Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 1991, Publication: 78th ILC session (1991)

The Government has communicated the following information:

As concerns the comments made by the Independent Workers' Confederation in October 1990 referring to the application of this Convention, the Government refers to its responses to the Committee of Experts and the Committee on Freedom of Association, dated 19 March 1991.

A. Adoption of legislation giving effect to the Convention

The Government must point out that the Labour Code in force establishes various provisions for the protection of wages. In this regards, it expressly confirms:

(a) that wages shall be stipulated and paid entirely in legal currency (section 187);

(b) that wages must be paid on working days and at the workplace, at the latest one hour after the end of the payday (section 188);

(c) that wages cannot be paid for period longer than one month and, when the work is by hour or by day, the wages must be paid weekly (section 190);

(d) that wages cannot be seized, except one-third of the wages may be withheld for alimony payments (section 192);

(e) that deductions of wages shall not be made except for those authorised by the law, those concerning trade union dues with the worker's prior authorisation, advances on wages and those concerning credit granted by bank institutions, with the guarantee from the employer that in each case the deduction cannot exceed one-sixth of the worker's monthly wages (section 193);

(f) that a worker's credit for accrued wage is granted a general privilege as concerns the employer's real estate or personal property (section 197). Act No. 1226 of 1936 on the prohibition of seizing or handing over the appropriate amount to contractors when it is to the worker's prejudice, establishes an accelerated claims procedure which enables the worker to be paid directly with privilege as to the price of material and the transfer of the amount owed to the contractors.

All of these provisions have been reinforced in the draft Labour Code which expressly repeals the authority granted to the agricultural and agro-industrial enterprises to effect partial wage advances by means of delivering or handing out negotiable vouchers, wage tickets, chits or other things of this general order. As soon as the new Labour Code is adopted, this authority granted to the agricultural and agro-industrial enterprises in section 200 of the present Labour Code will disappear (sections 195-215 of the draft Code).

Also, the draft Labour Code expressly prohibits sanctions and seizures upon the amounts owed workers (section 213); this section was taken from Act 1226 of 15 December 1936 previously cited. This Act limits its scope of application to public works, but the draft Code extends its coverage to all works, whether they are public or private (section 213).

Furthermore, section 215 of the draft Code establishes that the worker's dependants have the right to obtain unpaid wages, exercise legal action or continue the lawsuit of a deceased worker, without, without having to be subjected to the common law rules of succession.

B. Protection of wages in sugar plantations

1. Measures to guarantee observance with respect to legal minimum wages

The circumstances occurring recently under which the minimum wage has been increased annually or over periods of less than one year indicate the concern and the interest which the Government gives to adjusting wages to correspond as much as possible to the increase in the cost of living.

It is fitting to recall that the minimum wage in agriculture is established for an eight-hour workday and is increased or decreased according to the hours worked; that the cane cuters have a flexible schedule and, as they are paid for their output or by the job, they are not strictly subjected to a fixed schedule or eight-hour workdays. A large majority of these workers work less than eight hours a day.

It is difficult to establish a fixed schedule for cane cutters because of the climate. There are hours of the day when the heat of the intense sun renders work difficult, exhausting the worker and diminishing his output. For this reason, agricultural workers accustom themselves and have always accustomed themselves to the establishment of flexible working hours and workdays and pay for output or by day, beginning the work at the hour the worker considers most convenient and the most advantageous. The cane cutters are the ones who fix the starting hour, duration and end of the day, as well as the days of rest, a necessary reality due to the reaons already explained.

2. Weighing the sugar cane

The special delegations installed in the sugar refineries for the application of section 2 of Decree No. 417/90 of 15 October 1990, integrated by the Labour Inspectorate in the service of the Secretariat of State for Labour, maintain permanent and continuous vigilance in order to ensure the introduction of the most effective measures to permit monitoring of the weighing of sugar can and to prevent deception in the weighing.

In this regard, various reports from the labour inspectors indicate that the situation has improved and the infractions which have been discovered have been denounced by the State Sugar Board, which has resulted in the cancellation of various weighings.

3. Articles 3 and 7 (payment of wages in cash and company stores)

As has been said previously, the draft Labour Code repeals section 200 of the Code presently in force and abolishes from its standards the authority which agricultural and agro-industrial enterprises presently possess to pay advance wages in the form of negotiable vouchers, wage tickets or chits. With the approval of the new Code, the practice in sugar refineries of paying agricultural workers in vouchers or chits will disappear completely.

In any event, relevant measures have already been adopted so that wage advances paid in the form of vouchers or chits can be carried out in the offices of the National Price Stabilisation Institute (JNESPRE), a partial solution for avoiding abusive deductions in private stores.

4. Article 14 (workers' information)

Faced with a majority of illiterate workers, the best possible means of informing workers is orally. The fact that a majority of Haitian agricultural workers to not speak Spanish makes the communication even more difficult.

Nevertheless, the labour inspectors who work in the refineries have been instructed to offer assistance of training to any worker who asks for it.

C. Enforcement

The Secretariat of State for Labour requested technical assistance for the strengthening and energising of the labour inspection services from the Inter-American Labour Advisory Administration (CIAT).

In addition a Government representative, the Secretary of State for Labour, reiterated the contents of the written information communicated by his Government on Conventions Nos. 95 and 105. He also gave some general indications concerning: the draft Labour Code, which had been sent to the ILO so that its compliance with ILO Conventions could be checked and which would soon be submitted to Parliament; the Decree of 14 May 1991 amending the regulations made under the Labour Code so as to give effect to the Convention (No.77) on the Medical Examination of Young Persons (Industry), 1946; and to Act No. 14/91 on the civil service and administrative career which recognises the freedom of association of public servants.

The speaker then referred to the various questions raised in the report of the Committee of Experts concerning the application of Convention No. 95 with regard to Haitian workers in the sugar industry. He indicated that the draft Labour Code expressly repealed the authority granted to the agricultural and agro-industrial enterprises to effect partial wage advances by means of delivering or handing out negotiable vouchers, wage tickets, chits or other things of this general order. As soon as the new Labour Code was adopted, this authority granted to the agricultural and agro-industrial enterprises in section 200 of the present Labour Code would disappear (sections 195-215 of the draft Code). This would help to stop unscrupulous persons exploiting the workers. While awaiting the adoption of the Code the Government had taken corrective measures, for instance, the management of certain major plantations had been required through a circular of 21 May 1991 to pay the tickets daily or at the latest within three days. Referring to the legal minimum wage, he indicated the difficulties stemming from remuneration by output in sugar cutting and the flexibility of working hours which was unavoidable in this kind of work. The Government had supplied information on this point concerning the pay records of the last harvest (1990-91) which showed that for an eight-hour workday the legal minimum wage for agriculture was being paid. He added that the minimum wage had been increased annually or over periods of less than one year, which showed the concern and the interest which the Government gave to adjusting wages to correspond as much as possible to the increase in the cost of living.

Referring to the weighing of sugar cane, he indicated that the special delegations installed in the sugar refineries for the application of section 2 of Decree No. 417/90 of 15 October 1990, integrated by the Labour Inspectorate in the service of the Secretariat of State for Labour, maintained permanent and continuous vigilance in order to ensure the introduction of the most effective measures to permit monitoring of the weighing of sugar cane and to prevent deception in the weighing. Various reports from the labour inspectors indicated that the situation had improved and the infractions which had been discovered had been denounced by the State Sugar Board, which had resulted in the cancellation of various weighings.

With respect to the agriculture diversification programmes and social welfare programmes, the Government described in its written reply the full programme of social development that the State Sugar Board is in the process of implementing in its own mills.

Concerning the information to workers on their wages, the speaker indicated that, given the fact that most workers are illiterate, the information needs to be transmitted orally. The fact that most of the Haitian workers do not speak Spanish makes this communication still more difficult, but the labour inspectors who are working on the sugar plantations have been trained to offer assistance to any workers who require it. He nevertheless considered that the best way to make the amount of wages known, and to defend them, was through the organisation of the workers themselves. Finally, he indicated that the Secretariat of State for Labour had requested technical assistance for the strengthening and energising of the labour inspection services from the Inter-American Labor Advisory Administration (CIAT), and that some of the proposals made in that project had already begun to be applied.

He then referred to the questions raised concerning the Forced Labour Convention, 1957 (No. 105). Under Decree No. 417/90, work had continued of taking a census and regularising the status of Haitians having lived and worked in the country for a certain time and of those born in the Dominican Republic. He informed the Committee on the statistics concerning the numbers of Haitian nationals whose position had been legalised or who were listed for registration and of children of Haitian nationals who had been registered. The situation was developing favourably but these measures took great efforts and thus required international cooperation.

Regarding the regularisation of the hiring procedure, he stressed that at present the Dominican authorities were prepared to strengthen relations with the Haitian Government with a view to reaching an agreement on the hiring of cane cutters. Meanwhile, the Government had proceeded to establish individual contracts, in Spanish and Creole, in conformity with the provisions of Decree No. 417/90; it had set up border posts for the hiring of labour and had strengthened the inspectorate, which met weekly with the Secretary of State for Labour to report on its work and the kind of offences noted. The State Sugar Board had laid off employees guilty of maltreatment of Haitian workers. The speaker stressed the demilitarisation of the hiring arrangements, a development which had been observed not only by the ILO direct contacts mission which had visited the country, but also the Generalized System of Preferences Subcommittee of the US Trade Policy Staff Committee. Furthermore, the round-ups had diminished and the Haitian nationality had not been an obstacle to the creation of cane-cutter trade unions or trade unions counting Haitian nationals among their leaders.

The Workers' members thanked the Secretary of State for Labour for his presence which allowed the present Committee to pursue the dialogue on the development of the situation of Haitian workers. The Committee has been discussing this case for many years and it was mentioned last year in a special paragraph in the general part of its report. Having compared the information given verbally and in writing this year with that discussed during previous years, it might be pointed out that there are some changes: a direct contacts mission visited the country; information, reports and replies have been furnished; Decree No. 417/90 referred to and examined in the Committee of Experts' report has been adopted, and the draft Labour Code has been elaborated with a view to improving the living and working conditions of workers. It is clear that the problem is vast and complex, which is shown by the Committee of Experts' comments, as well as by the replies and information in writing provided by the Government. The Workers' members made the following general statements: as regards observations made for many years by the Committee of Experts and the Conference Committee, a certain progress might be noted concerning recruitment practices, the weighing, the minimun wage, the payment of wages, the workers' information and the living conditions. A lot of things still have to be done. The draft Labour Code still has to be adopted and the measures taken still have to be applied in practice: such as the application in practice of Decree No. 417/90 and, when it is adopted, the Labour Code; and ensuring an effective supervision with a view to achieving the elimination of negative practices, in particular in the field of recruitment and payment of wages. In this regard, the Workers' members would ask what penalties have been provided for and imposed upon those employers who, for example, continue to pay wages in the form of negotiable vouchers and what penalties are provided for in the draft Labour Code to ensure its application in practice. After having read the report of the Committee of Experts and that of the direct contacts mission, one should come to a conclusion that the working conditions in the country remain deplorable and, according to witnesses, the local police took the place of the military, and more important a number of children are recruited for plantation work. All this indicates that the situation remains difficult and there is still much to do. The Government itself indicates in the information in writing supplied to the Conference that the improvements envisaged, and in particular concerning the recruitment system, should be further developed for the next harvest beginning in November 1991. Recalling that the Committee of Experts noted in its observation the existence of problems that merit energetic and sustained action by the authorities, the Workers' members request the Government to undertake such action and to inform on measures taken and on their practical application in order to enable the Committee of Experts and the Conference Committee to examine the development of the situation in the next year.

The Employers' members, noting that the present case is a very complicated one, recalled that since the Committee of Inquiry set up in 1983, the present Committee and the Committee of Inquiry have been dealing regularly with it and on many occasions expressed their grave concern. That is why they are particularly glad to hear the statements made by the Government representative who has given a very detailed, comprehensive, moderate and realistic report. The information provided by the Government representative, as well as that contained in the written reply, shows that there are new Decrees and new draft legislation. The Committee of Experts shall examine this detailed information, both verbal and in writing. The Employer' members observed, however, that according to the report of the direct contacts mission, to which reference is made in the Committee of Experts' report, certain progress has been made.

In relation to the application of Convention No. 95, the Employers' members, noting that the crux of the matter is the fair and guaranteed payment of the sugar-cane workers, recalled individual problems, such as the level of wages and the guarantee of minimum wage, the correct weighing of the sugar cane and the correct form of payment of wages. In their opinion, progress has been made as regards the time of payment of wages.

Concerning the application of Convention No. 105, the Employers' members pointed out that the question of the legal status and the general treatment of the Haitian workers in the Dominican Republic is a question of providing for humanitarian treatment in many aspects of life and recalled that these workers were often simply rounded up and forced to work. They consider it necessary that the State Sugar Board should improve its own practices. They also regretted that after such a long period of time there is still no agreement between the Government of Haiti and the Government of the Dominican Republic. The Employers' members considered it necessary that further steps should be taken and expressed the hope that the goodwill which is being demonstrated will help to transform the words into acts and the Government will communicate information on any progress made either in legislation or in practice.

The Government representative of Haiti indicated that his intervention would refer to the case of Haitian workers living in the Dominican Republic and the application of Conventions Nos. 95 and 105, and congratulated the Committee of Experts for its valuable and insightful observations and for its refined and detailed analysis of the question. The Haitian Government noted with satisfaction Decree No. 417/90 of 15 October 1990, which aimed to normalise the situation of Haitian citizens, to install special offices responsible for applying the employment contracts in the plantations and ensure their strict observation as well as the respect of human rights for Haitian workers. His Government trusted that this showed a clear willingness on behalf of the Government of the Dominican Republic to solve the problem. All of the reports received from the relevant departments in the Dominican Republic indicated, however, that in practice the situation of Haitian workers had not changed. The Haitian Government hoped that the situation would improve and to this end proposed that a mixed body of Haitian inspectors and ILO members be formed to supervise the practical application of Decree No. 417/90 and encourage enterprises in the sugar industry to change their attitudes and their customs with regard to Haitian agricultural workers.

The Worker's member of the United Kingdom stated that the detailed report given by the Government representative did show some positive aspects. The Employers' members were right saying that it was a complicated case which covers 20 pages of the Committee of Experts' report. There are also documents in the D-series and a very comprehensive report from the Government. Referring to the "special paragraph" procedure of 1989 and to that of "continued failure to implement" of 1990 concerning this case, the speaker pointed out that these positive procedures seem to have produced some effect on the Government. There are still many things that require investigation by the present Committee in future years on both of these Conventions, but there are also signs that the Government is making an attempt to bring the national legislation and practice into conformity with their provisions.

The Government representative of Venezuela stated that the intervention made by the Government representative of the Dominican Republic demonstrated that the Government had adopted important measures in the direction requested by the supervisory bodies. The Committee could be pleased with the recent evolution of the situation and should encourage the Government of the Dominican Republic to continue in this direction. She considered that the results obtained confirmed the positive and educational nature of the supervisory system and the importance of the supervisory system should be stressed.

The Government member of Germany stated that he was impressed, first of all, by the seriousness of the problem, and second, by the comprehensive information communicated by the Government in writing and verbally. Without going into the details, what is important is an open attitude, the self-criticism and the readiness to deal with these enourmous problems seriously. This case is a very encouraging example of the positive role which is played both by the Committee of Experts and by the present Committee in order to improve the situation of workers in a spirit of an ongoing dialogue with governments, as reflected in paragraph 13 of the Committee of Experts' report. With reference to the intervention of the Government member of Haiti, he considered it positive that the Committee of Experts and the present Committee have given the first impulse and impetus to a dialogue between the two Governments in the interests of the workers concerned.

The Workers' member of the Dominican Republic emphasised that, if the problems seemed to be improving, there still remained much to do in order to better the conditions of life and of work of Haitian workers. He stated that the trade union movement hoped that the draft Labour Code, which was being discussed at the tripartite level with the assistance of the ILO, and Decree No.417/90, as well as the efforts that had been made by the State Sugar Board (CEA), would contribute to the improvement of the situation for these workers. He considered that the ILO should continue to follow up on the situation in order to ensure full respect of human rights and trade union rights for Haitian workers.

The Employers' members, with reference to the intervention of the Government representative of Haiti, asked about the attitude of the Government of Haiti concerning the conclusion of an agreement with the Government of the Dominican Republic on the recruitment of Haitian works and recalled that the importance of the conclusion of such an agreement between the two Governments was revealed during the discussion at the Conference Committee in 1988.

The Government representative of the Dominican Republic expressed his thanks for the words of encouragement and appreciation received from the Workers', Employers' and Government members who had taken the floor during the debate. He stated that there was a lot to be accomplished, but emphasised the political will of his country to deal fully with these problems. Replying to the question of the Workers' members, he indicated that the draft Labour Code had amended the amount of sanctions for violation of the current standards because those set in the present Code dated from 1951 and were obsolete and could not guarantee strong sanctions. Regarding the protection of minors, he stated that, to strengthen protective measures, a programme of placement of youth labour had been set up in sugar-cane areas and that the repatriation of some had taken place. He also referred to a circular from the State Sugar Board (CEA) dated 9 May 1991 which contained instructions for the control in practice of the employment of minors and strong disciplinary measures against those infringing the provisions relating to child labour. He concluded by referring to the economic restrictions prevailing in his country and emphasised its determined and irrevocable will to face up to the problems raised. He trusted that international collaboration and ILO cooperation would help in finding solutions to the problems of Haitian and Dominican workers.

