Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2013, published 103rd ILC session (2014)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2008, published 98th ILC session (2009)

The Committee notes the adoption of the Labour Act, 2006 (Act No. XLII of 2006), which repeals the Shops and Establishments Act, 1965 (Act No. VII of 1965), that previously gave effect to the provisions of the Convention. It notes with satisfaction that, contrary to the Shops and Establishments Act, 1965, which applied to businesses of five and more employees, the new Labour Act applies to all shops and commercial establishments irrespective of the number of employees, city corporations or municipal areas – a point on which the Committee had been commenting for a number of years.

Article 2 of the Convention. Scope of application. The Committee notes that the Labour Act, 2006, in its section 1(4)(a)(i), continues to exclude from its scope of application offices of, or under, the Government as well as any shop and commercial establishment owned and directly managed by the Government. It understands that, in accordance with the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, the weekly rest periods for civil servants continue to be regulated by means of Government executive orders. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide additional clarification in this respect and specify the instruments currently governing the weekly rest entitlement of public employees.

Article 6. Weekly rest day. The Committee notes that under section 103(a) of the Labour Act, 2006, workers employed in shops and commercial enterprises are entitled to one-and-a-half days of weekly holiday which, of course, exceeds the minimum 24-hour requirement set out in this Article of the Convention. However, recalling that section 4(1) of the now repealed Shops and Establishments Act, 1965, provided for one-and-a-half days consecutive holidays in each week, the Committee requests the Government to clarify how it is ensured in law and practice that workers are granted an uninterrupted period of rest of at least 24 hours in the course of each period of seven days. Moreover, noting that the weekly rest day may vary from one area to another and also that it may be changed in the public interest, the Committee requests the Government to explain how it is ensured in practice that weekly rest, wherever possible, is given simultaneously and coincides with the day established as a day of rest by the traditions or customs of the country.

Article 7. Permanent exemptions. The Committee notes that, under section 114(5) of the Labour Act, 2006, the normal one-and-a-half days’ weekly rest period does not apply, among other establishments, to shops dealing with vegetables, meat, fish, dairy products, bread, pastries, sweetmeats and flowers; shops dealing mainly in medicines, surgical appliances, bandages or other medical requisites; shops dealing mainly in tobacco, cigars, cigarettes, liquid refreshments, newspapers or periodicals; barbers’ and hair dressers’ shops; clubs, hotels, restaurants, catering houses, cinemas or theatres. It also notes that the opening or closing hours of these shops and establishments are fixed by order of the Chief Inspector. The Committee requests the Government to provide more detailed information, including copies of any relevant texts, on the special weekly rest schemes applicable to the above businesses and also to indicate whether consultations with representative employers’ and workers’ organizations have been held in this regard, as required by this Article of the Convention.

The Committee further notes that under section 104 of the Labour Act, persons working on a weekly rest day are to be given compensatory rest of an equal duration “as soon as circumstances permit”. Formulated in such general terms, the legislation seems to offer little guarantee that workers will not need to wait excessively long before they can take their compensatory rest. The Government’s attention is drawn to Paragraph 3 of the Weekly Rest (Commerce and Offices) Recommendation (No. 103), which indicates that persons to whom special weekly rest schemes apply should not work for more than three weeks without receiving the rest periods to which they are entitled. The Committee requests the Government to provide additional explanations in this regard.

Article 8. Temporary exemptions. The Committee notes that the Labour Act, 2006, in section 104, refers to exemption orders and rules but does not specify the grounds on which temporary exemptions to the normal weekly rest scheme may be granted. Recalling that the Convention allows for temporary exemptions only on limited and well-defined grounds, namely: (i) accident, force majeure or urgent work; (ii) abnormal pressure of work due to special circumstances; and (iii) in order to prevent loss of perishable goods, the Committee requests the Government to explain how it is ensured in law and practice that temporary exemptions from the normal weekly rest scheme are authorized only on those grounds.

Article 9. Reduction of income. The Committee notes that the new Labour Act, 2006, does not contain any provision prohibiting deductions from wages on account of weekly rest, except for those employed in road transport services. Recalling that section 4(2) of the now repealed Shops and Establishments Act, 1965, expressly prohibited deductions on account of weekly holidays to be made from workers’ wages, the Committee requests the Government to specify how this Article of the Convention is given effect in law and practice.

Part V of the report form. The Committee would appreciate receiving up to date information on the practical application of the Convention, including, for instance, statistics on the approximate number of workers covered by the relevant legislation, labour inspection results showing the number of contraventions observed concerning weekly rest and sanctions imposed, copies of collective agreements containing provisions on weekly rest, etc.

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

Article 2 of the Convention. According to this Article, the weekly rest provisions apply to establishments irrespective of the size of the workforce. The Shops and Establishments Act of 1965, however, which is the main legislation to give effect to the Convention, only applies automatically to the establishments in which five or more workers are employed (section 1(4)). Otherwise, the Act shall apply if the establishments are notified in the Official Gazette (section 1(5)).

