Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2005, published 95th ILC session (2006)

The Committee notes with regret that the Government’s report has not been received. It hopes that a report will be supplied for examination by the Committee at its next session and that it will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous direct request, which read as follows:

The Committee notes the Government’s statement that effect cannot be given to Article 6 of the Convention, in that the exceptions to normal working hours provided for in the Labour Code (Act No. 213 of 29 October 1993) in sections 202 and 203 are, by nature, unforeseeable and so cannot be determined in advance in regulations made by public authority. The Committee once again refers to section 211 of the Labour Code, which it addressed in its previous comments, and wishes to draw the Government’s attention to the fact that, in its view, the activities cited in this provision which have special characteristics or require the continuous performance of work may include the exceptions to normal working hours allowed for preparatory or complementary work or for workers whose work is intermittent. For these cases among others Article 6, paragraph 2, provides that regulations shall be made by public authority after consultation with the organizations of employers and workers concerned. In these circumstances, the Committee again recalls the need to provide, as section 211 of the Labour Code previously did, for the consultation of organizations of employers and workers. The Committee asks the Government in its next report to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to this end and to explain how effect is given to section 211 in practice taking account of the requirements of the Convention.