The Government representative of Haiti stated that this Government is waiting for the normalisation of the working conditions of Haitian workers in the Dominican Republic before any eventual agreements are envisaged.

The Government member of the United States expressed her Government's satisfaction with a significant amount of movement which had taken place in this case. She pointed out that her Government has followed the situation in the Dominican Republic with some interest and is encouraged by the progress that has been made, though there is much work to be done still. The speaker also indicated that certain trade preferences which might be awarded by her Government usually depend on whether the Government in question is providing workers with the basic rights and freedoms in conformity with ILO Conventions.

The Committee took note of the report of the Committee of Experts, the detailed information, both verbal and in writing, provided by the Government representative, and the views expressed in the wide-ranging discussion which took place at the meeting. The Committee took note of the fact that direct contacts have taken place in January 1991. It welcomed the reopening of the dialogue between the Dominican Republic and the supervisory bodies, as well as the progress that has been observed. However, the Committee remains extremely concerned about the situation of Haitian workers in the sugar-cane plantations in the Dominican Republic. The Committee noted with interest that a series of specific preliminary measures have already been undertaken to improve the situation, in particular by the preparation of a new Labour Code. However, the Committee deplored the fact that this progress has not yet made it possible to adapt national law and practice to meet all the requirements of Conventions Nos. 95 and 105, in respect of which there are still various divergencies. The Committee hoped that this Code can be adopted as soon as possible. The Committee noted with interest the existence of Decree No. 417/90 dated 15 October 1990 which in particular imposes a form of cooperation with the International Labour Office which should make it possible to see in the field that the promised improvements have taken place which are still awaited. The Committee invited the Government to strengthen necessary measures the application of which could be monitored. The Committee noted with concern the failure of efforts aimed at concluding an agreement with Haiti concerning recruitment. It expresses the strong hope that the Government will have recourse to the assistance of the ILO in order to renew its efforts so that such an agreement can be concluded, taking into account, inter alia, the comments of the supervisory bodies. The Committee trusts that the Government of the Dominican Republic will continue its efforts and will immediately, by means of energetic and sustained action, take the additional measures, in particular by adopting the new Labour Code in order to fully implement in law and in practice measures in response to the comments made by the supervisory bodies of the ILO.

Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 1990, Publication: 77th ILC session (1990)

A Government representative, the Secretary of State for Labour, stated that his Government had made great efforts to introduce substantial changes in the country's labour legislation, with the aim of guaranteeing the implementation of Conventions Nos. 95 and 105. He indicated that there were approximately 1 million Haitian cane cutters, 90 per cent of which were illegal workers. He went on to state that the numbers of migrant Haitian workers were growing constantly, because of job opportunities and the growth of activities in other sectors of the economy. This had enabled sugar workers to move into other branches of economic activity, where they enjoyed the same rights as Dominican nationals. During harvest season, about 5 per cent of the resident Haitian population was employed in the sugar industry, 2 per cent of which work in the state-owned factories. He insisted that both legal and illegal Haitian workers had the right to freedom of movement and to choose their employment. They were freely engaged and provided with adequate transport facilities. As dar as conditions of work in the state-owned bateyes were concerned, he confirmed that the State Sugar Board (CEA) had taken a number of administrative measures to guarantee a substantial wage increase. As a result of a decision by the CEA, the amount paid for each ton of cut cane had been increased by 12 pesos. Average daily output per picker was 2 tons. Daily pay of 24 pesos was higher than the 16.50 pesos prescribed as the statutory minimum wage for the agricultural sector under Resolution No. 1 of 1989. There was constant monitoring to ensure that the cane was weighed correctly. One measures had been taken to guarantee full payment of wages in cash; to set an eight-hour day and a 48-hour work week; and to apply health and safety standards prescribed by Regulation No. 807. Labourers (braceros) were also covered by the existing social security system. Other social assistance and protection programmes for sugar-cane workers included accommodation, diversification of agricultural activities, setting up of low-cost shopping facilities and food distribution. The speaker believed that the results of those programmes had been ignored by those intent on carrying out a campaign to discredit his country which, on humanitarian grounds, allowed Haitian workers to enter, work and reside freely and to enjoy the same rights as Dominican workers.

The Workers' member of the Dominican Republic stated that this organisation, the Autonomous Labour Federation (La Confederacioon Autoonoma Sindical Clasista) was engaged in a long-standing struggle to ensure the implementation of the Conventions, which had great importance for both Haitian and Dominican workers. He added that, as a result of such efforts, there had been a siginificant reduction in the systematic violation of the provisions of those instruments, as had been the case in the past. There were now only isolated cases. His Federtation worked closely with the Socio-cultural Movement of Haitian Workers, in order to make workers more aware of their rights.

The Workers' member of Greece emphasised that dialogue was an appropriate means for resolving problems, provided that it was not a dialogue of the deaf. He did not appreciate the term "illegal workers" which the Government representative had used, since in his view work was not an illegal activity; the term "clandestine workers" would be more suitable. The Government representative's statement led one to believe that acceptance of Haitian workers constituted a philanthropic act on the part of the Dominican Republic. It was, in fact, a way of enabling the country to cope with its manpower problems. The speaker went on to pose three questions to the Government representative. The first concerned steps being taken by the Government to regularise the situation of Haitian workers. The second was whether or not penalties were imposed on those employers or state companies employing clandestine workers; in the event that there were none, he wanted to know whether the Government intended to take measures in this regard. Finally, he asked for an explanation of the reasons for which the ILO mission planned for 1989 had been cancelled.

The Workers' member of the United Kingdom stated that similar statements had been made to the present Committee by the Government representative from the Dominican Republic for several years now, yet problems remained. He had difficulty in believing that the Government was referring to the same case as himself. Yet it was an outstanding case which deserved not only special attention but also special action. The issue at stake was the treatment of sugar workers still largely recruited from Haiti. Although slavery had been abolished in the Dominican Republic over 100 years ago, Haitians working in the country on state sugar plantations were still delivered to that work at gunpoint and those were Government-run plantations. They were forcibly kept there, living in appalling conditions, and the overseers of this forced labour were Government officials. He was not talking about some distant past but about last year. The massive human rights violations which took place on these plantations had been recorded in United Nations documents and reports by human rights organisations, the ILO and the press. The Governments' cancellation of the planned ILO mission to verify working conditions during the 1989-90 sugar harvest, on the grounds of "its disagreements with the orientation of the mission" was in his his view indicative of the Government's opposition to having an on-the-spot verification of what was taking place. As pointed out in the report of the Committee of Experts, there had been a total failure to do anything at all about the measures requested by the ILO and by this Committee. Sugar-importing countries did bear some responsibility for forced labour of adults and children used on sugar plantations during the harvest. In this connection, he pointed out that the European Community bought sugar only from countries which were parties to the 1973 Lomoe Convention. There was, however, no question of the Dominican Republic fulfilling the conditions under that Convention. That might change if all countries refused to buy sugar produced in such circumstances. The way sugar was produced in the Dominican Republic might rot the fabric of Dominican society, and failure of this Committee to maintain standards would rot the basis of its work, so that finally, the ILO's credibility would suffer.

The Government member of Haiti, Minister of Social Affairs, said she had listened very attentively to the statement of the Minister of Labour of the Dominican Republic. She herself had visited the Dominican sugar plantations bateyes on many occasions, including at the beginning of February 1990. Unfortunately, what she had seen and heard during this visit did not correspond to conditions described by the Government representative. She stressed that the Dominican Republic should respect the Conventions it had ratified and, in particular, authorise an ILO mission to carry out an on-the-spot investigation as previously agreed.

The Workers' member of the United States stated that the information supplied by the Government had clearly been unsatisfactory. He considered the case to be one of the most serious ever to come before this Committee. The basic problems were many and long-standing but, despite considerable technical assistance from the ILO, no improvements had been introduced into the working conditions of plantation workers. During the last few years this Committee had found it necessary to include a special paragraph in its report on the working and living conditions of Haitian cane-cutters in the Dominican Republic, which could only be described as deplorable, notwithstanding the recommendations of an ILO Commission of Inquiry made as far back as 1983. The actual situation with respect to Convention No. 105 was summed up quite clearly in the concluding paragraphs of the report of the Committee of Experts where it stressed that "there had been no progress either in terms of legislation or practice, on essential points raised over a number of years by the Commission of Inquiry, the Committee of Experts and the Conference Committee".

The Workers' members stated that for many years, the Committee had been discussing, in pratically the same terms, Conventions Nos. 95 and 105 and the appalling sitation which affected a significant category of workers. The problems are well-known and remained unresolved. They pointed out that there was a large gap between the intentions stated by the Government and the real situation, in which there had been no improvement. They were of the view that, each year, when called before the Committee, the Government adopted the same strategy of making solemn declarations and promising future improvements, only to forget its promises afterwards.

Since the last Conference, no information had been submitted for review by the Committee of Experts. No information had been given with respect to basic requirements of Convention No. 95 concerning: the prohibition of payment of salaries in the form of vouchers; the direct payment to workers; the general prohibition on free disposal by workers of their wages; the assignment of wages; the protection of wages in plantations, the control of the weighing of the cane; payment in kind; the operation of company stores; and the deferred payment of part of the salary. According to the Government, notices dealing with those issues had been circulated and the problems had been resolved. However, the Committee of Experts had made it known that those notices were neither brought to the attention of the workers nor were they applied. Notwithstanding the Government's promise to the Committee, no detailed labour inspection reports on plantations had been submitted.

With regard to Convention No. 105, the Committee of Experts called attention to the fact that problems raised in previous reports persisted and, indeed, seemed to have worsened. The statement made by some Workers' members confirmed this situation, as did official reports and clippings from national and international newspapers, which described the dramatic working conditions of sugar cane plantation workers. No information had been received on the question of the legal status of Haitians living in the Dominican Republic and on the regularisation of procedures governing their employment.

The Workers' members recalled that in 1989 this Committee had stressed the need for special efforts whereby the ILO could monitor the situation and verify on-the-spot the extent to which the promised improvements had been made. The Committee of Experts pointed out that the Government had cancelled this mission which was supposed to have been carried out. Despite the 1983 Commission of Inquiry, and the 1988 direct contacts mission, it was still not possible to determine whether or not real progress had been made. The Committee of Experts had informed the Government of the need to take concrete measures to redress the situation and also pointed out that this case had already been dealt with in several special paragraphs of its report. Under the circumstances, the Workers' members asked that the case of the Dominican Republic be included in the part of the report of the Committee relating to continued failure to implement, in relation to the application of Conventions Nos. 95 and 105.

The Workers' member of El Salvador noted with regret that the Government representatives did not transmit to their governments the recommendations of the ILO. He added that failure to comply with the provisions of the Conventions could lead to social injustice and expressed great dissatisfaction over the fact that the Governments of the Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Colombia and many other countries were violating these instruments. He restated his earlier call for economic and political sanctions to be imposed on those governments which did not fulfil their obligations, so as to guarantee peace and social justice for all workers.

The Employers' members expressed their disappointment with the statement of the Government representative, who had not replied on several important points and had not adopted a sufficiently clear position. The case in question concerned outstanding problems which had come before the present Committee on many occasions and which had been the subject of the report of a Commission of Inquiry in 1983, as well as direct contacts. Moreover, in each of the three previous years the case had figured in a special paragraph in the report of the present Committee. Moreover, a report, drafted by Mr. Pons commissioned by the State Sugar Board (CEA) had been published in 1986. Its results basically corresponded with the findings of the Commission of Inquiry, the observations of the Committee of Experts and the repeated recommendations of this Committee. The Employers' members stated that this case particularly concerned the legal status of Haitians working on sugar plantations in the Dominican Republic and their fair remuneration. Today, the Government delegate had said that Haitian and Dominican workers were treated in the same way. Should this be the case, then the violation under discussion also concerned Dominican workers because they were also covered by Conventions Nos. 95 and 105. For many years, the Government had been making unfulfilled promises, and had not even suggested reports for examination by the Committee of Experts the Employers' members stated that they would refer to only a few of the many issues raised. As far as payment of inadequate salary was concerned, they noted that there was a legal minimum wage related to the duration of work, whereas the sugar industry paid piece rates based on tons of cane cut. There were doubts as to whether, under such a system, sugar workers actually received a minimum wage and whether instructions contained in circulars issued by the CEA were known to everyone and applied in practice. All this could be determined only if the CEA as well as the state inspection service provided accurate information. One was left with the impression that the CEA operated as "a State within a State" with its own rules and laws. the Government should carry out checks since it was responsible for ensuring compliance with Conventions. Similar doubts existed as regarded the correct amount of sugar cane cut and the adequate involvement of the workers in this process. Here again, the reports of the labour inspection servicer were lacking. Precise information had been requested on payment of wages, the use of vouchers and the time at which wages are paid. The Government had provided no written evidence on any of these matters, although announced plans should have been put into effect and described in a proper report. The Employers' members noted that in the case in question here was a link between Conventions Nos. 95 and 105. That was due to the dubious manpower "procurement" methods by which Haitians were "recruited" to work on sugar plantations. There had been serious cases of using forced labour, with the complicity of State authorities, namely the police and army. Urgent steps were needed to deal with such a situation. The remarks of the Government representative that Haitian workers should be pleased to be allowed to work in the Dominican Republic, even though their status was illegal, were unacceptable. The Government could not employ Haitian labour on State plantations and at the same time do nothing to change their illegal status. Their status should be rectified and the State should ensure that rights of these workers were protected. All States had a duty to protect and guarantee minimum standards to all those living in the country for a certain period of time. Recruitment procedures should be properly regulated and an interstate agreement between the Dominican Republic and Haiti should be concluded. Both States should undertake sustained efforts along these lines.

As regards outstanding requests as well as the shortcomings noted, this Committee had again considered last year that a mission might be useful. The fact that this mission had been cancelled at the request of the Government showed a lack of goodwill towards making any real changes. The Employers' members considered that there was a marked contradiction between repeated promises made to the present Committee and the actual situation. They therefore thought that this case should be given particular attention in the report. A special paragraph should be adopted, since it was evident that no aspect of the situation had improved, that conditions remained the same and had even deteriorated. They agreed with the Workers' members that the continued failure to implement the two Conventions should be noted in the appropriate part of the report. The Government should expedite a report containing concrete information on all the points so that the Committee of Experts and this Committee would be in a position to see whether there had been progress.

The Government representative reaffirmed that, now more than ever, human rights were respected in his country. He said that it was difficult to prevent people crossing the border and that the Haitians entered Santo Domingo in search of a better life. They were neither deported nor coerced, particularly since the armed forces were no longer associated with matters concerning the employment of Haitian workers. He called on the ILO to provide assistance in carrying out a census of the Haitian workers, since it was difficult to determine their actual number. Referring to the text of resolution No. 1 of October 1989 concerning the revision of statutory minimum wages, he stated that in his country there was machinery enabling the implementation of all those provisions. Notwithstanding the many difficulties which his country faced as a developing country, the aim of the Government was to resolve the problems relating to the presence of Haitian workers. On the question of allowing an ILO mission to visit his country, the Government representative stated that the final decision rested with the President of the Republic.

The Workers' member of Benin said that the Government representative had evaded the issue, failing to provide clear explanations. He asked the Government representative to authorise a fact-finding mission to enter the country to assess the progress that had allegedly been made.

The Workers' members expressed their disappointment over statements made by the Government representative which did not reply to the questions posed. They believed that the most constructive approach would be to include the case in the appropriate part of the report concerning cases of continued failure to implement Conventions.

The Employers' members stated that they had learnt nothing new from the second statement made by the Government representative, and that they had only been presented with confusing data on minimum wages. They had expected a written report with more precise information. With respect to the request by the Government representative for Office assistance to carry out a consensus of Haitian workers, they wondered whether the Office could provide such services, and noted that the role of the Office was to assist in matters pertaining to the application of Conventions. They recalled that for some time this Committee had been noting that, as regards certain basic issues, the provisions of Conventions Nos. 95 and 105 were not being duly respected. That had been mentioned in a special paragraph of its report and it was in fact a case of long-standing violation of these instruments. They expressed the hope that promises made by the Government - which were similar to those made by its predecessors - would result in real, substantial and noticeable changes.

The Committee noted the information supplied by the Government on the protection of wages and the position of Haitian and other workers in the sugar-cane industry. It recalled that the same matters had been discussed at earlier sessions, up to the 76th Session of the International Labour Conference, when the Committee had considered that special efforts were called for to ensure the application of the Conventions in both legislation and practice, so that the ILO could, as from the 1989-90 harvest, verify the situation and ascertain on the spot that improvements which had been promised, but were still awaited, had in fact been made. It deeply deplored the fact that the Government had not supplied the required indications on necessary legislative and practical measures - which, according to the Government, had already or would be taken - and that the Government did not co-operate with the ILO in this regard since it had cancelled a mission of representatives of the Director-General due to visit the Dominican Republic and Haiti following the last Conference. The Committee therefore had to conclude that the information supplied by the Government did not add substantially to what the Committee had heard at its earlier sessions.

The Committee took note of this case with extreme concern and decided to mention it in the General Part of its Report under the heading "Continued failure to implement" as one in which there had been continued failure over several years to eliminate serious deficiencies in the application of ratified Conventions which the Committee had previously discussed.

Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 1989, Publication: 76th ILC session (1989)

The Government has sent the following information:

With reference to the Committee of Experts' comments, the labour authorities are considering urgent and necessary measures which might be adopted to ensure effective application of Articles 2, 3, 5, 6, 8(2), 14 and 15 (b) of the Convention and of the recommendations made by the Commission of Inquiry in paragraph 543 of its 1983 report - in particular legislative reforms:

- to prohibit strictly the payment of wages in the form of promissory notes, vouchers, coupons or other negotiable instrument;

- to allow wages to be paid directly to the workers;

- to lay down a general prohibition on employers limiting the worker's freedom to spend his wages;

- to regulate the assignment of wages;

- to take sufficient measures to inform workers of the conditions of payment of wages and the deductions which can be made; and

- to regularise other aspects of the employment of sugar-cane workers.

The Government also provided the following details of the application of the Convention:

Article 2. In practice, the Government repeats, the coverage of the Convention has been widened, although the legislation needed to apply it has not yet materialised. The labour authorities still wish to consult concerned workers' and employers' organisations in order to exclude from the total or partial application of the Convention persons working in conditions of employment in that such application would be inappropriate, or persons engaged in non-manual or domestic or similar work. Amendments to the Labour Code to extend wage protection to all agricultural enterprises, regardless of how many workers they employ or what operations are involved, are being considered.

Article 3. Wages are generally paid in legal tender; payment by cheque is also allowed. Payment by promissory note, voucher or coupon or in any other form in place of currency is prohibited. Payment of Haitian workers' wages in negotiable vouchers has, it is repeated, been abolished by administrative means pending repeal of the provisions of the Labour Code which authorise it. This provision is applied in enterprises of the State Sugar Board (CEA) and Consorcio Vicini operations which had for decades allowed workers to negotiate wage vouchers to third parties. In these enterprises, under administrative arrangements workers receive cash advances, as is the case in the Central Romana.

Article 5. Wages are paid directly to the worker concerned unless the worker is unable to collect them in person and authorises payment by the enterprise to some other person on production of the workers' identity paers. In the CEA, wages are paid to casual workers by chitties which are redeemed each week; while awaiting their wages, workers can use the chitties to buy essential goods at official prices in CEA- and INSEPRE- (National Price Stabilisation Institute) run shops.

Article 6. No employer may in any way restrict the worker's freedom to dispose of his wages. The Government considers that it fully satisfies Resolution No. 1/88 of 10 June 1988, which retroactively to 1 April 1988 laid down that all agricultural workers, whatever their type of employment, receive a minimum wage of RD12 Dominican pesos for an eight-hour day. The Resolution also provided for measures to be adopted as soon as possible to guarantee minimum wages when these workers have task-rate contracts. The CEA presently employs casual workers only for the transport and collection of cane, which is why cutters have increased their productivity and thus attained daily wages above these fixed by the National Wages Committee, since they cut over 2 tons of cane in an eight-hour day.

Circular No. 8 referred to by the United Workers' Organisation (CGT) in its communication of 3 January 1989 has been duly observed and widely distributed among cane workers. In accordance with the 1988-89 rates, administrative measures have been taken to make sure all workers employed in CEA operations receive minimum wages. The labour and CEA authorities will supply the ILO with complete information on the practical application of Circular No. 8 including the wage rates fixed by the CEA, the number of contracts and the daily earnings of workers employed in each process, and the means by which non-CEA plantations are made to observe the agricultural minimum wage.

Article 7. No coercion whatever in respect of workers using any works stores selling goods or services at fixed rates is allowed. The following are the main measures by which it is ensured that, in conformity with Article 7(2), goods are sold at fair and reasonable prices and that there is no exploitation in and around the sugar enterprises and plantations:

(a) In collaboration with INESPRE, various public stores have been set up.

(b) In collaboration with the DGCP (Price Control Department), a price list for essential goods has been drawn up.

(c) The CEA has substantially increased the production of groceries for sale to its workers as part of the recent Agricultural Diversification Plan.

(d) Sugar workers can validate their wage advance chitties in CEA plantation shops in collaboration with INESPRE without any reduction or discount.

(e) The DGCP regularly inspects private and CEA stores to ensure prices are fixed and to avoid speculation and usury to the prejudice of the workers.

(f) The CEA has considerably increased the network of nonprofit-making businesses both for cash sales and through advance forms (CEA Form No. 1) or letter of payment for daily workers.

(g) Businesses in and around CEA enterprises have to pay all the rest of the money due to sugar workers when they pay for purchases with written proof of what has been cut, collected or transported.

(h) All businesses (private or CEA) operating in or around the enterprises and plantations have to accept cash or written proof of what has been cut, collected or transported.

(i) To avoid arrears of payments to sugar workers and prevent them having to pay with chitties or written proofs of wage advances, in businesses, stores, shops or public selling points providing essentials, payment of wages is made or cancelled weekly.

In and around the Central Romana enterprise there are stores, shops, kiosks and public selling points where the requirements of Article 7 are strictly observed. Central Romana has a detailed and effective Agricultural and Cattle-farming Diversification Programme as part of its overall social plan for the benefit of its own workers and the whole population of the eastern region.

The CEA has greatly increased the coverage of its own Agricultural Diversification Programme, especially the Food Programme, which includes vegetable, fish, chicken, pig and rabbit farming, reasonably priced beef, wheat flour and other goods at the public selling points (comestibles, rice, beans, bananas, etc.), and the food supplement programme, according to the CEA Social Development Programme Director. There are other programmes, for instance, for clean drinking water, nutrition and health, and education. The Government is compiling data and will shortly send a full report on the resources spent and the results obtained by the CEA and private enterprises in their compulsory and non-compulsory employees Agricultural Diversification and Social Assistance Programmes.

Article 8. Deductions from wages are only allowed under conditions fixed by legislation, collective agreement, or tribunal decision for the economic protection of persons under the age of 18 years. In the last case, the size of the deduction is determined as a proportion of the worker's income. Enterprises have to inform workers of the conditions for such deductions. The State Secretariat for Labour's inspection department is vigilant in CEA enterprises and districts in ensuring wage protection measures are applied and that cane is correctly weighed: the latter operation is satisfactorily organised, according to inspection reports, by laying down rules to make sure weighing is accurate (with no reduction for wastage) and done in the presence of the driver, the cutter or a CEA representative who supervises it. All workers may see the weight conversion table and the wage rates in force.

Articles 9 and 10. Any deduction from wages to guarantee a direct or indirect payment by a worker to the employer, his representative or an intermediary for obtaining or retaining employment, and any attachment or confiscation of a worker's wages contrary to the legislation are strictly prohibited.

Article 11. The long-standing practice in the CEA and Casa Vicini of withholding part of cutters' pay as an "incentive" to be paid at the end of the harvest (intended to keep casual workers in their jobs until the end of the harvest) has been abolished. Authorised incentives to cane workers now form part of the weekly wage.

Article 12. Under the legislation wages are paid regularly (weekly, fortnightly or monthly) as the parties to the contract (worker and employer) agree, with the union's consent if there is one. Within a reasonable time of the expiry of the contract, all remuneration due is finally adjusted in accordance with the legislation, collective agreement or decision of an arbitration tribunal. A Bill now before the National Congress would require employers to pay off their workers within ten days. The ILO will be informed of further developments in this regard.

Article 13. This Article is satisfactorily applied. In the CEA, workers are paid at the end of each week somewhere near to the workplace. Advances to the workers are deducted.

Article 14. It is common practice in the country to give workers an appropriate and easily understandable statement of their conditions of wages, a breakdown of how wages are calculated, the time and place of payment, etc. In the CEA, Circulars Nos. 8 and 9 of 20 October 1988 are satisfactorily applied, guaranteeing information on wage conditions to workers known as "ajusteros" who work by the day or the task and workers presenting cut cane by weight, mostly in Spainish and in Creole if necessary. There has been a widespread publicity campaign to inform Dominican and foreign (Haitian) workers living in the country of the incentives and conditions of work and life in CEA operations for the 1988-89 harvest. The campaign covered the whole country and various mediums of communication with the aim of attracting manpower for cutting and collection of cane, at a time when labour is scarce, in the absence of imported labour from Haiti.

In each CEA enterprise the management displays in prominent places texts, in Spanish and Creole, showing the terms of employment contracts binding on the employer and the agricultural worker covering such subjects as wages, living conditions, medical assistance, food facilities, labour discipline, etc. Every CEA enterprise also gives orally full information in Spanish and Creole when a worker is engaged or at work.

Article 15. The labour authorities are considering early measures to apply this Article in full, in accordance with labour legislation in force.

The labour authorities have strengthened inspection in the CEA, Casa Vicini and the Central Romana, in order to guarantee sugar workers their rights. Further information on inspection will be sent to the ILO. The CEA has designed its inspection to cover all aspects of plantation work, cutting and transport of cane, sugar milling and production, the Agricultural Diversification Programme, etc. Living and working conditions in CEA enterprises and districts are inspected by the State Labour Secretariat's inspectorate, which has been augmented for this purpose. Inspection also takes place in Casa Vicini and the Central Romana.

In addition see under Convention No. 105, as follows:

The Government has communicated the following information:

No form of forced or compulsory labour is used in the Dominican Republic. The national authorities maintain strict compliance with the standards set forth in this Convention and with the recommendations made by the ILO's Commission of Inquiry in its 1983 report, as well as the observations made by the Committee of Experts in 1988 and 1989. This compliance maintained by the authorities explains why no measures involving imprisonment and/or forced or compulsory labour exist.

In the labour sphere, no recourse is had to this form of work as a method of mobilisation and utilisation of national or foreign labourers in order to foster the economy in the sugar plantations and refineries of the CEA, as was previously alleged by the Central Unitaria de Trabajadores (CUT). With regard to the importation of Haitian labourers for work in the sugar cane harvest (cutting and collection of the sugar-cane) in government-owned sugar mills, the collective agreements between the Governments of Haiti and the Dominican Republic for the recruitment of Haitian workers have not been renewed. These agreements were suspended because of the difficult socio-political situation which has emerged in that country. Haitian workers have not been hired under the bilateral agreements since the fall of the Duvalier regime in 1985. Both Governments are presently involved in a complete revision of the procedures and of the numbers of jobs for Haitian workers in order to re-establish these agreements as soon as possible, based on the best living and working conditions for these workers on Dominican territory and in the most favourable terms for both States. Any new developments on this matter will be communicated to the ILO. The present forms of recruitment of Haitian workers for sugar plantations in 1988-89 do not include, in any instance, round-ups of these workers legally or illegally resident in the Dominican Republic with the complicity of the national authorities, in order to hand them over, for payment, to the state sugar refineries.

Neither forced labour nor any form of discrimination exists in the Dominican Republic against Haitian workers engaged in agricultural work, cutting and collecting of sugar-cane at the CEA plantations and refineries, where these foreigners enjoy the same rights and privileges under the labour legislation as Dominican workers employed in similar work. Clandestine work by Haitian nationals who regularly, and in increasing numbers, cross the Dominican/Haitian border illegally does, however, exist to a large degree. These workers are used by private employers in various agricultural and livestock activities whence they move later to the informal rural and urban sectors, to domestic work and to the construction industry in the large cities of the country. The authorities are studying possible measures, to be adopted in the near future, to regulate recruitment and contracting, and the work of foreigners resident in the country, in particular, to reduce illegal - trafficking of Haitian workers "ambastilles" to a minimum. These measures would also regulate the inadequate living and working conditions of these workers offered to them by private employers who benefit considerably from the use of practices which fall outside the labour law. In fact, the living and working conditions provided by private employers to illegal immigrant Haitian workers are less advantageous and humane than those granted to workers in the sugar plantations and refineries of the CEA.

In recent years (1987 and 1988), the CEA has undergone a dynamic process of diversifying its production into the agricultural and livestock subsectors, giving emphasis to the agroindustrialisation of the duty-free zones. The CEA has not been able to achieve full "Dominicanisation" of the sugar plantations in this process despite the great efforts made by its administration and the plan conceived to attract Dominican and resident Haitian agricultural workers, and to issue to the latter the full legal and social status similar to that enjoyed by Dominicans. Because of this, and in the absence of Haitian agricultural workers being brought in, the present harvest (1988-89) has been affected by a considerable lack of pickers which has resulted in a significant delay in the work of cutting and collecting sugar-cane, as well as the task of grinding it, with the subsequent loss of millions of pesos for the state sugar trading centre.

Presently, no violation of the labour law has been registered against the CEA as concerns its sugar plantations and refineries nor do they offer sub-human conditions, particularly with regard to the work-day and wages. For the cutting and collecting of sugar-cane, Haitian and Dominican agricultural workers do not work for more than the eight hours a day allowed by agreement or by statute. The object of misunderstanding is that the said workers voluntarily vary their hours of starting and stopping work in order to take advantage of the hours of moonlight, early morning, dusk, etc. Earned wages are higher than those offered in Dominican agriculture due to the increase accorded for each ton of sugar-cane cut and collected. The considerable increase in income guarantees better living conditions. The presence of armed guards does not imply repression (such as the completion of excessively long workdays) but rather exists for the protection of human and material resources in the state-owned work centres.

Likewise, although Conventions Nos. 97 and 143 and Recommendations Nos. 86 and 151 (concerning migrant workers) have not been notified by the Dominicain Republic, their provisions are observed so as to give full effect to the recommendations of the 1983 Commission of Inquiry found in paragraphs 516, 522, 526 and 527 of its report.

With reference to the provision of the Third Part of the Labour Code, it is reiterated that labour laws in the Dominican Republic are of a territorial nature and apply to Dominicans and foreigners without distinction.

The methods for recruitment established in the absence of agreements between the Governments of Haiti and the Dominican Republic for the hiring of Haitian agricultural workers, consist of contacts and personal interviews between the agricultural workers and the authorised representatives of the CEA, either in their place of residence in the Dominican territory, or in some cases when workers appear in person at branches of the state sugar enterprise searching for work at the time of the sugar harvest. In both cases, the Haitian agricultural workers showed particular interest in the cutting and pulling of sugar-cane, accepting the actual living conditions and work available in the CEA's plantations and refineries. Moreover, the CEA provides all possible facilities so that the recruited workers can be adequately transported from their places of residence around the country to their workplaces.

In compliance with the recommendation in paragraph 544 of the 1983 report of the Commission of Inquiry, the State Secretariat for Labour has intensified its inspection services in the sugar plantations and refineries, both state-owned respect for the rights of both national and foreign workers employed in agricultural work or on plantations for the cutting and collection of sugar-cane. In due time reports will be forwarded on the results of the system of regular visits to both the state and private sugar plantations and refineries, in order to improve the effectiveness of these services and on the complaints and irregularities investigated and sanctions imposed in cases of violations of agricultural workers' rights.

The CEA regularly uses individual contracts as a means for recruiting Haitian agricultural workers. Each contract contains all the contractual conditions and benefits which are enjoyed by Dominican workers hired also on an individual basis.

The Government is carefully considering the recommendations made by the Commission of Inquiry in 1983 in order to apply fully this Convention and others ratified by our country, as concerns the employment of Haitian workers in Dominican Republic sugar plantations, in order to take and implement all administrative and legislative measures that may be necessary.

The CGT, in its communications of 3 and 31 January 1989, made allegations concerning the violation of some provisions of this Convention. With regard to the questions raised in these accusations, the Government refers to the contents of its report recently sent to the ILO.

Article 1(c) of the Convention

Despite the existence of Act No. 3143 of 11 December 1951, amended by Act No. 5224 of 1959, on work paid for but not done, this does not imply that it is a means of labour discipline in practice since this Act has fallen into disuse. In order to repeal the application of Act No. 3143 as a practical measure, the authorities have determined ways of resolving labour conflicts, arising under this Act, through administrative or judicial means.

Article 1(d)

The provisions in the Labour Code which contemplate punishment by means of sentences of imprisonment involving compulsory labour for participation in strikes have, in practice, been completely abolished, now that the right to strike is guaranteed by law and by the authorities. The Government has, however, invoked some provisions of the Labour Code (sections 370, 373 and 378) in order to protect public order. human life and private property. The Government is promoting both the repeal of some of these provisions and possible amendments to others in order to ensure that the laws are in conformity with the Conventions.

As was expressed in earlier reports, the authorities are reevaluating possible reforms to the Labour Code in order to bring national legislation into conformity with the Convention by providing that no form of forced labour may be imposed as a labour disciplinary measure. Furthermore, the Government's willingness to ensure the adoption of all measures necessary to give full effect to the provisions of the Convention remains.

In addition a Government representative of the Dominican Republic, the Secretary of Labour. stated that there had been a lack of labour inspectors and a budget deficit in the State Secretariat of Labour; 60 posts for labour inspectors had now been created in order to overcome these shortcomings. These labour inspectors were employed under sections 390 and 400 of the Labour Code in order to effectively oversee the application of the labour provisions in that Code, especially in sugar mills under the administration of the State and on individual private plantations. These inspectors were to ensure, inter alia, that the minimum wage be paid to agricultural workers, and that the measures dictated by the State Sugar Board (CEA) in an effort to improve the situation of Dominican and Haitian labourers were being taken, and in particular that workers be paid wage bonuses before the end of the harvest. Other types of measures had been taken as well, such as mechanising the harvesting of cane and having the cut cane weighed in the presence of the cane cutter who was then given chits (showing the number of the cart, the name of the cutter, the date and the exact weight of the cut cane) as proof of the work performed. These labourers also benefited from having products available on sale at reasonable prices, social assistance and medicines. All of these measures were designed to increase the wage earned by workers on sugar cane plantations. The Government representative gave the exact number of weighers at each mill. He also stated that in case of difficulties in the weighing process, the chief weigher could intervene to try to resolve the problem; all the same, inspectors had shown that it was difficult to cheat the cane cutters, since they had garnered great experience over many years and knew the precise weight of cut cane. Up to now, 12 weighers had been dismissed for committing irregularities in carrying out their duties; this indicated that the circulars issued by the CEA were being observed in practice.

