Appendix B: Status of Submissions Under the North American Agreement on Labor Cooperation (April 10, 1998)

Ten submissions have been filed under the North American Agreement on Labor Cooperation (NAALC). Nine were filed with the U.S. NAO and involved allegations against Mexico. One was filed with the Mexican NAO and involved allegations against the U.S. (Sprint).

Eight of the nine submissions filed with the U.S. NAO involved issues of freedom of association, concerning restrictions on trade union organization by independent unions. One case currently under review (9701) raises issues of pregnancy-based gender discrimination. Another case (9702) also raises issues of safety and health as well as freedom of association.

Of the submissions filed thus far, two (940004 and 9602) were withdrawn by the submitters before hearings were held or the review process completed. Hearings were held on six (940001, 940002, 940003, 9601, 9701, and 9702). Two of the U.S. submissions (940003 and 9601) have gone to ministerial level consultations, and Ministerial Consultations are under way on a third (9701). The one Mexican NAO submission (9501) resulted in Ministerial Consultations.

U.S. NAO Submissions 940001 and 940002 were submitted on February 14, 1994, by the International Brotherhood of Teamsters (IBT) and the United Electrical, Radio, and Machine Workers of America (UE) respectively. The submissions concerned the operations of subsidiaries of the Honeywell Corporation and the General Electric Corporation in Mexico. Both submissions alleged that workers had been deprived of their freedom of association insofar as they had not been permitted to organize into the unions of their choice. Both cases were accepted for review by the NAO on April 15, 1994.

Information was collected and a joint hearing was conducted by the NAO on the two submissions. A hearing was conducted on September 12, 1994. In its Public Report issued on October 12, 1994, the NAO concluded that the information was insufficient to establish that the Government of Mexico failed to enforce its labor laws. Accordingly, the NAO did not recommend Ministerial Consultations. Nevertheless, acknowledging the strong concerns raised in the allegations with regard to the freedom of association and the right to organize of workers, the NAO recommended that the U.S., Mexico, and Canada develop joint cooperative programs to address these issues.

U. S. NAO Submission 940003 was filed on August 16, 1994, by four workers' rights and human rights organizations, headed by the International Labor Rights Education and Research Fund (ILRERF). The submission concerned the operations of a subsidiary of the Sony Corporation in Mexico and involved allegations concerning freedom of association and the right to organize. Following the information gathering process and the conduct of a public hearing on February 13, 1995, the NAO issued a report on April 11, 1995, recommending Ministerial Consultations on the issue of union registration in Mexico. The ministers reached an agreement on implementation of Ministerial Consultations which included a series of programs designed to publicly address these concerns in all three countries, and these were completed during 1995 and 1996.

The submitters in the case subsequently requested that the Ministerial Consultations be reopened, arguing that the problems raised in the original submission continued. The Secretary of Labor directed the NAO to conduct a follow-up review of the issues raised in the submission, and a related Mexican Supreme Court Decision, and submit a report to him. The NAO conducted the follow-up review as directed, and a report was issued on December 4, 1996.

U.S. NAO Submission 940004 was filed by the United Electrical, Radio, and Machine Workers (UE) against a subsidiary of the General Electric Corporation in Mexico. The UE withdrew the submission on January 5, 1995, prior to the completion of the review process.

U.S. NAO Submission 9601 was filed with the U.S. NAO on June 13, 1996. It was submitted by three labor rights/human rights groups: the International Labor Rights Fund (ILRF), Human Rights Watch/Americas, and the Mexican National Association of Democratic Lawyers (ANAD, the Spanish acronym). The submission raises issues of freedom of association for federal workers and questions the impartiality of the labor tribunals reviewing these issues.

U.S. NAO Submission 9601 was accepted for review on July 29. A hearing was conducted on December 3, 1996, at the Department of Labor in Washington, D.C. A report, recommending Ministerial Consultations on the status of international treaties and constitutional provisions protecting freedom of association, was issued on January 27, 1997. Pursuant to the consultations, the Departments of Labor of Mexico, Canada, and the U.S. agreed to exchange sufficient publicly available information to permit a full examination of the issues raised in the submission. This included a seminar, open to the public, on the issues raised, which was held in Baltimore, Maryland, on December 4, 1997.

On December 3, 1997, the submitters filed a request for reconsideration on the ground that some of the issues raised in the original submission were not adequately addressed by the NAO in its report. The NAO is presently considering the request.

