Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 2019, Publication: 108th ILC session (2019)



Labour Inspection Convention, 1947 (No. 81) - Labour Inspection (Agriculture) Convention, 1969 (No. 129)

Discussion by the Committee

Government representative – The Republic of Serbia wishes to inform the Committee that, under the national legal order and the Constitution of the Republic of Serbia, ratified international treaties and Conventions take precedence and prevail over other applicable national laws. The Law on Inspection Oversight of April 2015 is subject to this rule. Article 4, paragraph 4, of this Law prescribes that ratified international treaties and Conventions have precedence over the Law on Inspection Oversight. This includes Conventions Nos 81 and 129. Under article 194, paragraphs 4 and 5 of the Constitution of the Republic of Serbia, it is prescribed that ratified international treaties and other generally accepted rules of international law shall be part of the legal system of the Republic of Serbia.

In this particular case, this means that, if the ratified international treaty or Convention prescribes that an inspection shall be launched without prior notice, it shall be so, in compliance with article 4, paragraph 4, of the Law on Inspection Oversight, and in compliance with the position that ratified international Conventions hold within the constitutional and legal system of the Republic of Serbia. To support the aforesaid, I will provide the Committee with the statistical data clearly demonstrating the number and types of the inspections undertaken by the labour inspectorate in the previous year.

In 2018, there were in total 70,122 inspections of the registered and unregistered employers conducted by the labour inspectorate, of which 4,607 (7 per cent) were conducted upon the prior notification and 65,515 (93 per cent) were conducted without prior notification or any written inspection warrant.

In 2018, 939 extraordinary inspections of unregistered entities were conducted without prior notification to the employer on the upcoming inspection. The above-mentioned figures show that the labour inspectorate, in its inspections conducted in 2018, applied directly the standards of the ratified ILO Conventions, in accordance with the Constitution of the Republic of Serbia. The same situation was observed in 2017 and 2016. I would like to add that no inspector paid a fine for the actions undertaken in the course of their duties.

Finally, taking into consideration the findings of the Committee of Experts, we would like to inform the Committee that the Government of the Republic of Serbia will send a request for technical assistance of the ILO, in order to overcome this situation and to adjust the provisions that have been brought into question by the Committee of Experts regarding Conventions Nos 81 and No. 129.

I am sure that after discussion with the ILO, and with our social partners and relevant stakeholders within the Government – because I just want to mention that this Law is under the responsibility of the Ministry of Public Administration in the local governments – if the ILO offers this technical assistance, we will manage to remedy this situation with regard to our legal framework in the near future.

Employer members – The objective of the present case is to analyse the conformity of the Law on Inspection Oversight of Serbia, No. 36/15 of April 2015, with the principles set out in the Labour Inspection Convention, 1947 (No. 81), and the Labour Inspection (Agriculture) Convention, 1969 (No. 129).

Both instruments form part of the series of international labour standards intended to guarantee a minimum floor and universal protection for workers in the sectors concerned. Their objective is not to promote a uniform system of labour inspection, but to establish principles to guide its operation as a basis for labour inspection:

- in terms of its function of ensuring compliance with the legislation on conditions of work and the protection of workers; and

- also to contribute to the development of this legislation in conformity with national and international labour markets.

In addition to the function of supervision, which includes a series of competences and prerogatives directed toward the repression of violations, the instruments confer on labour inspectors an information and advisory function, as well as bringing to the notice of the competent authority defects or abuses not specifically covered by existing legal provisions.

Finally, the instruments provide for the publication and communication to the International Labour Office of an annual inspection report which has to include principally information on the legal basis of labour inspection, the composition and distribution of inspection personnel, their areas of competence and their activities, as well as industrial accidents and cases of occupational diseases.

With regard to the case of Serbia, the ratification by this Balkan country of Conventions Nos 81 and 129 of the International Labour Organization forms part of an ambitious effort to bring its institutions and standards into conformity with international standards. This process has taken on greater dynamism since the entry into force of the Stabilization and Association Agreement between the European Union (EU) and Serbia in 2013 and the initiation of negotiations for the adhesion of the country to the EU, which will involve an adaptation of the social and labour standards in the country to the 20 principles of the European Pillar of Social Rights, for which the ILO and its Conventions are the highest source of inspiration in social and labour matters.

Serbia has been one of the principal objectives of programmes such as the Employment and Social Affairs Platform (ESAP), promoted jointly by the EU, the ILO and the Regional Cooperation Council in the Western Balkans, the main objectives of which consist of:

- improving economic and social councils;

- establishing employment mediation mechanisms;

- promoting the articulation of employment policies and strategies; and

- modernizing labour inspection in accordance with ILO principles, and through the establishment of a labour inspection network in the region for the exchange of experience.

It is within this context that we have to place the adoption by the Government of Serbia of the Law on Inspection Oversight No. 36/15, the principal objective of which is to establish the new model of labour inspection in the country through greater coordination between the various institutions involved in inspection activities and a uniform application of the principles for the operation of labour inspection in the country.

However, the Committee of Experts notes that sections 16 and 17 of the new Law on Inspection Oversight No. 36/15 restrict the freedom of initiative of labour inspectors by requiring three days prior notice for most inspections and a prior inspection warrant, except in emergency situations, specifying, among other matters, the purpose of the inspection and its duration. The Committee of Experts also noted that if, during the course of the inspection, an inspector uncovers an instance of non-compliance that exceeds the inspection warrant, an application must be made for an addendum to the warrant.

It also noted that the Law provides that inspectors shall be held personally accountable for the actions undertaken in the course of their duties, under the terms of section 49, and that they may receive a fine of between Serbian dinar (RSD) 50,000 and 150,000 (approximately between US$500 and 1,500), for example if they undertake inspections without prior notice, as set out in section 60.

In light of the above, the Committee of Experts requested the adoption of the necessary measures to remove the restrictions and limitations placed on labour inspectors by the Law on Inspection Oversight No. 36/15 so as to ensure that labour inspectors are fully authorized to enter freely and without previous notice any workplaces liable to inspection, in accordance with Conventions Nos 81 and 129.

In the view of the Employers, in a State in which the rule of law prevails, a modern labour inspectorate and a judicious legal framework are key to establishing an environment conducive to enterprise, increasing legal and economic security, and reducing the social risks to which investors are exposed.

We therefore consider it fundamental to have a good labour inspection service which, in particular, takes preventive and advisory action, to guarantee fair competition and promote investment, economic growth and employment creation. The independent and unrestricted operation of labour inspection guarantees good governance, transparency and responsibility in the system for the protection of rights. In this respect, the Law on Inspection Oversight No. 36/15 has to be understood as part of the firm will of the Government of Serbia to contribute through the modernization of its inspection system to the reinforcement of the rule of law in the country.