With regard to the labourers' housing, the labour inspectors had found that in plantations administered by the State, there were adequate sanitary facilities, works stores and childcare centres. It was important to note that the works stores, previously under private ownership, which had lent itself to speculation, were owned by the State, and offered prices for food and medicines which were within the reach of the workers and which were controlled by the Government Price Stabilisation Institute. The labour inspectors had also been asked to make a detailed report on the situation of agricultural workers on plantations with a view to improving the situation of workers of Dominican Republic and Haitian origin who were resident in the country. Circular No. 789 of 20 October 1988 contained provisions and recommendations to plantation administrators in relation to contracting Dominican Republic and Haitian manpower and in connection with the sugar cane harvest.

In regard to wages, the Government representative explained that there was a policy of wage bonuses, and that no plantation worker received a wage below the level of the statutory minimum wage. Nor were wages deferred, they were instead paid directly to the worker. Circular No. 111 of 11 November 1988 set forth provisions on wages: the price for sugar-cane was 7 pesos and 50 centavos per ton. To this was added the bonuses offered for cutting a set number of tons, and which were now paid at the same time as wages were paid. The bonus was 1 peso per ton, which increased the amount to 8 pesos and 50 centavos per ton of sugar-cane. In addition, the labourer received 2 pesos and 50 centavos when he or she cut more than two tons. All this, together with incentives granted by the CEA, had increased the real wages of the workers. In addition, thanks to newly introduced mechanisation, a worker's output was around 22.65 tons per load and per cart. In a study done in the state cane mills by the Secretariat of Labour, it had been shown that between 1 April 1988 and 30 May 1989, there had been a monthly average of 11,850 labourers and 3,623,205 tons of sugar-cane had been cut in that period. When this figure was divided by the number of national and foreign labourers, the average was 50.55 tons per worker per month, which meant 2.14 tons per worker per day. When multiplied by the real price per ton, which was 8 pesos and 50 centavos each worker was earning 18 pesos and 19 centavos per day, representing an increase of 51 per cent over and above the statutory minimum wage for rural workers which was 12 pesos per day. In addition the representative stated that if account were taken of the wage bonus given at the end of the harvest to each worker who cut more than 150 tons, this increased the wage by 5.25 per cent, for a total of 23 pesos and 52 centavos per day, which was 96 per cent in excess of the minimum wage.

It was also envisaged that the Labour Code. in particular sections 200, 201, 202. and 203 will be modified so as to eliminate finally the practice of wage payments being made in tokens, promissory notes, or vouchers. It was hoped that the National Congress would approve this modification so as to give full effect to section 187 of the Labour Code which provides that wages must be paid immediately and directly in legal tender.

In relation to Convention No. 105, the Government representative stated that the problem of Haitian workers in the Dominican Republic was a difficult one. especially given the economic, social and historical conditions of the two countries. The Government of the Dominican Republic was perfectly aware of the problem and of the shared material interests of the island: this had to be taken into account but with prudence so as not to harm the islands resources and national interests. The Government of the Dominican Republic had the firm political will to seek solutions to this problem; its willingness to receive ILO missions, which were afforded all necessary facilities, stood as proof of this. On the occasion of the most recent direct contacts mission, the President of the Republic had established a commission charged with studying the possible ways of finding human and legal solutions to the problem of Haitian agricultural workers. This commission was made up of personages from all social and economic sectors of the country. The problem was an economic one, imposing obligations on both countries which shared a common border yet had different economic and social characteristics. At this time there were about one million Haitian nationals who had crossed the border illegally in search of better economic prospects and who were not being pursued by the immigration authorities of the Dominican Republic. Complaints had been made against the Government, but they had come from a trade union leader who had been expelled from the trade union federation to which he had belonged; these complaints had been made more for political than trade union purposes. and they had been disavowed by his former organisation.

Forced or compulsory labour for nationals or foreigners did not exist in the Dominican Republic; this was shown by the fact that, although sugar-cane being the backbone of the economy of the Dominican Republic, the amount of sugar-cane harvested in the years since the suspension of the agreements between the Dominican Republic and the Republic of Haiti had diminished considerably. This was also indicated by the fact that if there were a desire to resort to forced labour, in a country where there were one million illegal Haitian residents and well-organised police and armed forces, it would have been very easy to recruit the 30,000 to 40,000 persons required for the sugar-cane harvest. Instead, the Government had been obliged to close two sugar mills to take account of this reduction in manpower.

The Government representative stated that at the beginning of the harvest, the CEA had conducted a publicity campaign using the mass media in both the Dominican Republic and in Haiti in order to encourage the contracting of agricultural workers, informing them of the new minimum wage, social programmes (medical and social services), working conditions (hours of work, housing, provision of subsidised foodstuffs and other social benefits). Transport was also paid for persons voluntarily recurited.

The Government of the Dominican Republic was in compliance with Convention No 105 and was taking appropriate measures in this regard. The President of the Republic had named a high-level commission which had recently visited the Republic of Haiti in order to conclude an agreement concerning the situation of Haitian workers in the Dominican Republic. In addition, a formal request for technical assistance had been made to the Director-General of the ILO so that such an agreement would take into account all pertinent international labour standards. The ILO had also been asked to designate an international legal expert specialised in labour standards who could, together with legal experts from the Dominican Republic and Haiti, study the extent of legal standards necessary so as to adopt legislation which would be in complete conformity with the international Conventions ratified by the Dominican Republic.

The Workers' members deeply regretted the fact that the Conference Committee had been discussing this case involving the Dominican Republic for many years, and almost always in the same terms. Despite comments made by the Committee of Experts and the Conference Committee, regular observations appearing in the reports of the present Committee (a special paragraph had been included on the case involving the Dominican Republic in the 1988 report), a Commission of Inquiry in 1983 and a direct contacts mission in 1988, there had been practically no results apart from the announcement of the appointment of 60 labour inspectors. The Government had not sent any report and had not replied to any direct request or observation made by the Committee of Experts concerning Convention No. 105. Contrary to the Government's allegations, the legislation and practice in the Dominican Republic were in contradiction to the provisions of this Convention, and this remained the case in spite of many direct contacts and repeated technical assistance by the Office. Although poverty in Haiti could explain the fact that many people cross the border to seek work in the neighbouring country, this could not justify the continuing failure to take measures to give effect to Convention No. 105, in particular concerning regularisation of the status of Haitians who were on Dominican Republic territory. regularisation of procedures for recruitment and residence permits, and other matters referred to by the Committee of Experts. The Workers' members took note that when a trade union body presented claims or complaints in the Dominican Republic, its leaders were thrown out. The leaders who dared to take such action in that country should be congratulated.

The Workers' members wondered about the usefulness of pursuing, year after year, technical assistance from the Office where there had not been, in the short-term, any fundamental changes in the legislation or the practice in the Dominican Republic. Without a firm willingness to fully apply the right to freedom of association and to abolish all that is not in conformity with Convention No. 105 in the national legislation and practice, any further assistance from the ILO would be superfluous.

Without wishing to give up hope, since even the oldest, most serious problems could always be resolved some day, the Workers' members remained deeply concerned in face of the absence of valid and complete replies from the Government.

The Employers' members wished to stress the key points in relation to Convention No. 95, to wit the working conditions for Haitian workers in the Dominican Republic and their legal status, and particularly whether they were working on a legal or an illegal basis and whether force was involved in certain instances. These basic problems had been before the present Committee for a number of years. As to working conditions, the report of the Commission of Inquiry was available and the direct contacts mission had now taken place. The issues involved regular payment of wages, working hours and corresponding wages. the minimum wage, verification of the amount of work performed, payment in cash or with vouchers, facilities in relation to welfare, food and health, prompt payment of wages, wage advances and the Haitian workers, awareness of the working conditions and of their rights. The Employers' members wanted to know what in fact was going on, as opposed to what existed on paper. As indicated by the report of the Committee of Experts, the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry and the direct contacts mission, CEA circulars addressed these matters; however, information was not sufficient to say to what extent these circulars were implemented in practice. In its statement before this Committee, the Government had juggled a lot of figures but a written report stating the Government's position on law and practice in relation to each and every issue under examination was still lacking. The overall situation could be determined only on the basis of a comprehensive written report by the Government, which should give information on the results of labour inspections and which should cover private plantations as well as those run by the CEA.

The Employers' members thought the situation in relation to Convention No. 105 was even less clear. In the five points the Committee of Experts had highlighted, their report had mentioned the employment of Haitian workers, whereas the Government had stated earlier that Haitians were being employed but had no legal status and were, especially in the case of young people, being placed under pressure. There were many points here which called for clarification.

The Employers' members referred to the incident involving a fatal accident of a vehicle that had been transporting Haitian workers, with the participation of officials of the Dominican Republic. They also noted the Government's statement of its readiness to find a solution to the problems posed. Mention had been made of a committee to study the issues and make proposals, but according to the Committee of Experts' report, that national committee had fallen apart. For the Employers' members, three measures were essential: (1) the Government must see to it that the legal status of Haitian workers becomes clarified; (2) even if negotiations between the Dominican Republic and Haiti produced no results, national laws and regulations were to govern the conditions of work for these Haitians; (3) the competent authority had to see to it that the legal protections were applied in practice. Much was left to be done. At a minimum, the Government would have to prepare a written report addressing each point, so that the many pending questions could be clarified.

An Employer member of the Dominican Republic wished to present certain clarifications regarding the recruitment of Haitian workers He stated that neither the Republic of Haiti nor the Dominican Republic had the resources to stop illegal border crossings or illegal recruitment of Haitians. This problem before the present Committee was one of long standing, and it was necessary to take into account certain indications and facts referred to by the Government of the Dominican Republic, since they reflected a change in attitude. These were concrete actions which should not be taken lightly. As such he cited statistics showing that fewer than one per cent of Haitian residents in his country were in cutting sugar cane, even though the CEA had had problems because of the shortage of manpower. If round-ups had really been the normal practice for the CEA, there would not have been such shortages this year; a round-up in the city of Santo Domingo alone would have sufficed if this were indeed the practice. Among the measures adopted by the Government and by employers to improve the situation of Haitian workers, mention should be made of the establishment of a study commission on the working and living conditions of Haitian workers, with instructions to adopt the measures necessary to improve those conditions and to comply with international undertakings made by the country The Dominican Republic was interested in reaching an agreement with the Republic of Haiti to clarify the situation of temporary workers, but to do so also required the willingness of the Haitian Government. As additional examples of concrete action, he cited the adoption of Act No. 224 of 1984 on the penal system which had substituted imprisonment for a sentence to carry out public works, thus eliminating the possibility that anyone might be sentenced to compulsory labour. Another positive development had been the re-initiation of discussions with the Haitian authorities in the search for satisfactory solutions, in the short term, and for the establishment of standards and procedures for the contracting of Haitian temporary workers. Other positive deeds that could be stressed were the request for ILO technical assistance, wage improvements and measures taken to increase the number of labour inspectors by 40 per cent. These could not be ignored since they were actions which showed serious purpose and a willingness to seek solutions to these problems.

In regard to Convention No. 95, mention should be made, in relation to comments by the Committee of Experts, that sections 184 et seq. of the Labour Code provided that: (1) wages shall be fixed and paid in full in legal tender (section 187), which implied an express prohibition on the payment of wages in kind; (2) there was a prohibition on deductions from wages, except deductions for trade union dues with the prior written authorisation of the worker, wage advances and legally authorised deductions such as those for social security contributions (section 193); (3) wages were to be paid directly and personally to the worker, one hour before the end of the normal work day, on the date agreed upon (section 188); (4) wage debts of workers enjoyed a privilege against the employers' debts, the workers' creditors and the employers' creditors; (5) the minimum wage was the lowest wage which could be paid to a worker; (6) the law provided for criminal penalties against an employer who makes unlawful deductions, deferred payment or did not pay wages in full. The non-respect for, or the non-payment of, the statutory minimum wage was also subject to criminal penalties. The employers had, along with the CEA, provided for a substantial increase in the price per ton of cut sugar cane. Wages were now paid weekly, which also served to avoid illegal trade in sugar cane received by the CEA. It was not necessary to adopt laws similar or identical to those already in force; rather the key point was applying the laws already in force and having trade unions and workers exercise their rights in accordance with legally established procedures.

The Workers' member of Greece stated that the present Committee was fortunately not a court. If it were, he said, there would be convictions for perjury. Concerning the application of Conventions Nos. 95 and 105, the Government representative of the Dominican Republic and the Employers' member of this country had denied the indications of the Committee of Experts regarding the wages of workers on sugar cane plantations, transport of Haitian workers to sugar cane plantations on vehicules chartered by the CEA and under military escort, and the round-ups of persons of Haitian origin (including young persons of second-generation Haitian origin who had Dominican Republic nationality). The Government representative had stated that this involved false information and unfounded accusations designed to support a tourism boycott of the country. The speaker wondered who was lying and who was spreading false information?

Referring to the suggestion by the Government representative that the trade union representatives who had lodged a complaint had been thrown out of their own trade union organisations, the speaker wished to know whether the representatives of these two trade union organisations cited in the report of the Committee of Experts were present at the International Labour Conference, and if not, why not. And if, as had just been stated, one million Haitians came to the Dominican Republic without any papers, why could not the authorities of that country regularise their status? The speaker wondered about the expediency of concluding an accord between the host country and the country of origin; this might be indispensable but in any case these workers should be able to have their status regularised and should be treated like human beings.

Finally, the speaker noted that the lengthy replies given had neither contained the substance desired, nor permitted the present Committee to overcome its feelings of impotence in the face of a situation which was intolerable from the point of view of freedom of association, freedom of labour and human rights.

The Worker member of the United Kingdom thanked the Government representative for the information provided. He also expressed gratitude to the Employer member of the Dominican Republic for independently assisting the Government in providing necessary facts. Paraphrasing Shakespeare ("Methinks they do protest too much"), the speaker said that forced recruitment had been the principal tool used by the Dominican Republic for years to compensate for the shortage of voluntary labour in the sugar cane harvest, where wages were low. He referred to the incident involving the truck accident as proving the involvement of the army of the Dominican Republic. He said that the accident had occurred on 27 January 1989, when a truck overturned while carrying 78 persons, including 73 Haitian cane workers who were being guarded (not accompanied) by two Dominican Republic soldiers on their way to a plantation near Santo Domingo. Forty-seven people had been killed, including one of the soldiers. Several survivors of the accident had told of being captured by the military and kept prisoner in military barracks before being put in the plantation-bound truck. Citing a number of detailed newspaper accounts, the speaker stated that the father of the truck driver had said his son regularly made trips for the CEA, and that the son had been hired by the military on behalf of the CEA, which paid him in their Santo Domingo offices. The truck driver corroborated this account, specifying the amount he was paid by the State for each worker transported. When the CEA initially denied involvement in transporting Haitian cane cutters, the National Federation of Truckowners (FENATRADO) had publicly contradicted this. FENETRADO had made public a document signed by a military commander authorising the shipment of 75 Haitian workers and had stated that such transport was regularly engaged in at the direction of the military. The only way to get to the ultimate truth in this case would be to send independent observers who could be present during the entire period of the harvest. He wondered if it would be possible for the ILO to do this. Until the evidence was in, the matter had to be pursued. The information provided by the Government had not been satisfactory. Serious infringements of Convention No. 105 had been taking place for many years now and the case had to be pursued until resolved.

A Government representative of Haiti, the Minister of Social Affairs, wished to recall several matters. The central question in this discussion had already been brought before the present Committee on a number of occasions and had been the subject of an inquiry in 1982-1983 which had issued recommendations to the Governments of Haiti and the Dominican Republic concerning the application of certain Conventions ratified by those two countries. Since then the government regime in Haiti had changed, and since 1985-1986 there had been no agreement authorising recruitment of Haitians to work in the Dominican Republic. Nonetheless, Haitian workers were continuing to go to the Dominican Republic and there were many problems in connection with this.

In regard to Conventions Nos. 95 and 105, the Government of Haiti wished to concur in the observations and recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry in 1983 and of the supervisory bodies on the application of standards, since the ILO is an international institution with jurisdiction, in a sense, over problems involving labour and working conditions throughout the world, and it is an institution which had to ensure respect for its Conventions by ratifying States. In 1988, his Government had, in agreement with the Government of the Dominican Republic requested a direct contacts mission in the two countries in order to assess the situation on the spot.

One week before the speaker's departure from Haiti to attend this Conference, he had received a high-level delegation from the Dominican Republic which had averred the good will and the good faith of the Government of the Dominican Republic concerning measures to take towards improving the situation of Haitian workers. The long-standing problem was in fact very complex, and it had been rather neglected by previous government regimes. The general crisis Haiti was facing means that unemployed peasants were compelled to leave to find work elsewhere, without it being possible for any national solution to be found to the problem. For this reason, his Government had let the delegation of the Dominican Republic which had come to Haiti know that it was ready to seek a solution on the basis of negotiations and perhaps even an agreement between the two States. Such an agreement should deal with two aspects.

The first was that the Government of the Dominican Republic should implement the recommendations made by the Commission of Inquiry, which had been taken up later in comments of the supervisory bodies. This meant granting legal status to Haitian workers who were already in the Dominican Republic and whose situation was considered irregular and illegal. In addition, a distinction should be made regarding Haitians who had lived for many years in the Dominican Republic and who could be granted resident status as well as a work permit and a residence permit. Moreover, under the law of the Dominican Republic, Haitians who had been born and lived in the Dominican Republic should be recognised as having Dominican Republic nationality or should be granted resident status. In relation to working conditions, housing, social security and so forth, Haitian workers should be treated the same as Dominican Republic workers and should have the same legal entitlement to benefits in case of sickness or accident; this applied equally to the housing and sanitary conditions on the "bateys".