U.S. NAO Submission 9602 was filed with the U.S. NAO by the Communications Workers of America (CWA), the Union of Telephone Workers of Mexico, and the Federation of Goods and Services Companies (FESEBS) of Mexico on October 11, 1996. This submission raises issues of freedom of association for workers attempting to organize a union at a facility owned by Maxi-Switch, S.A. de C.V., in Cananea, Sonora, Mexico. The company produces and markets high-tech keyboards for computers and computer games and is owned by Silitek Corporation of Taiwan.

The NAO accepted this submission for review on December 10, 1996. A hearing was scheduled to be held in Tucson, Arizona, on April 18, 1997. On April 16 the submitters informed the NAO that the issues raised in the submission had come to favorable resolution and that they were withdrawing the submission.

U.S. NAO Submission 9701 was filed on May 16, 1997, by Human Rights Watch, the International Labor Rights Fund (ILRF), and the National Association of Democratic Lawyers (ANAD) of Mexico. The submission raises issues of gender-based discrimination in Mexico's export processing (maquiladora) industry. The submission contains allegations that the companies, many of which are subsidiaries of U.S. companies, regularly require female job applicants to verify their pregnancy status as a condition of employment and deny employment to pregnant women. Additionally, the submission includes allegations that some maquiladora employers mistreat and/or discharge pregnant employees in order to avoid payment of maternity benefits. The U.S. NAO accepted the submission for review on July 14, 1997, within the 60 days specified in its procedural guidelines, and a public hearing was conducted in Brownsville, Texas, on November 19, 1997.

The NAO issued its Public Report of Review on the submission on January 12, 1998, recommending ministerial level consultations for the purpose of ascertaining the extent of the protections against pregnancy-based gender discrimination afforded by Mexico's laws and their effective enforcement by the appropriate authorities. The Secretary of Labor requested consultations with the Secretary of Labor and Social Welfare of Mexico by letter dated January 13, 1998, and Secretary Bonilla of Mexico agreed to consult by letter on February 27, 1998.

U.S. NAO Submission 9702 was filed on October 30, 1997, by the Support Committee for Maquiladora Workers (SCMW), the International Labor Rights Fund (ILRF), the National Association of Democratic Lawyers (ANAD) of Mexico, and the Union of Metal, Steel, Iron, and Allied Workers Union (Sindicato de Trabajadores de la Industria Metálica, Acero, Hierro, Conexos y Similares - STIHMACS) of Mexico.

Submission 9702 raises primarily freedom of association issues involving workers at the Han Young export processing (maquiladora) plant in Tijuana, Baja California, Mexico. The submitters allege that workers at the plant who attempted to organize a union were intimidated and threatened by the company and some of the workers were fired. It is further alleged in the submission that the effort to defeat the organizing effort occurred with the cooperation of local government authorities and union organizations associated with the government and that the responsible labor tribunal (CAB) overturned the results of a representation election in which a majority of the workers indicated they wished to be represented by their union (STIMAHCS). On December 16, 1997, a second union election was held following the intervention of federal authorities. This election was again won by STIMAHCS. Subsequently, STIMAHCS was recognized as the collective bargaining representative. However, the submitters allege that the company continues to refuse to bargain with the union and that the CAB has agreed to permit yet another representation election at the plant to challenge the representation by STIMAHCS.

The NAO accepted the submission for review on November 17, 1997. A public hearing was held in San Diego, California, on February 18, 1998. In accordance with its procedural guidelines, the NAO may take up to 180 days, or until May 18, 1998, to complete its review and issue a report.

U.S. NAO Submission 9703 was filed on December 15, 1997, by the Echlin Workers Alliance, a group of unions from the United States and Canada, which includes the Teamsters; the Canadian Auto Workers; UNITE; the United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of America; the Paperworkers; and the Steelworkers. Twenty-four additional organizations, including nongovernmental organizations, human rights groups and labor unions from the three NAFTA countries, are cited as concerned organizations in the submission.

The submission alleges violation of freedom of association at the ITAPSA export processing plant in Ciudad de los Reyes, in the State of Mexico. The submitters allege that, when workers at the facility attempted to organize an independent union, they faced intimidation and harassment from the company and the existing union, the Confederation of Mexican Workers (CTM), including threats of physical violence and job loss. The submitters allege that approximately 50 workers have been subject to retaliatory discharge for their support of the independent union. They further allege that the representation election that was held following the organizing drive was flawed and plagued by irregularities that occurred at the instigation of management and the CTM union. Finally, the submitters allege that Mexican government authorities are aware of the situation and have taken no remedial action.

The NAO accepted this submission for review on January 30, 1998. A public hearing was held in Washington, D.C., on March 23, 1998. In accordance with its procedural guidelines, the NAO has up to 180 days, or until July 31, 1998, to complete its review and issue a public report.