibilities. The Committee asks the Government to consider extending the special measures for workers with children to men as well as women.

7. Noting the findings of the mission regarding the prevalence of discriminatory job advertisements, the Committee asks the Government to provide information on measures taken or envisaged to prohibit such practice. Further to its 2002 general observation, the Committee again requests the Government to provide information on measures taken or envisaged to prevent and prohibit sexual harassment in employment and occupation.

8. Discriminatory laws and regulations. The Government indicates that it has taken steps to involve law makers more closely on the issue of the need to amend or repeal discriminatory laws and regulations, and that it is constantly seeking the assistance of the social partners and non-governmental organizations in processes and negotiations that will hopefully lead to the revision of the laws and practices that are in contradiction with the Convention. However, the Committee notes that none of the provisions to which the Committee has been referring for a number of years, as set out below, have yet been amended or repealed.

9. The Committee notes the finding of the mission team that there was general acknowledgement that section 1117 of the Civil Code and the discriminatory provisions in social security regulations need to be repealed. According to the report of the mission, section 1117 of the Civil Code, which allows a husband to bring a court action preventing his wife from taking up a job or profession, has a negative impact in practice on the ability of women to enter the workforce. Attempts in the past to have this provision repealed have been unsuccessful and new initiatives have been launched; however, the report of the mission states further that “it remains to be seen whether these initiatives will be successful”. There are also a number of initiatives under way with the aim of amending the provisions of the social security regulations that favour the husband over the wife in terms of pension and child benefits, as these provisions give rise to considerable difficulties for women. With respect to the administrative rules restricting the employment of wives of government employees, the Committee regrets to note that once again the Government has provided no information on this matter. The Committee also notes that according to the mission report, there appears to be a legal barrier to being hired after the age of 30, thus impeding women who take career breaks for reasons of maternity or caring for young children from re- entering the labour market. Noting that the Committee has asked the Government over many years to repeal legal and administrative provisions that are not in conformity with the Convention, and noting further the urgency expressed by the Conference Committee with respect to this matter, the Committee urges the Government to repeal the relevant provisions without delay, and to inform the Committee of the concrete steps taken in this regard. Please also provide information on any legal obstacles to applying for jobs after the age of 30, and on any measures taken or envisaged to amend or repeal such provisions.

10. With respect to women's access to the judiciary, from the Government's report, it appears that Decree No. 55080 of 1979 changing the status of female judges from judicial to administrative, thus preventing them from issuing verdicts, remains in force. The Government stresses, however, that due to recent reforms in the judiciary, women now occupy a range of judicial positions, including assistant prosecutor, remand judges, adviser to the court of appeal, adviser to the family court, and judge of guardianship and minors. The Government goes on to note that a new Bill has been introduced to elevate women as adviser judges in other types of cases, and that granting them full authority “is being seriously looked into”. The Committee notes from the report of the mission that statistics on the number of men and women in the judicial system and their rank have been requested. The Committee urges the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that there are no obstacles in law or in practice to women having access on an equal footing with men to all positions in the judiciary and with the same powers, and asks the Government to provide details of the measures taken in this regard. Please also provide details of the content and status of the most recent Bill regarding women in the judiciary that has been introduced, as well as statistics on the number of women and men at each level of the judiciary.

11. Regarding the obligatory dress code for women and the imposition of sanctions in accordance with the Act on administrative infringements, the Committee has for a number of years raised concerns that this could have a negative impact on the employment of non-Islamic women in the public sector. The Committee has also raised similar concerns regarding the disciplinary rules for university and higher education institutes students. In the absence of any information in the Government's report on this issue, the Committee urges the Government to provide detailed information on the manner in which the abovementioned administrative and disciplinary rules regarding the dress code are being applied in practice with respect to education and employment, including information on the number of violations of the dress code and the sanctions imposed. The Committee must also again repeat its request for information on the status, contents and objectives of a bill concerning the dress code that was forwarded to Parliament in 2004.

12. Discrimination on the basis of religion. The Committee notes from the report of the mission that a clear distinction is made in law and practice between recognized and unrecognized religious minorities. Recognized religious minorities have reserved seats in Parliament, are entitled to apply for positions in the public sector, and there is a quota system for hiring teachers from recognized religious minorities. However, the report of the mission goes on to state that the situation with respect to unrecognized religious minorities, and in particular the Baha'i appears to be very serious, “and there is no indication that the situation will change in the near future”. They cannot apply for public sector positions, and under the circular of the Presidential High Screening Board, cannot be hired as teachers. The Committee notes the Government's statement that statistics pertaining to the employment of the Baha'i and other religious and ethnic minorities are not collected “because of the likely misinterpretation such an attempt may cause among the minorities of Iran”.

13. With reference to the Baha'i, the Committee notes from the report of the mission, that out of a university population of 3.6 million students, the Government could identify only 23 Baha'i. The mission also learned that the Baha'i are not permitted to attend TVTO training. They have also been denied their pension entitlement on the express ground of being Baha'i, though the mission was informed that some measures are being taken to ensure that these pension entitlements are paid. The Committee notes the information from the mission that there appears to be “a general and deeply rooted climate of intolerance against the Baha'i that has a negative impact on their equality of opportunity and treatment in education, employment and occupation”. The Committee also notes the circular referred to by the Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief on increasing the surveillance of the Baha'i, as well as her reference to an increasing media campaign against the Baha'i faith (Human Rights Council, A/HRC/4/21/Add.1, 8 March 2007, paragraphs 181-183). The Committee is deeply concerned that the climate of intolerance against the Baha'i is a serious obstacle to their equality of access and opportunities to education, training, employment and occupation, and urges the Government to take active and effective measures to promote respect and tolerance for unrecognized religious minorities. The Committee urges the Government to ensure that all circulars or other government communications relating to limiting activities of the Baha'i in education, training, employment or occupation, are withdrawn without delay, and to take proactive measures to address the existing discrimination against the Baha'i. The Committee must also reiterate its previous comment on the practice of “gozinesh”, and requests information on this practice, and on the status of the Bill that had been before Parliament asking for a review of this practice.

14. Ethnic minorities. The Committee had previously requested the Government to provide statistics referred to by the Government on the increasing number of public sector positions filled by members of ethnic minorities. The Committee welcomes the information provided by the Government on the number of political positions occupied by ethnic minorities. The Committee notes from the report of the mission that members of ethnic minority groups are excluded from some positions on the ground of national security. The Committee again asks the Government to provide information on the employment situation of ethnic minority groups, including the Azeries, the Kurds and the Turks, in particular the statistics on their employment in the public sector, and information on any efforts taken to ensure equal access and opportunities to education, employment and occupation for members of these groups. Please also provide information on the positions from which members of ethnic minorities are excluded on the ground of national security.

15. Dispute settlement and human rights mechanisms. The Committee notes that there are a number of potential avenues for bringing complaints of discrimination, including the National Commission on Human Rights, the Islamic Commission on Human Rights, Parliamentary Article 98 Commission, the courts and the dispute settlement boards. The Committee notes that the National Commission on Human Rights was established in December 2005, and is mandated to deal with the rights of minorities. The Committee notes from the report of the mission that there appears to be a lack of awareness of the various bodies and procedures, and in some cases fear of victimization may be an obstacle to lodging a complaint. The issue of accessibility of the procedures, in particular for those alleging religious discrimination, was also raised. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the number and nature of complaints lodged with the various dispute settlement and human rights bodies and the courts, including their outcome. The Committee also requests the Government to take measures to raise awareness of the existence and mandate of the various bodies, and to ensure the accessibility of the procedures for all groups.

16. Social dialogue. The Government in its report stresses its strong commitment for constructive dialogue with the social partners and intensifying its cooperation with the ILO regarding implementation of the Convention. However, the Committee is concerned that in the context of the present freedom of association crisis in the country, as described in the report of the technical assistance mission, meaningful social dialogue on these issues at the national level is not currently possible. The Committee also notes that while some steps have been made towards meeting the objective of bringing the relevant legislation and practice into line with the Convention, much still remains to be done. The Committee requests the Government to intensify its efforts to bring its legislation and practice into conformity with the Convention, in order to be able to demonstrate tangible results by 2010.