The second point was that to the extent that the Government of the Dominican Republic followed up on these recommendations, which involved a plan for regularising the status of Haitians in the Dominican Republic, the Government of Haiti was willing to consider the possibility of an agreement on the migration of Haitian workers. This would involve the Government of the Dominican Republic giving the necessary guarantees so that Haitian workers would have legal papers permitting them to move about, to receive prior to their departure a clear and explicit contract of employment explaining the work to be done, the wages, the housing conditions, the payment system, etc.

The third point was that such negotiations should necessarily include the ILO since there was already a legal procedure under way in accordance with the ILO standards and since the matter had in a way already been adjudicated in the ILO. The Haitian Government called for the Governments of Haiti and of the Dominican Republic to jointly request ILO technical assistance so that there could be machinery on the spot which would permit verification of the follow-up given to the recommendations.

Fourthly, the Government of Haiti also suggested the establishment of a Haitian-Dominican Republic mixed commission composed of representatives of the private sector, the trade unions and the Governments of the two countries which would also watch to see whether the agreement was being respected and which could even serve to arbitrate in case of a conflict in interpretation.

Moreover, the Government of Haiti urged that it be authorised to send periodically a national commission to investigate the situation of Haitian workers in the Dominican Republic and to report to the Haitian Government. Finally, his Government urged that there be a corps of Haitian inspectors and superintendents who could work alongside Haitian workers on the "bateys" in order to help them formulate their claims and assist them in resolving problems.

In conclusion, the Government representative of Haiti thanked the representative of the Dominican Republic for having provided information on certain measures taken by his Government, particularly the establishment of a national commission composed of independent persons. He indicated that it was a human tragedy that workers were subjected to conditions of this sort and that the Conference Committee on Standards had not found any solution after having examined the question many times.

The Government representative of the Dominican Republic stated that his country and the Republic of Haiti shared the same island and that the economic situation of both countries was extremely difficult, although even more so in Haiti. He indicated that, as the Secretary for Social Affairs of the Republic of Haiti had said, the social and economic situation in that country was dramatic, in both urban and rural areas, and the same could be said for the Dominican Republic. The problem had perhaps not always been tackled with the same energy the Dominican Republic was now bringing to bear, but, as the Employer member of the Dominican Republic had pointed out, it was necessary to have two parties to conclude an agreement. The Republic of Haiti was now moving towards democracy and with this development it was hoped that agreements could be concluded so as to resolve these problems. The Government representative referred to a letter from the Minister of Social Affairs of the Republic to the highlevel mission which had recently visited Haiti. The letter made four main points: (1) implementation of the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry which had visited Haiti in 1982-1983; (2) renewal of an agreement covering various forms of payment, freedom of association, the conclusion of individual contracts of employment and other working conditions; (3) a request by both Governments for ILO technical assistance; (4) authorisation granted to the Government of the Dominican Republic to have a Haitian mission visit the Dominican Republic to verify implementation of the agreement.

The Government representative stated that his country sincerely wished to respect the provisions of Convention No. 105 and to this end the Government had taken effective measures, as shown by the statistics presented. It had been unfortunate that in this Committee it had been said that if it were a court, there would have been convictions for perjury. The problem was a critical one and the direct contacts mission that had visited the Dominican Republic, although it had not stayed long, had stated in its report that it was not in a position to verify the nature of the recruitment or to know exactly where it took place. According to the Government representative, this mission had not been able to establish whether it was voluntary or forced recruitment, since there was no proof of maltreatment of Haitian nationals, much less of forced labour. It was true that a lot of propaganda has appeared in the press; but any journalist who went to a developing country in Latin America or Africa could find and write about desperate situations which were much worse than what was happening in the Dominican Republic. He averred that in no country of Latin America were the rights of citizens and public freedoms enjoyed as much as in the Dominican Republic.

With regard to wages, he stated that statistics had been placed before the present Committee in relation to Convention No. 95. They showed that under Decision No. 188 of 1988, a minimum wage had been set for agricultural workers, that it was paid directly, as ensured by section 187 of the Labour Code, and that in addition, national and Haitian workers who worked in sugar cane cutting earned wages that exceeded the minimum wage by 51 per cent and by 96 per cent when additional bonuses where counted. A serious effort had been made in the Dominican Republic to respect and comply with ILO standards. If the Dominican Republic made contacts with the ILO to request technical assistance it was because this Organisation was established to assist and advise countries encountering serious economic problems as in the case of the Dominican Republic. It was a duty on the part of the Organisation to provide such assistance so as to permit the conclusion of agreements to bring an end to these problems. The Government representative said he had not indicated that in the past there had been no infringements of the Conventions; rather, he had stated that it could not be denied that at the present time serious efforts were being made and that some progress had been made.

The Workers' members inquired whether it would be possible to send, for example, one or more ILO observers to follow the actual situation in the sugar cane plantations over a certain length of time and to determine what was to be done. They also wondered whether within the next few months, the amendments needed in the legislation of the Dominican Republic would be made so as to bring it into conformity with Conventions Nos. 87, 95, 98 and 105.

The Government representative stated that it seemed that the Dominican Republic was being compelled to do what the Workers' member wanted. He had agreed with their statement. Nevertheless, in relation to one of the points raised by the Government representative Haiti, that permission has already been granted to have a verification commission visit the Dominican Republic; also, the two Governments had decided to request ILO assistance. He also said that the Government of his country was making all possible efforts, not just promises, in the sense of concrete actions such as contacts with the Haitian Government. He stated that the Ministry of Labour, which the speaker heads, would ensure through its inspectors that international labour standards in force in the Dominican Republic were being respected. Once he returned home, he would send the ILO a detailed report on the progress made up to now; with a view to satisfying the Workers' members, he would send a list of the names of the new labour inspectors and would indicate the budget of the Labour Secretariat, which had been increased by 2.26 million pesos to total 6.9 million pesos.

The Workers' members proposed that this case be mentioned in a special paragraph of the Conference Committee's report. The Employers' members agreed, provided the conclusions would refer specifically to the application of Conventions Nos. 95 and 105.

The Government representative reiterated the political will on the part of his Government to respect the Conventions it had ratified and he recalled the efforts it had made towards this end. The Government considered it unjust to have this case mentioned in a special paragraph.

The Committee, taking note of the direct contacts which took place in October 1988, expressed its extreme concern over the situation of Haitian workers.

The Committee regretted that once again no government report had been received and that the Government representative had merely provided some information in regard to labour inspection and minimum wages.

The Committee stressed that there had been no progress, either in terms of legislation or in practice, on essential points raised over a number of years by the Commission of Inquiry, the Committee of Experts and the Conference Committee.

The Committee further noted that the Dominican Republic had requested ILO assistance in order to ensure the application of the Conventions in both its legislation and in practice. In this regard, the Committee considered that special efforts were called for so that the ILO could, as from the next harvest, verify the situation and ascertain on the spot that improvements which had been promised but were still awaited had in fact been made. The Committee insisted upon the need for the Government to take the necessary measures whose implementation should be verified in practice.

The Committee also noted that the Government had requested ILO assistance in drawing up an agreement with Haiti concerning the migration of workers. The Committee trusted that any agreement drawn up with ILO assistance would particularly heed the comments of the supervisory bodies. The Committee also trusted that, whether or not such an agreement were concluded, the Government of the Dominican Republic would without delay take the measures necessary to give full effect to the comments made by the ILO supervisory bodies.

The Committee decided to mention this case in a special paragraph of its general report.

Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 1988, Publication: 75th ILC session (1988)

See under Convention No. 105, as follows:

A Government representative stated that since 16 August 1986 his country had entered into a different political and economic period and that they were now concerned to correct fundamental errors and to reconstruct the nation's forces. This did not imply recognition of the accusation made with respect to non-compliance with Conventions Nos. 98 and 105. In relation to Convention No. 105. In relation to Convention No. 105 it had not ruled out that violations of this Convention had been committed in the past, but the Government had now adopted remedial measures which respected human rights. Amongst others these included the need to seek out and repress the recruitment of foreign workers and their clandestine employment. At present, they were carrying out periodic investigations in regard to clandestine employment in the sugar plantations. Illegal immigration from Haiti was very difficult to control. His country did not wish to carry out mass repatriation in applying, with police help, the laws concerning migration and health. Clandestine employment and its inherent wrongs derived from the social and economic conditions of Haiti.

In regard to Convention No. 98, he stated that no legal text prevented a worker, national or foreign, from enjoying the rights to live and to work, or to join a trade union, the organisation of which was provided for in the Labour Code. Haitian workers were, in every respect, entitled to the same rights in regard to employment as foreign or Dominican workers. Labour legislation was applied without any difference to foreign workers. Given that the 1983 Commission of Inquiry had taken place in an era in which Government authorities neglected to show the attention that it should have to a number of crucial problems, his Government had made a request to the Director-General of the ILO for a direct contacts mission to be undertaken in the Dominican Republic as soon as possible.

The Workers' members stated that this case had been discussed for several years but that the situation remained unchanged. A new and interesting element in this case was the official request by the Government for a high-level direct contacts mission to be carried out. This mission should look into all problems, it should involve the Government, employers' organisations and trade unions, and it should draw up recommendations in order to bring about the necessary changes in law and practice. Referring to Convention No. 95 they stated that this Convention represented protection for people who lived in acute poverty. As yet no satisfactory reply had been given, either to the observations of the Committee of Experts or to the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry in regard to this intolerable situation. In regard to Convention No. 98, they regretted the violation of the trade union rights of rural workers who had been excluded from the provisions of the Labour Code, and that the Government had merely given a promise to consider draft legislation. They stressed the importance of the agricultural sector which in their opinion merited special attention. In relation to Convention No. 105 they referred to the unacceptable situation of Haitian plantation workers, which, although frequently illegal, was tolerated by the Government as well as exploited by employers. Having taken into consideration the good will that the Government had shown, they proposed that the case be mentioned in a special paragraph in order to emphasise the importance both of the problem and the Government's willingness to resolve it. They hoped that the mission requested by the Government would contribute to the improvement of the situation in the two countries.

The Employers' members observed that this case had been under discussion since 1973 and that according to the report of the Committee of Experts specific replies to important questions had still not been received. In regard to Convention No. 95, the 1983 Commission of Inquiry had made specific recommendations for wage protection. In particular, this concerned the Payment of wages in negotiable vouchers, and the observance of minimum wages on sugar plantations where wages were based on output, that is, on the quantity of sugar cane harvested. The Government representative had not replied in a specific manner to any of these questions. The situation was the same for Convention No. 98. The Commission of Inquiry had drawn up a series of recommendations in regard to the application of this Convention to Haitian workers who were employed on sugar cane plantations. No specific measures had been taken in response to these, and the statement by the Government representative confirmed previous statements on the difficult in controlling those people who had entered the country illegally. In reference to Convention No. 105 the Report of the Committee of Experts indicated that although Haitian workers were not legally hired but were obliged by force to carry out the work in the Dominican Republic. The Government had mentioned illegal immigration and the problems therein, but had not given any information on whether or not new agreements between Haiti and the Dominican Republic had been concluded. The Employers' members considered that the only new item in the discussion had been the proposal to send a direct contacts mission, but this did not alter the fact that the Government representative had not mentioned anything which had actually changed the situation or would change it in the future. They remarked that three important Conventions had been violated in the Dominican Republic and regretted the discrepancy that existed between the standards and their application.

The Government representative of Haiti announced his satisfaction with the statement made by the Government representative of the Dominican Republic in which he spoke of the willingness of his Government to put an end to the errors which had been made in the past. However, he was surprised that the requirement to observe the Conventions was considered to be a punishement and that Haitians had benefited from the good will of the Dominican Republic when this behaviour was in any case required by the Conventions. The case caused great anxiety to his Government and was of great interest to Haitian citizens. He considered it opportune that a direct contacts mission was to be undertaken but stressed that the carrying out of this mission should not end the discussion of this case by the Committee.

The Worker member of the Dominican Republic stated that Convention No. 98 continued to be violated by private and public employers and that the Labour Code contained provisions which did not comply with the Convention. As well, in one specific case, in the Dominican Republic the Executive Power had frozen the application of a collective agreement. Notwithstanding this, the present Government could not be accused of having an anti-trade union attitude. Recently tripartite dialogue had taken place and had led to a draft amendment being presented to the National Congress to change those provisions which did not comply with Convention No. 98. She stated that Haitian workers were members of trade unions, with rights to vote and be elected. The problem which did exist affected all workers and concerned the establishment of trade unions.

Referring to Convention No. 95 she said that the problem of the exclusion of agricultural workers from the Labour Code continued to exist. In relation to Convention No. 105 she remarked that there was a problem, which was widely known. She believed that if the Dominican Republic was traditionally going to seek Haitian workers for sugar cane harvesting, the Government was obliged to offer these workers normal and adequate living and working conditions. She stated she was satisfied with the present positive attitude of the Government, which was aware of the problem and had proposed that a mission visit the country in order to find a solution to the problem.

The Worker member for the United States of America emphasised the importance of the case which had now been discussed by the present Committee for the fifth consecutive time. Noting that the case concerning Convention No. 105 had appeared in a special paragraph in 1984 and 1987, he insisted on the necessity to undertake action, which could take the form of a direct mission.

The Workers' members proposed that the text of the conclusion appear in a special paragraph of the report of the present Committee. They stated that they were satisfied with the frank and constructive discussion which had taken place.

The Employers' members agreed to the Workers' members' proposal. They repeated that the special paragraph was not a penalty but highlighted a particular problem. They hoped that the text of the special paragraph would reflect the hopes that the direct contacts mission had given rise to.

The Committee took note of the information provided by the Government representative, as well as the extensive and detailed discussion which took place in the Committee while expressing its concern as regards the situation. The Committee welcomed the proposal made by the Government to invite an ILO direct contacts mission. The Committee expressed the hope that this mission would assist in removing the various discrepancies which existed regarding the application of these Conventions as well as others covered by the Commission of Inquiry in 1983, and that the Government would be able to report progress in law and practice the following year. The Committee decided to include this case in a special paragraph of its general report.

Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 1987, Publication: 73rd ILC session (1987)

A Government representative stated that there had been no changes since the last amendments to the legislation which had been communicated to the Committee. Information concerning the concrete measures that had been taken to implement this legislation would be sent during the next few days.

The Employers' members stated that the case seemed to them to be quite clear-cut. No information on the application of this Convention had been submitted, either in 1986 or in 1985, and this year nothing in writing, nor any other explanation dealing with the substance of the question, had been received. They thought that it was not necessary to repeat the well-known points which had often been raised by the Committee of Experts concerning the protection of wages. They felt that, given the absence of explanations from the Government and after observing that there ha progress on this matter, this case should be mentioned in the report of this Committee.

The Workers' members agreed entirely with what the Employers' members had expressed and emphasised the seriousness of the observations of the Committee of Experts concerning, inter alia, the non-respect for minimum wages and the payment of wages in kind.

The Government representative stated that for reasons of force majeure his Government had not been able to present the documents that confirmed the progress that had been achieved in this field; the progress had been considerable as far as minimum wages were concerned.

See also under Convention No. 98, as follows:

A Government representative stated that the situation had changed in that in 1987, just as in the two previous years, no Haitian workers had been engaged. Furthermore, there had been contacts between the Governments of Haiti and the Dominican Republic with a view to obtaining a complete and extensive revision of the process of recruiting Haitian workers.

The Workers' members stated that they had no information relating to the hiring of Haitian workers in 1987. In contrast, as far as 1986 was concerned they had received information according to which Haitian workers had been engaged and the existence of forced labour that been reported. As far as the right to collective bargaining was concerned there were serious difficulties since trade union representative did not enjoy any protection and could be dismissed. They felt it was impossible to have a clear view of the situation because of the lack of information and the absence of a reply from the Government, circumstances which prevented any dialogue. They considered that in spite of what the Government representative had said, this case should be mentioned in a special paragraph. They hoped that the information requested would be provided as quickly as possible and that the necessary progress would be achieved so as to ensure full conformity with this Convention and Conventions Nos. 95 and 105.

The Employers' members observed that no changes had occurred in the legislation. They stated that in spite of the Government representative's statement, there was informal recruitment of Haitian workers and this recruitment took place in conditions which were far from satisfactory, if not deplorable. They observed that no reply to the comments of the Committee of Experts had been received and stated that as long as no steps were taken to put the legislation into conformity with the Convention, this should be indicated in the report. The Employers' members supported the Workers' members' proposal that this case be mentioned in a special paragraph.

The Government representative stated that there was no forced labour in the Dominican Republic. He said that for two years no Haitian workers had been recruited and that Haitians working in the Dominican Republic enjoyed the same rights as Dominican workers. What did exist was clandestine work by Haitian workers who illegally crossed the border. This was a phenomenon which could be controlled only with difficulty. Nevertheless the authorities of the tow countries were working in good faith to resolve these problems. He hoped that the good faith of the Government, proof of which was its appearance before this Committee, would also be acknowledged.

The Committee, as concerns the application of Convention No. 95 and the Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 (No. 105), expressed its regret that the Government had not provided a reply which could be examined by the Committee of Experts on the numerous questions raised in its comments with regard to the protection of wages and including important aspects of the recommendations which had been formulated by the Commission of Inquiry established under article 26 of the ILO Constitution to examine the application of certain Conventions, including Nos. 95 and 105. The Committee hope that the Government would be able to take the necessary measures and that in its next report it would provide information on the progress achieved. The Committee decided to mention this case in a special paragraph.

