Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2003, published 92nd ILC session (2004)

The Committee notes the Government’s report and the comments made by the Latin American Confederation of Labour Inspectors (CIIT), supplementing the information provided in 1999. It also notes the information provided by the Government to the Conference Committee and that provided to the Office in reply to its previous comments, the matters raised by the CIIT in its additional observation in May 2002, and the attached documents. Finally, it notes the new comments made by the Federation of Workers’ Unions (PIT-CNT), supplied by the Government in September 2003.

With reference to the discussion in the Conference Committee in 2002, during which the Government expressed its will to revalue the inspectorate and provided information concerning the increase in the staff of the labour inspectorate and the improvement in the level of remuneration of inspectors over recent years, the Committee notes that, according to the CIIT, the Directorate of General Labour Conditions has been headed by an inspector appointed ad interim for the past six years, while there is no head of the Division of Environmental Working Conditions. The degradation of the inspection system, aggravated by the budgetary restrictions which have limited inspections, is masked by having recourse to the collaboration of officials called upon to carry out a large number of inspections in a small locality for a brief period with the sole aim of increasing the statistics. By reason of the inadequacy of travel allowances for labour inspectors, their duties are restricted to workplaces within a radius of 50 kilometres from the inspection premises and budgetary restrictions have even resulted in a lack of paper. The low level of the salaries of labour inspectors encourages them to engage in parallel employment to the prejudice of their principal duties, while another cause of lack of motivation is the discriminatory wage practices between the various services performing inspection duties. Furthermore, the new burden placed upon the labour inspectorate due to the dissolution of the National Port Services Administration (ANSE) has not been accompanied, as it should have been, by an appropriate strengthening of the infrastructure to allow, for example, inspections at night. Furthermore, as statistics on employment accidents and occupational diseases, and information on their causes, are not published, it is not possible to implement any prevention policy. With regard to the question of organization, this situation is reported to have resulted in the desertion of the inspection services by users who do not find that it responds to their concerns.

1. In reply to the points raised by the CIIT, the Government indicates that the post of director of the Division of Environmental Working Conditions is currently filled and that the head of the General Labour Conditions Division should be filled in the near future by means of a competition. It adds that most of the other matters are related to the economic crisis, that all the officials in all public administrations are also affected by the low level of remuneration, the absence of travel allowances and the inadequacy of material resources. With regard to the fall in the number of complaints lodged by workers, it indicates that this is directly related to the rise in unemployment, which is also a result of the economic crisis.

2. With regard to the possibility for labour inspectors to engage in a parallel occupation, under the terms of section 290 of Act No. 16626, the Government reiterates its remarks to the Conference Committee, namely that a declaration to the competent authority and the prohibition from any intervention as inspectors in matters directly or indirectly related to their private activities is sufficient to ensure the compatibility between the two occupations exercised by labour inspectors. The independence of inspectors is not therefore jeopardized. The Government indicates in this respect that any violations reported have given rise to disciplinary proceedings.

3. The problem concerning the overload of work related to the new responsibilities of the inspectorate in the port sector is reported to be being resolved, as a tripartite working group has been established to improve the effectiveness of the action taken with the collaboration of all the stakeholders concerned.

4. Finally, the Government states that the publication of all statistics on employment accidents and occupational diseases lies within the competence of the State Insurance Fund.

The Committee wishes to emphasize the priority nature of labour inspection for the achievement of social objectives and recalls the possibility, where the economic situation of a country does not allow it to comply adequately with the requirements of a ratified Convention, to have recourse to international financial cooperation with, where necessary, the technical support of the ILO, with a view to the financing and implementation of priority measures for this purpose. It trusts that the Government will take the necessary measures for this purpose and that it will rapidly be in a position to implement, in accordance with the request of the Conference Committee on the Application of Standards, measures to: (1) re-establish for labour inspectors conditions of service ensuring their independence from any improper external influences (Article 6 of the Convention) and enabling them to discharge their duties with the authority and impartiality which are necessary in their relations with employers and workers (Article 3, paragraph 2); and (2) strengthen the material, financial and logistical resources that are indispensable for the discharge of their duties, in view of the mobility required of labour inspectors (Articles 11 and 16). The Committee requests the Government to provide information on all the measures adopted or envisaged for these purposes and the results obtained.

Furthermore, in an observation forwarded by the Government in September 2003, PIT-CNT refers to problems in the application of the Convention in relation to: Article 5(b) (collaboration between officials of the labour inspectorate and employers and workers or their organizations); Article 6 (status and conditions of service of labour inspectors); Article 9 (association of experts and technicians with the work of labour inspection); Article 11 (material and logistical resources of the inspection services); Article 16 (frequency and effectiveness of inspections); Article 18 (adequacy of penalties). Reacting to the Government’s indication concerning the responsibility of the State Insurance Fund for the notification to labour inspectors of employment accidents and occupational diseases (Article 14), PIT-CNT considers that it is nevertheless the responsibility of the Government to take measures to ensure the communication of the relevant information to the inspectorate. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would indicate to the Office its point of view on each of these issues.

Noting that, according to the Government, an annual report on the work of the labour inspection services should soon be drawn up based on the development of the computer system of the statistical unit of the General Labour Inspectorate, the Committee once again expresses the hope that a report of this nature containing information on each of the matters covered by Article 21 will be published and a copy transmitted to the ILO, in accordance with Article 20.

The Committee is addressing a request directly to the Government on other points.