However, we also note certain inadequacies in the content of the Law and the procedure followed for its adoption:

- With regard to section 17 of the Law, which requires three days notice for labour inspection, we agree with the Committee of Experts that this provision should be adapted to the spirit of Conventions Nos 81 and 129, which recognize the principle of unannounced inspections.

Accordingly, under the terms of Article 12(1) of Convention No. 81 and Article 16(1) of Convention No. 129, labour inspectors provided with proper credentials shall be empowered:

– to enter freely and without previous notice at any hour of the day or night any workplace liable to inspection; or

– to enter by day any premises which they may have reasonable cause to believe to be liable to inspection.

Convention No. 129, in Article 16(2), adds that labour inspectors shall not enter the private home of the operator of an agricultural undertaking except with the consent of the operator or with a special authorization issued by the competent authority.

But while agreeing in this respect with the Committee of Experts, we must:

– recall that the complaints made in the observations must be limited to the specific rights and obligations provided for in the Conventions concerned; and

– specify that, although unannounced inspections have been shown to be very effective, it is no less important to be governed by a series of specific rules which respect fundamental freedoms and maintain the principle of proportionality.

- With regard to the procedural issues, the fact that the Government submitted the draft Law on Inspection Oversight to the national Economic and Social Council highlights the lack of effective consultation of the highest tripartite advisory body in the country and takes us back to the debate last year on the deficiencies of social dialogue in Serbia, in light of the Tripartite Consultation (International Labour Standards) Convention, 1976 (No. 144).

Taking into consideration the points raised, we recommend the Committee to request the Government of Serbia to:

- bring the national legislation into conformity with Conventions Nos 81 and 129 so that labour inspectors can undertake inspections in workplaces liable to inspection without previous notice with a view to ensuring appropriate and effective supervision;

- guarantee that inspections are adapted to their purpose and that it is possible to carry them out as often as is necessary; and

- finally, to continue its efforts to give effect to the conclusions adopted last year by the Committee in relation to Convention No. 144 to guarantee effective consultation with the social partners

Worker members – From its very beginning, the International Labour Organization identified labour inspection as one of its priority concerns. I recall in this respect that labour inspection is already included in the general principles set out in the Treaty of Versailles, which created the ILO.

If this major concern was present from the very first moments of our Organization, that is because it is clear that, without an efficient system of inspection, the effectiveness of social standards would be left to chance. Indeed, what is the purpose of adopting standards, formulating texts and voting for laws if there is not an inspection service responsible for the effective supervision of their application and for explaining their content to the various actors? The relevance of these considerations can easily be seen in relation to the case of Serbia.

The Committee of Experts has made worrying observations concerning the application of the Labour Inspection Convention, 1947 (No. 81), and the Labour Inspection (Agriculture) Convention, 1969 (No. 129), in the country. The report indicates that a new law adopted in April 2015 has the consequence of placing significant restrictions on the powers of labour inspectors. Sections 16 and 17 of the Law provide that most inspections must be announced three days in advance and that a written inspection warrant (except in emergency situations) must specify the purpose and duration of the inspection. Section 16 also provides that if, during the course of the inspection, an inspector uncovers an instance of non-compliance that exceeds the inspection warrant, the inspector must apply for an addendum to the warrant. The Committee of Experts also notes that the Law provides that inspectors shall be held personally accountable for the actions undertaken in the course of their duties and that they are liable to very dissuasive fines if they undertake inspections without prior notice.

These provisions raise serious problems in light of Conventions Nos 81 and 129 and, more specifically, Article 12(1)(a) of Convention No. 81 and Article 16(1)(a) of Convention No. 129. The two texts provide that labour inspectors provided with proper credentials shall be empowered to enter freely and without previous notice at any hour of the day or night any workplace liable to inspection. In comparison with these provisions, it is clear that the new Law adopted by Serbia is intended to ensure that the labour inspection services cannot organize any unannounced inspections, or at least endeavours to intimidate inspectors who might wish to do so. As a result, this legislation is not only contrary to the Conventions, but also pursues an objective that is totally opposed to them. There is no need to provide a long justification of the importance of carrying out unannounced inspections, so evident is it.

We can nevertheless recall that the Committee of Experts had the occasion in its General Survey on labour inspection to specify that: “Unannounced visits enable the inspector to enter the inspected premises without warning the employer or his or her representative in advance, especially in cases where the employer may be expected to attempt to conceal a violation, by changing the usual conditions of work, preventing a witness from being present or making it impossible to carry out an inspection. Conducting unannounced visits on a regular basis is especially useful as it enables inspectors to observe the confidentiality required by Article 15, subparagraph (c), of Convention No. 81 and Article 20, subparagraph (c), of Convention No. 129 as regards the purpose of the inspection if it was carried out in response to a complaint.” Restricting the powers of inspectors, as this legislation does, is tantamount to telling employers that their impunity is assured. They are given a blank cheque to exploit the workforce shamelessly.

Attention should also be drawn to the fact that, as indicated in a direct request made by the Committee of Experts, Serbia has also taken measures to significantly reduce the number of inspectors. According to the information provided by the Government, the number of inspectors fell from 324 to 242. To give an idea of the extent of the work to be carried out, in 2016 there were 337,927 registered commercial establishments, without counting those that are not registered. Despite all the rotation systems possible and imaginable, and the best possible organization, it is not possible under these conditions to provide an effective inspection service capable of fulfilling its missions. That is truly impossible.

We should also point out that this reform was adopted without any consultation either with employers or trade unions. This is yet another illustration of the countless harmful effects of austerity. Our Committee has already had the opportunity to deal with similar cases in countries in the region that have taken the same path. The starting point for the reasoning underlying these policies is that social inspections, and more generally all public services, are a cost that must absolutely be reduced. From this perspective, social inspections are mere administrative cost items which must be reduced in the name of this dogma. And yet, austerity policies have continually shown all their limitations and the dead ends to which they lead. Making public services a factor of budgetary adjustment inevitably leads to a rise in inequality and more precarious conditions for workers. When austerity measures are targeted at the resources of inspection services, they lead to a deterioration in working conditions and serious problems for the health of workers, their families and communities as a whole. Worker delegates will provide greater detail in their interventions to illustrate this wave of austerity and its harmful effects.

At this stage, in conclusion, I am bound to insist on the fact that conditions of work and the health of workers cannot be used as levers for the achievement of budgetary savings. This is the whole reason for the existence of the ILO, which emphasizes that work cannot be assimilated to a vulgar commodity. Labour standards are not a weight on public finances, but on the contrary a necessary precondition for the prosperity of everyone.