See also under Convention No. 98, as follows:

A Government representative stated that the situation had changed in that in 1987, just as in the two previous years, no Haitian workers had been engaged. Furthermore, there had been contacts between the Governments of Haiti and the Dominican Republic with a view to obtaining a complete and extensive revision of the process of recruiting Haitian workers.

The Workers' members stated that they had no information relating to the hiring of Haitian workers in 1987. In contrast, as far as 1986 was concerned they had received information according to which Haitian workers had been engaged and the existence of forced labour that been reported. As far as the right to collective bargaining was concerned there were serious difficulties since trade union representative did not enjoy any protection and could be dismissed. They felt it was impossible to have a clear view of the situation because of the lack of information and the absence of a reply from the Government, circumstances which prevented any dialogue. They considered that in spite of what the Government representative had said, this case should be mentioned in a special paragraph. They hoped that the information requested would be provided as quickly as possible and that the necessary progress would be achieved so as to ensure full conformity with this Convention and Conventions Nos. 95 and 105.

The Employers' members observed that no changes had occurred in the legislation. They stated that in spite of the Government representative's statement, there was informal recruitment of Haitian workers and this recruitment took place in conditions which were far from satisfactory, if not deplorable. They observed that no reply to the comments of the Committee of Experts had been received and stated that as long as no steps were taken to put the legislation into conformity with the Convention, this should be indicated in the report. The Employers' members supported the Workers' members' proposal that this case be mentioned in a special paragraph.

The Government representative stated that there was no forced labour in the Dominican Republic. He said that for two years no Haitian workers had been recruited and that Haitians working in the Dominican Republic enjoyed the same rights as Dominican workers. What did exist was clandestine work by Haitian workers who illegally crossed the border. This was a phenomenon which could be controlled only with difficulty. Nevertheless the authorities of the tow countries were working in good faith to resolve these problems. He hoped that the good faith of the Government, proof of which was its appearance before this Committee, would also be acknowledged.

As concerns the application by the Dominican Republic of Convention No. 98, the Committee took note of the explanations provided by the Government representative. It observed with regret that no information had been provided in reply to the comments of the Committee of Experts. This Committee hoped that the necessary action would be taken soon and that the progress that had been achieved would be reported. The Committee decided to mention this case in a special paragraph of its report.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2023, published 112nd ILC session (2024)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2018, published 108th ILC session (2019)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2012, published 102nd ILC session (2013)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2011, published 101st ILC session (2012)

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2011, published 101st ILC session (2012)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2006, published 96th ILC session (2007)

The Committee notes the information provided in the Government’s report. It would, however, like to receive information concerning the following points.

Article 3, paragraph 1, and Article 12 of the Convention. Conditions of payment of wages on plantations. With regard to the situation of migrant workers on sugar cane plantations, which has been the subject of comments for a number of years, the Committee notes the Government’s statements to the effect that labour relations between employers and workers have improved, notably due to regular inspections and the appointment of six labour inspectors in sugar cane-growing areas. The Government indicates that wages are paid every week for agricultural workers and every 15 days for other workers, in all establishments. The Committee also notes the Government’s indication that the agreement reached in February 2000, between the Dominican Republic and Haiti, on the employment conditions for their nationals, has been implemented without any difficulties, thanks to collaboration between the State Secretariat for Labour, the State Secretariat for Foreign Affairs, the State Sugar Board and the National Sugar Institute (INAZUCAR). While welcoming the measures taken and the progress reported in this field, the Committee would be grateful if the Government would communicate more specific information, including statistical data and extracts of official documents, on the results achieved through the strengthening of staff numbers and through action taken by the labour inspectorate in the specific area of wage protection. The Committee recalls, in this regard, that a similar request was made in its previous observation on the application of Convention No. 29. It therefore hopes that the Government will provide, in its next report, detailed information confirming the improvement of the conditions of migrant workers employed on sugar plantations.

Article 8. Limits on wage deductions. The Committee notes that the Labour Code still does not stipulate limits on the deductions from wages authorized under section 201. While noting that the Government plans to study this issue at the next meeting of the Labour Advisory Council (CCT) and recalling that the purpose of this provision of the Convention is to protect workers against excessive or unfair reductions in their wages and guarantee a minimum subsistence income, the Committee requests the Government to keep it informed of any developments in this respect.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2000, published 89th ILC session (2001)

Article 8 of the Convention.  The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its report concerning the deductions from wages authorized by law by virtue of section 201(1) of the Labour Code. The Committee notes the ceiling on deductions envisaged in section 201(4), which concerns the repayment of loans granted by banking institutions. Nevertheless, no ceiling is established for other deductions authorized by this section of the Labour Code. The Committee recalls once again that, in accordance with this Article of the Convention, in all cases in which deductions from wages are allowed, limits for such deductions have to be fixed. The Committee once again requests the Government to provide information on the measures which have been adopted or are envisaged to give effect to this provision of the Convention.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2000, published 89th ILC session (2001)

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in reply to its previous comments. The Committee notes that since it made its previous comments the situation of the sugar plantations owned by the Dominican State (State Sugar Board) has changed. The plantations have been leased to private enterprises, which have been managing the plantations and recruiting workers since the sugar cane harvest in November 1999. Before the tender was issued for the leasing of the plantations, the State Sugar Board terminated all the employment contracts of the persons working in the various plantations. All workers were paid for their work and fortnightly wages owed to them and workers over 60 years of age were granted the corresponding pension. The Committee also notes that the private enterprises which are currently managing the sugar plantations have concluded new employment contracts. The labour inspectorate is discharging its functions to determine the working conditions in sugar refineries and plantations, and to ensure compliance with labour standards. The Committee also notes that the private administrators of plantations have indicated their readiness to pay their workers’ wages on a weekly basis, and that this practice has now been initiated, and have undertaken not to retain a proportion of the wage for payment at the end of the harvest. The Committee requests the Government to continue providing information on this new situation and on the results of the work of the labour inspectors.

The Committee welcomes the conclusion of a technical agreement between the Dominican Republic and the Republic of Haiti on 23 February 2000 determining the terms and conditions for the recruitment of their nationals. The Committee also notes that the above agreement has to be ratified by the Congresses of the countries party to the agreement. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would report on the ratification of the agreement and, in particular, on the measures taken for its application and the results achieved.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1998, published 87th ILC session (1999)

Further to the previous direct request, the Committee notes the information supplied by the Government in its report, in particular the information on the laws that permit deductions from wages by virtue of section 201, item (1) (Article 8 of the Convention).

The Committee notes that the Government's report describes the reasons for which deductions may be made, but does not mention the limit of permitted deductions. It draws the Government's attention to the requirement of Article 8 that the extent to which deductions from wages may be made should be prescribed regarding the permitted cases of deductions. The Committee again asks the Government to indicate measures taken or envisaged to give effect to this provision of the Convention.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1998, published 87th ILC session (1999)

Regarding the protection of wages in sugar plantations, the Committee earlier noted that the provisions of the Labour Code (promulgated by Act No. 16-92 of 29 May 1992) on the protection of wages are applicable to rural workers, including those in sugar plantations, by virtue of section 281, and asked the Government to provide information on its application in practice. The Committee also noted the comments received from the following workers' organizations: National Union of Agricultural Workers of Sugar and Similar Plantations (SINATRAPLASI); Union of Cane Cutters of Barahona Plant (SIPICAIBA); and Union of Workers of Agricultural and Similar Plantations of Barahona Plant (SITRAPLASIB).

The Government states in reply that measures had been taken to ensure reliable and correct weighing of the sugar cane by (a) installing computerized scales in certain sugar plantations, and (b) placing inspectors at each weighing, who are recommended by concerned non-governmental organizations.

The Government has also supplied, in reply to the Committee's previous comments, information concerning some Articles of the Convention as follows. Article 4 of the Convention: while the 1992 Labour Code does not contain provisions on partial payment of wages in kind, except for section 260 concerning domestic workers, yet, where, according to the Government, food or coupons for acquisition of goods are provided by some undertakings, such would be benefits complementing the payment of the wage in cash. Article 7: works stores do not exist in practice and what used to exist in sugar plantations have been abolished. Articles 14(b) and 15(d): as to the workers' information and records of wage payment, section 33 of Act No. 1896 on social security requires the employers with less than 50 workers to keep a book of wages and hours. However, according to the Government, it is expected that the State Secretariat of Labour would elaborate in the near future a document to be used as a book of wages and hours, as authorized under section 33 of Regulation No. 258-93 of 1 October 1993 concerning the application of the Labour Code. The Committee has taken due note of these indications.

With reference to the observation it made at its last session concerning Convention No. 105, the Committee recalls that the above-mentioned organizations consider that the amendments to the legislation, particularly the Labour Code and the various programmes announced by the Government, have led to no significant improvement in the conditions of Haitian workers employed on sugar plantations in the Dominican Republic. Their comments further included particular points concerning the application of the Convention: payment in wage tickets negotiable in the plantation is less common but still exists in some plantations (Articles 3 and 7); it is still common to retain a part of wages until the end of the harvest (Article 12(1) on regular payment); individual contracts are not generalized practice and workers are not adequately informed of the conditions of remuneration (Article 14).

The Committee notes that the Government has not replied to these points. It asks the Government to provide information, with particular reference to workers in sugar plantations, on measures taken to ensure the application in practice of the Labour Code and other legislative provisions concerning the protection of wages, in accordance with Article 16 of the Convention.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1996, published 85th ILC session (1997)

Article 4 of the Convention. Noting that the new Labour Code does not contain provisions on partial payment of wages in kind, except for section 260 concerning domestic workers, the Committee asks the Government to indicate whether in practice employers provide the workers with allowances in kind such as food and accommodation, and if so what measures have been taken to regulate the issue.

Article 7. Noting that the Code does not provide for works stores, the Committee asks the Government to indicate whether they exist in practice.

Article 8. The Committee notes that sections 196(3) and 201 of the Code prescribes the conditions for deductions from wages but that the extent of the deduction is set forth only in relation to repayment of credits granted by banks (section 201, item (4)). It draws the Government's attention to the requirement of the Convention that the extent to which deductions from wages may be made should be prescribed regarding all the permitted cases of deductions. Please indicate measures taken or envisaged to give effect to this provision of the Convention, and also provide information on the laws that permit deductions from wages by virtue of section 201, item (4).

Articles 14(b) and 15(d). The Committee is raising the question of workers' information in its observation in relation to the wage payment in sugar plantations. It also requests the Government to indicate, for all the workers in general, measures taken to ensure that they are informed of variable particulars of wages at each payment, and that records of wage payment are maintained.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1996, published 85th ILC session (1997)

Protection of wages in sugar plantations. In its previous observation, the Committee noted that the provisions of the Labour Code (promulgated by Act No. 16-92 of 29 May 1992) on the protection of wages are applicable to rural workers, including those in sugar plantations, by virtue of section 281, and asked the Government to provide information on its application in practice. The Government has supplied information on the application of the provisions of the Convention during the sugar-cane harvest in 1994-95.

The Committee notes that, since then, comments have been received concerning the application of several Conventions including this Convention to workers who are Haitian or of Haitian origin in sugar plantations, from the following workers' organizations: National Union of Agricultural Workers of Sugar and Similar Plantations (SINATRAPLASI); Union of Cane Cutters of Barahona Plant (SIPICAIBA); and Union of Workers of Agricultural and Similar Plantations of Barahona Plant (SITRAPLASIB).

Noting that the above comments of the workers' organizations were communicated in November 1996 to the Government for observations, the Committee requests the Government to supply its observations on the points raised in them so that the Committee will be able to examine them at its next session.

The Committee also asks the Government to supply information on the questions raised in the previous direct request which is again addressed to it.

[The Government is asked to report in detail in 1997.]

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

Article 4 of the Convention. Noting that the new Labour Code does not contain provisions on partial payment of wages in kind, except for section 260 concerning domestic workers, the Committee asks the Government to indicate whether in practice employers provide the workers with allowances in kind such as food and accommodation, and if so what measures have been taken to regulate the issue.

Article 7. Noting that the Code does not provide for works stores, the Committee asks the Government to indicate whether they exist in practice.

Article 8. The Committee notes that sections 196(3) and 201 of the Code prescribes the conditions for deductions from wages but that the extent of the deduction is set forth only in relation to repayment of credits granted by banks (section 201, item (4)). It draws the Government's attention to the requirement of the Convention that the extent to which deductions from wages may be made should be prescribed regarding all the permitted cases of deductions. Please indicate measures taken or envisaged to give effect to this provision of the Convention, and also provide information on the laws that permit deductions from wages by virtue of section 201, item (4).

Articles 14(b) and 15(d). The Committee is raising the question of workers' information in its observation in relation to the wage payment in sugar plantations. It also requests the Government to indicate, for all the workers in general, measures taken to ensure that they are informed of variable particulars of wages at each payment, and that records of wage payment are maintained.

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

The Committee notes the Government's reports and the new Labour Code (promulgated by Act No. 16-92 of 29 May 1992).

Protection of wages in sugar plantations. Further to its previous observation, the Committee notes with interest that the provisions of the new Labour Code concerning the protection of wages are applicable to rural workers, including those in sugar plantations, by virtue of section 281. It hopes that their application will be effectively ensured in practice and requests the Government to provide information in accordance with point V of the report form, including for instance extracts from official reports of labour inspectors. Please refer, in particular, to the following points.

1. Measures to guarantee observance of the statutory minimum wage. With reference to its previous observation, the Committee notes the information supplied by the Government concerning the wages for work on the sugar cane harvest which are higher than the minimum wage rates. It also notes the Government's indication that a group of 18 labour inspectors are specifically nominated to keep a full-time watch over the work of cane-cutters. The Committee asks the Government to supply information on the findings of these inspectors, including the number of plantations visited, the infringements of the provisions on wage payment of the Labour Code reported and the sanctions imposed.

2. Weighing the sugar cane. The Committee notes the Government's statement in reply to the previous observation that in spite of the agreement between the State Sugar Board (CEA) and the trade unions, the representatives of unions have not been able to be present at the weighing of cane. It requests the Government to continue to report on any progress made in this respect, to refer to the situation concerning the weighing of sugar cane in plantations that do not belong to CEA, and to supply information on the activities of labour inspectors on this issue.

3. Articles 3 and 7 (Payment of wages in cash and works stores). The Committee notes that the rural workers including those in sugar plantations are covered by the provisions of the Code concerning the payment of wages in legal tender (section 195), and the prohibition of payment in wage tickets (section 196). It also notes the Government's indication that the practice of cashing wage tickets in the stores set up by the National Price Stabilization Institute (INESPRE) has been discontinued. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the application in practice in sugar plantations of the above provisions of the Code as well as of section 208 (concerning the periodicity of wage payment, regarding Article 12 of the Convention) and of sanctions under section 211.

4. Article 14 (Workers' information). The Committee notes that the Government again refers to the role of labour inspectors in informing workers of their rights and relevant legislation. It notes that the Code does not contain provisions requiring that workers be informed, at the time of each payment of wages, of the particulars of their wages that may be subject to change. Please indicate any measures taken to give effect to this provision of the Convention.

The Committee is also addressing a direct request to the Government on certain points.

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

The Committee notes the Government's report and the discussion in the Conference Committee in 1991 on the application of Conventions Nos. 95 and 105 by the Dominican Republic.

Protection of wages in sugar plantations

In its previous observation, the Committee requested the Government to re-examine in the light of the Convention, the procedures for determining and paying wages. It also requested the Government to examine the possibility of associating workers' organisations and other social organisations with the monitoring of the weighing of sugar-cane so that this process is more open to scrutiny. The Committee hoped that programmes to sell food at low prices would be continued with greater vigour.

1. Measures to guarantee observance of the statutory minimum wage

In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that all workers employed in plantations are paid the statutory minimum wage, and it requested the Government to supply information on any adjustment of the minimum wage in agriculture and on the rates for the cutting and transport of sugar-cane.

The Committee noted the wage increase for the sugar-cane harvest in 1990-91 and considered that although the new rates for the cutting and transport of sugar-cane improved the chances of a greater number of cane-cutters earning the statutory minimum wage, the increase, while significant, was lower than the increase in the cost of living.

The Committee requested the Government to supply information on the wages that were actually paid to workers and to supply, for example, extracts of the payrolls of various state or private plantations.

The Committee notes that the Government supplied the wage rates for various agricultural tasks in plantations, but that no information was received concerning the wages actually paid, and that it is not therefore in a position to ascertain that cane-cutters are paid the minimum wage for an eight-hour day.

The Committee requests the Government to supply information on any measures that have been taken to guarantee the payment of the minimum wage and to indicate whether there have been increases in wages in the agricultural sector or for work on the sugar-cane harvest.

2. Weighing the sugar-cane

In its previous comments, the Committee also referred to the recommendation made by the Commission of Inquiry in paragraph 537 of its report concerning the introduction of more effective measures to ensure the accuracy of the weighing of cane, since cheating over the weighing of cane has been described as one of the most serious abuses suffered by cane-cutters.

The Committee notes with interest the Government's indications concerning the activities of special delegations set up in plantations under Decree No. 417/90 and the reports of the inspection services which describe some contraventions and the sanctions which were imposed.

The Committee requests the Government to supply information on the situation concerning the weighing of sugar-cane in plantations which do not belong to the State Sugar Board (CEA) and to state whether workers' organisations have been associated with the supervision of the weighing.

