After more than six months of back and forth between the Constitutional Court and the Ministry of Labor, a decision was finally reached regarding whether collective agreements are a valid tool for companies to reach agreements with their workers or whether, on the contrary, everything should be done through union channels. with a view to ensuring decent conditions or benefits for employees.
By means of ruling C-288 of July 17 of this year, the high court upheld collective agreements but set clear rules for them, warning that their celebration cannot be detrimental to union rights, nor to the rights of association that are established in the Substantive Labor Code.
Constitutional court
Courtesy
“The Court considered that the coexistence of collective agreements and collective agreements do not ignore the rights of union association and collective bargaining; and the existence of collective agreements is not contrary to the State’s obligation to stimulate and encourage collective bargaining,” they indicated in a statement.
SEE: Government makes a new call to the private sector to work together
This decision was made after studying a lawsuit filed by the Ministry of Labor against articles 481 of the Substantive Labor Code and 70 of Law 50 of 1990, which, according to the plaintiffs, ignore the provisions of articles 4 of ILO Convention 98 and 2 and 3 of Convention 154 of the International Labor Organization (ILO), which are part of the block of constitutionality by virtue of the provisions of Article 93 of the Political Constitution.
Thus, according to this court, “collective bargaining was not exclusive to trade union organizations, recalling that constitutional jurisprudence has recognized that collective agreements signed with representatives of non-unionized workers are included in the right to bargain.” collective recognized in Article 55 of the Political Constitution and ILO Conventions 87, 98 and 154.”
The Deputy Minister of Labor, Edwin Palma, was the figure within the Government who sought to have the collective agreements declared unconstitutional, since from his legal point of view, they go against not only labor rights but also fundamental rights of Colombians that should be legally protected.
Guilds.
Sebastian Carvajal / EL TIEMPO
Even at the time this official invited through his social networks “We call on all the country’s unions that are victims and have been victims of collective agreements to participate in this great debate. We must put an end to the main anti-union instrument that exists in Colombia.”
READ: Trade Council warns that now is not the time for tax reform
Clear rules
Although the Constitutional Court’s decision saved collective agreements, the ruling drew clear red lines that companies must respect if they want to avoid headaches with labor authorities, since it must be guaranteed that workers who want to unionize and meet the requirements can do so.
“The misapplication of the rule has created a context “which allows us to understand that the celebration of collective agreements in itself violates the rights of union association and collective bargaining. In fact, the legislator, aware of this situation of abuse of the figure, has contemplated guarantees, even of a penal nature, so that this right of association in its negative aspect can be exercised without affecting the unions and their right to negotiate,” said the Court.
Edwin Palma, Deputy Minister of Labor Relations and Inspection
Private file
Finally, although Judge Diana Fajardo Rivera and Judge Antonio José Lizarazo Ocampo clarified their vote, this judicial authority urged the Ministry of Labor to maintain the operations it has been carrying out for some time to protect the rights of workers. trade unionists, arguing that they have been important in ensuring that the law is enforced.
