Saturday, May 5, 2012
THTU WAKALA MAALUMU WA MAJADILIANO UDOM KUANZIA 3/ MAY 2012
Chama cha wafanyakazi wa Taasisi za Elimu ya juu (THTU), tawi la UDOM , kimepewa hadhi ya kuwa wakala pekee wa majadiliano kupitia barua ya Makamu Mkuu wa Chuo, Prof Idris S. Kikula yenye Kumb. Na. UDOM/VC/THTU/175/38.
Hatua hii imefuatiwa baada ya kuwazidi wanachama chama cha RAAWU. Ambao uwakala wao ulisimama rasmi tarehe 3/May 2012. Sasa kila tunaposheherekea Sikukuu ya wafanyakazi duniani, tunajiandaa kusheherekea ushindi huu.
Kwa niaba ya Kamati ya utendaji ya THTU, wanawashukuru sana wanachama wake kwa kuendelea kuwaunga mkono. Moto wetu kwa sasa ni kuhakikisha wafanyakazi wote waliofukuzwa wanarudi. Ajenda nyingine tutaanza kujadili kwa kina baada ya kufanya ukombozi wa wafanyakazi ambao wamefukuzwa kinyume na sheria.
Chama kimejiandaa vyema. Na kinapenda kiwahakikishie hakuna mtu atakayepotea. Kwa taarifa zaidi tembela
FACEBOOK PAGE
Wednesday, May 2, 2012
'Not an ordinary May 1st', says ILO chief
Opinion piece delivered for May 1st, 2012 by ILO Director-General Juan Somavia.
Statement | 01 May 2012
Tens of thousands of people around the world are taking to the streets today to mark May 1st. What else is new? Well, plenty.
The continuing economic crisis is hitting workers hardest. The macroeconomic policies of the past decades have downgraded the meaning of decent work.
The current growth model considers work as a production cost that must be as low as possible in order to raise competitiveness and profits. Workers are seen as being consumers of all sorts of loans rather than as having a legitimate share through wages in the wealth they contribute to create.
Lost in translation is the fact that quality work is a source of personal dignity, family stability, peace in the community and, certainly, a source of credibility for democratic governance. However, in too many places we have lost the basic notion that labour is not a commodity.
So, this is no ordinary May 1st. It comes at a time when deep-rooted interests are pushing to go back to business-as-usual, arguing that this is just another crisis that can be solved applying the same old recipes. It is not.
This trend is especially visible in advanced economies and particularly in the Eurozone, where policies that are trying to cope with very high levels of public debt are generating even higher social deficits that will also have to be addressed.
When youth unemployment rates hover around 50 per cent in Spain and Greece, it is obvious that we have reached the limits of this austerity-induced recession. This ignores the EU’s foundational values of justice and solidarity that have been enshrined in all major European treaties, from Rome to Lisbon. It also ignores the fact that paying back debt needs growth and jobs. Policies are also departing from ratified ILO conventions and disregarding the crucial role that social dialogue can play in times of crisis.
We need a socially-responsible approach to fiscal consolidation. In a democracy, it is more important to retain the long-term trust of people – especially the most vulnerable groups – than to gain the short-term confidence of financial markets.
Globally speaking, most large companies and the financial system in general have bounced back from the crisis, although some pundits claim that there are still some “fragile” banks. Governments spent billions of dollars to ensure their recovery. Workers have not received the same treatment. It is understandable that people marking this first of May feel that while some banks are too big to fail, they are too small to matter.
So what do we do? I believe we need to change the current global growth model. True, this is a model that has created huge amounts of wealth, but it is wealth concentrated in very few hands. This model has failed to generate the type of inclusive growth we were led to believe it would.
We need a different type of growth that is environmentally conscious and focused on people. This means a model whose main aim is to increase the general well-being of people and reduce inequalities, that measures success by the number of good-quality jobs generated, not the percentage of GDP growth.
The financial system has to be at the service of the real economy, not playing around with other people’s money. Banks have to go back to their original and valuable role of lending to sustainable enterprises so they can invest and create jobs. Employment, social and environmental policies need to be as relevant as macroeconomic policies. This is not the case today.
Back in the days of the so-called Washington Consensus, conventional wisdom said that inclusive labour markets, which provide quality jobs, social protection and workers rights, would perform poorly. The fact is that countries that invested in long-term social policies and capacity-building have experienced more stable growth. Many have even become more competitive and are recovering quicker from the crisis than countries that chose the fiscal austerity path.
We must move to a fairer, greener and more sustainable globalization capable of meeting people’s aspirations for a decent life. That means progressive access to a good-paying job with labour rights. That’s how middle classes emerged at different stages in different countries. That’s also why middle classes are now under threat, because it is increasingly difficult for people to find a decent job and to work their way out of poverty.
This concern applies to all countries. And no country or region can lead on its own. Moving towards a new era of social justice requires cooperation, dialogue and, above all, leadership. Leadership fired by human values – key among them, the respect for the dignity of work and workers.
Friday, October 28, 2011
RUFAA YA CALIST RITTE JUU YA KUACHISHWA KAZI ISIVYO HALALI
A: UTANGULIZI
Calist Ritte aliajiriwa Chuo Kikuu cha Dodoma mnamo tarehe 05 Septemba 2007 kupitia barua yenye kumbukumbu Na. DVC/AC/AP/07/13 kama Tutorial Assistant.Kabla ya kuajiriwa UDOM,Calist Ritte alikuwa muajiriwa wa wizara ya elimu akifundisha shule ya sekondari ya wasichana Ashira.
Mnamo 25th October 2007,Calist alimwandikia barua katibu mkuu kumjulisha juu ya ajira yake mpya na kumuomba asimamishe mshahara ,na nakala ya barua hiyo ilitumwa kwa katibu mkuu wizara ya elimu na mafunzo ya ufundi.Akiwa wizara ya elimu file lake ni namba EDPF 29957 na check 9343030.
Pamoja na kuandika barua mshahara uliendelea kuanzia Septemba 2007 hadi Machi 2008 ambapo ulisimamishwa. Hatua hiyo ilimridhisha kwamba ombi lake lilishaanza kushughulikiwa. Cha kustaajabisha Machi 2009 mshahara ulirudishwa tena bila kupewa taarifa yoyote, hadi July 2010, alipogundua mshahara kutoka MoEVT umeanza kurudi tena aliaandika barua tarehe 22/04/2010 kuusimamisha, hakujibiwa hadi Agosti 2010 kupitia barua yenye Kumb. Na. CB. 45/169/01/ ‘S’/27 kutoka Ofisi ya Rais Utumishi wa Umma ikimtaka arudishe mishahara na nakala ilitumwa kwa Mkuu wa Chuo, Chuo Kikuu Dodoma.
B: TUHUMA ZINAZOMKABILI
Calist Ritte anatuhumiwa kuvunja kanuni za maadili za chuo Na. 6, kwa udanganyifu, na pia ametuhumiwa kwa udanganyifu mkubwa (Gross dishonesty) F. 27 (kanuni za kudum u za utumishi wa umma). Udanganyifu unahusu kupokea mishahara miwili, moja kutoka kwa mwajiri wake wa zamani, (MoEVT) na pili mwajiri wa sasa UDOM kati ya Septemba 2007 hadi Februari 2008 na Machi 2009 hadi Julai 2010.
Tuhuma tajwa hapo juu zinapatikana kwenye barua kutoka Utumishi yenye namba CB. 45/169/01/ ‘S’/27 ya 03 Agosti 2010, na barua kutoka UDOM yenye Kumb. Na. UDOM/AC/PCF-103/12 ya tarehe 15 Agosti 2011. Alipokea barua ya kufukuzwa kazi tarehe 22 Septemba 2011 yenye Kumb. Na. UDOM/AC PCF 147/14 ya tarehe 06 Septemba 2011.