Employer member, Serbia – I will be very brief. I am here to note that this Law was not a regular procedure. It results of public discussion. This Law was not on the Social Economic Council of the Republic of Serbia, so I think that trade union representatives and representatives of employers did not have a chance to make some influence in changing the articles. It was adopted by the Parliament of Serbia according to the urgent procedure, so some mistakes happen. We know these problems and for the first level you think that employers have some benefits of this Law, but I do not think so because I think somehow that this Law can be some kind of possible corruption because inspectors and employers can make a deal, so we know everything about this. In practice, as the representative of my country said, Ms Dragna Savic, it was just 7 per cent of this kind of labour inspection in the previous years, and I am sure that this Law will be changed very soon. They start with the procedure of changing the Law, and one more thing: it is the same kind of Law as the one that existed in former Yugoslavia, a former socialist country. So the same articles exist in the Special Laws in Slovenia, in Croatia, in Montenegro, in Bosnia and Herzegovina, in North Macedonia – so it is not just in Serbia, it is the same for others in the region. So, I am sure that whatever the Committee decides about this Law, it will make influence on the whole region. So, employers’ organizations of Serbia have full confidence in the decision of the Committee.

Worker member, Serbia – We welcome the findings of the Committee of Experts regarding the violation of Conventions Nos 81 and 129. We are fully convinced that the Law on Inspection Oversight of 2015 provides for a number of restrictions on the powers of labour inspectors, especially with regard to free initiatives of labour inspectors to undertake inspections without prior notice which is in direct violation of the Conventions. In addition, this law is also in contradiction with the Labour Law and it is an example of the trends that we are facing for quite some time when the Labour Law is derogated by the different laws of lower levels of hierarchy. Trade unions are struggling against this and will continue to do it because it is crucial for the future of labour relations in the Republic of Serbia.

The Law on Inspection Oversight was written by the Ministry of State Administration and Local Self-Governance and it was not the result of consultation with the representative social partners. In addition, the Ministry did not submit the draft law for the opinion of the Social and Economic Council even though it is a legal obligation to submit all draft laws that deal with issues that are relevant to workers and employers for the opinion too of this tripartite institution of social dialogue. This is a concrete example of how a lack of social dialogue can have a negative impact on workers’ position and violations of international labour standards.

Representing working people, we as a trade union have an absolute interest in advocating for a strong, independent, educated, adequate in numbers and equipped labour inspectorate – but the precondition and the most relevant thing is that labour inspectors are free to undertake their duties without any restrictions and in a concrete case, not to be sanctioned if they undertake inspections without prior notice. This is not the way we will protect working people, diminish the grey economy and improve workplace health and safety.

In 2018, 53 workers lost their lives at the workplace in the Republic of Serbia. We need empowered labour inspectors who are credible to have zero tolerance for the employers who are not implementing health and safety measures defined by the relevant legislation. We need labour inspectors free from influences of employers and politics. The obligation of prior notice under the current law can only have negative effects such as corruption and double standards for the employers. We are also sure that some exemptions to this rule cannot be relevant argumentation for the Government because Article 12(1)(a) of Convention No. 81 clearly states that labour inspectors provided with proper credentials shall be empowered to enter freely and without previous notice at any hour of the day or night any workplace liable to inspection.

To conclude, we strongly support the request of the Committee of Experts for the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that the restrictions and limitations for labour inspectors in the Law on Inspection Oversight are removed so as to ensure that labour inspectors are empowered to enter freely and without previous notice workplaces liable to inspection in conformity with relevant Articles in Conventions Nos 81 and 129. Trade unions would also welcome ILO technical assistance on this matter.

Government member, Romania – I am speaking on behalf of the European Union (EU) and its Member States. The EFTA country Norway, member of the European Economic Area, aligns itself with this statement.

We would like to reiterate the importance we attribute to the promotion, protection and respect of human rights, as safeguarded by ILO Conventions and other human rights instruments. The EU and its Member States also believe that safe and healthy conditions of work should be ensured for all, everywhere, and we support the recognition of the right to safe and healthy working conditions as a fundamental right at work. In the same spirit, we believe that labour inspection is fundamental in promotion of decent work. Compliance with ILO Conventions Nos 81 and 129 is essential in this respect.

As a candidate country, Serbia and the EU have a very close and constructive relationship. The EU and its Member States are determined to strengthen and intensify its engagement at all levels to support Serbia’s political, economic and social transformation, including through increased assistance, based on tangible progress on the rule of law, as well as on socio-economic reforms. We nevertheless note with concern the Committee of Experts’ observations on Serbia’s non-compliance with ILO Conventions Nos 81 and 129 with regard to free entry of labour inspectors to workplaces without prior notice. We note with regret that the Law on Inspection Oversight No. 36/15 of April 2015 applies to labour inspection and provides for a number of restrictions on the powers of inspectors, including the requirement of three days prior notice for most inspections and a written inspection warrant (except in emergency situations) specifying, among other things, the purpose of the inspection and its duration. In addition, in case of recognition of non-compliance that exceeds the inspection warrant, the inspector must apply for an addendum to the warrant. Finally, we deeply regret that the Law also introduces personal liability of the inspectors for the actions undertaken in the course of their duties for example the possible imposition of a fine for an inspection undertaken without notification.

The share of undeclared work remains at around 20 per cent and addressing this problem requires a comprehensive approach across the relevant ministries. Labour inspections have focused on tackling undeclared work, but the results do not have an impact yet on the level of this type of work.

We therefore call on the Government to ensure that the restrictions and limitations for labour inspectors in the Law on Inspection Oversight No. 36 of April 2015 are removed so as to ensure that labour inspectors are empowered to enter freely and without previous notice workplaces liable to inspection in conformity with ILO Conventions. The EU and its Member States remain committed to their close cooperation and partnership with Serbia.

Worker member, Greece – As we celebrate the International Labour Organization (ILO) Centenary, we recall that labour inspection has been a standard setting priority since the ILO was founded, with references in the Versailles Treaty and the ILO Constitution.

Addressing labour inspection as a pillar of labour administration, Conventions Nos 81 and 129, and the accompanying Recommendations, have provided the universal reference framework, with a high ratification level. As emphasised in Report V of the 2011 Conference, labour inspection systems play a vital, fundamental role in labour law enforcement and compliance, particularly regarding workers’ rights. They also provide information, advice, and training, playing a vital role for occupational health and safety.

Still, in a shifting political, social and economic background, compounded by the economic crisis, the labour law inspection systems have been faced with complex challenges, including high and persistent unemployment, precarious jobs, undeclared or illegal work, labour migration and technological change. Linked to new business and production models, these challenges negatively affect labour standards and labour market institutions.

In this context, regulatory inspection in many EU Member States has been weakened by a well-established trend of cuts in public expenditure, aiming to remove alleged “regulatory burdens on business” and enhance competitiveness.