The Committee understands from previous reports that the Government has extended, by notification under section 1(5) of the Shops and Establishment Act of 1965, the application of the Act to all shops and establishments in four city corporations and 52 municipal areas.

The Government’s report indicates that there are still areas without notifications where the Act only applies to shops and establishments with more than five employees. In the absence of exhaustive information, the Committee requests the Government to indicate how effect is given to the Convention in respect of establishments where fewer than five workers are employed. The Committee furthermore asks the Government to provide it with a list of areas where the Act only applies to shops and establishments of more than five employees.

Article 6, paragraph 3. In response to its direct request, the Committee notes receipt of two notifications in Bengali by the Chief Inspector under section 5(2) of the Shops and Establishment Act of 1965, regulating the weekly rest days of shops and establishments. The Committee understands that the weekly rest days in Bangladesh might differ according to the district, municipality or area. It would appreciate receiving further information on the criteria used by the Chief Inspector in determining the weekly rest days and on any problems encountered. The Committee would be grateful if the Government could provide it in its next report with copies in English, if they exist.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2002, published 91st ILC session (2003)

The Committee notes that the information provided in the Government’s last report still does not contain a reply to its previous comments with regard to Article 2 of the Convention. It hopes that the next report will include full information on the matters raised in this respect in its previous direct request, which read as follows:

Article 2 of the Convention. With reference to its previous comments, the Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that the weekly rest provisions of the 1965 Shops and Establishments Act apply to establishments, irrespective of the number of workers, by government notifications made under section 5(2) of the Act. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide texts of the notifications applying the weekly rest provisions of the 1965 Act to establishments employing fewer than five workers. It also requests the Government to indicate the areas in which the 1965 Act does not yet apply to establishments employing less than five workers.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1995, published 82nd ILC session (1995)

Article 2 of the Convention. With reference to its previous comments, the Committee notes the Government's indication in its report that the weekly rest provisions of the 1965 Shops and Establishments Act apply to establishments, irrespective of the number of workers, by government notifications made under section 5(2) of the Act. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide texts of the notifications applying the weekly rest provisions of the 1965 Act to establishments employing fewer than five workers. It also requests the Government to indicate the areas in which the 1965 Act does not yet apply to establishments employing less than five workers.

Article 8. The Committee notes from the Government's report that the provision of the 1965 Act permitting exemptions of weekly rest applies to some seasonal factories such as sugar mills and rice mills, on the condition that weekly rest is granted at the end of the season. It requests the Government to indicate the measures taken to ensure that when such exemptions to the weekly rest are made, all persons concerned are granted compensatory rest of a total duration at least equivalent to the period provided for under Article 6 of the Convention.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1992, published 79th ILC session (1992)

The Committee notes the comments of the Bangladesh Employers' Association.

Article 2 of the Convention. In its previous comment, the Committee noted that it appeared that, under section 1(4) of the 1965 Shops and Establishments Act, only establishments in which five or more workers are employed were covered by the notifications made under section 5(2) of the Act concerning weekly rest.

The Bangladesh Employers' Association points out that in view of section 1(4) of the Act, although there appears to be no coverage of the establishments in which fewer than five workers are employed, most of the shops and establishments are self-managed and the employer-worker relationship is almost absent in such establishments; therefore, this limitation of coverage does not pose any problem of concern with regard to the coverage of the Convention.

The Committee would point out that the definitions of "establishment" (section 2(h)) and "worker" (section 2(p)) in the 1965 Act appear to be rather broad. Furthermore, the Convention covers "all persons" employed in certain establishments, irrespective of the size of the establishment, and the possible exclusion under Article 5(a) relates only to establishments in which only members of the employer's family not considered wage-earners are employed. The Committee accordingly requests that the Government indicate how effect is given to the Convention in respect of establishments where fewer than five workers are employed.

Article 8. Please include in future reports information on any exemptions or suspensions of weekly rest provisions made under section 3(1) of the 1965 Act.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1991, published 78th ILC session (1991)

Article 2 of the Convention. Further to its previous comments, the Committee takes note of the notifications made under section 5(2) of the 1965 Shops and Establishments Act, copies of which the Government has provided. Whilst the Committee recalls the Government's earlier indication that these notifications are made irrespective of the number of workers employed in those enterprises, it notes that they do not refer to section 1(5) of the Act: it therefore appears that, as provided in section 1(4), they only apply to establishments in which five or more workers are employed. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would indicate how it is ensured that effect is given to the Convention in respect of establishments where fewer than five workers are employed.

Article 8. Please include in future reports information on any exemptions or suspensions of weekly rest provisions made under section 3(1) of the 1965 Act.

Information provided by the Bangladesh Employers' Association has been noted.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1987, published 74th ILC session (1987)

With reference to its previous comments the Committee notes with interest, from the Government's report, that the provision of the Shops and Establishments Act, 1965, ensuring weekly rest has been extended to 48 municipal areas of the country and applied to all shops and establishments irrespective of the number of workers employed therein. It requests the Government to supply with its next report copies of all relevant notifications.