3. Articles 3 and 7 (payment of wages in cash and enterprise stores)

In paragraph 538 of its report, the Commission of Inquiry recommended that the practice of permitting the negotiation of wage tickets by workers in favour of third parties be discontinued and that, instead, arrangements be instituted to enable workers to receive advances on wages in cash.

The Committee notes the Government's indication in its report that the draft Labour Code will repeal section 200 of the current Labour Code and will abolish the possibility that currently exists for agricultural enterprises to make advances on wages in the form of wage tickets. It also states that at the present time advances of wages paid in wage tickets can be converted into cash in the stores set up by the National Price Stabilisation Institute (INESPRE), which is a partial solution to avoid abusive discounts. The Committee also notes the social development programme that is currently being carried out by the CEA in its plantations and sugar plants ("bateyes").

The Committee requests the Government to indicate how often wage tickets are converted into cash in the stores of the INESPRE.

4. Article 14 (workers' information)

The Committee requested the Government to supply information on any measures taken to ensure that all workers are informed of the conditions in respect of their wages.

In this regard, the Government states in its report that the inspectors operating in plantations have been instructed to provide advice to workers who require it. It adds that illiteracy and the lack of knowledge of Spanish among plantation workers makes it difficult to disseminate information.

The Committee requests the Government to supply information on what further measures have been taken or are envisaged to give effect to this requirement of the Convention.

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

The Committee notes the discussion in the Conference Committee in 1990 on the application of Conventions Nos. 95 and 105 and the Government's report. It also notes the comments on the application of Convention No. 95 made by the Independent Workers Confederation (CIT) in October 1990, a copy of which was transmitted to the Government so that it could make the observations that it considered appropriate. The Committee notes that the Government has not yet made observations in this respect.

The Committee also notes the report of the direct contacts mission which visited the country from 3 to 21 January 1991 at the request of the Government.

The Committee also refers to its comments under Convention No. 105.

A. Adoption of legislation to give effect to Convention No. 95

In the comments that the Committee has been making for a number of years, it has drawn attention to the need to adopt legislative measures to give effect to Articles 2, 3, 5, 6, 8 (paragraph 2), 10, 13 (paragraph 2), 14 and 15(b), of the Convention. The Committee notes that, with the few exceptions referred to below, the Government has not taken the measures that were requested. In paragraph 543 of the report that it made in 1983, the Commission of Inquiry on the employment of Haitian workers on the sugar plantations of the Dominican Republic also draws attention to the need for legislative changes to ensure the observance of the Convention, particularly in order to prohibit wage payments in the form of negotiable vouchers, to require the payment of wages directly to the worker, to establish a general prohibition for employers to limit the freedom of the worker to dispose of his wages, to regulate the assignment of wages and to provide for information of workers regarding the conditions governing their wages and deductions from wages.

B. Protection of wages in sugar plantations

1. Measures to guarantee observance of the statutory minimum wage. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that all workers employed in plantations are paid the statutory minimum wage, and it requested the Government to supply information on any adjustment of the minimum wage in agriculture and on the rates for the cutting and transport of sugar-cane.

The Committee notes that, in Resolution No. 2/90 of 28 September 1990, the National Wages Commission established for agricultural workers employed in any activity a minimum wage of RD$24.00 for a working day of eight hours, which would be proportionally increased or decreased where the working day is longer or shorter than eight hours.

The Committee notes circular No. 007 of the State Sugar Board (CEA) on rates of pay for cultivating and harvesting for the 1990-91 sugar-cane harvest, which set the rate for cane-cutters at RD$16.00 per tonne for unauthorised burnt cane with a bonus of RD$2.00 per tonne for green cane, to be paid against the corresponding receipts, thereby raising the pay to RD$18.00 per tonne.

The Committee notes with interest the increase in the above rates and the information contained in the report of the direct contacts mission that the new rates for the cutting and transport of sugar-cane improve the chances of a greater number of cane-cutters earning the statutory minimum wage, although it also notes that the increase, while significant, is lower than the increase in the cost of living.

The recommendations contained in paragraphs 533 to 536 of the report of the Commission of Inquiry set plantation administrations the task of guaranteeing the statutory minimum wage to all workers, irrespective of their output, for a working day of eight hours, with a proportional increase for longer hours of work, but without any deduction for periods in which workers who are employed on a regular basis are prevented from working as a result of factors which are not imputable to them. This would require the adoption of more uniform and regular working hours for cane-cutters, including the establishment of a reasonable limit on working hours.

The Committee notes that cane-cutters must cut a minimum of 1.5 tonnes of sugar-cane every day, at the rate of RD$16.00 (the rate per tonne), in order to obtain the statutory minimum wage of RD$24.00, as established for agricultural workers. Sources close to the workers and some of the workers who were consulted during the direct contacts mission stated that the output of cane-cutters depends largely on the quantity and quality of the cane that they are assigned to cut and the efficiency of the transporter in taking the cane to be weighed. Under normal conditions, a cane-cutter can achieve the output that is necessary to earn the minimum wage, although it is frequently the case, particularly in certain plantations, that daily output is decreased by restrictions on cutting that are imposed by the plantation, by the low quality of the cane, by environmental or health problems or by delays by the transporter in taking the cane to the point where it is weighed. Furthermore, cane-cutters are not given paid weekly rest days and therefore need to work all the days of the week. In certain cases the remuneration of cane-cutters is in fact the result of the work of various persons, partly because cane-cutters help each other to load the cane and send in one load the cane that has been cut by two of them, who therefore share the pay, and partly because in certain cases the cane-cutter is assisted by members of his family, women and children, who do not appear in the enterprise's list of workers.

The Committee requests the Government to supply information on the wages that were actually paid to workers during the 1990-91 sugar-cane harvest and to supply, for example, extracts of the payrolls of various state or private plantations, including information on the measures that have been taken to ensure that cane-cutters are paid the minimum wage for an eight-hour day.

2. Weighing the sugar-cane. In its previous comments, the Committee also referred to the recommendation made by the Commission of Inquiry in paragraph 537 of its report, that more effective measures should be taken to ensure the accuracy of the weighing of cane since cheating over the weighing of cane has been described as one of the most serious abuses suffered by cane-cutters.

The Committee notes that, according to the report of the direct contacts mission, many of those who were interviewed agreed that irregularities in the weighing of cane continued to exist and that they were generally perpetrated by weighers for their own benefit, and that the direct contacts mission was able to observe that in some cases cane-cutters were not present at the moment of weighing.

The Committee notes that in the "La Romana" a procedure has been introduced whereby cane-cutters are recompensed in proportion to the difference in weight between two weighings of the cane, if the first weighing is unknowingly imprecise.

The Committee notes that section 2 of Decree 417/90 provides that the special labour inspection delegations set up in plantations shall ensure the application of the terms of the contract of employment concluded by the worker.

The Committee requests the Government to supply information on the measures that have been taken to ensure that workers can monitor the weighing operation through their own representatives. It also requested the Government to supply copies of reports of the inspection services concerning the monitoring of weighing operations, any violations that are reported and the penalties that are imposed in state plantations and in plantations that do not belong to the CEA.

3. Articles 3 and 7 (Payment of wages in cash and enterprise stores). In paragraph 538 of its report, the Commission of Inquiry recommended that the practice of permitting the negotiation of wage tickets by workers in favour of third parties be discontinued and that, instead, arrangements be instituted to enable the workers to receive cash advances, as was already the case in "La Romana". There would be no objection to allowing workers to cash their wage tickets at stores to be established on the state-owned plantations in collaboration with the Price Stabilisation Institute, on the understanding that this would take the form of an advanced payment of wages by the employer to the worker and would be without any deduction or discount.

The Committee notes from the report of the direct contacts mission that, in CEA plantations, the "Casa Vicini", and in private plantations, cane-cutters continue to receive a chit when the cane is weighed, on which the tonnes and corresponding value are marked. Cane-cutters should receive their wages in cash every fortnight upon presentation of their chits. Nevertheless, because they have no savings, workers do not wait for payday but are obliged to exchange their chits for food in the private stores ("colmados") that exist in each "batey" (living area of plantations), or for cash from money-lenders, and that in each case there is a high discount. Subsequently, the persons who have been given the chits present them to the enterprise for payment, so that it may be said that in practice these chits, on which the amounts of cane that has been cut and delivered are marked, become a means for the payment of wages and circulate as negotiable papers in the "batey", as previously noted by the ILO supervisory bodies. The CEA authorities stated that the stores set up by the Price Stabilisation Institute (INESPRE), which exist in certain "bateyes", are a partial solution to prevent deductions in "colmados", but recognise that it would be difficult to cash the cane-cutters' chits more frequently.

The Committee notes that the Government refers in its report to the plantations of "La Romana" in which there are sales points for essential products for the workers. The Committee notes that the report of the direct contacts mission corroborates this statement. The Committee also notes that in CEA plantations the programme of agricultural diversification and social assistance has not been extended.

The Committee hopes that the Government and the CEA will take the necessary measures to ensure that the system for the payment of wages prevents the extortion of a proportion of the wages by private individuals through the negotiation of chits and, it also hopes that information will be supplied on the implementation of the agricultural diversification and social assistance programmes.

4. Article 14 (Workers' information). The Committee notes that the CEA circulars on rates of pay were adopted at the end of November 1990 and have been publicised through various media, including the radio, so that many of the persons interviewed by the direct contacts mission knew of these circulars, even though there appeared to be a certain confusion over some of the details of Circular No. 007 in which the rates of pay are set down.

The Committee notes that workers who arrive at the harvest for the first time are not in possession of precise information concerning the conditions governing their wages, since they have sometimes not concluded a contract, and even if they have done so, many of them are illiterate and do not understand the terms of the contract.

The Committee requests the Government to supply information on any measure that is taken to ensure that all workers are informed of the conditions in respect of their wages.

C. Enforcement

In paragraph 544 of its report, the Commission of Inquiry pointed out the need for effective administrative services for the enforcement of legislation in order to ensure that effect is given to ratified international labour Conventions. In relation to the employment of workers on Dominican plantations, the primary responsibility for ensuring such enforcement must rest with the Government of the Dominican Republic. The Commission of Inquiry recommended that labour inspection services of the Secretariat of State for Labour be developed so as to be an effective instrument for ensuring observance of labour laws and of the workers' rights on the plantations.

The Committee notes with interest that Decree no. 417/90 of 15 November 1990, provides in section 2 for the establishment of special labour inspection delegations responsible for implementing employment contracts and ensuring that their terms are strictly applied.

The Committee requests the Government to supply copies of labour inspection reports for the 1990-91 harvest containing information on the effect given in practice to provisions respecting the level and procedure for the payment of wages.

With regard to the protection of wages, the Committee notes that the system of remuneration of cane-cutters does not guarantee that the workers receive the minimum wage for a working day of eight hours. Furthermore, even though in some cases there have been improvements in the system for weighing cane, workers and their organisations continue to make frequent complaints, at least in certain plantations, concerning the fraudulent weighing of sugar-cane, with the additional disadvantage that, by reason of the form in which wages are paid, workers have to negotiate their chits, vouchers or receipts for the work performed in order to obtain cash for which they pay high rates of interest or in order to purchase goods at the store ("colmado") of the "batey", for which they also have to pay a higher price.

The Committee requests the Government to re-examine in the light of the Convention the procedures for determining and paying wages. It also requests the Government to examine the possibility of associating workers' organisations and other social organisations with the monitoring of the weighing of sugar-cane so that this process is more transparent. Finally, the Committee hopes that programmes to sell food at low prices such as those undertaken by the INESPRE and "La Romana", and programmes for allotting parcels of land to families to grow crops, will be continued with greater energy.

The Committee requests the Government to supply information on the points raised above.

D. The Committee notes the comments made by the Independent Workers Confederation (CIT) in which it alleges that the rights set out in the Convention have been violated. The Committee requests the Government to make observations in this respect.

The Committee refers to its comments on this matter under Convention No. 87, as follows:

The Committee notes the Government's report, the numerous documents attached to it and the written information transmitted to the Conference Committee in June 1990. It also notes the comments made by the Independent Workers Confederation (CTI) dated 19 October 1990.

1. Trade union rights in free trade zones

With reference to its previous comment, the Committee notes that, according to the Government, the trade union rights of workers employed in free trade zones in the country are guaranteed by the Labour Code and other labour legislation. It also notes the Government's statement that there is no discrimination in law or practice as regards the establishment, registration and operation of trade union organisations on condition that the formalities set out in the law are respected. However, in its comments, the CTI indicates - as had already in previous comments the General Workers' Confederation (CGT) and the "Classistas" Confederation of Workers - that in practice trade union rights are not respected in view of the violence carried out against workers, the dismissal of activists and the refusal to register organisations.

Referring to the documents transmitted by the Government, the Committee notes that between 1987 and 1989 three applications to register trade unions in free trade zones were made to the authorities, but that they were refused under section 349 of the Labour Code on the ground of non-conformity with the legal procedures. Furthermore, the Committee notes from the same sources that only five trade unions are registered in all the free trade zones in the country (which cover around 200 companies), in contrast with the registration of 84 trade unions, ten federations and one confederation, as reported by the Government, for the rest of the country during the years 1989-90.

The Committee notes the low rate of unionisation of the workers employed in free trade zones compared with the figures provided for the rest of the country and requests the Government to supply information on the reasons underlying this situation. It requests the Government in particular to supply information on the nature of the formalities which were not respected by trade unions whose applications for registration were refused and on the practical obstacles which may be encountered by workers in the establishment of organisations.

2. Workers in agricultural enterprises employing no more than ten workers

As regards these workers, who are excluded from the Labour Code under the terms of section 265, the Government points out that this provision is not an obstacle to their unionisation since any occupational or trade union has to have at least 20 members to be legally constituted. The Government adds that, although this provision has not yet been amended, it is still its firm intention to repeal or amend it and that this should be done during the next session of the legislature. The Committee requests the Government to indicate any progress made in this regard.

3. Public officials and other workers and technicians in the public sector

The Committee also notes that the situation as regards these workers has not changed. However, the Government states that measures are currently being examined in order to include personnel of this type within the scope of the Labour Code and to modify the provisions of Act No. 56 of 24 November 1965, Act No. 520 respecting non-profit making associations and Act No. 2059 of 22 July 1949, which contain important restrictions on the trade union rights which these workers should enjoy (prohibition of all trade union propaganda within public or municipal administrations and autonomous institutions of the State, and the administrative dissolution of the associations established by public officials).

4. Restrictions on the right to strike

The Committee once again notes the Government's statement that this question is also undergoing an examination which should result in amendment of the provisions of the Labour Code limiting this right (section 371 which bans strikes in services which are not essential in the strict sense of the term; section 373, and section 1(2) of Act No. 5915, which prohibit sympathy strikes; section 374 which lays down the obligation to obtain too high a majority in a strike vote; and section 376 respecting compulsory arbitration).

In addition, the Committee refers to the conclusions reached by the Committee on Freedom of Association in Case No. 1549 (277th Report, February-March 1991) and draws the Government's attention to the need to ensure that when strikes are limited or prohibited in essential services - namely, those whose interruption would endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the population - the workers benefit from compensatory procedures for the settlement of disputes and the presentation of their demands.

In view of the above, the Committee is bound to point out that the serious divergencies between the national legislation and the provisions of the Convention have been the subject of its comments for many years without any change in the situation. The Committee therefore urges the Government to take measures in the near future to bring its legislation into conformity with the Convention and requests the Government to supply information in its next report on the progress made in these fields.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1990, published 77th ILC session (1990)

The Committee notes the discussion that took place at the Conference Committee in 1989 on the application of Conventions Nos. 95 and 105. It also refers to its observation on Convention No. 105.

A. Adoption of legislation to give effect to Convention No. 95

In comments that it has been making for a number of years, the Committee has drawn attention to the need to adopt legislative measures to give full effect to Articles 2; 3; 5; 6; 8, paragraph 2; 10; 13, paragraph 2; 14 and 15(b), of the Convention. For its part, in paragraph 543 of its report presented in 1983, the Commission of Inquiry concerning the employment of Haitian workers on sugar plantations of the Dominican Republic pointed out that legislative changes are required to ensure the observance of the Convention, particularly in order to prohibit wage payments in the form of negotiable vouchers, to require the payment of wages directly to the worker, to establish a general prohibition on employers limiting the freedom of the worker to dispose of his wages, to regulate the assignment of wages and to provide for information of workers regarding the conditions governing their wages and deductions from wages.

In a report received before the 1989 Conference, the Government indicated that the competent labour authorities were considering urgent and necessary measures which they considered adopting to give effect to the above Articles of the Convention, in particular amendments to the legislation on each of the points referred to above, as well as other points concerning the employment of sugar plantation workers.

The Committee notes that, since the 1989 Conference, the Government has provided no report on the provisions adopted, or on any other measure taken to give effect to the Convention.

B. Protection of wages in sugar plantations

1. Measures to guarantee observance of the statutory minimum wage. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that, in Resolution No. 1/88 of 10 June 1988, the National Wages Commission established, with retroactive effect to 1 April 1988, for agricultural workers engaged in any activity, a minimum wage of RD$12.00 for a working day of eight hours. In the case of piece-work employment contracts or contracts for specific tasks, the minimum wages established "shall be reasonably guaranteed".