Recent research highlights cuts in operational costs affecting staff, salaries and conditions of work, a preference for voluntary/private regulation, prioritizing an advisory/informative role for inspection – all these to the detriment of coverage, enforcement and sound labour administration governance at a time when effective labour inspection services are most needed.

Such trends, in particular, weakened labour inspections, tend to be endemic in South-East Europe, a region populated with medium, small and micro-enterprises, some of them even clandestine workplaces, and burdened with undeclared or illegal employment. These trends are aggravated by legislation or practices, such as the Law on Inspection enforced in Serbia, which curtails rights and powers established by Conventions Nos 81 and 129, including the right of labour inspectors to freely conduct unannounced inspections in any workplace; to conduct examinations they deem necessary; interrogate alone or in the presence of witnesses, the employer or the staff. But these rights are essential for an effective, credible labour inspection that respects confidentiality.

Yet, they are abolished by this Law, which imposes prior notice obligation, requires detailed warrants, and compels inspectors to get an additional warrant if they find non-compliances not specified in the first warrant. Moreover, a disgraceful clause incriminates underpaid and overworked Serbian inspectors, imposing huge fines for actions undertaken during the course of their duties. As we heard, the Law has been adopted without any prior consultation or dialogue with the trade unions and the other social partners.

Efficient, transparent and credible labour inspection systems, invested with all the means and resources needed for their unhindered operation are crucial for upholding labour standards, for ensuring a fair workplace, for fighting corrupt practices and for economic development. All these, in turn, are vital for Serbia, the biggest Western Balkan country, an EU candidate aiming to align its legislation with the EU – Serbia deserves better.

We also note with concern that other countries in our region, including Montenegro, Croatia, North Macedonia, Slovenia and even Greece, deploy comparable provisions and practices that fundamentally annul the very idea of inspection. In this light, we urge the ILO to renew its focus on the whole region and monitor labour inspection systems.

To conclude, we follow the Committee of Experts and we request the Government to take the necessary measures for ensuring full compliance with two Conventions and engaging also in dialogue with the social partners so as to consolidate a working, credible and efficient labour inspection system.

Worker member, Belgium – The Committee on the Application of Standards is an essential component of the ILO supervisory system. Essential, because it examines the manner in which States comply with their obligations deriving from the Conventions and Recommendations adopted by the ILO that they have ratified.

As has been mentioned during the discussion on another case, adopting standards without a robust mechanism to supervise the respect of these standards, would be pointless.

Supervising standards on the national level, supervising the respect of the legislation on the national level, is the very essence and purpose of labour inspectorates. Having a well-established corpus of labour law, does not mean a thing in practice if the respect of these labour laws cannot be controlled.

Without labour inspection, workers would be left to the whims of their employers. Without a well-functioning, well-trained and sufficiently equipped force of labour inspectors, decent work, decent working conditions, occupational safety and health, are but distant aspirations that cannot be fulfilled.

It is not a surprise, that one of the conclusions already adopted by this Committee in another case, calls on that government to strengthen the capacity of the labour inspectorate. And this as well on the human as on the material level. To provide the inspectorate with sufficient technical resources and training.

We need to stress however that even a fully equipped, well-trained labour inspectorate is rendered useless if it does not have the ability to conduct surprise inspections. Forcing labour inspectors to give prior notice three days in advance deprives them of the possibility to truly see to it that labour law is being respected.

It is for a reason that the Conventions, the respect of which we are discussing now, stipulate clearly that labour inspectors should be empowered to enter freely and without previous notice any workplace liable to inspection and to enter by day any premises which they may have reasonable cause to believe to be liable to inspection.

Depriving labour inspectors of this possibility, obliging labour inspectors to give a three-days prior notice, is giving a free pass to malicious employers to obfuscate problematic working conditions, to befog non respect of labour law, to simply send away or even lock up workers that are being exploited, to pack up their things and disappear to another location where they can continue their nefarious actions.

The respect of labour law, the respect of occupational safety and health, the respect of decent working conditions is frankly a matter of life and death. Already this year, at least 14 workers have lost their lives in the Republic of Serbia. The Government has confirmed that the number of accidents at work has risen, due to lower compliance.

Without even touching on the ban on hiring new staff in the whole public sector, a ban that is already in place for five years, a ban of which the effect on the number of labour inspectors, given the impossibility to replace labour inspectors, is simply disastrous, we strongly urge the Government to swiftly revise the Law on Inspection Oversight so as to drop the obligation for labour inspectors to give prior notice. And this for all possible situations. We stress once again that labour inspectors should be empowered to enter freely and without previous notice workplaces liable to inspection.

Worker member, France – The Labour Inspection Convention, 1947 (No. 81), is an essential Convention because all rights at work depend on its sound implementation, and particularly the right to occupational safety and health, which would merit inclusion in the body of fundamental standards, as no one should die at work. And yet, the situation of labour inspection in Serbia is such that 53 people lost their lives at the workplace in 2018, and there have already been 14 deaths since January 2019.

Globalization and liberalization are exerting greater pressure on labour resources, and this situation requires greater vigilance by labour inspection services to prevent the exploitation of workers and the deterioration of conditions of work. Labour inspection activities are fundamental for balanced socio-economic development and, consequently, for social justice.

And yet the issue is not new in Serbia, a candidate country for membership of the European Union in 2025. In 2010, the ILO designed a tool kit for labour inspectors in Serbia, entitled: “A model enforcement policy: A training and operations manual: A code of ethical behaviour”. The publication was prepared to help Serbia modernize its labour inspection system and make it more suited for its subsequent membership of the European Union, and to bring its policies and practices into conformity with those of similar neighbouring States in Europe. The objective was to improve significantly the level of compliance with its laws and regulations on occupational safety and health.

Wages paid late, unpaid social contributions, unpaid overtime hours, disastrous working conditions, even to the point sometimes of a prohibition to go to the toilet, have all been reported by the press in large enterprises in recent years. But prevention is a bonus, not an additional cost. Respect for labour law and labour standards is not simply an obligation imposed on employers, but a contribution to quality, efficiency, productivity and the success of enterprises, and to the health, safety and well-being of all workers in the country.

In the Declaration of the EU-Western Balkans Summit held in Sofia on 17 May 2018, the leaders of the European Union stated in point 3 that the EU is determined to strengthen and intensify its engagement at all levels to support the region’s political, economic and social transformation, including through increased assistance based on tangible progress in the rule of law, as well as in socio-economic reforms, by the Western Balkans partners.

For Serbia, that must include compliance with Convention No. 81 so that the State imposes compliance with labour standards in the country and does not sacrifice to the dogma of all-out competition, which can only lead to social dumping, far from the objectives of the European Pillar of Social Rights.