Complaint against the Goverment of Islamic Republic of Iran

Committee on Freedom of Association — 2008-07-10T15:57:03Z

Allegations: The complainant organization alleges government interference in the elections of the Iran Confederation of Employers' Associations (ICEA), the subsequent dissolution of the ICEA by administrative authority and the official backing of a new and parallel employers' confederation

Report No. 350 (Vol. XCI, 2008, Series B, No. 2) Interim Report

The complainant organization alleges government interference in the elections of the Iran Confederation of Employers' Associations (ICEA), the subsequent dissolution of the ICEA by administrative authority and the official backing of a new and parallel employers' confederation

1108. The complaint is contained in a communication dated 24 May 2007. The complainant organization transmitted additional information in support of the complaint in a communication of 19 May 2008.

1109. The Government provided its observations in communications dated 19 and 20 March 2008.

1110. The Islamic Republic of Iran has not ratified either the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), or the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).

A. The complainant's allegations

1111. In its communication of 24 May 2007, the complainant states that on 1 November 2006 the ICEA held an extraordinary General Assembly meeting at the Negin complex in Tehran in order, among other things, to submit its activities report to its members and to elect a new Board of Directors and Inspectors. Representatives of affiliated federations and associations attended the meeting, as well as more than ten representatives from the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs (MLSA). The latter included the Director and Deputy Director of the Ministry's Employers' and Workers' Organizations Department, members of the Security Department (“HERASAT”), and members of the Public Relations Department. The complainant indicates that under national law, it is mandatory for the ICEA to invite representatives of the MLSA to the meeting as observers; it maintains that this requirement violates freedom of association principles. Attached to the complaint is a copy of articles 19 and 20 of the Code of Practice (Regulations) for the quality of formation, limits of duties, authorities and quality of performance of guilds and respective centres, the subject of article 131 of the Labour Law, approved on 27 December 1992 by the Cabinet Ministers. The articles are as follows:

– Article 19. The registration of the guilds, the subject of this Code of Practice and monitoring the elections and their activities are undertaken by the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs. In case the General Office of Workers and Employers Organizations of the mentioned Ministry considers the activities of a guild or one of the members of the Board of Directors [to be] in conflict with the regulations and rules, it may refer the issue for decision taking on the basis of the case to the Board of Dispute Settlement or the competent court.

– Article 20. All guilds and related centers are obliged to announce the date of the formation of their general assemblies at least fifteen days prior to the formation of them without inclusion of the holidays in a written form to the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs.

1112. ICEA President Mr Mohammad Otaredian opened the sitting with some introductory remarks. The sitting proceeded with the election of the officers of the meeting (a Chairperson, two observers and a secretary), followed by the submission of the ICEA's activities report. Before turning to the election of a new Board of Directors and Inspectors, the sitting was disrupted by representatives of the MLSA, who approached the podium where the officers of the meeting were seated and announced that those federations and associations in arrears in their payment of ICEA dues and those whose registration processes as ICEA members were incomplete were not entitled to vote. This announcement led to many objections and protests by member federations, resulting in a tense atmosphere. However, in order to enable the sitting to continue, those federations and associations considered by the representatives of the MLSA as not entitled to vote were not taken into account when calculating the quorum.

1113. Following growing objections, and in order to provide those federations excluded by the representatives of the MLSA with an opportunity to participate in the election of the new Board of Directors and Inspectors, the General Assembly decided to suspend the election and to extend the mandate of the existing Board of Directors and Inspectors for a period of six months, until the next elections were held. During the adoption of this decision the representatives of the MLSA repeatedly intervened; the sitting closed at 8 p.m. the same day in conditions of chaos.

1114. On 2 November 2006, the ICEA sent a letter to the Labour Minister, informing him of the decision adopted by the General Assembly and requesting a meeting with him. The minutes of the meeting were attached to the letter. The ICEA received a letter dated 2 November 2006 from the MLSA, signed by the Director-General of the Employers' and Workers' Organizations Department, informing it of its dissolution and of the illegality of the continuation of its activities.

1115. On 4 November 2006, and in response to the Ministry's letter, the ICEA sent a letter to the Labour Minister calling his attention to the fact that the dissolution of the ICEA was, according to the regulations concerned, only enforceable through a judicial decision. Additionally the ICEA again requested a meeting with the Minister of Labour in order to hold discussions on the matter. It did not receive a response in this regard.

1116. On 12 November 2006, the ICEA filed a complaint against the MLSA with the Administrative Justice Court, requesting the annulment of the Ministry's dissolution order. On 17 January 2007, the Court found that the dissolution of ICEA was only enforceable through a competent court and declared a provisional injunction against the Ministry's decision to dissolve the ICEA. However, the MLSA refused to accept the Court's decision and challenged it by holding press conferences.

1117. In December 2006 a new employers' confederation, entitled the Iranian Confederation of Employers (ICE), assembled and supported by the MLSA, was registered. The complainant indicates in respect of the latter that the MLSA had paid the ICE an amount equal to $20,000. An ICE General Assembly meeting was held in a government building – the Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting (IRIB) building – with high security, preventing the entry of any representatives of employers' associations except those invited by the MLSA. Approximately 60 persons attended the meeting. The complainant states that the name of the new confederation is similar to the ICEA's, and is occasionally referred to as the “new ICEA”, which could lead to some confusion. The complainant also indicates that the new confederation has been registered with the MLSA under registration number 500, which is the same registration number as that of the ICEA.

1118. In January 2007, the MLSA filed a complaint against ICEA President Mohammad Otaredian with the Public Prosecutor's Office, alleging distortion of the truth, apprehension of public opinion and abuse of the signature of the ICEA President. On 14 February 2007 the Office issued an order clearing Mr Mohammad Otaredian of all the charges.

1119. On 5 March 2007, the ICEA held a General Assembly meeting attended by more than 84 per cent of the members entitled to vote. The ICEA informed the MLSA of the meeting and invited the MLSA to attend. No MLSA representatives attended the meeting; however, the Ministry of Justice, which was also invited to the meeting, did send representatives. A new Board of Directors and Inspectors was designated at the General Assembly meeting, the minutes of which were signed and confirmed by the representatives of the Ministry of Justice.

1120. In March 2007, the ICEA officially filed a complaint with the judicial authority against the MLSA and the newly founded ICE requesting, as a provisional measure, that the latter group desist in its activities.

1121. Several documents are attached to the complaint, including: (1) translated copies of the ICEA's letters to the MLSA, dated 2 and 4 November 2006 respectively; (2) a translated copy of the Government's 2 November 2006 letter informing the ICEA of its dissolution; (3) a translated excerpt of the Administrative Justice Court's decision of 17 January 2007 concerning the ICEA's dissolution; (4) a translated excerpt of the Public Prosecutor's 14 February 2007 decision clearing Mr Otaredian of the charges brought by the MLSA; (5) an 18 April 2007 news article on the High Administrative Court's decision regarding the ICEA's dissolution. The news article quotes the Minister of Labour as stating that the ICEA had been dissolved on the basis of its statutes, that a new confederation had been formed, and that it is of high priority that the majority of employer organizations join it. The Minister is also quoted as stating that the Court's decision is not in line with the reinstatement of the ICEA's Board of Directors and that if the ICEA claims that it is legal, it must obtain a verdict for the dissolution of the new ICEA.

1122. In its communication of 19 May 2008, the complainant indicates that the ICEA has filed a petition with the Administrative Justice Court appealing the 2 March 2008 decision of the Administrative Justice Court's Appellate Branch – which annulled the Court's 17 January judgement and nullified the provisional order against the MLSA's dissolution of the ICEA. In its petition, the ICEA requests that the case be referred to the Ultimate Appeals Branch of the Administrative Justice Court, and bases its appeal on the following grounds:

– The 2 March 2008 judgement was issued in contravention of article 19 of the Regulations on Establishing Workers' and Employers' Associations, under which the Dispute Settlement Boards or the competent courts have exclusive authority as regards the dissolution of associations.

