Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 2017, Publication: 106th ILC session (2017)



A Government representative reaffirmed his Government’s commitment to full compliance with the international labour Conventions that had been ratified. Since the last session of the Committee on the Application of Standards, dialogue had been reinforced with the Federation of Chambers and Associations of Commerce and Production of Venezuela (FEDECAMARAS). It should be emphasized that, at the request of the Government, a tripartite meeting would be held on 13 June 2017 with the national social partners accredited to the Conference, which would also be attended by the Director-General of the ILO. He regretted that ILO bodies were once again being used to single out countries where policies favoured the workers. The ILO should ensure the transparency of procedures and fair treatment. In its most recent comment, the Committee of Experts noted that the Government had provided indicators reporting a sustained employment policy since 1999 in favour of Venezuelan citizens, including statistics on youth employment. The comment also noted the information provided in June 2016 in the context of the discussion by the Committee on the Application of Standards in relation to the Second Socialist Plan for the Economic and Social Development of the Nation 2013–19 and the implementation of a Bolivarian Economic Agenda. The creation of the National Council for the Productive Economy (CNEP), which included the participation of the most representative workers’ confederation in the country and the most prominent employers in the Venezuelan economy, was also mentioned in the comment. This showed that there was a real and true employment policy in the country, which had reduced the level of unemployment, despite the fall in the price of oil, the economic war and the disturbances of public order promoted by opposition factions. He considered that the inclusion of the present case in the list to be discussed in 2017 was not justified, as the Committee of Experts had not commented on any failure of compliance, but had confined itself to requesting examples or additional information. That information, in accordance with the request made by the Committee of Experts, should be provided in the next regular report, and not to the Committee on the Application of Standards. In the absence of any technical justification, it had to be concluded that the inclusion of the present case in the list had political undertones, which ran counter to the principles of objectivity, transparency and impartiality which needed to prevail in the ILO. He added that, despite the insistence of certain employers that his Government should be brought before the Committee on the Application of Standards, that would not result in private, capitalist and individual interests holding sway over those of the working class and the Venezuelan people. Allegations and information were reflected in the comment of the Committee of Experts concerning the alleged absence of employment plans, with references being made to figures that were not known to the Government and were based on imprecise data, subjective considerations and unfounded information that the Government rejected. Other minority trade union organizations had collaborated to provide figures without giving their sources, nor the methods used for their compilation. However, despite all of the above, he said that with the best will and respect for the members of the Committee on the Application of Standards, updated information would be provided on the employment policy of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela.

In 1999, when the Venezuelan Government had taken office, the unemployment rate in the country had been 10.6 per cent. In April 2016, the unemployment rate was estimated at 7.3 per cent, as a result of clear and effective policies. As indicated by the Committee of Experts, the current unemployment rate for men was 6.7 per cent, compared with 8.3 per cent for women, which bore witness to the efforts made to achieve parity and equality of occupational opportunities for women and men. The indicators could be consulted on the website of the National Statistical Institute (INE). The Government had led a change of economic model to reduce dependence on the oil market and defeat the economic warfare, through measures including: export incentives; the removal of administrative restrictions and measures to facilitate the repatriation of capital; the initiation of a system of auctions for the purchase of currency at competitive prices, and access to credit for producers. The enterprises that had benefited the most had been small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). The Government also provided assistance to businesses affected by opposition factions so as to enable them to recommence and maintain their enterprise through financing. The development plan, which included the employment plan, was known as the Homeland Plan. During the meetings held with FEDECAMARAS, its leaders had expressed disagreement with the Plan, which showed that it included a real employment policy. The national social partners accredited to the Conference could request more information on the effect given to the Convention during the tripartite meeting on 13 June 2017. He regretted that FEDECAMARAS, as well as certain minority trade union organizations, despite the invitation made by the Government to discuss the holding of a National Constituent Assembly, had refused to take part in it. He considered that it was contradictory to call for social dialogue in the ILO and then not to take up the opportunities provided to express their views and opinions. He reiterated his objection to the inclusion of the present case on the list of those to be discussed, particularly as the Convention was a promotional instrument and consultations were not binding, as indicated in the 2010 General Survey on the employment instruments in relation to the content and nature of consultations. He also referred to the views expressed by the Employer members in the Committee on the Application of Standards in 2015 concerning the lack of competence of the Committee of Experts to assess the validity, effectiveness and justification of the measures adopted in accordance with the Convention and agreed with their views on its promotional nature, as it did not specify the content of employment policy and recognized the need to take into account the national political, social and economic context. In conclusion, he hoped that the discussion would be confined to the Convention under examination.