Government representative – I would like to express our gratitude to all groups and all individual speakers who took part in the discussion. I hope that the Government managed to explain the situation in the Republic of Serbia with the clear statistical data about the labour inspection practice. As I said in my introductory intervention, the Government will work with the ILO together with our social partners and other governmental institutions, and we will ask for technical assistance in order to remedy the situation. We will inform the ILO in our next reports on the implementation of the Conventions about the improvements in this regard.

Worker members – We have heard the explanations of the representative of the Government of Serbia and we wish to emphasize once again that the issue under examination here is of primary importance. Labour inspection is a crucial means of ensuring adequate supervision of the application of labour standards.

We invite the Government of Serbia to bring its legislation into conformity with Conventions Nos 81 and 129. More precisely, it is necessary to repeal sections 16 and 17 of the Law that we referred to in our introductory intervention. That implies lifting all restrictions that prevent labour inspectors from carrying out inspections as envisaged in the Conventions. It is not acceptable for an inspector to be under the threat of a penalty or a fine for undertaking an inspection without previous notice.

We also emphasize that the problems faced by the inspection services in the country are not limited to these aspects. We note in this regard that the Committee of Experts has sent the Government a series of direct requests. For example, we note that the legislation is not clear on the time when inspections are authorized and does not appear to guarantee that they can take place at any hour of the day or night.

The same applies to the absence in the legislation of adequate guarantees of the confidentiality of complaints. We therefore invite the Government of Serbia to make the legislative amendments proposed in consultation with trade unions, as I indicated, to provide a precise and detailed response to the issues raised by the Committee of Experts in its direct requests and to guarantee a sufficient number of inspectors so that they can discharge their duties in full.

To follow up on these elements, we request the Government of Serbia to provide a report to the Committee of Experts containing the amendments that will be made to the Law and its response to the issues raised so that the Committee of Experts can examine it at its next session in November 2019. Finally, we propose that the Government avails itself as much as necessary of ILO technical assistance.

Employer members – On behalf of the Employers, we wish to thank the Government of Serbia for the constructive spirit and the dialogue demonstrated from the outset to resolve this anomaly, and we are also very grateful for the information that has already been provided and which will be provided in the near future.

We are also grateful for the description provided of inspection in the country, fundamentally indicating that in most cases notice is not given of the inspections carried out. For this reason, we consider that it is basically necessary to bring the legislation into conformity with both Conventions, even though the primacy of the Conventions is established in accordance with the Constitution of Serbia. It is equally important for this harmonization to be undertaken with the fundamental objective of avoiding undesirable situations, and particularly to ensure legal certainty, not only for workers, but also for enterprises.

And we also see it as being very positive that the Government of Serbia has requested technical assistance and we hope that this will also be carried out in strict coordination with employers and workers who, in this case, and particularly for this type of legislative proposals, have much to offer, especially to guarantee the effective defence of rights and to ensure a system of inspection that also guarantees legal security and an environment in which enterprises can operate on a level playing field.

For all these reasons, we hope that the Government will take on board all the contributions and recommendations made with the essential purpose of definitively bringing the legislation into conformity with Conventions Nos 81 and 129.

Conclusions of the Committee

The Committee took note of the oral statements made by the Government representative and the discussion that followed.

The Committee noted with concern that the national legislation placed a number of restrictions on the powers of labour inspectors.

Taking into account the Government’s submissions and the discussion that followed, the Committee urges the Government to:

- amend sections 16, 17, 49 and 60 of the Law on Inspection Oversight No. 36/15 without delay so as to ensure that labour inspectors are empowered to enter freely and without previous notice workplaces in order to guarantee adequate and effective supervision in conformity with Convention No. 81 and Convention No. 129; and also

- undertake the legislative reforms in consultation with the social partners as well as to ensure effective collaboration between the labour inspectorate and the social partners.

The Committee calls on the Government to avail itself of ILO technical assistance in relation to these recommendations.

The Committee requests that the Government report in detail on the measures taken to implement these recommendations by 1 September 2019.

Government representative – The Government of the Republic of Serbia wishes to give thanks to the Committee and to all groups and individuals that took part in the discussion yesterday. We read the conclusions and we are of the opinion that conclusions should also refer to labour practices in Serbia and not only to the national legislation, but anyway, the Government said yesterday that we will ask for technical assistance of the ILO in order to remedy this situation and in this, we will work together with other ministries in the Government and with our social partners and we will send to the ILO the information by 1 September this year.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2020, published 109th ILC session (2021)

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2020, published 109th ILC session (2021)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2019, published 109th ILC session (2021)

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2019, published 109th ILC session (2021)

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

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

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

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

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

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2010, published 100th ILC session (2011)

The Committee notes the Government’s report received on 22 September 2009, in response to its previous comments.

Article 3(1)(a) and (c) and (2) of the Convention. Action against illegal employment, and monitoring of legislation relating to conditions of work and the protection of workers. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that the labour inspectorate’s priority for a number of years had been the fight against illegal employment and emphasized that the exercise of such a function by the labour inspectorate should have as its corollary the reinstatement of the statutory rights of all the workers in order to be compatible with the objective of labour inspection. The Committee notes the Government’s statement in its latest report to the effect that the fight against illegal labour is part of the European Union Accession Strategy and the Strategy on Poverty Reduction and focuses on industries where unregistered workers – mostly young and unqualified workers or older workers over 40 years – are most dominant (hotel/restaurant/cafe and tourism, trade, civil engineering and artisan and personal services). The Government adds that illegal employment is primarily due to a transition from public companies towards a huge number of small and medium-sized private enterprises, which has led to an aggravation of working conditions, often with regard to high‑risk jobs (e.g. engineering). This is why the Government is of the view that it is important to carry out regular and intensified inspection. The Government specifies that, where illegal employment has been detected, the employer is ordered to sign employment contracts and charges are pressed against employers in cases where more than one irregular worker is hired; as a result, the number of signed employment contracts and workers reported for compulsory social security coverage usually increases after the inspection is carried out. In order to address key legislative obstacles in this regard, the labour inspectorate has, among other things, proposed amendments to applicable regulations that would require the registration of signed employment contracts and improve the procedure for registration of workers in compulsory social security schemes under section 144 of the Pension and Disability Insurance Act.

Taking due note of the Government’s statement that the fight against illegal employment aims among other things at the “formalization” of employment relations so as to prevent a deterioration of conditions of work and that this has led to an increase of the number of signed employment contracts and workers reported for compulsory social security coverage, the Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide statistical data illustrating the improvements made in the enforcement of the legal provisions relating to conditions of work and the protection of workers through the activities of the labour inspectorate in the framework of the fight against illegal employment.