C: SABABU ZA KUPINGA KUFUKUZWA KAZI
Tuhuma zinazomkabili si sahihi, ikumbukwe mwajiriwa hawezi kujitoa mwenyewe kwenye orodha ya malipo; ikichukuliwa Calist Ritte amefanya jitihada za kutosha kumtaarifu mwajiri wake wa zamani.
1. Tarehe 25 Oktoba 2007, aliandika barua Utumishi na nakala kwenda Wizara ya Elimu, barua ambayo hakujibiwa, pamoja na kufanya ufuatiliaji mara kadhaa Wizarani mshahara ulisimamishwa mwezi Machi 2008, na Ritte alijua suala hili limekwisha. Mwezi Machi 2009 mshahara ulianza kuingizwa tena kwenye akaunti ya Calist Ritte bila yeye kujua.
2. Tarehe 22 Aprili 2010 aliandika tena barua Utumishi akikumbushia barua yake ya awali ya tarehe 25 Oktoba 2007, na akiomba mshahara wake usitishwe. Barua hii ilijibiwa miezi minne baadaye kupitia barua yenye Kumb. Na. CB.45/169/01/ ‘S’/27 ya tarehe 03 Agosti 2010 ikimtaka kurudisha mishahara husika.
Hili halina shaka limefanyika kwa ajili ya uzembe wa mwajiri kushindwa kushughulikia barua kwa wakati.
3. Barua zote ambazo Ritte ameandikiwa zikimtaka arudishe kiwango hicho, hazitaji ni kiasi gani anachodaiwa, hivyo itakuwa ni vigumu kuanza kulipa.
4. Calisti Ritte aliitwa kwenye kamati ya nidhamu kwa kupigiwa simu na hakuambiwa makosa yake, na alipigiwa siku hiyohiyo. Hapa alinyimwa haki ya msingi ya kuweza kupata muda wa kutosha kwa ajili ya utetezi. Uongozi wa Chuo ulivunja kanuni za ajira na mahusiano kazini (13) (3).
5. Mwanzoni mwa mwaka 2011, Ritte aliomba mkopo benki ya CRDB, kupitia dhamana ya Chuo, alinyimwa kwa madai ana tuhuma za kupokea mishahara miwili. Uongozi wa Chuo badala ya kumfukuza kazi ungemruhusu akope ili alipe hiyo hela.
6. Kufukuzwa kazi hakukuwa sahihi, Calist Ritte angeweza kukatwa kidogokidogo kwenye mshahara wake kila mwezi ili kufidia fedha hiyo.
7. Calist Ritte amefukuzwa kazi kwa kudaiwa fedha ambayo takribani milioni nne tu, deni amabalo sio kusudio lake. Chuo kinamfukuza na kuamua kumlipa mafao ambayo ni zaidi ya milioni sita. Hapakuwa na sababu ya kufukuzwa kazi. Aidha, Chuo kingemlipia deni halafu utaratibu wa kukatwa kwenye mshahara ungeendelea. Hii inamaanisha Chuo kimeingia hasara, nabado kitaingia hasara kuajiri mfanyakazi mwingine.
8. Kamati ya nidhamu na baadae baraza la Chuo, havikutenda haki; huwezi kumwambia mwajiriwa alipe deni kubwa hivyo ndani ya siku saba tu. Mshahara wa zaidi ya miezi 20. Pamoja na hilo Calist Ritte alijitahidi na alionyesha nia akalipa shilingi 800,000/= (shilingi laki nane tu), kiwango hicho ni kikubwa sana ni zaidi ya fedha taslimu anayopokea kila mwezi na aliandika barua kueleza hilo.
9. Hakukuwa na sababu ya msingi Calist Ritte kupelekwa kwenye kamati ya nidhamu kwasababu alipoandikiwa barua na chuo yenye Kumb. Na. UDOM/AC/DCF 103/8 ya Jumapili 20 Machi 2011, ambayo aliipokea tarehe 24 Machi 2011, aliijibu vizuri sana kwenye barua yake ya tarehe 29 Machi 2011 kwa kutoa maelezo ya kina.
10. Calist Ritte hakuelezwa juu ya adhabu ya kufukuzwa na hakupewa nafasi ya kujitetea kwa nini asifukuzwe kazi, kama inavyoelekezwa na kanuni za Ajira kazini .
11. Pamoja na kwamba tuhuma zilizomtia hatihani si sahihi, kiutaratibu na hata kimazingira ya kosa lenyewe, Calist Ritte alihitaji kufikiriwa zaidi na suala lake busara kubwa itumike kwa kuwa:
i. Hivi karibuni tarehe 29 Agosti 2011 alifiwa na mama yake mzazi, akiwa anaishi nae na amemuuguza muda mrefu. Kwa hiyo hali yake ya uchumi imeyumba sana.
ii. Ni mwaka wanne sasa anahangaika kujisomesha mwenyewe Shahada ya Uzamili inayofanya kipato chake kupungua.
iii. Ana mkopo ambao alikuwa anaendelea kuulipa katika benki ya CRDB.
iv. Ana mke na watoto watatu (3).
MAONI NA MAPENDEKEZO
1. Adhabu hiyo itenguliwe, Calist Ritte arudishwe kazini.
2. Wizara ieleze wazi ni kiasi gani Calist Ritte anadaiwa; kisha taratibu za ulipaji madeni kwa wafanyakazi wa umma zifuatwe.
Nawasilisha.
“NIA NA MWELEKEO WETU DAIMA NI KUJENGA”
………………………………………………
PAUL LOISULIE
(Mjumbe Kamati ya Utendaji – (THTU)
Calist Ritte aliajiriwa Chuo Kikuu cha Dodoma mnamo tarehe 05 Septemba 2007 kupitia barua yenye kumbukumbu Na. DVC/AC/AP/07/13 kama Tutorial Assistant.Kabla ya kuajiriwa UDOM,Calist Ritte alikuwa muajiriwa wa wizara ya elimu akifundisha shule ya sekondari ya wasichana Ashira.
Mnamo 25th October 2007,Calist alimwandikia barua katibu mkuu kumjulisha juu ya ajira yake mpya na kumuomba asimamishe mshahara ,na nakala ya barua hiyo ilitumwa kwa katibu mkuu wizara ya elimu na mafunzo ya ufundi.Akiwa wizara ya elimu file lake ni namba EDPF 29957 na check 9343030.
Pamoja na kuandika barua mshahara uliendelea kuanzia Septemba 2007 hadi Machi 2008 ambapo ulisimamishwa. Hatua hiyo ilimridhisha kwamba ombi lake lilishaanza kushughulikiwa. Cha kustaajabisha Machi 2009 mshahara ulirudishwa tena bila kupewa taarifa yoyote, hadi July 2010, alipogundua mshahara kutoka MoEVT umeanza kurudi tena aliaandika barua tarehe 22/04/2010 kuusimamisha, hakujibiwa hadi Agosti 2010 kupitia barua yenye Kumb. Na. CB. 45/169/01/ ‘S’/27 kutoka Ofisi ya Rais Utumishi wa Umma ikimtaka arudishe mishahara na nakala ilitumwa kwa Mkuu wa Chuo, Chuo Kikuu Dodoma.
B: TUHUMA ZINAZOMKABILI
Calist Ritte anatuhumiwa kuvunja kanuni za maadili za chuo Na. 6, kwa udanganyifu, na pia ametuhumiwa kwa udanganyifu mkubwa (Gross dishonesty) F. 27 (kanuni za kudum u za utumishi wa umma). Udanganyifu unahusu kupokea mishahara miwili, moja kutoka kwa mwajiri wake wa zamani, (MoEVT) na pili mwajiri wa sasa UDOM kati ya Septemba 2007 hadi Februari 2008 na Machi 2009 hadi Julai 2010.
