A.   Public Communications

Three public communications were filed with National Administrative Offices (NAOs) in 1997. Copies of documentation and all information related to these public communications are available from the applicable NAOs (see VI. Annex for NAO addresses) and from the Secretariat.

1. U.S. NAO No. 9701

On July 14, 1997, the U.S. NAO accepted for review a public communication raising the issue of possible employment discrimination based on pregnancy in certain maquiladoras in Mexico. The public communication, which was filed on May 16, 1997, alleges that many employers require women to undergo pre-employment pregnancy screening as a condition of employment and that pregnant women are dismissed from or are pressured into resigning from their jobs. The public communication was filed by the International Labor Rights Fund, Human Rights Watch, and the National Association of Democratic Lawyers of Mexico (Asociación Nacional de Abogados Democráticos - ANAD).

As part of its review process, the U.S. NAO held a public hearing on November 19, 1997, in Brownsville, Texas. The next stage in the U.S. NAO review process will be the issuance of a public report to the Secretary of Labor with possible recommendations for follow-up. This is expected to appear in January 1998.

2. U.S. NAO No. 9702

On November 17, 1997, the U.S. NAO accepted for review a public communication raising issues of freedom of association, occupational safety and health, and minimum employment standards including wages. The public communication alleges that workers at the Han Young plant in Tijuana, Baja California, Mexico, which produces trailer platforms exclusively for Hyundai Precision of America, a subsidiary of the Hyundai Corp. of Korea, were dismissed and intimidated because of their support of an independent union. It also alleges that the local Conciliation and Arbitration Board (Junta de Conciliación y Arbitraje - JCA) did not enforce the appropriate provisions of Mexican labor law related to the process by which one union can challenge another for the right to represent workers in a workplace.

The public communication was filed by the Support Committee for Maquiladora Workers (SCMW), the National Association of Democratic Lawyers (ANAD), the International Labor Rights Fund (ILRF), and the Union of Metal, Steel, Iron, and Allied Workers (Sindicato de Trabajadores de la Industria Metálica, Acero, Hierro, Conexos y Similares - STIMAHCS). A public hearing in the case is scheduled for February 18, 1998, in San Diego, California.

3. U.S. NAO No. 9703

On December 15, 1997, the U.S. NAO received a public communication alleging violation of Mexican laws regarding freedom of association, right to organize, right to bargain collectively, and prevention of occupational injuries and illnesses at the Echlin-owned ITAPSA export processing plant near Mexico City. The public communication was filed by the International Brotherhood of Teamsters; AFL-CIO; United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of America; Canadian Auto Workers; Union of Needletrades, Industrial and Textile Employees; United Paperworkers International Union; United Steelworkers of America; and the Steelworkers’ Canadian National Office. The U.S. NAO announced that it would decide whether to accept the submission for review by February 13, 1998.

B. Ministerial Consultations

In 1997 one Ministerial Consultation under Part IV of the NAALC took place between U.S. Secretary of Labor Alexis Herman and Mexican Secretary of Labor and Social Welfare Javier Bonilla concerning a public communication submitted to the U.S. NAO claiming that certain government employees in Mexico were denied the rights of union organization and freedom of association. As a result of the Ministerial Consultation, the NAOs of Mexico, Canada and the United States held a seminar on December 4, 1997, at the University of Maryland School of Law in Baltimore entitled Seminar on International Treaties and Constitutional Systems of the United States, Mexico and Canada.

Academic and governmental experts from all three countries attended the event to discuss international treaties, constitutional provisions, and each country’s labor laws. Their considerations included: whether and how treaties are considered self-executing or require legislation; the difference between treaties and executive agreements; the legal hierarchy of domestic laws and how international treaties and conventions fit within that hierarchy; what is required to make a treaty enforceable domestically and the actual experience with the domestic application of treaties; and the relationship of treaties to state and provincial laws. A transcript of the proceedings is available to the public from the U.S. NAO.

C. Evaluation Committees of Experts

The NAALC calls for the Council of Ministers to develop rules governing the work of Evaluation Committees of Experts (ECEs) established to conduct independent analysis of the administration of labor laws in the three NAALC countries. The ECE rules specify how the Council appoints such committees and, when necessary, employs independent experts to determine whether an issue is trade-related or covered by mutually recognized labor laws. Various rules specify operational principles that ECEs must observe, including the prompt submission of a budget for Council approval and the procedure for selecting an ECE member or replacing one if need be. Other rules cover information gathering by the ECEs , the way communications are conducted between an ECE and the Parties and the safegarding of confidential information. There are also rules to determine what documents received or created by an ECE must be made available in all three official languages of the Agreement. Lastly, a draft Code of Conduct and draft Disclosure Statements for ECE members and independent experts have been prepared.

The Secretariat will be the custodian of the rosters of experts established by the Council for the selection of independent experts and ECE members. It also will provide administrative assistance to any ECE and independent expert once appointed. Finally, as called for in NAALC article 12(6), the Secretariat must identify and safeguard confidential and proprietary information