Article 3(1)(b). Preventive role of the labour inspectorate in the field of occupational safety and health. The Committee takes due note of the information provided by the Government on various activities relative to cooperation with services and institutions dealing with prevention during the period under review, including the organization of 15 round tables on risk assessment throughout the country from 20 to 24 October 2008, with an active participation of representatives from trade unions, employers’ organizations, chambers of commerce, and experts in the area of occupational safety and health (OSH). The Committee would be grateful if the Government would continue to provide information on any action relative to cooperation with all the services and institutions dealing with prevention, including the social partners, the intensification of media campaigns, particularly in high-risk sectors, and the development of promotional material for public information.

Recalling that in its previous comments the Committee had welcomed the implementation of a new policy regarding health and safety in small and medium‑sized enterprises, according to which regular inspection visits would focus on prevention through information and education, the Committee also requests the Government to indicate the part of regular inspection visits targeted at small and medium-sized enterprises, and to provide information on information and education campaigns addressed at such enterprises.

Articles 5(a) and 18.  Effective cooperation of labour inspection services with government institutions and with the judicial system. Adequate penalties imposed and effectively enforced. In its previous comments, the Committee referred to comments by the Confederation of Autonomous Trade Unions of Serbia, according to which the system of penalties against employers is not efficient. The Committee notes that the Government refers in its latest report to the pronouncement of sentences far below the minimum foreseen by the law which constitutes an obstacle to the proper and full application of the penal provisions envisaged under the Labour Law and the Law on Safety and Health at Work (OSH Law). The Government’s report also refers to the need to accelerate judicial procedures so as to overcome related problems with regard to the statute of limitations.

According to the Government, the labour inspectorate organized expert meetings and consultations between the labour inspectorate and bodies responsible for criminal prosecution in Serbia, both at the first instance and at the level of the Council for Criminal Offences. The need to further intensify the cooperation between these bodies was underlined in these meetings with a view to overcoming problems in the duration of the criminal procedures and the amount of the penalties imposed. The importance of exchange of data between municipal bodies and prosecution councils on the collection of fines was also stressed so as to ensure the harmonization and alignment of databases and monitor the economic effects of inspections as well as the efficiency of penal policy. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide statistical data on the average duration of proceedings and the average amount of penalties imposed for violations of the Labour Law and the OSH Law as well as information on the impact of the steps taken in order to overcome problems in the duration of proceedings, the amount of fines and their effective enforcement. The Committee would also like to request the Government to continue to provide information on any further steps taken or envisaged in order to ensure effective cooperation between the labour inspection services and the judicial authorities.

According to the Government, in 2008, 60 requests for the institution of criminal proceedings were filed by the labour inspectorate in relation to offences which apparently concerned only the area of OSH. Recalling that the functions of the labour inspectorate are not limited to the enforcement of the OSH legislation (the OSH Law) but also include the enforcement of legal provisions and advice relating to the conditions of work under the Labour Law, the Committee requests the Government to specify in its next report the manner in which the labour inspectorate addresses violations of legal provisions on hours of work, wages, the employment of children and young persons and other connected matters and the number of proceedings instituted for such violations.

Article 7(3). Adequate initial and further training of labour inspectors. In its previous comments, the Committee had noted the comments of the Union of Employers of Serbia, according to which, following the restructuring of the labour inspectorate as a single body, labour inspectors were not provided with adequate training to perform both legal and technical supervision. According to the Government’s report, the labour inspectorate launched in 2008 a modernization process to be delivered through internal training in three phases so as to enable labour inspectors to undertake integrated inspections. In this framework, an inspection methodology was designed and all inspectors gained adequate knowledge in areas in which they had not yet performed inspections (e.g. engineers in the field of labour relations, lawyers in the field of safety and health at work, etc.). The Committee would be grateful if the Government would communicate additional information as to the number of participants in the training sessions, their duration, the topics covered and the evaluation of the results. It also requests the Government to continue to furnish information on further periodical training for labour inspectors.

Articles 12(1) and 18. Penalties for obstructing labour inspectors in the performance of their duties, particularly with regard to their right of free entry in establishments. In its previous comments, the Committee took note of comments by the Confederation of Autonomous Trade Unions of Serbia, according to which labour inspectors were occasionally denied the right to enter a workplace for inspection purposes, particularly in new private enterprises. The Committee notes that, according to the Government, the 2005 Labour Law and the 2005 OSH Law contain an obligation for the employer to allow the labour inspector to access facilities and premises at any time when occupied by workers, and, should it occur that the labour inspector is prevented from undertaking inspections, the labour inspectorate should address the Ministry of the Interior, which will enable unobstructed inspection with the assistance of the police. Keeping in mind that section 273(10) of the Labour Law and section 69, paragraph 1(32), of the OSH Law set fines in cases where a labour inspector is prevented from conducting an inspection, the Committee once again requests the Government to indicate if any acts of obstruction were reported by labour inspectors to the central inspection authority and, if so, to describe the penalties imposed and the proceedings followed to ensure their effective enforcement in conformity with Article 18 of the Convention.

Article 5(a), 14 and 21(f) and (g). Notification of industrial accidents and cases of occupational  disease. In its previous comments the Committee took note of difficulties in the actual system of notification and registration of occupational accidents and diseases, despite the existence of a legal obligation for the employer to notify these under section 50 of the OSH Law. The Government’s report contains a list of steps that are necessary to ensure effective prevention of occupational accidents and diseases, including coordination of all services, institutions and individuals who work on the prevention of occupational accidents; intensified media campaigns, brochures aimed at promoting a national prevention culture in the field of safety and health at work, the introduction of a continuous data processing practice in all departments and institutions working in the area of OSH; as well as an efficient national system for recording and collecting data on occupational accidents and diseases. With regard to the latter, the Government indicates that the Serbian Institution for Occupational Medicine and Radiology “Dr Dragomir Krajovic” (under the Ministry of Health) is implementing a project on the development of a register for occupational accidents and on the identification, reporting and registration of occupational diseases. Working groups, in which representatives of the labour inspectorate have taken active part, were established in order to consider proposals for a new list of occupational diseases and an efficient registration system for occupational accidents.

The Committee once again draws the Government’s attention to the 1996 ILO code of practice on the recording and notification of occupational accidents and diseases which could offer guidance in this framework. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the measures taken or envisaged in order to strengthen the efficiency of the system for recording and notifying occupational accidents and diseases, including through the adoption of a new list of occupational diseases and a better collaboration of all institutions concerned for that purpose.

Articles 20 and 21. Submission and content of the annual report. In its previous comments, the Committee welcomed the detailed information contained in the annual report on the labour inspection activities for 2007 and requested additional information including on the total number of industrial and commercial establishments under the supervision of the labour inspectorate and the number of workers employed therein. The Committee takes due note of the information provided by the Government as to the number of establishments subject to labour inspection (318,540 businesses of which 10,056 are legal entities and 33,592 are individual entrepreneurs engaged in industrial activities as well as 35,738 legal entities and 72,703 entrepreneurs engaged in the trade sector). Drawing the Government’s attention to its 2009 general observation on the importance of statistics on workplaces liable to inspection and the number of workers covered as a basis for assessing the effectiveness of the labour inspection system and its needs, the Committee takes due note of the Government’s indication that, in its future annual reports, the labour inspectorate will provide statistical data on the number of registered companies engaged in industrial and commercial activities as well as on the number of workers employed therein.