The Committee also noted that, according to the rates established on 4 April 1988 by Memorandum-Circular No. 18 of the State Sugar Board (CEA), cane-cutters henceforth were to earn RD$6 per tonne, plus an incentive bonus ("incentivo") of RD$0.60, payable at the end of the harvest season to workers still at their jobs, plus a productivity bonus of RD$0.50, payable to cane-cutters who have cut more than 28 metric tonnes in two weeks. It appeared from the findings of the Commission of Inquiry and the direct contacts mission which went to the Dominican Republic and Haiti in October 1988 at the request of the two Governments, that very few cane-cutters could, in an eight-hour working day, cut nearly two tonnes of sugar-cane, with the result that, for most cane-cutters, the rates established by the CEA in April 1988 were below the minimum wage established by the National Wages Commission. The rates for the cutting and transport of sugar-cane for the 1988-89 harvest had still not been communicated to the ILO at the end of the harvest.

The Committee also noted CEA Circular No. 8 of 20 October 1988 issuing instructions to the administrations of plantations regarding the conclusion of specific contracts with daily workers known as "ajusteros", who are employed by the task in other agricultural work (paid at lower rates) than sugar-cane harvesting. This Circular includes a contract form and obliges the administrator of the plantation ("mayordomo"), at the worker's request, to describe the surface of a field and give the wage rates per task and per day. According to the communication by the United Workers' Organisation (CGT) of 3 January 1989, this Circular was unknown to the workers and was not applied.

The Committee expressed the hope that the necessary measures would be taken to ensure that all workers employed in plantations were paid the statutory minimum wage. It asked the Government to supply soon full information on the wage rates established by the CEA for future harvests; on the practical implementation of CEA Circular No. 8 of 20 October 1988, with indications of the number of contracts concluded and the daily earnings of workers employed in the various tasks; on the measures adopted to ensure observance of the statutory minimum wage in plantations not belonging to the CEA; and on any review of the statutory minimum wage in agriculture.

The Committee notes that most of this information has not been supplied. With regard to the wage rates established by the CEA for future harvests, a Government representative referred, before the Conference Committee in 1989, to a Circular (No. 111) of 11 November 1988 establishing the wages for the 1988-89 harvest, the text of which has still not yet been communicated. According to the above Circular the price per tonne of sugar-cane for 1988-89 was RD$7.50, or RD$8.50 if the incentive bonus offered for the cutting of a specific tonnage is included. The Government representative also referred to the mechanisation of harvesting, but did not specify whether the cane harvested using mechanised or semi-mechanised methods was remunerated at the same rates. Referring to a study conducted on the state plantations, which was not communicated to the ILO, the Government representative compared the total weight of the harvest with the average monthly number of cane-cutters, which gave a daily average of 2.14 tonnes of cane per cutter. He deduced from this that cane-cutters earned much more than the minimum daily wage of RD$12.00.

In this connection, the Committee must point out that the average wage calculations presented by the Government representative are based neither on actual records of wages effectively paid to the various cane-cutters nor even on the total amount of all wages paid by the CEA to all the cane-cutters. Moreover, they do not take account of the number of hours worked per day in excess of eight or of the differences in output, not only between individual workers but also from one plantation to another and between different harvesting methods and harvest seasons.

The Committee recalls the recommendations in paragraphs 533 to 536 of the report of the Commission of Inquiry concerning, among other matters, observance by the administrations of sugar plantations of the statutory minimum wage which should be guaranteed to each worker, irrespective of his output, for a working day of eight hours, with a proportional increase for longer working days, without deductions for the periods during which regularly employed workers are prevented from working by factors that are not of their fault. This involves the adoption of more uniform and regular hours for cane-cutters, including the establishment of a reasonable limit to the working day.

With regard to the other information requested from the Government, the Committee notes the affirmation of the Government representative at the Conference Committee that CEA Circular No. 8 of 20 October 1988 (concerning the contracts of the daily workers known as "ajusteros") referred to by the United Workers' Organisation (CGT) in its communication of 3 January 1989 has been duly observed and widely distributed among cane workers. According to the Government representative, all necessary administrative measures have been taken to make sure that all workers employed in CEA operations receive the statutory minimum wage in accordance with the 1988-89 rates. The labour and CEA authorities planned to supply the ILO with complete information on the practical application of Circular No. 8, including the number of contracts and the daily earnings of workers employed in different tasks, and the measures taken to ensure that non-CEA plantations observe the agricultural minimum wage. The Committee notes that no information has been communicated either on these points or on any revision of the statutory minimum wage in agriculture.

Thus, the Committee is not in possession of any information enabling it to ascertain whether the statutory minimum wage is effectively paid to cane-cutters and piece workers ("ajusteros"), in either the state plantations or private plantations.

2. Weighing the sugar-cane. In its previous comments, the Committee also referred to the recommendations made by the Commission of Inquiry, in paragraph 537 of its report, that the accuracy of the weighing of the cane that has been cut should be verified by official inspection bodies outside the plantation and by the workers concerned or their representatives. The Committee noted with interest CEA Circular No. 9 of 20 October 1988 establishing a general system for weighing cane, which contains a series of rules to ensure the accuracy of weighing, without any deductions, in the presence of the transporter, cane-cutter or his representative and under the supervision of the central authorities of the CEA. In addition, a conversion table for weights and wage rates must be displayed so that the workers may consult it. According to the above-mentioned communication by the CGT, dated 3 January 1989, this Circular is unknown to cane-cutters and is not applied. The Committee expressed the hope that the necessary measures would be taken for the practical implementation of this Circular and that the Government would supply full information thereon and on any other similar measures taken in plantations not belonging to the CEA.

The Committee notes the statement made by the Government representative before the Conference Committee, that the cane is weighed in the presence of the cane-cutter who receives two chits (showing the number of the cart, the name of the cutter, the date and the exact weight of the cut cane), as proof of the work performed (as provided for in above-mentioned CEA Circular No. 9). The Government representative gave the exact number of weighers at each mill. He also stated that in case of difficulties in the weighing process, the chief weigher intervenes to try to resolve the problems; all the same, inspectors had shown that it was difficult to cheat the cane-cutters, since they had garnered great experience over many years and knew the precise weight of the cane cut. According to the Government representative, only 12 weighers had been dismissed for committing irregularities in carrying out their duties; this indicated that the circulars issued by the CEA were being observed in practice.

The Committee hopes that the Government will provide a copy of the inspection reports mentioned, as well as full information on the measures taken in the plantations that do not belong to the CEA.

3. Articles 3 and 7, paragraph 1 of the Convention (payment of wages in cash, and enterprise stores). In paragraph 538 of its report, the Commission of Inquiry recommended that the current practice in plantations belonging to the State and those of the Casa Vicini of permitting the negotiation of wage tickets by workers in favour of third parties be discontinued and that, instead, arrangements be instituted to enable the workers to receive cash advances, as was already the case at La Romana. There would be no objection to allowing workers to cash their wage tickets at stores to be established on the state-owned plantations in collaboration with the Price Stabilisation Institute, on the understanding that this would take the form of an advanced payment of wages by the employer to the worker and would be made without any deduction or discount.

In 1989, the Committee noted the indications provided to the direct contacts mission by the representatives of the CEA to the effect that vouchers would be exchanged for cash each week, and not every fortnight as occurred previously, and that while awaiting payment workers would be able to use their vouchers to buy basic products at the official price in stores operated by the CEA in collaboration with the Price Stabilisation Institute. The Committee also noted with interest a communication of the CEA of 4 October 1988 providing for the system of non-profit-making stores to be extended, both regarding sales for cash and sales covered by advance vouchers (CEA Form No. 1) or a card for the payment of daily workers. The same communication specifies that, when cutting, gathering or transportation vouchers are presented in order to make purchases at the store, change shall be returned in cash without any deduction.

The Committee noted, however, that these efforts would be worthless if wages remained excessively low and were paid late, so that the worker was obliged to spend his vouchers in the store to cover his needs. The Committee also noted the observation made by the direct contacts mission that a private store operating in a sugar plantation camp ("batey") was better stocked than that of the Price Stabilisation Institute and that the latter only accepted payment in cash, and asked the Government to provide detailed information on the implementation in practice of the system of non-profit-making stores envisaged by the CEA and the system for the payment of wages and advances, and on any similar measures taken in private plantations.

In its report received before the 1989 Conference, the Government refers to the following measures adopted in the CEA enterprises and plantations: in collaboration with the Price Stabilisation Institute (INESPRE) various public stores have been set up; in collaboration with the Price Control Department, a price list for essential goods has been drawn up; the CEA has substantially increased the production of groceries for sale to its workers as part of the recent agricultural diversification plan; sugar workers can validate their wage advance chitties in CEA plantation shops in collaboration with the INESPRE without any reduction or discount; the Price Control Department regularly inspects private and CEA stores to ensure prices are fixed and to avoid speculation and usury to the prejudice of the workers; the CEA has considerably increased the network of non-profit stores both for cash sales and through advance forms (CEA Form No. 1) or letter of payment for daily workers; businesses in and around CEA enterprises have to pay all the rest of the money due to sugar workers when they pay for purchases with written proof of what has been cut, collected or transported; all businesses (private or CEA) operating in or around the enterprises and plantations have to accept cash or written proof of what has been cut, collected or transported; to avoid arrears of payments of sugar workers and prevent them having to pay with chitties or written proofs of wage advances, in businesses, stores, shops or public selling points providing essentials, payment of wages is made or cancelled weekly.

In his statement to the Conference Committee in 1989, the Government representative stressed that the works stores, previously under private ownership, which had lent itself to speculation, were now owned by the State and offered prices for food and medicines which were within the reach of the workers and which were controlled by the Government Price Stabilisation Institute. He added that the labour inspectors had been asked to make a detailed report on the situation of agricultural workers on plantations with a view to improving the situation of workers of Dominican Republic and Haitian origins who were resident in the country.

The Committee takes note of this information on the main features of the CEA's system of works stores and payment of wages. It hopes that the information previously requested on the effective implementation of this system will also be supplied, including a copy of the inspection reports drawn up by the Price Control Department and the Labour Inspectorate.

Furthermore, the Committee again expresses the hope that detailed information will also be supplied on any corresponding measures taken in the Casa Vicini plantations.

4. Article 7, paragraph 2 (services intended for workers). In paragraph 539 of its report, the Commission of Inquiry asked for information not only on non-profit-making stores but also on the implementation of the CEA's plan to grow food crops on its plantations for the benefit of the workers, and any corresponding measures on privately owned plantations. In 1989, the Committee took note of a communication prepared by the Directorate of the CEA's social development programme on a food programme involving the production of food, fish farming, the rearing of chickens, pigs and rabbits, the sale of beef at a low price, people's stores and the sale and distribution of flour and other food programmes; and programmes for drinking water and sanitary facilities, nutrition, health and education; the Committee expressed the hope that the Government would provide detailed information on the progress achieved in this respect not only by the CEA but also in private plantations, particularly with regard to the allocation of land for collective or family food growing ("conucos"), in accordance with the recommendations made by the Commission of Inquiry in paragraphs 516 and 539 of its report. It also expressed the hope that the Government would supply information on any measures taken by the public authorities to supply to camps ("bateyes") on CEA plantations as well as those on private plantations the services that should not be at the expense of the employer, such as education.

In its report which was received before the 1989 Conference, the Government referred to the Casa Romana and CEA programmes for diversifying agriculture and stock raising and to the extension of other programmes such as drinking-water, sanitary facilities, nutrition, health and education programmes. In his statement to the Conference Committee in 1989, the Government representative added that, with regard to the cane-cutters' housing, the labour inspectors had found that in plantations administered by the State, there were adequate sanitary facilities, works stores and child care centres and that labour inspectors had been asked to make a detailed report on the situation of agricultural workers on plantations. In its report which was received before the 1989 Conference, the Government also stated that it would shortly be submitting a full report to the ILO on the efforts undertaken and the results obtained not only by the CEA but also by the private enterprises, with regard to the programmes for agricultural diversification and social assistance, compulsory or otherwise, for employees.

Since this report has not been received, the Committee again expresses the hope that the detailed information awaited on the services of the CEA and private enterprises will shortly be communicated, along with copies of labour inspection reports and information on any measures that have been taken by the public authorities to supply to plantation camps ("bateyes") of the CEA as well as those of private plantations the services that should not be at the expense of the employer, such as education.

5. Deferred payment of a part of wages. In paragraph 541 of its report, the Commission of Inquiry recommended the abolition of the imposed system of deferred payment of that part of cane-cutters' remuneration designated as "incentive pay" then in operation on the plantations of the State and of the Casa Vicini, and the incorporation of "incentive pay" in the workers' wage, to be paid regularly on the days fixed for that purpose.

The Committee notes the statement made by the Government representative to the Conference Committee in 1989 that, according to CEA Circular No. 111 of 11 November 1988, incentive bonuses for cutting a specified number of tonnes are currently paid at the same time as the wage. The Government representative also referred to an incentive bonus paid, as previously, at the end of the harvest to each worker cutting more than 150 tonnes. As already pointed out under point 2 above, the text of CEA Circular No. 111 of 11 November 1988 has not yet been communicated and no information has been supplied on the Casa Vicini.

6. Article 14 (workers' information). Reference has already been made in points 2 and 3 above to the provisions of CEA Circulars Nos. 8 and 9 of 20 October 1988 concerning the provision of information to daily workers, known as "ajusteros", performing work by the task, and to sugar-cane workers presenting cane to be weighed, regarding their wage conditions. More generally, CEA Circular No. 7 of the same date, which was addressed to the administrators of plantations, issuing preliminary recommendations and specifications regarding the engagement of agricultural workers for the 1988-89 harvest provides, in point 3, that each administration has to ensure the display in an appropriate place of the contractual conditions that are to be fulfilled, both by the plantation and by the agricultural worker under contract; these contractual conditions should, among others, include wages, living conditions in sugar refineries, medical assistance, facilities for the purchase of foodstuffs, etc., and labour discipline. According to the communication of the CGT of 3 January 1989, this Circular was unknown to the workers and was not applied.

In its report which was received before the 1989 Conference, the Government indicates that it is common practice in the country to give workers appropriate and easily understandable information on their conditions of wages, a breakdown of how wages are calculated, and the time and place of payment. In the CEA, Circulars Nos. 8 and 9 of 20 October 1988 are satisfactorily applied, guaranteeing information on wage conditions to workers known as "ajusteros" who work by the day or the task, and to workers presenting cut cane by weight, in Spanish and if necessary in Creole. In each CEA enterprise the management displays in prominent places texts, in Spanish and Creole, showing the terms of employment of contracts binding on the employer and the agricultural worker covering such subjects as wages, living conditions, medical assistance, food facilities, labour discipline, etc. Every CEA enterprise also gives orally full information in Spanish and Creole when a worker is engaged or at work.

The Committee takes due note of this information. It observes that the Government has not provided particulars of the provisions that it may have taken to ensure effective implementation of the above-mentioned measures in the CEA plantations or corresponding measures in other sugar plantations.

C. Enforcement

In paragraph 544 of its report, the Commission of Inquiry pointed out the need for effective administrative services for the enforcement of legislation through which ratified international labour Conventions are to be applied. In relation to the employment of workers on Dominican plantations, the primary responsibility of ensuring such enforcement must rest upon the Government of the Dominican Republic. The Commission of Inquiry recommended that labour inspection services of the Ministry of Labour be developed so as to be an effective instrument for ensuring observance of labour laws and of the workers' rights on the sugar plantations.

The Committee noted in 1989, from the report of the direct contacts mission, that the supervision of all sugar production operations in its own plantations, including their labour aspects, was provided by a central State Sugar Board service. The Committee expressed the hope that the Government would supply detailed information on any activities of the inspection services of the Ministry of Labour in state and private plantations and the results obtained with regard to the observance of workers' rights, including those respecting wages.

In its report which was received before the 1989 Conference, the Government indicates that the labour authorities have strengthened inspection services in the CEA, Casa Vicini and the Central Romana, in order to guarantee sugar-workers their rights. The CEA has limited its inspection functions to plantation work: cutting and transport of cane, sugar-milling and production, the Agricultural Diversification Programme, etc. Living and working conditions in CEA enterprises and plantations are inspected by the Labour Ministry's inspectorate which also inspects the enterprises and plantations of the Casa Vicini and the Central Romana. In his statement to the 1989 Conference Committee, the Government representative added that there had been a lack of labour inspectors and a budget deficit in the Labour Ministry; 60 posts for labour inspectors had now been created in order to overcome these shortcomings. These labour inspectors were employed under sections 390 and 400 of the Labour Code in order to effectively enforce the application of the provisions of that Code, especially on the sugar plantations of the State and on the different private plantations. These inspectors were to ensure, inter alia, that the minimum wage is paid to agricultural workers, and that the measures adopted by the State Sugar Board (CEA) to improve the situation of Dominican and Haitian labourers are being applied, in particular that workers are paid the incentive bonuses before the end of the harvest.

In its report on the application of Convention No. 105, received before the 1989 Conference, the Government also indicated that, in compliance with the recommendation in paragraph 544 of the 1983 report of the Commission of Inquiry, the State Secretariat for Labour has intensified its inspection services in the sugar plantations and refineries, both state-owned and private, in order to ensure application of labour law and observance of the rights of both national and foreign workers employed in agricultural work and sugar-cane cutting, collection and transport operations. The Government added that, in due course, reports would be forwarded on the results of the plan for regular visits to both the state and private sugar plantations and refineries, in order to improve the effectiveness of these services and on the complaints received and irregularities noted and the sanctions imposed in cases of violations of agricultural workers' rights. Furthermore, the Government representative at the Conference Committee undertook to send a detailed report on the progress achieved by the new labour inspectors, as soon as he returned to his country.

The Committee notes that this information has not been received.

The Committee expresses its deep concern over the contradiction between the stated intentions of the Government and the absence of information to enable it to ascertain any real progress in the implementation of measures to ensure observance of the Convention. [The Government is asked to report in detail for the period ending 30 June 1990.]