Tuhuma tajwa hapo juu zinapatikana kwenye barua kutoka Utumishi yenye namba CB. 45/169/01/ ‘S’/27 ya 03 Agosti 2010, na barua kutoka UDOM yenye Kumb. Na. UDOM/AC/PCF-103/12 ya tarehe 15 Agosti 2011. Alipokea barua ya kufukuzwa kazi tarehe 22 Septemba 2011 yenye Kumb. Na. UDOM/AC PCF 147/14 ya tarehe 06 Septemba 2011.
C: SABABU ZA KUPINGA KUFUKUZWA KAZI
Tuhuma zinazomkabili si sahihi, ikumbukwe mwajiriwa hawezi kujitoa mwenyewe kwenye orodha ya malipo; ikichukuliwa Calist Ritte amefanya jitihada za kutosha kumtaarifu mwajiri wake wa zamani.
1. Tarehe 25 Oktoba 2007, aliandika barua Utumishi na nakala kwenda Wizara ya Elimu, barua ambayo hakujibiwa, pamoja na kufanya ufuatiliaji mara kadhaa Wizarani mshahara ulisimamishwa mwezi Machi 2008, na Ritte alijua suala hili limekwisha. Mwezi Machi 2009 mshahara ulianza kuingizwa tena kwenye akaunti ya Calist Ritte bila yeye kujua.
2. Tarehe 22 Aprili 2010 aliandika tena barua Utumishi akikumbushia barua yake ya awali ya tarehe 25 Oktoba 2007, na akiomba mshahara wake usitishwe. Barua hii ilijibiwa miezi minne baadaye kupitia barua yenye Kumb. Na. CB.45/169/01/ ‘S’/27 ya tarehe 03 Agosti 2010 ikimtaka kurudisha mishahara husika.
Hili halina shaka limefanyika kwa ajili ya uzembe wa mwajiri kushindwa kushughulikia barua kwa wakati.
3. Barua zote ambazo Ritte ameandikiwa zikimtaka arudishe kiwango hicho, hazitaji ni kiasi gani anachodaiwa, hivyo itakuwa ni vigumu kuanza kulipa.
4. Calisti Ritte aliitwa kwenye kamati ya nidhamu kwa kupigiwa simu na hakuambiwa makosa yake, na alipigiwa siku hiyohiyo. Hapa alinyimwa haki ya msingi ya kuweza kupata muda wa kutosha kwa ajili ya utetezi. Uongozi wa Chuo ulivunja kanuni za ajira na mahusiano kazini (13) (3).
5. Mwanzoni mwa mwaka 2011, Ritte aliomba mkopo benki ya CRDB, kupitia dhamana ya Chuo, alinyimwa kwa madai ana tuhuma za kupokea mishahara miwili. Uongozi wa Chuo badala ya kumfukuza kazi ungemruhusu akope ili alipe hiyo hela.
6. Kufukuzwa kazi hakukuwa sahihi, Calist Ritte angeweza kukatwa kidogokidogo kwenye mshahara wake kila mwezi ili kufidia fedha hiyo.
7. Calist Ritte amefukuzwa kazi kwa kudaiwa fedha ambayo takribani milioni nne tu, deni amabalo sio kusudio lake. Chuo kinamfukuza na kuamua kumlipa mafao ambayo ni zaidi ya milioni sita. Hapakuwa na sababu ya kufukuzwa kazi. Aidha, Chuo kingemlipia deni halafu utaratibu wa kukatwa kwenye mshahara ungeendelea. Hii inamaanisha Chuo kimeingia hasara, nabado kitaingia hasara kuajiri mfanyakazi mwingine.
8. Kamati ya nidhamu na baadae baraza la Chuo, havikutenda haki; huwezi kumwambia mwajiriwa alipe deni kubwa hivyo ndani ya siku saba tu. Mshahara wa zaidi ya miezi 20. Pamoja na hilo Calist Ritte alijitahidi na alionyesha nia akalipa shilingi 800,000/= (shilingi laki nane tu), kiwango hicho ni kikubwa sana ni zaidi ya fedha taslimu anayopokea kila mwezi na aliandika barua kueleza hilo.
9. Hakukuwa na sababu ya msingi Calist Ritte kupelekwa kwenye kamati ya nidhamu kwasababu alipoandikiwa barua na chuo yenye Kumb. Na. UDOM/AC/DCF 103/8 ya Jumapili 20 Machi 2011, ambayo aliipokea tarehe 24 Machi 2011, aliijibu vizuri sana kwenye barua yake ya tarehe 29 Machi 2011 kwa kutoa maelezo ya kina.
10. Calist Ritte hakuelezwa juu ya adhabu ya kufukuzwa na hakupewa nafasi ya kujitetea kwa nini asifukuzwe kazi, kama inavyoelekezwa na kanuni za Ajira kazini .
11. Pamoja na kwamba tuhuma zilizomtia hatihani si sahihi, kiutaratibu na hata kimazingira ya kosa lenyewe, Calist Ritte alihitaji kufikiriwa zaidi na suala lake busara kubwa itumike kwa kuwa:
i. Hivi karibuni tarehe 29 Agosti 2011 alifiwa na mama yake mzazi, akiwa anaishi nae na amemuuguza muda mrefu. Kwa hiyo hali yake ya uchumi imeyumba sana.
ii. Ni mwaka wanne sasa anahangaika kujisomesha mwenyewe Shahada ya Uzamili inayofanya kipato chake kupungua.
iii. Ana mkopo ambao alikuwa anaendelea kuulipa katika benki ya CRDB.
iv. Ana mke na watoto watatu (3).
MAONI NA MAPENDEKEZO
1. Adhabu hiyo itenguliwe, Calist Ritte arudishwe kazini.
2. Wizara ieleze wazi ni kiasi gani Calist Ritte anadaiwa; kisha taratibu za ulipaji madeni kwa wafanyakazi wa umma zifuatwe.
Nawasilisha.
“NIA NA MWELEKEO WETU DAIMA NI KUJENGA”
………………………………………………
PAUL LOISULIE
(Mjumbe Kamati ya Utendaji – (THTU)
Tuesday, October 4, 2011
KIKAO CHA THTU NA MHE. WAZIRI WA AFYA NA USTAWI WA JAMII KILICHOFANYIKA TAREHE 29/09/2011 DSM
Mshikamano Wajumbe,
Baada ya viongozi wa THTU kutoa tamko lao kuhusu mgogoro wa ISW kwenye vyombo vya habari ndipo Waziri wa Afya alivyowaita viongozi wa THTU na kufanya nao kikao tarehe 29/09/2011 na ifuatayo ni attachment ya THTU kwa Waziri wa Afya na Ustawi wa Jamii.
KIKAO CHA THTU NA MHE. WAZIRI WA AFYA NA USTAWI WA JAMII
KILICHOFANYIKA TAREHE 29/09/2011 DSM.
Chama cha THTU kimejihusisha na mgogoro wa Taasisi ya Ustawi wa Jamii
kikamilifu na kimefanya utafiti wa kina na kubaini kwamba matatizo ya Taasisi
ya Ustawi wa Jamii yanaweza kumalizika na Taasisi kupatiwa ithibati na kurejea
katika hali ya kawaida iwapo yafuatayo yatafanyika kwa haraka:-
(i) Kuwarudisha wafanyakazi wote 30 waliofukuzwa kazi bila masharti
yoyote.