The Worker members recalled that this was the second consecutive year that the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela had come before the Conference Committee in relation to the application of the Convention. Although they had previously urged the Government and different sides of the political dispute in the country to resolve the impasse through social dialogue, the situation had deteriorated further. Highlighting the role of social dialogue and tripartism as a possible avenue for peace, the Worker members appealed to all parties to resist the temptation to use the economic crisis and social discontent for political purposes, which would cause greater suffering to the majority of the population. In this regard, they regretted that the Government had not responded to the Conference Committee recommendation that it accept a high-level tripartite ILO mission since 2016. The Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela faced many challenges, including a deep economic crisis that had had a profound impact on employment generation. That state of affairs was also a consequence of past economic decisions. Between 1999 and 2014, the country had benefited from high oil prices, which had allowed the Government to invest in the economy and expand public policies. During that period, the Government had nationalized companies. Such measures had had a positive impact on the creation of jobs, including a decline in unemployment from 14.5 per cent in 1999 to 6.7 per cent in 2014, and had helped foster decent work and reduce informality. High oil prices had also enabled the pursuit of social policies for the poor, and poverty had been reduced from 49.4 per cent in 1999 to 32 per cent in 2013, while extreme poverty had fallen from 21.7 per cent to 9.8 per cent. However, the Government had behaved as if high oil prices would last forever. Throughout the period of economic growth, no effective measures had been taken to end the dependence of the economy on the export of a single product. To the contrary, dependence on the hydrocarbon sector had grown dramatically with oil accounting for 96 per cent of the country’s total exports. It would be difficult to reduce the country’s historical dependence on oil overnight, but efforts to break dependency had not been sufficient. It was no surprise that the economy had been seriously affected by the collapse in international oil prices at the end of 2014. The collapse of the economy had resulted in a deeper crisis; hyperinflation; currency speculation; and shortages in, and hoarding of, food and medicines, which in turn had impacted on the quality of employment, increased both job insecurity and informality, with negative consequences on the standard of living of the poorest groups. Some estimates suggested that GDP had contracted significantly in 2016 and that the agricultural sector had declined, further exacerbating food shortages. The decrease in the number of jobs created had also affected workers. According to government data, unemployment had risen to 7.5 per cent in 2016. Such figures could have been even higher, as underemployment or precarious forms of employment had not been taken into account by official statistics. If workers with reduced working hour contracts had been considered in these data, unemployment would have been around 11 per cent.

With reference to the Government’s comments on the Second Socialist Plan for the Economic and Social Development of the Nation 2013–19, the Worker members invited the Government to provide details on how this programme had taken account of the relationship between employment objectives and other economic and social objectives. The Committee of Experts had referred to Resolution No. 9855 of 22 July 2016, which had been adopted under the State of Exception and Economic Emergency declared by the Government. They felt that in such a context, the Government should have ensured that no worker would be temporarily placed in another enterprise without his or her consent. With regard to the participation of the social partners, the Worker members recalled Article 3 of the Convention and several instances in which the attention of the Conference Committee had been drawn to the lack of measures to enable effective social dialogue. The economic crisis could only be overcome if the social partners joined in the decision-making process in relation to employment policy. Among the conclusions in the report of the ILO tripartite high-level mission in 2014, the Government had been called upon to establish a tripartite round table with the participation of the ILO to deal with all matters related to industrial relations, including the holding of consultations on legislation concerning labour, social and economic matters. Reiterating the need to implement the commitments made by the Government to the Governing Body, they regretted that the Government had not fully implemented these commitments, in particular the elaboration of a concrete schedule of meetings with employers’ and workers’ representatives. The Worker members expected to see tangible progress, in line with the objectives that had been set out in the agreed workplan, to ensure ILO standards were implemented and monitored with the full involvement of the social partners.

The Employer members observed that, for the second successive year, the case under examination concerned the application of a priority Convention which sought the promotion of employment policies. They added that in the present case the issue did not relate to the lack of replies by the Government, but more their evasive nature. In its latest comment, the Committee of Experts addressed two different aspects, namely, in relation to Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention, employment policy, labour market trends, the transitional labour regime, youth employment and the development of SMEs and, with regard to Article 3, the participation of the social partners, which was possibly the most relevant issue. Observations on these subjects had been made by various organizations, in addition to FEDECAMARAS, the most representative and historical employers’ organization, including the National Union of Workers of Venezuela (UNETE), the historical workers’ organization, the General Confederation of Labour (CGT) and the Confederation of Autonomous Trade Unions (CODESA). With reference to the observations made, there were common issues, such as the absence of statistical data. They were grateful for the information provided by the Government representative in relation to unemployment and noted that they had endeavoured to obtain official data without success. It would be useful for the INE to analyse the provisions of the Labour Statistics Convention, 1985 (No. 160), which had not yet been ratified by the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela. It would probably be helpful to examine Convention No. 160 with a view to its ratification, as it was instrumental in the formulation of an appropriate employment policy. The absence of information could be caused by the incapacity of the Government to produce data, or the desire to conceal it, neither of which was ideal.

