Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2009, published 99th ILC session (2010)

Article 2 of the Convention.  Scope of application. Further to its previous comments on this point, the Committee notes that the Government’s report does not contain any further information on the regulations issued under section 12 of Decree No. 195/CP of 31 December 1994. In this respect, the Committee notes that the scope of application of the Decree and of section 12 were amended by Decree No. 109/2002/ND-CP of 27 December 2002, which empowers the ministries in the sectors concerned (such as transport, petroleum production, nuclear energy, marine exploitation) to determine the specific hours of work and rest periods of workers, following the conclusion of an agreement with the Ministry of Labour, War Invalids and Social Affairs. It also notes the reference made by the Government in its 2003 report to Circulars Nos 23/1998/TT-BGTVT of 8 February 1998 respecting the railways, 07/1998/TT-TCBD of 19 December 1998 respecting the postal services and 20/2001/TT-GTVT of 12 November 2001 respecting seafarers, which have not been made available to the Office. The Committee therefore once again requests the Government to provide copies of the respective circulars and of any other relevant text that may have been adopted in the meantime.

Articles 4 and 5. Total or partial exceptions. Compensatory rest. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that section 72(3) of the Labour Code, which provides that where, due to the nature of the work, it is impossible for the employees to have a weekly day off, the employer must ensure that the employees on average have at least four days off in a month, is applied in the exceptional cases envisaged in section 80 of the Labour Code and in Decree No. 109/2002/ND-CP, particularly in the case of seasonal work, the road and rail transport industries and offshore work. It further notes the Government’s statement that this provision ensures the flexibility that is necessary to adapt the legislation to production and business practices and the respect for workers’ rights, and that the Government does not therefore envisage its amendment. The Committee observes in this respect that, even if arrangements of this type are not in formal contravention of any of the provisions of the Convention, the postponement and accumulation of weekly rest days over a relatively long period is liable to render the weekly rest period meaningless and would be contrary to the spirit of the Convention. The Committee also notes the Government’s reference to collective agreements and accordingly requests it to provide copies of collective agreements containing clauses respecting the weekly rest period.

Part V of the report form. Application in practice. The Committee notes the statistical data provided by the Government showing that in 2006 one out of four enterprises inspected was in violation of the legislation respecting the weekly rest period. It requests the Government to continue providing general information on the manner in which the Convention is applied in practice including, for instance, extracts from reports of the labour inspectorate indicating the number of contraventions reported in relation to the weekly rest period, the number of workers covered by the relevant legislation, etc.

Finally, the Committee takes this opportunity to recall that, based on the conclusions and proposals of the Working Party on Policy regarding the Revision of Standards, the ILO Governing Body has decided that the ratification of up to date Conventions, including the Weekly Rest (Industry) Convention, 1921 (No. 14), and the Weekly Rest (Commerce and Offices) Convention, 1957 (No. 106), should be encouraged because they continue to respond to current needs (see GB.283/LILS/WP/PRS/1/2, paragraphs 17–18). The Committee accordingly invites the Government to envisage ratifying Convention No. 106 and to keep the Office informed of any decision taken or envisaged in this respect.