(ii) Kuwaondoa Viongozi wa Taasisi ya Ustawi wa Jamii ambao hawana sifa
kwa mujibu wa NACTE na ambao ndiyo chanzo cha matatizo, na
kuweka viongozi wenye sifa ili Taasisi irejee katika hali yake ya kawaida.
(iii) Kurekebisha Bodi ya Magavana ya Taasisi ya Ustawi wa Jamii kwa kuwa
haikidhi matakwa ya Bodi ya Taasisi ya Elimu ya Juu ikiwa ni pamoja na
kutokuwa na wawakilishi wa Wanataaluma, chama cha Wafanyakazi na
Baraza la Wafanyakazi.
(iv) Mhe. Waziri atengue maamuzi yaliyofanywa yakubadilisha mwakilishi wa
NACTE katika Bodi ya Magavana.
(v) Mhe. Waziri atuhakikishie kwamba Wizara na Bodi ya Magavana
wataheshimu maagizo ya NACTE na kuhakikisha kwamba yanatekelezwa.
(vi) Wizara ya Afya na Ustawi wa Jamii itambue kwamba Taasisi ya Ustawi wa
Jamii ni Taasisi ya Elimu ya Juu na si Idara mojawapo ya Wizara na Wizara
iisimamie Taasisi kwa kupitia Bodi ya Magavana.
(vii)Mhe. Waziri atuhakikishie kwamba Wizara, Bodi ya Magavana na
Menejimenti hawaingilii shughuli za vyama vya wafanyakazi.
NIA NA MWELEKEO WETU DAIMA NI KUJENGA!
“TAIFA KWANZA”
Baada ya viongozi wa THTU kutoa tamko lao kuhusu mgogoro wa ISW kwenye vyombo vya habari ndipo Waziri wa Afya alivyowaita viongozi wa THTU na kufanya nao kikao tarehe 29/09/2011 na ifuatayo ni attachment ya THTU kwa Waziri wa Afya na Ustawi wa Jamii.
KIKAO CHA THTU NA MHE. WAZIRI WA AFYA NA USTAWI WA JAMII
KILICHOFANYIKA TAREHE 29/09/2011 DSM.
Chama cha THTU kimejihusisha na mgogoro wa Taasisi ya Ustawi wa Jamii
kikamilifu na kimefanya utafiti wa kina na kubaini kwamba matatizo ya Taasisi
ya Ustawi wa Jamii yanaweza kumalizika na Taasisi kupatiwa ithibati na kurejea
katika hali ya kawaida iwapo yafuatayo yatafanyika kwa haraka:-
(i) Kuwarudisha wafanyakazi wote 30 waliofukuzwa kazi bila masharti
yoyote.
(ii) Kuwaondoa Viongozi wa Taasisi ya Ustawi wa Jamii ambao hawana sifa
kwa mujibu wa NACTE na ambao ndiyo chanzo cha matatizo, na
kuweka viongozi wenye sifa ili Taasisi irejee katika hali yake ya kawaida.
(iii) Kurekebisha Bodi ya Magavana ya Taasisi ya Ustawi wa Jamii kwa kuwa
haikidhi matakwa ya Bodi ya Taasisi ya Elimu ya Juu ikiwa ni pamoja na
kutokuwa na wawakilishi wa Wanataaluma, chama cha Wafanyakazi na
Baraza la Wafanyakazi.
(iv) Mhe. Waziri atengue maamuzi yaliyofanywa yakubadilisha mwakilishi wa
NACTE katika Bodi ya Magavana.
(v) Mhe. Waziri atuhakikishie kwamba Wizara na Bodi ya Magavana
wataheshimu maagizo ya NACTE na kuhakikisha kwamba yanatekelezwa.
(vi) Wizara ya Afya na Ustawi wa Jamii itambue kwamba Taasisi ya Ustawi wa
Jamii ni Taasisi ya Elimu ya Juu na si Idara mojawapo ya Wizara na Wizara
iisimamie Taasisi kwa kupitia Bodi ya Magavana.
(vii)Mhe. Waziri atuhakikishie kwamba Wizara, Bodi ya Magavana na
Menejimenti hawaingilii shughuli za vyama vya wafanyakazi.
NIA NA MWELEKEO WETU DAIMA NI KUJENGA!
“TAIFA KWANZA”
Tuesday, September 20, 2011
SUALA LA EXCLUSIVE BARGAINING RIGHT – CHUO KIKUU CHA DODOMA
Kabla ya kuanzishwa kwa THTU, Chuo Kikuu cha Dodoma, kulikuwa na chama kimoja tu cha wafanyakazi RAAWU, ambacho hata hivyo kilikuwa na wanachama wachache sana na sehemu kubwa ikiwa ni wafanyakazi waendeshaji. Wanataaluma wakiwa hawafiki hata watano, na timu nzima ya Uongozi ikiwa imejaa administrators. In short ilikuwa imeelemea upande mmoja zaidi. Lakini pia viongozi wake walishindwa kabisa kusaidia wafanyakazi kutatua matatizo yao kwa wakati, hali hii ilijidhihirisha pale ambapo UDOMASA, ililazimika kufanya kazi kama Trade Union, ambayo kimsingi haikustahili.
Ilipoanzishwa THTU, mwezi February wanachama zaidi ya 100 walijiunga. Kikiwa na uwiano mkubwa sana wa wafanyakazi wandeshaji. Hata safu ya uongozi, nusu wakiwa wanataaluma na nusu wafanyakazi waendeshaji. Mwezi wa Marchi tuliomba rasmi tawi kufunguliwa, na tukakubaliwa tukiwa na wanachama zaidi ya 150, wanachama ambao RAAWU, ilikuwa haijafikia na mpaka leo hii bado haijafikia.
Mnamo mwezi May, tuliomba THTU, itambuliwe kama Mwakilishi wa wafanyakazi, tulijaza form kwa ajili ya Exclusive Bargaining Right, na tukakabidhi utawala. Kwa mujibu wa sheria za kazi ilitakiwa tuwe tumejibiwa ndani ya siku 30. VC alitushauri tuondoe suala la muda. Tufanye majadiliano, kwa sababu chuo kwanza ni kichanga, pili ni mara ya kwanza taasisi inakuwa na chama zaidi ya kimoja, Ushauri ambao tuliupokea bila shaka yoyote, nia yetu ikiwa ni kujenga.
Suala hili tangu hapo, limekuwa likipigwa danadana, na hata sasa limechukua miezi minne, bila mafanikio. Mnamo 19 August 2011, tulifanya mkutano na ofisi ya STC, kwa ajili ya kuhesabu wanachama RAAWU walikwa na wanachama 139 tu, wakijumuisha na wanachama ambao walishajitoa, na THTU ilikuwa na wanachama 255. Cha kushangaza baada ya mwezi , yaani 19 Septemba, tukaitwa tena, tukahesabu wanachama kwa ajili majina yamejirudia. Tukatumia busara tukaenda kikao ambacho Mwenyekiti wa RAAWU, hakutokea, akamtuma Katibu wake nae hakutokea. Na hata walipopatikana wajumbe wawili wa kamati yao ya utendaji na mwanachama mmoja, walikataa kufanya mkutano huo. Tukiwa na Mwenyekiti wa UDOMASA, tukaliripoti hili kwa VC, ambae ameamuru suala hili liishe Alhamisi 22, Septemba 2011, ameagiza Ofisi ya DVC PFA, HR, STC, RAAWU, UDOMASA tukutane. Tumekwisha pokea barua kwa ajili ya mkutano huo.
