Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2016, published 106th ILC session (2017)

Labour Inspection Convention, 1947 (No. 81) - Türkiye (Ratification: 1951)

Other comments on C081

Observation

Direct Request

Display in: French - SpanishView all

The Committee notes the observations made by the Confederation of Turkish Trade Unions (TÜRK-İŞ) and the Turkish Confederation of Public Workers Associations (Türkiye Kamu-Sen), as well as the observations made by the Turkish Confederation of Employers’ Associations (TİSK), all received on 29 October 2015. The Committee also notes the additional observations made by the TİSK, transmitted with the Government’s report.

Articles 1, 2(1), 3(1)(a) and (b), 22 and 23 of the Convention. Labour inspection in the informal economy. In its previous comment, the Committee noted that the TÜRK-İŞ called for the labour inspectorate to address the persistent problems in the large informal occupational sector (such as the non-payment of minimum wages, the lack of registration of workers with the social security authorities and adverse subcontracting practices). In this respect, the Committee noted with interest the establishment of an information system which, according to the Government, would enable labour inspectors to have access to information from multiple institutions regarding unregistered workplaces and uninsured workers.

Concerning working conditions in the informal economy, the Committee notes the information provided by the Government and the TİSK in its 2015 observations concerning the various activities undertaken to address undeclared work, including awareness-raising activities (on the effects of undeclared employment on social security rights and obligations, etc.) and labour inspection visits, as well as the number of unregistered workplaces and uninsured workers discovered during inspections. The Committee requests that the Government continue to provide statistical information on such activities. The Committee also once again requests that the Government provide information on the results of such activities (which have not been provided), particularly the number of cases in which workers were registered with the social security authorities, the number of cases in which workers were paid outstanding salaries resulting from their past employment relationship, etc.

Article 3(2). Additional duties entrusted to labour inspectors. The Committee notes from the statistics provided in the 2015 annual report of the labour inspection activities that in 2015 administrative fines were imposed on 75 migrant workers for working without the required permission or failing to notify as required under Law No. 4817.

In this regard, the Committee recalls that it emphasized, in paragraph 78 of its 2006 General Survey on labour inspection, that the primary function of labour inspectors is to secure the enforcement of the legal provisions relating to conditions of work and the protection of workers, and not to enforce immigration law. The Committee further highlighted that, with the exception of a few countries, only the employer is held accountable for illegal employment as such, with the workers involved being regarded as victims. The Committee requests the Government to take measures to ensure that any activities carried out by the labour inspectorate with regard to the legality of employment should have as its objective the protection of workers. The Committee requests that the Government provide more detailed information on the results of the activities carried out by the labour inspectorate in the area of controlling the migrant workers in an irregular situation (including information on the detected violations and the legal provisions concerned, the number of legal proceedings initiated, the number of penalties imposed and, in particular, the number of decisions ordering employers to settle unpaid wages and other benefits).

The Committee also requests that the Government specify whether labour inspectors provide migrant workers with information on the manner in which they may obtain the rights to which they are entitled, and briefly describe the procedure (including its duration) when such cases are identified by the labour inspectorate. Moreover, please provide detailed information on the number and circumstances in which migrant workers in an irregular situation have obtained the actual payment of wage arrears and other benefits due to them by virtue of their employment.

Articles 4, 5(a) and 10. Placement of labour inspection under the supervision and control of a central authority and effective cooperation with other inspection services. In its previous comment, the Committee noted the observations made by the TİSK in 2007 on the transfer of inspection duties from the Ministry of Labour and Social Security to other ministries (the Ministry of Health, the Ministry of Defence, and the Ministry of Energy and Natural Resources) and to municipalities, thereby obstructing the central coordination of labour inspection activities, and the effective communication of labour inspection data. In this regard, the Committee notes the information provided by the Government in reply to the Committee’s request concerning the organizational structure of the labour inspection services under the Ministry of Labour and Social Security, and the clarification that no functions relating to the monitoring of occupational safety and health (OSH) have been transferred to other ministries. In this respect, the Committee also notes the detailed explanations provided by the TİSK in its 2015 observation concerning the labour inspection functions assumed by the Ministry of Labour and Social Security.

Articles 5(a) and 9. Association of technical experts and specialists in a manner such as to ensure the effective application of the legal provisions relating to the protection of the safety and health of workers. The Committee notes the observations made by the TÜRK-İŞ that OSH experts and workplace physicians responsible for carrying out risk assessments in workplaces do not possess the necessary job security. The TÜRK-İŞ adds that the provisions concerning job security introduced by Act No. 6645 of 2015 (amending the 2012 OSH Act No. 6331) are inadequate. The TÜRK-İŞ therefore claims that other provisions are needed to guarantee that these experts may effectively exercise their functions in the area of OSH, free from any pressure exerted by employers. The Committee also notes the observations made by the Türkiye Kamu-Sen to the effect that the status and salaries of public OSH experts are not yet clearly defined. The Committee requests that the Government provide its comments in relation to the observations made by the TÜRK-İŞ and the Türkiye Kamu-Sen. It also requests that the Government provide detailed information on the system for conducting risk assessments, the legal provisions concerned and the status and conditions of service of the staff entrusted with carrying out risk assessment in workplaces.

Article 6. Status and conditions of service of labour inspectors. In its previous comment, the Committee noted the reiterated observations made by the TÜRK-IŞ claiming that labour inspectors should enjoy total independence. The Committee notes that the Government, in reply to the Committee’s previous request for information on the status and conditions of service of labour inspectors, emphasizes that the legislation provides for procedural safeguards against arbitrary appointments and undue dismissal and that labour inspectors cannot be held responsible for acts done in the course of their duty. Moreover, labour inspectors must adhere to the ethical conduct of their profession and enjoy more favourable working conditions and career opportunities than other inspectors, which is necessary to protect them from undue external influences. The Committee once again requests that the Government provide details on the concrete status, remuneration scale, allowances and career prospects of labour inspectors (in relation to other comparable categories of public officials).