Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2008, published 98th ILC session (2009)

Article 1, paragraph 1, of the Convention. Establishments covered by the Convention. The Committee notes the Government’s indications that a draft law governing the working conditions of the categories of employers excluded from the scope of the Labour Code under section 4 of that Code is in the process of being drawn up. It requests the Government to provide a copy of this text as soon as it is adopted.

Office work – Journalists. The Committee notes the Government’s indications that the Labour Code is applicable without distinction to workers employed in establishments in which the work is essentially based on office work. Furthermore, it notes that the conditions of service of professional journalists and Decree No. 774-85-2 of 4 November 1985 regulating working hours in state administrations and local authorities were not included with the Government’s report. The Committee therefore requests the Government to provide a copy of these two texts.

Articles 3, 4 and 6. Daily and weekly limits on hours of work – Annualization of working time. The Committee notes the explanations provided by the Government concerning the grounds on which annualization of working time is authorized by the Labour Code. It also notes that Decree No. 2-04-569 of 29 December 2004 establishes the framework for schemes for the annualization of working time by requiring the consultation of the workers’ representatives or the works council, the establishment of a plan for changes to hours of work and respect of a notice period of at least eight days for any changes to the programme for the distribution of hours of work. It notes in this regard that employers have to seek the opinion of the workers’ representatives or the works council “if the need arises”. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the cases in which this consultation is not compulsory. With regard to the very principle of annualizing working time, the Committee recalls that the basic rule set out in the Convention is respect for a double limit on hours of work of eight hours per day and 48 hours per week. Article 4 of the Convention, to which the Government refers in its report, permits an uneven distribution of hours of work in the week, provided that the hours of work in any day do not exceed ten. It therefore does not permit the distribution of hours of work over a period longer than the week. Finally, Article 6 of the Convention, which authorizes the distribution of hours of work over a period longer than the week, is only applicable in exceptional cases which make the provisions of the Convention on the maximum daily and weekly hours inapplicable, and may not serve as the basis for a provision of the Labour Code which permits the annualization of working time without restriction and subject to the sole condition of respecting certain procedural rules. Consequently, the Committee hopes that the Government will take steps to limit hours of work, and particularly weekly hours of work, in a manner that is in conformity with the provisions of the Convention for workers subject to a scheme based on annualization of working time.

Uneven distribution of weekly hours of work. The Committee notes that, under section 2 of Decree No. 2-04-569 of 29 December 2004 establishing the conditions for application of section 184 of the Labour Code, employers have the possibility, where they adopt the 44-hour-per-week scheme for non-agricultural activities, of distributing these hours of work unevenly over the days of the week, subject to weekly rest. It requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to ensure that the daily hours of work do not exceed ten hours in the case of uneven distribution of the weekly hours of work, as required by Article 4 of the Convention.

Article 5, paragraph 1. General interruptions of work. The Committee notes that the Order of 15 March 1937 determining the general conditions for the application of the Dahir of 18 June 1936 regulating hours of work, which had been the subject of repeated comments by the Committee, has been repealed by section 6 of Decree No. 2-04-569 of 29 December 2004. It also notes that the definition of force majeure contained in section 269 of the Dahir of 12 August 1913 issuing the Code of Obligations and Contracts, which corresponds to the definition provided for by Article 5 of the Convention, is applicable to the cases of force majeure referred to in section 189 of the Labour Code. Furthermore, the Committee notes the Government’s indications that the making up of hours of work lost in the case of a general interruption of work may not be authorized for more than 30 days per year. However, its previous comment concerned the measures taken to ensure that hours lost are made up within a reasonable lapse of time. It therefore requests the Government to provide additional information on this point.

Article 7, paragraph 1(c). Permanent exceptions – Purely traditional sectors. The Committee notes the Government’s indications that purely traditional sectors, which are excluded from the scope of the Labour Code and are subject to a special Act under section 4 of the Labour Code, come under the permanent exceptions authorized by Article 7, paragraph 1(c), of the Convention for shops and other establishments where the nature of the work, the size of the population or the number of persons employed render inapplicable the normal limits on hours of work. It also notes that a draft law governing conditions of employment in these sectors is in the process of being drafted, in collaboration with the Department for the Craft Industry and after consultation with employers’ organizations and trade union organizations. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any developments relating to the adoption of this draft law and on the outcome of the consultations held with employers’ and workers’ organizations.

Article 7, paragraph 2(d). Temporary exceptions – Work in the national interest. The Committee notes the adoption of Decree No. 2-04-570 of 29 December 2004 establishing the conditions of employment of workers beyond the normal hours of work, which lays down the procedure to be followed where an employer has to cope with work in the national interest or abnormal pressure of work. It requests the Government to provide information on the types of work recognized as being in the national interest within the meaning of section 196 of the Labour Code.

Article 7, paragraph 3. Authorized extension of hours of work – Intermittent or preparatory work. The Committee notes that, under section 190 of the Labour Code, the hours of work of workers who are engaged in essentially intermittent work, or preparatory or supplementary work may be extended up to the maximum daily limit of 12 hours. However, it draws the Government’s attention to the fact that this provision establishes a limit on the daily hours of work and not on the extension permitted in relation to the normal hours of work. Moreover, this extension cannot be calculated by taking into account the other provisions of the Labour Code, since the Labour Code does not establish normal daily hours of work. The Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate whether it envisages taking measures to regulate the extension of the working day authorized in the context of the permanent exceptions provided for under section 190 of the Labour Code.

Work in the national interest and abnormal pressure of work. The Committee notes that, under section 1 of Decree No. 2-04-570 of 29 December 2004, enterprises which have to cope with work that is in the national interest may employ their workers beyond the normal hours of work for the duration of the necessary work, provided that the working day does not exceed ten hours. It also notes that, under section 2 of the same Decree, employers who have to cope with abnormal pressure of work, may employ their workers beyond the normal hours of work, provided that no worker works more than a total of 80 hours (100 hours in certain cases) in overtime per year. It requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to limit the extension of the hours of work authorized per year in the context of work that is in the national interest, and per day in the context of abnormal pressure of work.

Article 7, paragraph 4. Higher rate of pay. The Committee notes that the Government refers in its report to section 201 of the Labour Code relating to the higher rate of pay for overtime hours. However, it understands that this provision is not applicable where overtime hours are carried out to avoid the loss of perishable goods, in accordance with section 192 of the Labour Code. Section 193 of the Labour Code provides that work carried out in accordance with section 192 is remunerated “based on the salary relating to normal hours of work”. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on this point. It recalls in this regard that Article 7, paragraph 4, of the Convention requires a higher rate of pay of at least 25 per cent in the case of temporary exceptions to the normal hours of work, including where they are intended to prevent the loss of perishable goods in accordance with Article 7, paragraph 2(b).

Part V of the report form. The Committee notes the Government’s indications that, in 2006, labour inspectors reported 106 violations of the legislation on hours of work. It requests the Government to continue providing general information on the application of the Convention in practice, including, in particular, information on the type of violations reported relating to the regulations on working time and on the measures taken in response. The Committee also requests the Government to refer to the comments made under the Labour Inspection Convention, 1947 (No. 81), particularly with regard to inspections, the follow-up to reports on violations drawn up by labour inspectors and the effective cooperation between the labour inspection services and judicial bodies.