Cha kuchekesha wanachama RAAWU, iliyowaweka amabo si wao ni wengi, Lakini yupo mwanaharakati na mpiganaji mzoefu, ambae pia ni Katibu wa THTU, Bwana Fredrick Oywech, yupo Balozi Lipili, yupo Mwanamama mpambanaji Kuluthum Mchatta, hao ni baadhi tu. Barua zao za kujitoa RAAWU, niliziwasilisha mimi mwenyewe.
Lazima niweke kumbukumbu sahihi, pamoja na juhudi za wazi za Makamu Mkuu wa chuo kutaka suala hili liishe, kumekuwa na njama za makusudi kabisa, ambazo nitazieleza vizuri kabisa wakati wa kutoa comment. Sisi kama THTU, tunaandaa ripoti yetu juu ya hili suala , na msimamo wetu, kwa Mujibu wa sheria za kazi. Naomba niwahakikishie hili suala litafika mwisho. Tumeazimia baada ya mkutano huo, tusiporidhika tutalipeleka suala hili CMA (Court of Mediation & Arbitration), siku ya Ijumaa asubuhi. Hili tutalisimamia kwa uwezo wetu wote. Hadi sasa THTU ina wanachama zaidi ya 300, wafanyakazi waendeshaji wakiwa zaidi ya 100,ambayo ni zaidi ya asilimia 33 (33%), mchakato unafanyika majina yao yataonekana humu muda si mrefu. Wenzetu kwenye idadi yao hiyo ya 139, wanataaluma wapo 7 tu, ambayo ni asilimia 5 (5% tu)hii ni hatari sana kwa masilahi ya chuo, tusishangae pale UDOMASA inapobidi iwe Trade Union.
Nini msimamo wa THTU, juu ya hili suala? Siku ya Alhamisi jioni 22 septemba 2011, tuta-post kwenye hii blog yetu. Don’t Go away
Cheers MWERANGI, Iddy (Chairman)
Ilipoanzishwa THTU, mwezi February wanachama zaidi ya 100 walijiunga. Kikiwa na uwiano mkubwa sana wa wafanyakazi wandeshaji. Hata safu ya uongozi, nusu wakiwa wanataaluma na nusu wafanyakazi waendeshaji. Mwezi wa Marchi tuliomba rasmi tawi kufunguliwa, na tukakubaliwa tukiwa na wanachama zaidi ya 150, wanachama ambao RAAWU, ilikuwa haijafikia na mpaka leo hii bado haijafikia.
Mnamo mwezi May, tuliomba THTU, itambuliwe kama Mwakilishi wa wafanyakazi, tulijaza form kwa ajili ya Exclusive Bargaining Right, na tukakabidhi utawala. Kwa mujibu wa sheria za kazi ilitakiwa tuwe tumejibiwa ndani ya siku 30. VC alitushauri tuondoe suala la muda. Tufanye majadiliano, kwa sababu chuo kwanza ni kichanga, pili ni mara ya kwanza taasisi inakuwa na chama zaidi ya kimoja, Ushauri ambao tuliupokea bila shaka yoyote, nia yetu ikiwa ni kujenga.
Suala hili tangu hapo, limekuwa likipigwa danadana, na hata sasa limechukua miezi minne, bila mafanikio. Mnamo 19 August 2011, tulifanya mkutano na ofisi ya STC, kwa ajili ya kuhesabu wanachama RAAWU walikwa na wanachama 139 tu, wakijumuisha na wanachama ambao walishajitoa, na THTU ilikuwa na wanachama 255. Cha kushangaza baada ya mwezi , yaani 19 Septemba, tukaitwa tena, tukahesabu wanachama kwa ajili majina yamejirudia. Tukatumia busara tukaenda kikao ambacho Mwenyekiti wa RAAWU, hakutokea, akamtuma Katibu wake nae hakutokea. Na hata walipopatikana wajumbe wawili wa kamati yao ya utendaji na mwanachama mmoja, walikataa kufanya mkutano huo. Tukiwa na Mwenyekiti wa UDOMASA, tukaliripoti hili kwa VC, ambae ameamuru suala hili liishe Alhamisi 22, Septemba 2011, ameagiza Ofisi ya DVC PFA, HR, STC, RAAWU, UDOMASA tukutane. Tumekwisha pokea barua kwa ajili ya mkutano huo.
Cha kuchekesha wanachama RAAWU, iliyowaweka amabo si wao ni wengi, Lakini yupo mwanaharakati na mpiganaji mzoefu, ambae pia ni Katibu wa THTU, Bwana Fredrick Oywech, yupo Balozi Lipili, yupo Mwanamama mpambanaji Kuluthum Mchatta, hao ni baadhi tu. Barua zao za kujitoa RAAWU, niliziwasilisha mimi mwenyewe.
Lazima niweke kumbukumbu sahihi, pamoja na juhudi za wazi za Makamu Mkuu wa chuo kutaka suala hili liishe, kumekuwa na njama za makusudi kabisa, ambazo nitazieleza vizuri kabisa wakati wa kutoa comment. Sisi kama THTU, tunaandaa ripoti yetu juu ya hili suala , na msimamo wetu, kwa Mujibu wa sheria za kazi. Naomba niwahakikishie hili suala litafika mwisho. Tumeazimia baada ya mkutano huo, tusiporidhika tutalipeleka suala hili CMA (Court of Mediation & Arbitration), siku ya Ijumaa asubuhi. Hili tutalisimamia kwa uwezo wetu wote. Hadi sasa THTU ina wanachama zaidi ya 300, wafanyakazi waendeshaji wakiwa zaidi ya 100,ambayo ni zaidi ya asilimia 33 (33%), mchakato unafanyika majina yao yataonekana humu muda si mrefu. Wenzetu kwenye idadi yao hiyo ya 139, wanataaluma wapo 7 tu, ambayo ni asilimia 5 (5% tu)hii ni hatari sana kwa masilahi ya chuo, tusishangae pale UDOMASA inapobidi iwe Trade Union.
Nini msimamo wa THTU, juu ya hili suala? Siku ya Alhamisi jioni 22 septemba 2011, tuta-post kwenye hii blog yetu. Don’t Go away
Cheers MWERANGI, Iddy (Chairman)
Saturday, September 17, 2011
C158 Termination of Employment Convention, 1982
Convention concerning Termination of Employment at the Initiative of the Employer (Note: Date of coming into force: 23:11:1985.)
Convention:C158
Place:Geneva
Session of the Conference:68
Date of adoption:22:06:1982
Subject classification: Termination of Employment - Dismissal
Subject: Employment security
See the ratifications for this Convention
Status: No conclusions The Working Party on Policy regarding the Revision of Standards could not reach any conclusions regarding Convention No. 158 and Recommendation No. 166.
The General Conference of the International Labour Organisation,
Having been convened at Geneva by the Governing Body of the International Labour Office, and having met in its Sixty-eighth Session on 2 June 1982, and
Noting the existing international standards contained in the Termination of Employment Recommendation, 1963, and
Noting that since the adoption of the Termination of Employment Recommendation, 1963, significant developments have occurred in the law and practice of many member States on the questions covered by that Recommendation, and
Considering that these developments have made it appropriate to adopt new international standards on the subject, particularly having regard to the serious problems in this field resulting from the economic difficulties and technological changes experienced in recent years in many countries,
Having decided upon the adoption of certain proposals with regard to termination of employment at the initiative of the employer, which is the fifth item on the agenda of the session, and
Having determined that these proposals shall take the form of an international Convention;
adopts this twenty-second day of June of the year one thousand nine hundred and eighty-two the following Convention, which may be cited as the Termination of Employment Convention, 1982:
PART I. METHODS OF IMPLEMENTATION, SCOPE AND DEFINITIONS
Article 1
The provisions of this Convention shall, in so far as they are not otherwise made effective by means of collective agreements, arbitration awards or court decisions or in such other manner as may be consistent with national practice, be given effect by laws or regulations.