– The MLSA has, on the one hand, issued instructions for the dissolution of the ICEA and, on the other hand, established an employers' confederation, in violation of articles 42 and 43 of the Confederation's statutes.

– Despite the fact that the Extraordinary Meeting of the Ordinary General Assembly of the ICEA was convened prior to the expiry of the six-month period, and that the organization's members voted to retain the existing board members to avoid dissolution, officials from the MLSA objected to this on the ground that the elections were held through open voting and ordered the ICEA's dissolution. Assuming the election regulations had not been observed, the MLSA should have demanded observance of the election formalities without ordering dissolution.

– The MLSA's dissolution order contravenes articles 130 and 131 of the Labour Code, as well as article 19 of the Labour Code's executive regulations.

– The grounds invoked in the first paragraph of the 2 March 2008 decision lack legal justification, as the MLSA had unilaterally ordered the ICEA's dissolution instead of confining itself to raising the issue of the observance of election formalities.

– According to the Regulations on the Establishment and Conduct of Professional Organizations, the vote to retain existing board members constitutes a new election, held by the Extraordinary Meeting of the Ordinary General Assembly before the expiry of the six-month period.

B. The Government's reply

1123. In its communication of 19 March 2008, the Government states that freedom of association rights are reflected in the country's Constitution, in particular article 26, which provides that “political parties, trade unions and Islamic societies or recognized religious minorities are free in the exercise of their doctrines provided that in conducting their exercises the fundamental principles of independence and integrity of the State, freedom, national unity, Islamic principles and conducts and the very foundation of the Islamic Republic of Iran may not be infringed upon. It is further reiterated that no subject of the State may be coerced into joining or denied of the free selection of the organizations of their choosing.” Other national laws and regulations, such as the five-year development plans and the Labour Law, provide for the freedom of workers and employers to freely establish their organizations at the provincial and national levels to protect their legitimate and legal rights and interests. Having due respect for the promotion of the principle of freedom of association, and being committed to the protection of the social partners' interests, the Government has adopted a coherent policy to assist the social partners that includes their registration and the observance of their elections. Additionally, serious measures have been taken by the MLSA for the further promotion of freedom of association rights, particularly those of the employers, throughout the Islamic Republic of Iran over the last two years and the observation of their rights has been coherently integrated into the strategic objectives of the MLSA.

1124. The Government indicates that the present complaint is based on good intentions, misunderstandings, and partially incorrect information received from the complainant. According to article 19 of the Council of Ministers' Rules and Procedures addressing the foundation process, capacities and liabilities and functioning of trade unions, the inspection of the election of trade unions and confederations is entrusted to the MLSA. The main reason for the non-recognition of the ICEA General Assembly's election of 1 November 2006 is the continuous disregard and negligence of the ICEA's Board of Directors in the implementation of their duties; the justifications for such negligence had been openly pronounced in different communications by the former Secretary-General of the Board of Directors of ICEA. According to the ICEA's announcement, the agenda of its 1 November 2006 meeting was to submit its activities report to its members and to elect the new Board of Directors and Inspectors. Being obliged to adhere to the meeting's agenda, ICEA office–holders could not contravene the provisions of the articles of the ICEA's Constitution, which does not in any manner allow for the extension of the tenure of the Board of Directors after an earlier six months' extension. This conspicuous breach of the agenda and the ICEA Constitution was brought to the attention of the Assembly by the inspectors of the MLSA, in accordance with their duties.

1125. Only two representatives from the MLSA – and not the figure provided by the ICEA – attended the General Assembly meeting at the invitation of the ICEA's Secretary-General and the Board of Directors. The observers' task was to ensure the credibility of the credentials, as well as the observance of the provisions of the ICEA Constitution and other laws and regulations concerning the proper administration of the General Assembly election. In fact, the ICEA Constitution itself designates the MLSA as the national reference for the recognition of its members.

1126. The Government maintains that paragraph 272 of the Digest, in providing that the founders of an organization are not free from the duty of observing the formalities concerning the publicity or other similar formalities which may be prescribed by law, supports its position that the practice of requiring previous authorization or observing elections does not constitute an obstacle to the establishment of an employers' organization or amount to the prohibition of its activities. Moreover organizations have the right to recourse to the judiciary in case their request for registration is rejected.

1127. In regards to the alleged disruption of the meeting by ministry representatives, the Government states that by announcing that those federations and associations in arrears in their ICEA dues and those whose registration processes as members of the ICEA were incomplete were not entitled to vote, the inspectors of the MLSA referred to the requirements of the ICEA Constitution, particularly article 38 which provides that:

(i) The electorate shall be permanent principal members of their organization.

(ii) The Board of Directors shall have their credentials validated by the provincial offices of the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs.

(iii) The organization of respective candidates for the Board of Directors of the ICEA should not have an outstanding debt to the ICEA.

(iv) Both electoral and candidates shall enjoy valid membership status (renounced or suspended members shall not have the right to vote or to be elected).

(v) The focal point for the recognition of the trade or industry of each trade union is the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs.

1128. According to the substantiated document provided by Mr Otaredian in his earlier correspondence to the MLSA, many of the participants failed to meet one or some of the above requirements; according to the ICEA's Constitution only its official members were eligible to vote, and many of the participants in the General Assembly failed to present their credentials and lacked the legal requirements for participation in the election. The ministry inspectors were therefore acting – in accordance with article 38(2) of the ICEA Constitution, which recognizes the MLSA as the authority for the confirmation of the membership of the electorate and the candidates – to ensure the legitimacy of the members' credentials and the due observance of the ICEA Constitution. The Government further states that Mr Otaredian himself was ineligible to be elected under article 38(2) of the ICEA Constitution: due to his resignation from the Federation of Construction Contractors' Organizations he had lost his ICEA membership and had consequently lost his credentials to either vote or to be elected. Other members of the Board of Directors were also ineligible for the renewal of their mandate, as they had failed to or refrained from presenting their organization affiliation documents at the November 2006 election.

1129. The Government indicates that the disruption of the 1 November election of the ICEA was not due to the interventions by the ministry inspectors but rather to the negative attitude of Mr Otaredian and the Board of Directors. No complaint was lodged by other members of the provincial federations and individual representatives attending the November General Assembly meeting, whereas the Ministry has received numerous complaints concerning the apparent violation of the provisions of the ICEA's Constitution. The Government attaches copies of letters sent to the MLSA by several employers' associations, including the Associations of Mobile Telephones, Audio-Visual Equipment, and Gold and Silver Shopkeepers; the Construction Companies Association; the Employers' Associations of the Flour Industry; the Iranian Textile Industry Association; and the Iranian Automobile Industry Association. The letters concern an ICEA General Assembly held on 24 October 2006, and refer generally to procedural irregularities and “chaos” that had occurred over the course of the meeting; one letter states that elections failed to take place, even though the quorum had been met.

1130. According to the written statement of the provincial federations, the disruption was due to the unconventional and irrational procedures adopted by the then Secretary-General and his insistence on the renewal of his term at any cost. The minutes of the 1 November 2006 meeting clearly indicate that the meeting had not gone very smoothly, and many of the participants raised objections as to the manner and modalities of the renewal of the Board of Directors' mandate. The Government attaches copies of letters sent to the MLSA by several employers' associations, including the Employers' Association Federations of the provinces of Guilan, Quazvin and Fars. The letters refer to disturbances that had occurred at the 1 November 2006 ICEA General Assembly and request the MLSA's assistance in calling for new ICEA elections.