The Committee also notes however, that no further annual report on the labour inspection activities was received. It recalls that, according to Article 20, the annual report should be published by the central authority and duly forwarded to the ILO within a reasonable time after its publication. The Committee therefore requests the Government to ensure that the annual report on the labour inspection activities is forwarded to the ILO on an ongoing basis in accordance with Article 20 and that it contains information on the items listed in Article 21. In particular, in order to assess the coverage of labour inspection, the Committee would be grateful if the Government would also indicate in its next report, in addition to the information usually provided in the annual report, the total number of industrial and commercial establishments under the supervision of the labour inspectorate and the number of workers employed therein (clause (c)), the statistics of inspections carried out (clause (d)), and statistics on the outcome of judicial procedures and penalties imposed
(clause (e)).

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

The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government in 2007, in response to its previous comments, and the annual reports on labour inspection activities for the years 2005, 2006 and 2007. It notes with interest the creation of the labour inspectorate as a body within the Ministry of Labour and Social Policy, following the entry into force of the Law on Ministries in 2007. The Committee further notes the comments of the Union of Employers of Serbia and the observations of the Confederation of Autonomous Trade Unions of Serbia communicated with the Government’s report on 11 October 2007.

Article 3, paragraphs 1(a) and 2, of the Convention. Action against illegal employment, and monitoring of legislation relating to conditions of work and the protection of workers. With reference to its previous comments, the Committee notes that the labour inspectorate’s priority for 2007 was again the fight against illegal employment through targeted and unannounced inspections. Even if inspection activities targeting illegal employment can also be an opportunity to monitor the application of the legal provisions relating to the conditions of work and the protection of workers, the Committee underlines, in its General Survey of 2006 on labour inspection (paragraphs 75–78), that when labour inspectors are invested with the function of verifying the legality of employment, the exercise of such function should have as its corollary the reinstatement of the statutory rights of all the workers if it is to be compatible with the objective of labour inspection. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would supply information on the follow-up measures taken to this end in such cases of infringement with regard to workers engaged in illegal employment and their employers.

Article 3, paragraph 1(b). Preventive role of the labour inspectorate in the field of occupational safety and health. The Committee notes that, in accordance with the 2005 Law on Safety and Health at Work (hereinafter the OSH Law), labour inspectors shall provide information and advice to employers and workers and to their organizations in the area of occupational safety and health (section 63(6)). It notes with interest the implementation of a new policy regarding health and safety of workers in small and medium-sized enterprises, according to which regular inspection visits focus on prevention through information and education. In order to improve the prevention of occupational accidents and diseases and to enforce the relevant legal provisions, the labour inspectorate recommends a set of measures in its 2007 report, such as the establishment of efficient cooperation with all the services and institutions dealing with prevention, including the social partners, the intensification of media campaigns, particularly in high-risk sectors, and the development of promotional material for public information. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide information on any action taken or envisaged further to these recommendations to reinforce the preventive role of labour inspectors.

The Committee notes with interest that, as provided for by Part I (Paragraphs 1–3) of the Labour Inspection Recommendation, 1947 (No. 81), labour inspectors are responsible for supervising the fulfilment of health and safety requirements in establishments prior to the beginning of their business activities, under the Law on Private Entrepreneurs and the Law on Companies.

Articles 5(a) and 18. Effective cooperation of labour inspection services with government institutions and with the judicial system. Adequate penalties imposed and effectively enforced. The Committee notes the allegations of the Confederation of Autonomous Trade Unions of Serbia, according to which the system of penalties against employers is not efficient. It observes that the annual report for 2007 states the number of requests instituting minor offence proceedings (5,942) and the number of criminal reports (22) established by labour inspectors, without indicating how these requests and reports were processed once they were transmitted by the labour inspectors to the competent authorities. However, according to this report, a closer cooperation was established with the Ministry of Justice and the bodies dealing with minor offences. Furthermore, guidelines for the institution of the minor offence proceedings were issued by the director of the labour inspectorate and sent to all departments and sections with a view to improving the efficiency of labour inspectors in drafting the requests for instituting such proceedings. The Committee requests the Government to supply information regarding the follow-up by the competent authorities to the requests and reports on offences committed, particularly on the penalties imposed, and to indicate how it is ensured that these penalties are effectively enforced. With reference to its general observation of 2007 in which it emphasizes the importance of developing effective cooperation between the labour inspection services and the judicial authorities, the Committee encourages the Government to continue to take measures to strengthen such cooperation.

Article 7, paragraph 3. Adequate initial and further training of labour inspectors. In response to the Committee’s request on the training of labour inspectors, the Government refers to section 62 of the OSH Law which prescribes the qualifications required for being recruited to perform inspection activities in the field of occupational safety and health as a labour inspector. However, it adds that the Ministry of Labour and Social Policy does not have a training centre for labour inspectors or any special programme for basic and advanced training for labour inspectors. New inspectors receive in-house training from more experienced colleagues, and conferences, consultations and seminars are organized on the application of the Law on Labour and the OSH Law, the list of which is in the annual report. The Committee notes, in this regard, the allegation of the Union of Employers of Serbia, according to which, following the restructuring of the labour inspectorate as a single body, labour inspectors are not provided with adequate training to perform both legal and technical supervision. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would supply information on any measures envisaged or taken to ensure that labour inspectors receive more adequate training with regard to the complexity of their missions.

Article 8. Gender balance within the labour inspectorate. The Committee notes with interest that the numbers of men and women in managerial positions (head of department and head of section) in the labour inspectorate are equal (15).

Articles 12, paragraph 1, and 18. Penalties for obstructing labour inspectors in the performance of their duties, particularly with regard to their right of free entry in establishments. The Committee notes that section 273(10) of the 2005 Labour Law and section 69, paragraph 1(32) of the 2005 OSH Law set fines in cases where a labour inspector is prevented from conducting an inspection. In its communication, the Confederation of Autonomous Trade Unions of Serbia alleges that labour inspectors are occasionally denied the right to enter a workplace for inspection purposes, particularly in new private enterprises. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would supply information in response to this allegation. It requests the Government to indicate if any acts of obstruction were reported by labour inspectors to the central inspection authority and, if so, to describe the penalties imposed and the proceedings followed to ensure their effective enforcement. The Government is further requested to supply information on the legal provisions governing the right of labour inspectors to enter workplaces liable to inspection, as prescribed by Article 12, paragraph 1(a) and (b), of the Convention.