Article 2
1. This Convention applies to all branches of economic activity and to all employed persons.
2. A Member may exclude the following categories of employed persons from all or some of the provisions of this Convention:
(a) workers engaged under a contract of employment for a specified period of time or a specified task;
(b) workers serving a period of probation or a qualifying period of employment, determined in advance and of reasonable duration;
(c) workers engaged on a casual basis for a short period.
3. Adequate safeguards shall be provided against recourse to contracts of employment for a specified period of time the aim of which is to avoid the protection resulting from this Convention.
4. In so far as necessary, measures may be taken by the competent authority or through the appropriate machinery in a country, after consultation with the organisations of employers and workers concerned, where such exist, to exclude from the application of this Convention or certain provisions thereof categories of employed persons whose terms and conditions of employment are governed by special arrangements which as a whole provide protection that is at least equivalent to the protection afforded under the Convention.
5. In so far as necessary, measures may be taken by the competent authority or through the appropriate machinery in a country, after consultation with the organisations of employers and workers concerned, where such exist, to exclude from the application of this Convention or certain provisions thereof other limited categories of employed persons in respect of which special problems of a substantial nature arise in the light of the particular conditions of employment of the workers concerned or the size or nature of the undertaking that employs them.
6. Each Member which ratifies this Convention shall list in the first report on the application of the Convention submitted under Article 22 of the Constitution of the International Labour Organisation any categories which may have been excluded in pursuance of paragraphs 4 and 5 of this Article, giving the reasons for such exclusion, and shall state in subsequent reports the position of its law and practice regarding the categories excluded, and the extent to which effect has been given or is proposed to be given to the Convention in respect of such categories.
Article 3
For the purpose of this Convention the terms termination and termination of employment mean termination of employment at the initiative of the employer.
PART II.
STANDARD OF GENERAL APPLICATION
DIVISION A. JUSTIFICATION FOR TERMINATION
Article 4
The employment of a worker shall not be terminated unless there is a valid reason for such termination connected with the capacity or conduct of the worker or based on the operational requirements of the undertaking, establishment or service.
Article 5
The following, inter alia, shall not constitute valid reasons for termination:
(a) union membership or participation in union activities outside working hours or, with the consent of the employer, within working hours;
(b) seeking office as, or acting or having acted in the capacity of, a workers' representative;
(c) the filing of a complaint or the participation in proceedings against an employer involving alleged violation of laws or regulations or recourse to competent administrative authorities;
(d) race, colour, sex, marital status, family responsibilities, pregnancy, religion, political opinion, national extraction or social origin;
(e) absence from work during maternity leave.
Article 6
1. Temporary absence from work because of illness or injury shall not constitute a valid reason for termination.
2. The definition of what constitutes temporary absence from work, the extent to which medical certification shall be required and possible limitations to the application of paragraph 1 of this Article shall be determined in accordance with the methods of implementation referred to in Article 1 of this Convention.
DIVISION B. PROCEDURE PRIOR TO OR AT THE TIME OF TERMINATION
Article 7
The employment of a worker shall not be terminated for reasons related to the worker's conduct or performance before he is provided an opportunity to defend himself against the allegations made, unless the employer cannot reasonably be expected to provide this opportunity.
DIVISION C. PROCEDURE OF APPEAL AGAINST TERMINATION
Article 8
1. A worker who considers that his employment has been unjustifiably terminated shall be entitled to appeal against that termination to an impartial body, such as a court, labour tribunal, arbitration committee or arbitrator.
2. Where termination has been authorised by a competent authority the application of paragraph 1 of this Article may be varied according to national law and practice.
3. A worker may be deemed to have waived his right to appeal against the termination of his employment if he has not exercised that right within a reasonable period of time after termination.
Article 9
1. The bodies referred to in Article 8 of this Convention shall be empowered to examine the reasons given for the termination and the other circumstances relating to the case and to render a decision on whether the termination was justified.
2. In order for the worker not to have to bear alone the burden of proving that the termination was not justified, the methods of implementation referred to in Article 1 of this Convention shall provide for one or the other or both of the following possibilities:
(a) the burden of proving the existence of a valid reason for the termination as defined in Article 4 of this Convention shall rest on the employer;
(b) the bodies referred to in Article 8 of this Convention shall be empowered to reach a conclusion on the reason for the termination having regard to the evidence provided by the parties and according to procedures provided for by national law and practice.
3. In cases of termination stated to be for reasons based on the operational requirements of the undertaking, establishment or service, the bodies referred to in Article 8 of this Convention shall be empowered to determine whether the termination was indeed for these reasons, but the extent to which they shall also be empowered to decide whether these reasons are sufficient to justify that termination shall be determined by the methods of implementation referred to in Article 1 of this Convention.
Article 10
If the bodies referred to in Article 8 of this Convention find that termination is unjustified and if they are not empowered or do not find it practicable, in accordance with national law and practice, to declare the termination invalid and/or order or propose reinstatement of the worker, they shall be empowered to order payment of adequate compensation or such other relief as may be deemed appropriate.
DIVISION D. PERIOD OF NOTICE
Article 11
A worker whose employment is to be terminated shall be entitled to a reasonable period of notice or compensation in lieu thereof, unless he is guilty of serious misconduct, that is, misconduct of such a nature that it would be unreasonable to require the employer to continue his employment during the notice period.
DIVISION E. SEVERANCE ALLOWANCE AND OTHER INCOME PROTECTION
Article 12
1. A worker whose employment has been terminated shall be entitled, in accordance with national law and practice, to-
(a) a severance allowance or other separation benefits, the amount of which shall be based inter alia on length of service and the level of wages, and paid directly by the employer or by a fund constituted by employers' contributions; or
(b) benefits from unemployment insurance or assistance or other forms of social security, such as old-age or invalidity benefits, under the normal conditions to which such benefits are subject; or
(c) a combination of such allowance and benefits.
2. A worker who does not fulfil the qualifying conditions for unemployment insurance or assistance under a scheme of general scope need not be paid any allowance or benefit referred to in paragraph 1, subparagraph (a), of this Article solely because he is not receiving an unemployment benefit under paragraph 1, subparagraph (b).
3. Provision may be made by the methods of implementation referred to in Article 1 of this Convention for loss of entitlement to the allowance or benefits referred to in paragraph 1, subparagraph (a), of this Article in the event of termination for serious misconduct.
PART III. SUPPLEMENTARY PROVISIONS CONCERNING TERMINATIONS OF EMPLOYMENT FOR ECONOMIC, TECHNOLOGICAL, STRUCTURAL OR SIMILAR REASONS
DIVISION A. CONSULTATION OF WORKERS' REPRESENTATIVES
Article 13
1. When the employer contemplates terminations for reasons of an economic, technological, structural or similar nature, the employer shall:
(a) provide the workers' representatives concerned in good time with relevant information including the reasons for the terminations contemplated, the number and categories of workers likely to be affected and the period over which the terminations are intended to be carried out;
(b) give, in accordance with national law and practice, the workers' representatives concerned, as early as possible, an opportunity for consultation on measures to be taken to avert or to minimise the terminations and measures to mitigate the adverse effects of any terminations on the workers concerned such as finding alternative employment.
2. The applicability of paragraph 1 of this Article may be limited by the methods of implementation referred to in Article 1 of this Convention to cases in which the number of workers whose termination of employment is contemplated is at least a specified number or percentage of the workforce.
3. For the purposes of this Article the term the workers' representatives concerned means the workers' representatives recognised as such by national law or practice, in conformity with the Workers' Representatives Convention, 1971.