1131. As concerns the complainant's allegation that those federations and associations considered by the representatives of the MLSA as not entitled to vote were not taken into account when calculating the quorum, the Government states that the two ministry inspectors, in compliance with the ICEA Constitution, did not recognize the legitimacy of the members who failed to present substantiated evidence of their membership. The said members furthermore had failed to present any valid documentation of their official registration in the General Assembly. Also, the memberships of many participants to the Assembly had already expired and they therefore could not cast their votes. To address the membership problems of the federations and associations that did not meet the electoral requirements, meetings were held between Mr Otaredian and MLSA officials, including the Minister himself. Trying to seek some solutions to the above problems, in a letter addressed to the Minister of Labour, Mr Otaredian stated his intention to hold the General Assembly meeting in November. He further advised the Minister that the Deputy Minister of Industrial Relations and the Director-General of the Workers' and Employers' Organizations Department had stated their readiness to spare whatever cooperation necessary to ease the holding of the General Assembly. In the same letter, he made specific references to the existing problems, which he had found to be against the corresponding rules and provisions of the Labour Law and the ICEA Constitution. He acknowledged that many member federations had apparently failed to hold their elections in due course, and accordingly could not participate in the 1 November 2006 election. Recalling that the ICEA had only a six-month deadline to hold the election before the expiry of its term and the consequent automatic and legal dissolution of the confederation, he further requested the Minister to exercise his power to extend the mandate of the ICEA Secretary-General and Board of Directors for another six months; he also reiterated the need for the Minister to exceptionally but unlawfully approve of the proposal to hold the ICEA election without requiring the electorate to submit legitimate and valid credentials approved by relevant authorities in different provinces as required by article 38 of the ICEA Constitution.

1132. In the same letter, Mr Otaredian acknowledged that the Minister had the right to dissolve confederations, but added that it would be a pity for the employers' federations concerned to be deprived of their membership because of their negligence in fulfilling the requirements of the ICEA Constitution. According to the Government, Mr Otaredian's letter duly admits to the negligence of the confederation's senior officers, who, despite their cognisance of the problems, failed to use the available six-month period upon the expiry of their office term to settle the long-standing problems of their members throughout the country. Expounding on the reasons for failing to rectify the long-standing problems of ICEA members, Mr Otaredian stated that the Ministry of Labour had not insisted on the implementation of the relevant regulations in the past and accordingly the ICEA did not feel obliged to comply with them. Finally, he called for the Minister to intervene by removing any obstacles to the ICEA's holding of elections. In his letter, Mr Otaredian failed to mention that the problems of the ICEA members related to long-outstanding debts, the non-remittance of membership fees, cash transfers and property liquidation. The Government attaches a copy of Mr Otaredian's letter.

1133. The Government states that the ICEA placed advertisements in different papers and invited members to participate in its 1 November 2006 General Assembly even though it was aware that many of the participants had long-standing membership and credential problems, in violation of its own Constitution. This act was challenged by many ICEA members, including members of the Board and colleagues of Mr Otaredian. MLSA inspectors reminded the executive committee of the General Assembly of the need to observe articles 17 and 38 of the Constitution, which call for the preparation of a list of all participants in the ICEA election and the provision of separate lists, including the Board members of each industry and trade, to help inspectors identify authorized members. Such procedural practice was not put into force because of the former Secretary-General's intervention. As article 28 of the ICEA Constitution and the provisions of the Rules and Procedures on the Organization, Functions, Scope and Liabilities of Trade Unions, approved by the Council of Ministers, do not allow for another six-month extension of the Board's mandate, the request by unrecognized and excluded representatives of the General Assembly to call for the extension of the mandate of the existing Board of Directors for another six months was found to be inadmissible and unlawful. Furthermore, article 27 of the ICEA Constitution clearly calls for secret balloting rather than voting by raising hands. Meanwhile, the MLSA has extended the utmost collaboration by accepting the earlier request for the extension of the Board of Directors for another six months; according to the articles of its own Constitution, the ICEA would have automatically dissolved upon the termination of this extension.

1134. To enforce the law and safeguard freedom of association principles and the legitimate rights of employers' associations, government inspectors had to question the dependability and legitimacy of the General Assembly election. The ICEA Board of Directors and the former Secretary-General had failed to implement the following laws and regulations:

– Article 11 of the Council of Ministers' Rules and Procedures on the Organization, Functions, Scope and Liabilities of Trade Unions, subject to article 131 of the Labour Law. According to note 5 of article 11, the boards of directors of organizations are required to call a general assembly at least three months prior to the termination of their tenure.

– Article 14 of the Council of Ministers' Rules and Procedures on the Organization, Functions, Scope and Liabilities of Trade Unions.

– Note 2 of article 131 of the Labour Law, which calls for the issuance of notices for the holding of a general assembly and a new election two months before the termination of the tenure of the Board of Directors.

– provisions of the ICEA Constitution which require that: (1) a General Assembly and a new election be held, with the participation of one third of the members, four months before the conclusion of their tenure at the latest; and (2) a public pronouncement of the organization's dissolution be communicated to the MLSA and other respective bodies, six months from the expiry of the Board's mandate at the latest.

1135. The Government indicates that Mr Otaredian, having resigned from his position in the ICEA and the Construction Companies Association (CCA), was ineligible to take part in the ICEA Board of Directors' election. Approving the extension of the Board of Directors' term of office for another six months would therefore be considered a clear infringement of the provisions of the ICEA Constitution. In having lodged an official complaint with the judicial authorities against the MLSA and advised the Minister of Labour of his legal action, Mr Otaredian seems to have chosen to stay on the warpath against the Ministry. As the case was before the court and Mr Otaredian did not intend to withdraw his complaint, the Government indicates that it has decided to abide by the court ruling. (The Government attaches a copy of a 27 July 2004 letter from the CCA informing the MLSA of Mr Otaredian's resignation from its Board, as well as a translated copy of Mr Otaredian's letter of resignation from the CCA.)

1136. As concerns the allegation that it had sent a letter to the ICEA informing it of its dissolution, the Government states that under national law the authorities may not dissolve workers' or employers' organizations. Article 19 of the Council of Ministers' Rules and Procedures on the Organization, Functions, Scope and Liabilities of Trade Unions on 3 February 1992, and circulated through Circulation No. E/513T/52251, states that pronouncing the dissolution of trade unions falls exclusively within the mandate of the judiciary. The MLSA letter No. 96700, dated 2 November 2006 and addressed to the ICEA, does not refer to the dissolution of the ICEA; in that letter the MLSA only notified the ICEA that in case they did not manage to hold an election before the deadline, the mandate of the current Board of Directors would expire and consequently the ICEA would automatically be dissolved. As a result of the misinterpretation and misunderstanding as to the contents of the letter, Mr Otaredian had started a propaganda campaign against the MLSA instead of using existing avenues to find an amicable solution to the problem.

1137. The Director-General of the Employers' and Workers' Organizations Department of the MLSA, in his letter No. 108028 dated 27 November 2006 and addressed to Mr Otaredian, pointed out that, according to the report of the inspectors, the election session of the ICEA appeared to have failed to meet the legal requirements stipulated in the articles of its Constitution and the respective national laws and regulations and reminded him that due to the expiry of the mandate of the ICEA Board of Directors, the Board and its decisions were not legally valid. He further noted that his department would fulfil its duties under article 19 of the Ministerial Rules and Procedures. Under its Constitution, the ICEA can provide for its dissolution if, according to paragraph 3 of article 42, the extraordinary General Assembly meeting adopts such a decision, or if the termination of the mandate of the previous Board of Directors automatically dissolves it. The dissolution of the ICEA occurred for the latter reason. In accordance with article 19 of the Ministerial Rules and Procedures, the MLSA referred the matter to the competent judicial authority to issue a decision on the situation of the ICEA. A translated copy of the 27 November 2006 MLSA letter is attached.

1138. As concerns the 17 January 2007 court decision regarding the ICEA's dissolution, the Court elaborated on the accepted and legal requirements of dissolution; the MLSA respects and accepts the court decision. All subjects and entities are entitled to recourse to the judicial authorities, including the High Administrative Court and the National Supreme Court as regards government decisions. The decisions made by judicial authorities are fully respected and binding for all government officials, even if they overturn the decisions made by high executive officials; there have been several cases where decisions made by tripartite bodies such as dispute settlement boards, compromise boards or boards of inquiry overturned the decisions of government officials and in which the referral of the case to higher judicial authorities had finally settled the issue. This holds true for workers' and employers' associations and they can freely object to the decisions of the Government. Respecting the decisions of the said authorities by all, including government officials, indicates that in the legal and judicial system of the Islamic Republic of Iran no rights are violated. The results of a survey on the number of government decisions overturned by the High Administrative Court showed that of 19 complaints lodged against the decisions of the dispute settlement board or other labour relations authorities, nine decisions were confirmed, five overturned and five again referred to the dispute settlement board for re-examination. Moreover, out of 12 complaints received by the High Administrative Court against the harmful effects of MLSA circulations, eight decisions annulled the said circulations, three confirmed them and one case was referred to the dispute settlement board for legal adjustment, thus demonstrating the observance of the rights of workers' and employers' associations in the Islamic Republic of Iran.

