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

Article 2, paragraphs 1 and 4, of the Convention. Minimum duration of annual holiday with pay and postponement of holiday. The Committee notes the adoption of Act No. 26 of 17 May 2004 amending section 96 of the Labour Code and introducing a new section 94(1). Further to its previous comments, it notes with satisfaction that, under section 94(1)(3) of the Labour Code, in the event of the postponement of annual holiday to the following year, workers shall benefit from at least 10 days’ holiday during the year in which they were due to take their entire holiday, and that section 96(3) of this Code imposes the same rule where an employee is called back to work during his annual holiday.

Article 8. Sanctions. The Committee once again requests the Government to provide a copy of the legal provisions establishing sanctions in the event of the failure to comply with the provisions of the Labour Code concerning the annual holiday with pay.

Part V of the report form. Application in practice. The Committee notes with interest that the Government ratified the Labour Inspection Convention, 1947 (No. 81), on 21 October 2009. It requests the Government to provide general information on the manner in which the Convention is applied in practice, including, in particular, information on the number of workers covered by the Labour Code, as well as extracts from reports of the labour inspection services indicating the number and nature of violations reported of the legal provisions relating to annual holiday with pay and the measures taken to bring them to an end.

Finally, the Committee reiterates its previous comment in which it invited the Government to consider the possibility of ratifying the Holidays with Pay Convention (Revised), 1970 (No. 132), and requests it to keep the Office informed of any measures taken in that regard. It recalls that the national legislation, which provides for a basic annual holiday with pay of 24 calendar days (or up to 56 calendar days for certain categories of workers), is far more favourable than the minimum required by of Convention No. 52 and seems to reflect most of the requirements of Convention No. 132.