DIVISION B. NOTIFICATION TO THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY
Article 14
1. When the employer contemplates terminations for reasons of an economic, technological, structural or similar nature, he shall notify, in accordance with national law and practice, the competent authority thereof as early as possible, giving relevant information, including a written statement of the reasons for the terminations, the number and categories of workers likely to be affected and the period over which the terminations are intended to be carried out.
2. National laws or regulations may limit the applicability of paragraph 1 of this Article to cases in which the number of workers whose termination of employment is contemplated is at least a specified number or percentage of the workforce.
3. The employer shall notify the competent authority of the terminations referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article a minimum period of time before carrying out the terminations, such period to be specified by national laws or regulations.
PART IV. FINAL PROVISIONS
Article 15
The formal ratifications of this Convention shall be communicated to the Director-General of the International Labour Office for registration.
Article 16
1. This Convention shall be binding only upon those Members of the International Labour Organisation whose ratifications have been registered with the Director-General.
2. It shall come into force twelve months after the date on which the ratifications of two Members have been registered with the Director-General.
3. Thereafter, this Convention shall come into force for any Member twelve months after the date on which its ratification has been registered.
Article 17
1. A Member which has ratified this Convention may denounce it after the expiration of ten years from the date on which the Convention first comes into force, by an act communicated to the Director-General of the International Labour Office for registration. Such denunciation shall not take effect until one year after the date on which it is registered.
2. Each Member which has ratified this Convention and which does not, within the year following the expiration of the period of ten years mentioned in the preceding paragraph, exercise the right of denunciation provided for in this Article, will be bound for another period of ten years and, thereafter, may denounce this Convention at the expiration of each period of ten years under the terms provided for in this Article.
Article 18
1. The Director-General of the International Labour Office shall notify all Members of the International Labour Organisation of the registration of all ratifications and denunciations communicated to him by the Members of the Organisation.
2. When notifying the Members of the Organisation of the registration of the second ratification communicated to him, the Director-General shall draw the attention of the Members of the Organisation to the date upon which the Convention will come into force.
Article 19
The Director-General of the International Labour Office shall communicate to the Secretary-General of the United Nations for registration in accordance with article 102 of the Charter of the United Nations full particulars of all ratifications and acts of denunciation registered by him in accordance with the provisions of the preceding Articles.
Article 20
At such times as it may consider necessary the Governing Body of the International Labour Office shall present to the General Conference a report on the working of this Convention and shall examine the desirability of placing on the agenda of the Conference the question of its revision in whole or in part.
Article 21
1. Should the Conference adopt a new Convention revising this Convention in whole or in part, then, unless the new Convention otherwise provides-
(a) the ratification by a Member of the new revising Convention shall ipso jure involve the immediate denunciation of this Convention, notwithstanding the provisions of Article 17 above, if and when the new revising Convention shall have come into force;
(b) as from the date when the new revising Convention comes into force this Convention shall cease to be open to ratification by the Members.
2. This Convention shall in any case remain in force in its actual form and content for those Members which have ratified it but have not ratified the revising Convention.
Article 22
The English and French versions of the text of this Convention are equally authoritative.
Convention:C158
Place:Geneva
Session of the Conference:68
Date of adoption:22:06:1982
Subject classification: Termination of Employment - Dismissal
Subject: Employment security
See the ratifications for this Convention
Status: No conclusions The Working Party on Policy regarding the Revision of Standards could not reach any conclusions regarding Convention No. 158 and Recommendation No. 166.
The General Conference of the International Labour Organisation,
Having been convened at Geneva by the Governing Body of the International Labour Office, and having met in its Sixty-eighth Session on 2 June 1982, and
Noting the existing international standards contained in the Termination of Employment Recommendation, 1963, and
Noting that since the adoption of the Termination of Employment Recommendation, 1963, significant developments have occurred in the law and practice of many member States on the questions covered by that Recommendation, and
Considering that these developments have made it appropriate to adopt new international standards on the subject, particularly having regard to the serious problems in this field resulting from the economic difficulties and technological changes experienced in recent years in many countries,
Having decided upon the adoption of certain proposals with regard to termination of employment at the initiative of the employer, which is the fifth item on the agenda of the session, and
Having determined that these proposals shall take the form of an international Convention;
adopts this twenty-second day of June of the year one thousand nine hundred and eighty-two the following Convention, which may be cited as the Termination of Employment Convention, 1982:
PART I. METHODS OF IMPLEMENTATION, SCOPE AND DEFINITIONS
Article 1
The provisions of this Convention shall, in so far as they are not otherwise made effective by means of collective agreements, arbitration awards or court decisions or in such other manner as may be consistent with national practice, be given effect by laws or regulations.
Article 2
1. This Convention applies to all branches of economic activity and to all employed persons.
2. A Member may exclude the following categories of employed persons from all or some of the provisions of this Convention:
(a) workers engaged under a contract of employment for a specified period of time or a specified task;
(b) workers serving a period of probation or a qualifying period of employment, determined in advance and of reasonable duration;
(c) workers engaged on a casual basis for a short period.
3. Adequate safeguards shall be provided against recourse to contracts of employment for a specified period of time the aim of which is to avoid the protection resulting from this Convention.
4. In so far as necessary, measures may be taken by the competent authority or through the appropriate machinery in a country, after consultation with the organisations of employers and workers concerned, where such exist, to exclude from the application of this Convention or certain provisions thereof categories of employed persons whose terms and conditions of employment are governed by special arrangements which as a whole provide protection that is at least equivalent to the protection afforded under the Convention.
5. In so far as necessary, measures may be taken by the competent authority or through the appropriate machinery in a country, after consultation with the organisations of employers and workers concerned, where such exist, to exclude from the application of this Convention or certain provisions thereof other limited categories of employed persons in respect of which special problems of a substantial nature arise in the light of the particular conditions of employment of the workers concerned or the size or nature of the undertaking that employs them.
6. Each Member which ratifies this Convention shall list in the first report on the application of the Convention submitted under Article 22 of the Constitution of the International Labour Organisation any categories which may have been excluded in pursuance of paragraphs 4 and 5 of this Article, giving the reasons for such exclusion, and shall state in subsequent reports the position of its law and practice regarding the categories excluded, and the extent to which effect has been given or is proposed to be given to the Convention in respect of such categories.
Article 3
For the purpose of this Convention the terms termination and termination of employment mean termination of employment at the initiative of the employer.
PART II.
STANDARD OF GENERAL APPLICATION
DIVISION A. JUSTIFICATION FOR TERMINATION
Article 4
The employment of a worker shall not be terminated unless there is a valid reason for such termination connected with the capacity or conduct of the worker or based on the operational requirements of the undertaking, establishment or service.
Article 5
The following, inter alia, shall not constitute valid reasons for termination:
(a) union membership or participation in union activities outside working hours or, with the consent of the employer, within working hours;
(b) seeking office as, or acting or having acted in the capacity of, a workers' representative;
(c) the filing of a complaint or the participation in proceedings against an employer involving alleged violation of laws or regulations or recourse to competent administrative authorities;
(d) race, colour, sex, marital status, family responsibilities, pregnancy, religion, political opinion, national extraction or social origin;
(e) absence from work during maternity leave.
Article 6
1. Temporary absence from work because of illness or injury shall not constitute a valid reason for termination.
2. The definition of what constitutes temporary absence from work, the extent to which medical certification shall be required and possible limitations to the application of paragraph 1 of this Article shall be determined in accordance with the methods of implementation referred to in Article 1 of this Convention.