1139. The Government states that the MLSA, in its press statement on the decision of the High Administrative Court, emphasized that it was not responsible for the ICEA's dissolution and that the ICE legally came into existence by a founding board of employers through democratic elections and was subsequently registered at their request months before any decision was made by the court. As the ICE had already gone through its formation process at the time the Court's decision was handed down, the latter was not enforceable. In its statement, the MLSA also indicated that the court decision does not ensure the survival of the ICEA as the decision is not final, and therefore not binding. The MLSA also pointed out that it never sought to confront the court decision; thus the allegation that the MLSA refused to accept the court decision and challenged it by holding press conferences is unfounded. The MLSA officials' press conferences were solely meant to frustrate the attempts made by the then Secretary-General of the ICEA to spread propaganda against the Ministry and tarnish its image before the public. The Government attaches a copy of the press statement and a copy of a letter addressed to the MLSA, apparently from the ICE, indicating that the employers' associations had re-established a confederation following the ICEA's dissolution.

1140. As concerns the allegation of support provided by the MLSA to the ICE, the Government indicates that recognizing two employers' confederations simultaneously is prohibited under Chapter VI of the Labour Law and parallel organizations cannot be identified as bargaining agents for collective bargaining purposes. Pursuant to the Labour Law, only one integrated employers' confederation can represent employers in national and international forums. As the ICEA was about to be dissolved, and following numerous objections presented by member associations to the ICEA's 1 November 2006 election and at the request of many employers to hold a new election, the MLSA agreed to register the ICE, which is by no means contrary to the provisions of Convention No. 87.

1141. The Government indicates that the ICEA Secretary-General's hesitation to hold an election, his consequent failure in the election and his pushing the ICEA towards dissolution are the main motivations behind the decision by employers' organizations to establish a new confederation. Retaining its impartiality in the establishment of the new confederation, the MLSA simply fulfilled its mandate to certify their elections and register the ICE. Moreover, under the principle of representativity it was not possible to ignore 1,170 members of 228 provincial and national employers' associations seeking to further their associations' interests legally, unlike a few members of the ICEA, and deprive them of their legitimate right to make decisions on national economic issues. From this perspective, the Government's approach may be considered as aiming to prevent dissolution; the Government's measure was intended to foster a free atmosphere respecting principles of freedom of association principles and the right to recourse to an independent and impartial judicial authority and lodge a complaint. The Government adds that the ICE is not an entirely new entity, but the same organization (the ICEA) with a newly elected Board of Directors. Many of these members are well known and trusted in the Office as well as the IOE; in fact they were the real engineers of Iran's membership to the IOE during the 285th Session of the ILO Governing Body and have long records of attending International Labour Conferences. Therefore, they constitute a well-known and credible group of Iranian employers, both nationally and internationally. Given the fact that the majority of the ICEA's initial founders and participants in the 1 November 2006 election are now members of the ICE, and the unity created through multiplicity, and that the current composition of the ICE is not different from that of the ICEA, the Government had no other choice but to register it. It is clear that, according to the provision of Convention No. 87, the matter of the dispute between organizations could be taken to judicial authorities. The Government's registration of the ICE should not be considered as an attempt to create parallel organizations. In fact, the ICE's founders are defending their professional interests with the same principles and values with which they joined the IOE. The ICE had explained the current dispute to IOE and ILO officials through correspondence and meetings in Tehran and Geneva, and the majority of the employers' community in the Islamic Republic of Iran has already expressed their willingness to welcome IOE fact-finding missions to visit the Islamic Republic of Iran and get them acquainted with the facts and realities concerning the employers' associations. Therefore, it can be concluded that the ICE is the natural and logical extension of the ICEA – not a new entity, but the same confederation with new members. The Government attaches a 19 May 2007 letter, from the ICE and addressed to the IOE, in which the ICE informs the latter of its establishment and requests an introductory meeting. The Government also attaches a document, entitled “A brief account of the employers' guild societies assocation of Iran”, which sets out a summary of the events leading to the ICEA's dissolution and up to the 17 January 2007 Administrative Justice Court decision to issue a provisional injunction against the MLSA's dissolution of the ICEA.

1142. The Government contends that the fact that ICE conferences were held in the IRIB International Conference Centre does not amount to an affiliation with the Government. The IRIB Centre is a suitable environment for holding public and open meetings, and hundreds of seminars are held there annually by private and state institutions who rent the space from the IRIB corporation. The Government states that it had no role whatsoever in the ICE's rental of the IRIB Centre, and the allegation that the ICE's election – which was public and open – were held under conditions of tight security in the IRIB building is only intended to prove the state dependence of an inclusive employers' organization. According to statistics received the from Workers' and Employers' Organizations Department of the MLSA, on 21 October 2006, the General Assembly was attended by 1,170 members from 64 independent provincial and national employers' associations, a figure that is unprecedented in the history of employers' general assemblies. The allegation that the Government prevented other representatives of employers' associations from participating in the election is false, and the minutes of the proceeding demonstrates that the real number of representatives present was far greater than the number mentioned in the complaint. The Government attaches a copy of a 19 December 2006 contract, between the IRIB International Conference Centre and Mr Davoudabadi of the Iranian Concentrate and Fruit Juice Production Association, for the rental of the centre's facilities for a 20 December 2006 ICE General Assembly meeting.

1143. The legal title stipulated in the Labour Law for employers' organization is “Iranian Confederation of Employers' Associations”, or ICEA, which is not the correct English equivalent of the name the former confederation chose for itself in Farsi. In fact, the term “employers' association”, which exists in the text of the Labour Law, was changed to “employer” in the Farsi name of the former confederation. The Government states that any confusion concerning the names of the organizations would occur only if both the ICE and the ICEA were acting legally. One of these entities is temporary and to avoid confusion they are referred to with different names; after the final court decision is announced, the MLSA is obliged to annul the registration of the concerned employers' organization.

1144. As regards the allegation that the ICEA's registration number was granted to the ICE, the Government states that the infringements by the ICEA's Board of Directors were so clear that it did not hesitate to register the ICE under the same number. Any sort of hesitation in this regard could harm the practice of tripartism, including meetings of national high councils, and delay the decision-making process to improve employers' conditions and workers' wages. The new confederation was registered under number 500 because according to national regulations two employers' confederations cannot co-exist. Registering under the same number is therefore meant to retain the legal identity of the Islamic Republic Iran's Confederation of Employers' Associations and also the unity and legitimacy of the employers' community.

1145. In respect of the allegation that the MLSA had filed charges against Mr Otaredian for distortion of the truth, apprehension of public opinion and abuse of the signature of the ICEA President, the Government states that the MLSA, through letter No. 49173 dated 13 July 2007, requested the Chief Judge of Branch No. 1018 of the Public Courts of Tehran Province to stop the prosecution of Mr Otaredian and re-examine the actions taken by him to spread false news and present the MLSA's decisions as against international rules in order to influence public opinion. In one of his press interviews, Mr Otaredian had claimed that, at the 96th Session of the International Labour Conference, the Government enjoyed a conditional voting right; the MLSA mentioned this false claim in its request for an appeal. The Government states that there have been numerous cases of spreading false news in seminars and the media by Mr Otaredian that was not considered as disturbing public order by the court, and the MLSA, while respecting the court's decisions, believes that such decisions should not be used as a means to advertise his innocence. Since the fairness of the November 2006 election was rejected, the meeting held in 19 March 2007 was basically illegal and invalid. As the supervisory role of the Government over employers' elections does not amount to interference, no harm was done to their independence or their existence. It is stipulated in the articles of their Constitutions, and is therefore not incompatible with ILO freedom of association principles, which is why the old Board of the ICEA asked the MLSA to send an official to monitor the election in order to deal with any problems arising from disputes among employers. In their March election, an official from the judiciary was also invited to monitor the election. The Government states that this practice has never been a controversial issue inside the country.