Article 14. Notification of industrial accidents and cases of occupational disease. In its report for 2007, the labour inspectorate observes that, despite the existence of a legal obligation for an employer to notify occupational accidents and diseases (section 50 of the OSH Law), the actual system is not efficient. With regard to industrial accidents, the inspectorate reports difficulties due to differences in the methodological approaches used to record, process and evaluate the information on accidents as well as a lack of effective communication and exchange of information among the institutions concerned. It also states that the notification of occupational diseases is sporadic and inadequate and that, as a result, data concerning such diseases are incomplete. Drawing the Government’s attention to the 1996 ILO code of practice on the recording and notification of occupational accidents and diseases which offers guidance in this respect, the Committee requests it to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to strengthen the efficiency of the system for recording and notifying occupational accidents and diseases and to encourage the collaboration of all institutions concerned for that purpose, with a view to reducing their occurrence.

Article 21. Content of the annual report. The Committee notes with interest that the report contains detailed information on the labour inspection activities for 2007 and wishes to underline the quality of this information. However, the Committee observes that it does not contain some of the statistical data necessary for the appraisal of the scope of competence of the labour inspection system. The Committee therefore requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that the total number of industrial and commercial establishments under the supervision of the labour inspectorate and the number of workers employed therein will be included in the next annual report. Moreover, in order to assess the coverage of labour inspection, the Committee would also be grateful if the Government would indicate, in addition to the number of inspections carried out, the number of establishments visited. With reference to the above comments under Article 18 of the Convention, the Committee emphasizes that Article 21(e) requires the inclusion in the annual report of statistics of penalties imposed, and hopes that the next annual report on the work of inspection services will also contain such information.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2005, published 95th ILC session (2006)

The Committee notes a report, received in December 2003, on the application of the Convention in the Republic of Serbia, and a report, received in August 2005, on the application of the Convention in the Republic of Montenegro. It requests the Government to provide additional information in its next report on the following points.

Republic of Serbia

1. Functions of labour inspectors. The Committee notes that labour inspectors exercising their functions in fields other than occupational safety and health focus their efforts in particular on combating illegal employment. It points out that any further duties which may be entrusted to labour inspectors shall not be such as to interfere with the effective discharge of their primary duties or to prejudice in any way the authority and impartiality which are necessary to inspectors in their relations with employers and workers (Article 3, paragraph 2, of the Convention). The Committee requests the Government to indicate in this regard the duties entrusted to labour inspectors pursuant to the Law on Private Entrepreneurs and the Law on Enterprises. Please also provide copies of the State Administration Law and the Law on General Administrative Proceedings.

2. Collaboration with employers and workers. Please provide information on the measures taken to ensure effective collaboration between officials of the labour inspectorate and employers and workers or their organizations (Article 5(b)).

3. Initial and subsequent training of labour inspectors. Please provide detailed information on the measures implemented to ensure that labour inspectors receive adequate training both at the time of appointment to the service and subsequently (Article 7, paragraph 3).

4. Gender balance within the labour inspectorate. Please indicate the proportion of women within the labour inspectorate, stating their distribution by grade and whether special duties are assigned to them, as envisaged by Article 8 of the Convention.

5. Material resources. Please provide information on the resources, premises, equipment and vehicles furnished to labour inspectors for the performance of their duties, as well as the accessibility of local offices for those concerned (Article 11, paragraph 1). Please transmit any text providing for the reimbursement to labour inspectors of any travelling and incidental expenses which may be necessary for the performance of their duties (Article 11, paragraph 2).

6. Prosecution of violations. Please indicate whether exceptions to the principle of immediate prosecution of violations of legal provisions are provided for by the national legislation, in order that prior notice may be given so that the situation may be resolved or that preventive measures be taken, as provided for by Article 17, paragraph 1, and whether labour inspectors are able, in accordance with Article 17, paragraph 2, to give warning or advice instead of instituting or recommending proceedings.

7. Penalties. Please indicate whether the national legislation establishes penalties for obstructing labour inspectors in the performance of their duties (Article 18).

8. Publication of an annual report. The Committee notes that no annual inspection report has been transmitted to the International Labour Office. It requests the Government to ensure that such a report on the subjects covered by Article 21 is published and transmitted to the International Labour Office in the form and within the time limits prescribed by Article 20.

Republic of Montenegro

1. Functions of labour inspectors. Please indicate the manner in which effect is given to Article 3 of the Convention.

2. Structure and organization of the labour inspectorate. Please provide information on the structure and organization of the labour inspectorate and transmit the organization chart of the inspection services (Article 4). Please transmit the Labour Inspection Act (Official Journal of the Republic of Montenegro No. 69/03), the Occupational Safety Act (Official Journal of the Republic of Montenegro No. 79/04) and the Decree on Joint Inspection (Official Journal of the Republic of Montenegro No. 48/2003).

3. Collaboration with employers and workers. Please provide information on any measures taken to promote collaboration between the officials of the labour inspectorate and the employers and workers or their organizations, in accordance with Article 5(b).

4. Initial and further training of labour inspectors. Please provide information on the measures taken to ensure that labour inspectors receive adequate training at the time of appointment to the service and communicate detailed information on the annual seminar organized for labour inspectors, its length, programme and the number of inspectors participating (Article 7, paragraph 3).

5. Gender balance within the labour inspectorate. Please indicate the proportion of women within the labour inspectorate, indicating their distribution by grade and whether special duties are assigned to them, as provided for by the provisions of Article 8.

6. Workplaces liable to inspection and workers employed therein. Please indicate the number of workplaces liable to inspection and the workers employed therein (Articles 10 and 21(c)).

7. Reimbursement of expenses to labour inspectors. Please transmit any text providing for the reimbursement to labour inspectors of any travelling and incidental expenses which may be necessary for the performance of their duties (Article 11, paragraph 2).

8. Powers of inspectors. Please indicate the measures taken to give effect to each of the provisions of Article 12.

9. Obligations of labour inspectors. Please indicate the provisions prohibiting labour inspectors from having any direct or indirect interest in the undertakings under their supervision and ensuring their professional secrecy and discretion, in accordance with Article 15.

10. Prosecution of violations. Please indicate the manner in which effect is given to the provisions of Article 17.

11. Publication of an annual report. The Committee notes the report on the work of the labour inspectorate for the period between 2001 and 2005. It requests the Government to take such measures as are necessary to ensure that the report on the work of the labour inspectorate is prepared on an annual basis and that it contains information on all the subjects covered by Article 21 of the Convention, including statistics on workplaces liable to inspection and the number of workers employed therein (clause (c)). The Committee also requests the Government to ensure that this report is published and transmitted to the International Labour Office within the time limits prescribed by Article 20.