DIVISION B. PROCEDURE PRIOR TO OR AT THE TIME OF TERMINATION
Article 7
The employment of a worker shall not be terminated for reasons related to the worker's conduct or performance before he is provided an opportunity to defend himself against the allegations made, unless the employer cannot reasonably be expected to provide this opportunity.
DIVISION C. PROCEDURE OF APPEAL AGAINST TERMINATION
Article 8
1. A worker who considers that his employment has been unjustifiably terminated shall be entitled to appeal against that termination to an impartial body, such as a court, labour tribunal, arbitration committee or arbitrator.
2. Where termination has been authorised by a competent authority the application of paragraph 1 of this Article may be varied according to national law and practice.
3. A worker may be deemed to have waived his right to appeal against the termination of his employment if he has not exercised that right within a reasonable period of time after termination.
Article 9
1. The bodies referred to in Article 8 of this Convention shall be empowered to examine the reasons given for the termination and the other circumstances relating to the case and to render a decision on whether the termination was justified.
2. In order for the worker not to have to bear alone the burden of proving that the termination was not justified, the methods of implementation referred to in Article 1 of this Convention shall provide for one or the other or both of the following possibilities:
(a) the burden of proving the existence of a valid reason for the termination as defined in Article 4 of this Convention shall rest on the employer;
(b) the bodies referred to in Article 8 of this Convention shall be empowered to reach a conclusion on the reason for the termination having regard to the evidence provided by the parties and according to procedures provided for by national law and practice.
3. In cases of termination stated to be for reasons based on the operational requirements of the undertaking, establishment or service, the bodies referred to in Article 8 of this Convention shall be empowered to determine whether the termination was indeed for these reasons, but the extent to which they shall also be empowered to decide whether these reasons are sufficient to justify that termination shall be determined by the methods of implementation referred to in Article 1 of this Convention.
Article 10
If the bodies referred to in Article 8 of this Convention find that termination is unjustified and if they are not empowered or do not find it practicable, in accordance with national law and practice, to declare the termination invalid and/or order or propose reinstatement of the worker, they shall be empowered to order payment of adequate compensation or such other relief as may be deemed appropriate.
DIVISION D. PERIOD OF NOTICE
Article 11
A worker whose employment is to be terminated shall be entitled to a reasonable period of notice or compensation in lieu thereof, unless he is guilty of serious misconduct, that is, misconduct of such a nature that it would be unreasonable to require the employer to continue his employment during the notice period.
DIVISION E. SEVERANCE ALLOWANCE AND OTHER INCOME PROTECTION
Article 12
1. A worker whose employment has been terminated shall be entitled, in accordance with national law and practice, to-
(a) a severance allowance or other separation benefits, the amount of which shall be based inter alia on length of service and the level of wages, and paid directly by the employer or by a fund constituted by employers' contributions; or
(b) benefits from unemployment insurance or assistance or other forms of social security, such as old-age or invalidity benefits, under the normal conditions to which such benefits are subject; or
(c) a combination of such allowance and benefits.
2. A worker who does not fulfil the qualifying conditions for unemployment insurance or assistance under a scheme of general scope need not be paid any allowance or benefit referred to in paragraph 1, subparagraph (a), of this Article solely because he is not receiving an unemployment benefit under paragraph 1, subparagraph (b).
3. Provision may be made by the methods of implementation referred to in Article 1 of this Convention for loss of entitlement to the allowance or benefits referred to in paragraph 1, subparagraph (a), of this Article in the event of termination for serious misconduct.
PART III. SUPPLEMENTARY PROVISIONS CONCERNING TERMINATIONS OF EMPLOYMENT FOR ECONOMIC, TECHNOLOGICAL, STRUCTURAL OR SIMILAR REASONS
DIVISION A. CONSULTATION OF WORKERS' REPRESENTATIVES
Article 13
1. When the employer contemplates terminations for reasons of an economic, technological, structural or similar nature, the employer shall:
(a) provide the workers' representatives concerned in good time with relevant information including the reasons for the terminations contemplated, the number and categories of workers likely to be affected and the period over which the terminations are intended to be carried out;
(b) give, in accordance with national law and practice, the workers' representatives concerned, as early as possible, an opportunity for consultation on measures to be taken to avert or to minimise the terminations and measures to mitigate the adverse effects of any terminations on the workers concerned such as finding alternative employment.
2. The applicability of paragraph 1 of this Article may be limited by the methods of implementation referred to in Article 1 of this Convention to cases in which the number of workers whose termination of employment is contemplated is at least a specified number or percentage of the workforce.
3. For the purposes of this Article the term the workers' representatives concerned means the workers' representatives recognised as such by national law or practice, in conformity with the Workers' Representatives Convention, 1971.
DIVISION B. NOTIFICATION TO THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY
Article 14
1. When the employer contemplates terminations for reasons of an economic, technological, structural or similar nature, he shall notify, in accordance with national law and practice, the competent authority thereof as early as possible, giving relevant information, including a written statement of the reasons for the terminations, the number and categories of workers likely to be affected and the period over which the terminations are intended to be carried out.
2. National laws or regulations may limit the applicability of paragraph 1 of this Article to cases in which the number of workers whose termination of employment is contemplated is at least a specified number or percentage of the workforce.
3. The employer shall notify the competent authority of the terminations referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article a minimum period of time before carrying out the terminations, such period to be specified by national laws or regulations.
PART IV. FINAL PROVISIONS
Article 15
The formal ratifications of this Convention shall be communicated to the Director-General of the International Labour Office for registration.
Article 16
1. This Convention shall be binding only upon those Members of the International Labour Organisation whose ratifications have been registered with the Director-General.
2. It shall come into force twelve months after the date on which the ratifications of two Members have been registered with the Director-General.
3. Thereafter, this Convention shall come into force for any Member twelve months after the date on which its ratification has been registered.
Article 17
1. A Member which has ratified this Convention may denounce it after the expiration of ten years from the date on which the Convention first comes into force, by an act communicated to the Director-General of the International Labour Office for registration. Such denunciation shall not take effect until one year after the date on which it is registered.
2. Each Member which has ratified this Convention and which does not, within the year following the expiration of the period of ten years mentioned in the preceding paragraph, exercise the right of denunciation provided for in this Article, will be bound for another period of ten years and, thereafter, may denounce this Convention at the expiration of each period of ten years under the terms provided for in this Article.
Article 18
1. The Director-General of the International Labour Office shall notify all Members of the International Labour Organisation of the registration of all ratifications and denunciations communicated to him by the Members of the Organisation.
2. When notifying the Members of the Organisation of the registration of the second ratification communicated to him, the Director-General shall draw the attention of the Members of the Organisation to the date upon which the Convention will come into force.
Article 19
The Director-General of the International Labour Office shall communicate to the Secretary-General of the United Nations for registration in accordance with article 102 of the Charter of the United Nations full particulars of all ratifications and acts of denunciation registered by him in accordance with the provisions of the preceding Articles.
Article 20
At such times as it may consider necessary the Governing Body of the International Labour Office shall present to the General Conference a report on the working of this Convention and shall examine the desirability of placing on the agenda of the Conference the question of its revision in whole or in part.
Article 21
1. Should the Conference adopt a new Convention revising this Convention in whole or in part, then, unless the new Convention otherwise provides-
(a) the ratification by a Member of the new revising Convention shall ipso jure involve the immediate denunciation of this Convention, notwithstanding the provisions of Article 17 above, if and when the new revising Convention shall have come into force;
(b) as from the date when the new revising Convention comes into force this Convention shall cease to be open to ratification by the Members.
2. This Convention shall in any case remain in force in its actual form and content for those Members which have ratified it but have not ratified the revising Convention.
Article 22
The English and French versions of the text of this Convention are equally authoritative.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)