1146. According to an ICEA letter addressed to the MLSA, the validity of a noticeable number of employers' associations present at the election had expired and, consequently, they had lost their voting rights and no authority had confirmed their elections. The ICEA claims that it held a General Assembly meeting attended by more than 84 per cent of its members entitled to vote; however it is not clear which national regulations were used by the ICEA in recognizing the legitimacy of the electorate. Moreover, no authority confirmed the election, the employers present at the said meeting were disunited and whether the required quorum was reached was under dispute. In his reply to a 15 May 2007 letter of the International Relations and Overseas Employment Department of the MLSA concerning the number of member associations and their validity, Mr Hossein Ahmadizadeh, Chairman of the ICEA Board of Directors, stated that the ICEA has 215 members, out of which 132 members were entitled to vote on 5 March 2007 and of this number, 111 were present at the election. The ratio of present members to total number of members is 51.6 per cent and therefore the alleged ratio of 84 per cent is not true. On the other hand, the ICE held its 20 December 2006 election with 288 member associations and 1,170 representatives, which is far greater than the old ICEA in terms of inclusion and representation. The presence of common faces in the election clearly indicates that the ICE enjoys a majority of the employers' associations of the Islamic Republic Iran. In fact, the ICE's membership comprises 91 per cent of the employers' associations, compared to just 9 per cent for the ICEA.

1147. In regards to the ICEA's legal action against the MLSA and the ICE, the Government states that the case is now under examination and the final decision is still pending. The High Administrative Court's rejection of the request of Mr Otaredian to annul the ICE's election, and its referral to the branches where cases are under examination indicates that the legitimacy of the ICE has been confirmed until the final verdict is issued, and until then their presence in the supreme labour council and tripartite councils concerning wage determination and social security is legal and logical.

1148. The Government states that by lodging a complaint with the Committee on Freedom of Association (CFA), the IOE is seeking the CFA's support to confirm its pre-judgment of the matter at hand. The IOE moreover demonstrates an obvious bias that runs contrary to international norms and the principle of tripartism. The Government has emphatically promoted freedom of association, and to this end the MLSA has taken steps to foster the multiplication of workers' and employers' associations. The Government believes that sustainable economic growth will be unattainable unless principles of tripartism and social dialogue are widely practised; one of the main MLSA objectives is to increase the sense of commitment within the workers' and employers' communities by encouraging them to establish associations based on elections. Furthermore, it discourages any exclusionary measures and views them as contrary to the objective of civil development. The fact that the number of workers' associations has doubled over the last two years, and that workers' and employers' associations can object to government policies by having recourse to legal channels demonstrates the Government's observance of freedom of association principles. There are currently approximately 3,837 workers' associations and 1,451 employers' associations that freely practise their organizational rights; the number of employers' associations grew from 1,299 in 2006 to 1,451 in 2007, a 7.92 per cent increase.

1149. The Government indicates that the complainant has provided no evidence of harassment and the grounds on which its allegations were made are still unclear. It considers the current situation to be an internal dispute between two employers' associations and while sticking to freedom of association principles has made every effort to settle the dispute. The Government expresses its dismay that the IOE remains so concerned about the rights of the ICEA while ignoring the problems faced by the ICE, which is a more inclusive confederation. The Government has never ignored the strong roles played by workers' and employers' associations in tripartite consultations and has always facilitated discussions and meetings with parties to disputes, be they worker- or employer-related. Disputing parties have never been afraid of government interference and have freely expressed their ideas and opinions during the aforesaid meetings.

1150. The Government indicates that it has given priority to the amendment of national regulations, including the Labour Law, so as to remove any obstacles to the establishment of more than one workers' or employers' organization. It further states that, as depriving other registered associations from its support until the judiciary's final decision is handed down is not compatible with recognized international labour standards, it could not deny the legitimate rights of the ICE as the biggest employers' entity.

1151. According to the Government, the complainant has demonstrated a clear bias against the ICE by having refused the latter's numerous requests to hold a meeting and discuss the matters raised in the present case. Finally, as a gesture of goodwill, the Government invites the ILO to send a technical mission in order to examine the situation of employers' organizations, free from the Government's interference.

1152. In its communication of 20 March 2008, the Government transmits a translated copy of a 2 March 2008 decision handed down by the Appellate Branch of the Administrative Justice Court concerning the MLSA's appeal of the 17 January 2007 decision of the lower Administrative Justice Court. In its decision, the Appellate Court found that the MLSA, in its 2 November 2006 letter addressed to the ICEA, merely indicated the latter's non-compliance with the articles of its Constitution and did not declare the organization's dissolution. It further found the extension of the ICEA Board's term for another six months to be invalid, as the organization's bylaws made no provision for such an extension, and considered the ICEA to have been dissolved as of 4 November 2006 by virtue of article 42 of its Articles of Association, which provides that the organization shall be dissolved if it fails to elect a new Board of Directors six months from the expiry of the term of the present Board of Directors. On the basis of these findings the Appellate Court overturned the lower court's decision.

C. The Committee's conclusions

1153. The Committee notes that the present case concerns allegations of government interference in the elections of the ICEA, the subsequent dissolution of the ICEA by administrative authority and the official backing of a new and parallel employers' confederation (the ICE).

1154. As regards the matters raised in the present case from the information at its disposal, the Committee notes the following:

– The ICEA convened an extraordinary General Assembly on 1 November 2006 for the purpose, inter alia, of electing a new Board of Directors and Inspectors.

– The representatives of the MLSA present at the meeting disrupted the proceedings by announcing that those ICEA members who were in arrears in their membership dues, or had not completed the membership registration process, were not entitled to vote. This announcement led to many objections and protests by member federations; in order to provide those federations excluded by the representatives of the MLSA with an opportunity to participate in the election of the new Board of Directors and Inspectors, the General Assembly decided to suspend the election and to extend the mandate of the existing Board of Directors and Inspectors for a period of six months, until the next elections were held.

– As concerns the MLSA representatives' intervention at the ICEA's meeting, the Government states that: (1) the inspection of the election of trade unions and confederations is entrusted to the MLSA under article 19 of the Council of Ministers' Rules and Procedures on the Organization, Functions, Scope and Liabilities of Trade Unions; (2) paragraph 272 of the Digest of decisions and principles of the Freedom of Association Committee (fifth edition, 2006), in providing that the founders of an organization are not free from the duty of observing the formalities prescribed by law, supports its contention that the monitoring of elections does not infringe upon employers' organizations' freedom of association rights; (3) the MLSA Inspectors were simply enforcing the requirements stipulated in article 38 of the ICEA's Constitution, which provides, inter alia, that the electorate must possess valid membership status in order to participate in the organization's elections; (4) Mr Otaredian, President of the ICEA, was ineligible to be elected under article 38(2) of the ICEA Constitution: due to his resignation from the Federation of Construction Contractors' Organizations, he had lost his ICEA membership and had consequently lost his credentials to either vote or to be elected; and (5) it had received numerous complaints from ICEA members following the General Assembly's failure to hold an election.

– The ICEA received a letter dated 2 November 2006 from the MLSA, signed by the Director-General of the Employers' and Workers' Organizations Department, informing it that it would be dissolved and of the illegality of the continuation of its activities.

– Mr Otaredian submitted a letter to the MLSA acknowledging the latter's right to dissolve confederations, admitting to the negligence of the confederation's senior officers in failing to use the available six month period following the expiry of their terms of office to settle the organization's problems concerning the status of its members, and calling upon the Minister to intervene by removing any obstacles to the ICEA's holding of elections.

– Article 28 of the ICEA Constitution and the provisions of the Council of Ministers' Rules and Procedures on the Organization, Functions, Scope and Liabilities of Trade Unions do not allow for another six month extension of the Board' mandate.

– On 12 November 2006, the ICEA filed a complaint against the MLSA with the Administrative Justice Court, requesting the annulment of the Ministry's dissolution order.

– In December 2006, the ICE was registered by the MLSA under the same registration number previously assigned to the ICEA. The complainant alleges that the MLSA had paid the ICE an amount equal to $20,000 and that the ICE General Assembly meeting was held in a government building – the Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting (IRIB) building – with high security, preventing the entry of any representatives of employers' associations except those invited by the MLSA.

– The Government indicates that the ICE was sufficiently representative of the organizations whose interests it seeks to defend, and that in view of the violations committed by the ICEA's Board of Directors, and in order to preserve the legal identity of the employers' confederation under its single confederation system, it did not hesitate to register the ICE under the same number previously given to the ICEA. The Government further states that it played no part in the ICE's rental of the IRIB centre for its General Assembly. The IRIB centre hosts many meetings by private and state institutions and had contracted with the ICE for the provision of election facilities free from the Government's involvement.

– On 17 January 2007, the court found that the dissolution of ICEA was only enforceable through a competent court and declared a provisional injunction against the Ministry's decision to dissolve the ICEA.

– On 5 March 2007, the ICEA held a General Assembly meeting attended by more than 84 per cent of the members entitled to vote. The ICEA informed the MLSA of the meeting and invited the MLSA to attend. No MLSA representatives attended the meeting; however, the Ministry of Justice, which was also invited to the meeting, did send representatives. A new Board of Directors and Inspectors was designated at the General Assembly meeting, the minutes of which were signed and confirmed by the representatives of the Ministry of Justice.

– On 2 March 2008 the Appellate Branch of the Administrative Justice Court overturned the 17 January 2007 decision of the lower Administrative Justice Court. In its decision, the Appellate Court found that the MLSA, in its 2 November 2006 letter addressed to the ICEA, merely indicated the latter's non-compliance with the articles of its Constitution and did not declare the organization's dissolution. It further found the extension of the ICEA Board's term for another six months to be invalid – as article 28 of the ICEA Constitution and the provisions of the Council of Ministers' Rules and Procedures on the Organization, Functions, Scope and Liabilities of Trade Unions do not allow for another six-month extension of the Board's mandate – and considered the ICEA to have been dissolved as of 4 November 2006 by virtue of article 42 of its Articles of Association, which provides that the organization shall be dissolved if it fails to elect a new Board of Directors six months from the expiry of the term of the present Board of Directors.

1155. As regards the allegations concerning interference in the ICEA's 1 November 2006 General Assembly and the latter's subsequent dissolution, the Committee notes the Government's indications that: (1) the inspection of organizational elections is entrusted to the MLSA under article 19 of the Council of Ministers' Rules and Procedures on the Organization, Functions, Scope and Liabilities of Trade Unions; (2) the MLSA inspectors were simply enforcing the requirements stipulated in article 38 of the ICEA's Constitution, which provides, inter alia, that the electorate must possess valid membership status in order to participate in the organization's elections; (3) the ICEA had failed to abide by several provisions of the Labour Law and the Council of Ministers' Rules and Procedures on the Organization, Functions, Scope and Liabilities of Trade Unions – specifically article 11 of the Council of Ministers' Rules and Procedures, which requires the boards of directors of organizations to call a general assembly at least three months prior to the termination of their tenure, article 14 of the Council of Ministers' Rules and Procedures, and article 131 of the Labour Law providing for the issuance of notices for the holding of a general assembly and a new election two months before the termination of the tenure of the Board of Directors; (4) as article 28 of the ICEA Constitution and the provisions of the Council of Ministers' Rules and Procedures do not allow for another six-month extension of the Board' mandate, in its 2 March 2008 decision the Appellate Branch of the Administrative Justice Court found the ICEA to have been dissolved as of 4 November 2006 by virtue of article 42 of its Articles of Association, which provides that the organization shall be dissolved if it fails to elect a new Board of Directors six months from the expiry of the term of the present Board of Directors.

1156. The Committee, while taking due note of the Government's indications relating to the legislative framework for its intervention and the statutory obligations upon the leadership of the ICEA, must recall that the legal formalities referred to must be considered in the light of freedom of association principles. A number of the legal requirements concerning the holding of elections, particularly the Government's role in their sanctioning, are contrary to the principle that workers' and employers' organizations should be guaranteed the right to elect their officers without interference by the public authorities. While the Government further argues that those conditions are also contained in the ICEA's statutes, the Committee can only query whether their inclusion in the confederation's statutes was due to, or required by the existing legislative framework. The Committee must therefore first recall that the regulation of procedures and methods for the election of trade union officials, as well as those of employers' organizations, is primarily to be governed by the organizations' rules themselves. The fundamental idea of Article 3 of Convention No. 87 is that workers and employers may decide for themselves the rules which should govern the administration of their organizations and the elections which are held therein. For this right to be fully acknowledged, it is essential that the public authorities refrain from any intervention which might impair its exercise, whether it be in determining the conditions of eligibility of leaders or in the conduct of the elections themselves. The Committee further recalls that the presence during trade union elections of the authorities is liable to infringe freedom of association and, in particular, to be incompatible with the principle that workers' and employers' organizations shall have the right to elect their representatives in full freedom, and that the public authorities should refrain from any interference which would restrict this right or impede the lawful exercise thereof. [See Digest of decisions and principles of the Freedom of Association Committee, fifth edition, 2006, paras 392, 391 and 438.]

1157. As regards the Government's statement concerning Mr Otaredian's ineligibility for office, the Committee recalls that the determination of conditions of eligibility for union membership or union office is a matter that should be left to the discretion of union/employer organization by-laws and the public authorities should refrain from any intervention which might impair the exercise of this right [see Digest, op. cit., para. 405]. Any concern as to the violation of the ICEA's constitution should have been the subject of a complaint emanating from the ICEA membership itself and dealt with in accordance with its own constitution and ultimately referred for judicial determination. In light of the above principles, the Committee can only conclude that the Government's presence and conduct during the ICEA elections on 1 November 2007 amounts to interference in the right of employers' organizations to elect their representatives in full freedom contrary to the principles of freedom of association and urges the Government to refrain from such interference in the future.

1158. As regards the MLSA decision in its letter of 2 November 2007 to dissolve the ICEA in line with article 42 of its own constitution on the basis of the failed outcome of the elections called for 1 November, the Committee must recall that measures of suspension or dissolution by the administrative authority constitute serious infringements of the principles of freedom of association [see Digest, op. cit., para. 683]. The Committee notes the Government's argument that it had simply communicated the dissolution of the ICEA in accordance with its own Constitution. However, the Committee cannot ignore the evidence that the Government's communication was the act which declared the dissolution of the ICEA and that this occurred the day following interference by the Government in the internal affairs of the ICEA. The Committee also observes that the General Assembly – the sovereign body of workers' and employers' organizations – decided to suspend the election and to extend the existing Board of Directors and Inspectors for a period of six months, pending renewed elections. In view of the serious consequences which dissolution of an employers' organization involves for the representation of employers, the Committee considers that the determination of the application of article 42 of the ICEA Constitution should have been a matter for an independent judicial body on the basis of complaints emanating from the ICEA membership and that the Government should have refrained from any administrative action in that respect until the competent court had heard the matter.

1159. The Committee notes with deep regret that, not only had the Government announced the dissolution of the ICEA prior to such a court decision, but that it also allegedly supported a break-away faction of the ICEA in its General Assembly election in December 2007 and then proceeded to acknowledge the new organization, the ICE, prior to the decision of the competent court that had been seized with the ICEA appeal of the MLSA administrative dissolution. Moreover, the Government continued to recognize the ICE as the unique employers' organization in the country registered under the same number that the ICEA had been previously registered under, even following the injunction ordered by the court in respect of the status of the ICEA.

1160. While taking due note of the Government's indication that the ICE was registered because it was sufficiently representative of the organizations whose interests it sought to defend, the Committee would recall that on more than one occasion, it has examined cases in which allegations were made that the public authorities had, by their attitude, favoured or discriminated against one or more trade union/employers' organizations: (1) pressure exerted by means of public statements made by the authorities; (2) unequal distribution of subsidies or the granting to one organization, rather than to the others, of premises for holding its meetings or carrying on its activities; (3) refusal to recognize the leaders of certain organizations in the performance of their legitimate activities. Discrimination by such methods, or by others, may be less formal, yet it still constitutes a serious breach of freedom of association as it is equally capable of adversely influencing the organization's membership and prejudicing its activities. Although such discrimination may be difficult to prove as it may be constituted by a series of events, this factor can make it more insidious. The fact, nevertheless, remains that any discrimination of this kind jeopardizes the right of workers and employers set out in Convention No. 87, Article 2, to establish and join organizations of their own choosing [see Digest, op. cit., para. 342]. The Committee notes in this regard the Government's affirmation that it played no part in the ICE's rental of the IRIB Centre for its General Assembly, but further observes with concern that the Government does not respond to the allegation that it provided $20,000 to the ICE. In any event, the Committee considers that the Government has demonstrated de facto favoritism towards the ICE by registering it as the replacement to the ICEA in December 2006 – prior to the court's determination of the appeal brought by the ICEA. The Committee deeply regrets the favouritism shown by the Government in this regard. The Committee considers such favouritism to be a breach of the freedom of association rights of the ICEA and calls on the Government to remedy past discriminatory acts, to desist from those acts which are continuing, and to refrain from such interference in the future.

1161. With regard to the ICEA's dissolution, the Committee observes that although the ICEA had suspended its 1 November 2006 election – in which MLSA officials had intervened by declaring certain members ineligible to vote – and extended the mandate of the existing Board of Directors and Inspectors for a period of six months during which time it organized another election, this extension was deemed invalid by the Appellate Court under the confederation's own Constitution and the Council of Ministers' Rules and Procedures on the Organization, Functions, Scope and Liabilities of Trade Unions. Consequently, the ICEA was found to have been dissolved by virtue of article 42 of its own Constitution.

1162. In light of the principles set out above in relation to the importance of ensuring non-interference by the public authorities in respect of the autonomy of workers' and employers' organizations in relation to the election of their officers and the Committee's conclusion that there was serious interference by the public authorities during the 1 November 2007 General Assembly and through the registration in December 2007 of the ICE, the Committee can only conclude that the legislative provisions annulling the 1 November General Assembly decision – referred to by the Government and the appellate court - constitute grave interference in the fundamental freedom of association rights of workers and employers and have been applied in a manner so as to infringe upon the independence of their organizations. The Committee therefore urges the Government to take the necessary measures to amend the existing legislation, including the Council of Ministers' Rules and Procedures on the Organization, Functions, Scope and Liabilities of Trade Unions, so as to ensure that employers' and workers' organizations may fully exercise their right to elect their representatives freely and without interference by the public authorities.

1163. As concerns the Labour Law's prohibition on the existence of more than one employers' confederation, the Committee recalls that while it is generally to the advantage of workers and employers to avoid the proliferation of competing organizations, a monopoly situation imposed by law is at variance with the principle of free choice of workers' and employers' organizations [see Digest, op. cit., para. 320]. The Committee observes that it has been taking note of the Government's efforts to amend the labour legislation so as to bring it into full conformity with the principles of freedom of association for some time now [see Case No. 2508, 346th Report, para. 1190]. It further notes that the organizational monopoly required by the legislation appears to be the basic problem giving rise to numerous obstacles to the exercise of freedom of association in the country and, in this particular case, appears to be the main hurdle to the recognition of the ICEA. In these circumstances, the Committee requests the Government to take measures as a matter of urgency to amend the Labour Law so as to ensure the freedom of association rights of all workers and employers and in particular, the right of workers and employers to establish more than one organization, be it at enterprise, sectoral or national level, in a manner consistent with freedom of association and that this be done in a manner that does not prejudice the rights formerly held by the ICEA. It requests the Government to transmit a copy of the proposed amendments as soon as they are finalized and firmly expects that the legislation will be brought into conformity with the abovementioned principle in the very near future.

1164. In light of all the above, the Committee cannot but conclude that the final decision to dissolve the ICEA was based on legislative provisions and practices that it considers to be contrary to the fundamental principles of freedom of association. Noting that the ICEA has appealed the 2 March 2008 decision of the Administrative Justice Court's Appellate Branch, the Committee expects that the appeal will, as per the ICEA's request, be heard by the Ultimate Appeals Branch of the Administrative Justice Court in the very near future, and that the latter body will take into full consideration all of the Committee's conclusions set out above. The Committee requests the Government to keep it informed of developments in this regard and to provide a copy of the final judgement once it is handed down. In the meantime, the Committee urges the Government to immediately take the necessary measures to re-register the ICEA, as constituted following its General Assembly of 5 March 2007, and to ensure that it can exercise its activities without hindrance. Upon such re-registration, the Committee further urges the Government to adopt a position of non-interference and neutrality in the exercise of freedom of association employers must have in relation to membership of the ICEA, and to provide no formal or informal preference or favouritism to other organizations. It requests the Government to keep it informed of the steps taken in this regard.

1165. Overall, the Committee is compelled to express its deep concern with the seriousness of the situation prevailing in the country and calls the Governing Body's special attention to the grave situation relating to the freedom of association climate in the Islamic Republic of Iran. It requests the Government to accept a direct contacts mission in respect of the matters raised in the present case, as well as those raised in the other cases concerning the Islamic Republic of Iran pending before the Committee.

D. The Committee's recommendations

1166. In the light of its foregoing interim conclusions, the Committee invites the Governing Body to approve the following recommendations:

(a) Considering that the Government's presence and conduct during the ICEA elections on 1 November 2007 amounts to interference in the right of employers' organizations to elect their representatives in full freedom contrary to the principles of freedom of association, the Committee urges the Government to refrain from such interference in the future.

(b) The Committee considers the favouritism shown by the Government to be a breach of the ICEA's freedom of association rights and calls on the Government to remedy past discriminatory acts, to desist from those acts which are continuing, and to refrain from such interference in the future.

(c) The Committee urges the Government to take the necessary measures to amend the existing legislation, including the Council of Ministers' Rules and Procedures on the Organization, Functions, Scope and Liabilities of Trade Unions, so as to ensure that employers' and workers' organizations may fully exercise their right to elect their representatives freely and without interference by the public authorities.

(d) The Committee requests the Government to take measures as a matter of urgency to amend the Labour Law so to ensure the freedom of association rights of all workers and employers and, in particular, the right of workers and employers to establish more than one organization, be it at enterprise, sectoral or national level, in a manner consistent with freedom of association and that this be done in a manner that does not prejudice the rights formerly held by the ICEA. It requests the Government to transmit a copy of the proposed amendments as soon as they are finalized and firmly expects that the legislation will be brought into conformity with the abovementioned principle in the very near future.

(e) Noting that the ICEA has appealed the 2 March 2008 decision of the Administrative Justice Court's Appellate Branch, which ruled that the ICEA had been dissolved by operation of article 42 of its Articles of Association, the Committee expects that the appeal will, as per the ICEA's request, be heard by the Ultimate Appeals Branch of the Administrative Justice Court in the very near future, and that the latter body will take into full consideration all of the Committee's conclusions set out above. The Committee requests the Government to keep it informed of developments in this regard and to provide a copy of the final judgement once it is handed down.

(f) Pending the decision of the Ultimate Appeals Branch of the Administrative Court, the Committee urges the Government to immediately take the necessary measures to re-register the ICEA, as constituted following its General Assembly of 5 March 2007 and to ensure that it can exercise its activities without hindrance. Upon such re-registration, the Committee further urges the Government to adopt a position of non-interference and neutrality in the exercise of freedom of association employers must have in relation to membership of the ICEA, and to provide no formal or informal preference or favouritism to other organizations. It requests the Government to keep it informed of the steps taken in this regard.

(g) The Committee expresses its deep concern with the seriousness of the situation prevailing in the country and calls the Governing Body's special attention to the grave situation relating to the freedom of association climate in the Islamic Republic of Iran. It requests the Government to accept a direct contacts mission in respect of the matters raised in the present case, as well as those raised in the other cases concerning the Islamic Republic Iran pending before the Committee.

براي خواندن ترجمه‌ي فارسي گزارش فوق اينجا را كليك كنيد.