The World Bank had recently noted the existence in the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela of a fiscal deficit estimated at the end of 2016 as being over 20 per cent of GDP; one of the highest inflation rates in the world; the depreciation of the currency, which was being sold on the black market; and a reduction of international reserves by over half, at US$1.3 billion. From an economic perspective, the country was suffering from a process of exhaustion from stagflation. On the demand side, private consumption was severely affected, suffocated by the fall in real income, the scarcity of basic consumer necessities and the ever higher transaction costs of doing business. Confidence levels were at rock bottom and the high levels of uncertainty, combined with the lack of availability of capital goods, had resulted in a major fall in investment. Although there were no data on gross capital formation or precise figures for direct foreign investment, there were reports in the news of very representative international enterprises that were leaving the country. There was also a general contraction of supply, due to price controls, controls on the profit margins of producers and service providers, and restrictions on the purchase of currency, despite recent liberalization measures, which had affected the purchase of intermediary goods and capital goods. That had been prejudicial to the manufacturing industry, construction, the agricultural sector, services, retail trading, transport, storage, financial and insurance services. The Economist Intelligence Unit had recently made an analysis of the consequences of the announced increases in the minimum wage. In 2015, it had been increased three times by between 10 and 20 per cent. In 2016, it had been raised on four occasions by between 20 and 50 per cent. But in 2017, it had been increased twice, without dialogue with the representative organizations, with an adjustment on the last occasion on 1 May of 60 per cent. The analysis concluded that: “The move is highly unlikely to placate widespread anti-Governmental sentiment. The Banco Central de Venezuela (the central bank) is likely to print money to fund the increase in the minimum wage (annual growth in monetary aggregates has already risen from 160 per cent at the start of 2017 to 216 per cent in late April), with a consequent rise in inflation likely to erode purchasing power. Moreover, shortages of food and other consumer items remain widespread, negating the impact of higher wages. … [T]hese developments indicate that inflation will continue to rise, and are in line with our current forecast that inflation will average 562 per cent in 2017, compared with 422 per cent in 2016. This will be a factor contributing to ongoing and increasing popular unrest.” The requests made in 2016 by the Committee of Experts had still not been given effect to. The Employer members considered that it was essential to call on the Government to implement all the action and policies that had been requested. These requests were related to procedures in other ILO bodies. With reference to the intervention by the Government representative, they expressed concern at the indication by the Government that the “most prominent employers” participated in the CNEP, rather than the most representative organization of employers. This was a clear violation of Article 3 of the Convention. They emphasized the link between this provision and Case No. 2254, which was before the Committee on Freedom of Association, which had expressed serious concern at the persistence of the situation with regard to social dialogue. In view of the lack of progress, it had been decided to hold a direct conversation with the Government during the Conference. As employers, they hoped for a climate of constructive, inclusive and genuine dialogue.

The Employer member of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela recalled that the case was being discussed once again after one year, as the situation in the country was so unsustainable and all the indicators had substantially worsened. The Government had not given effect to the conclusions of the Committee on the Application of Standards, had not engaged in tripartite consultation with a view to drawing up an employment policy, had not established a tripartite dialogue forum and had not accepted the ILO high-level tripartite mission envisaged by the Conference Committee. The Government maintained that it had held meetings with employers in the CNEP, but FEDECAMARAS had not been invited to participate. Accordingly, the agreements concluded with individual or sectoral employers’ and workers’ organizations could not replace the institutional participation of FEDECAMARAS and could not be regarded as committing other employers through the discussion of the transversal issues and structural reforms required by the country in the economic field. The measures decided by the CNEP had not had a positive effect. Indeed, the opposite was true, in view of the lack of genuine dialogue, as illustrated by the closure of so many enterprises due to the absence of raw materials, the lack of economic viability or the failure of the Government to fulfil its financial and commercial obligations. She referred to the major fall in imports and the significant shortages of food and medicine which, in some cases, amounted to between 80 and 100 per cent. By the end of 2017, the accumulated contraction of GDP was estimated to have reached over 30 per cent over a four-year period. At the end of 2016, imports had fallen by 45 per cent. Productive capacity was stagnating at around 60 per cent. According to the latest INE figures on the labour force, in one year since April 2016, the losses included 110,000 employers and 224,500 jobs in comparison to 2015. There were no more up-to-date figures, as the main official macroeconomic indicators had not been published for 17 months. It was estimated that the economically active population had fallen by 198,000 persons, with a significant decrease among women and young persons aged between 15 and 24 years. The economically inactive population had risen by 612,000 persons.

According to the figures of the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), foreign investment in Latin America in 2015 was approximately US$134 billion, of which the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela only received US$2 billion (approximately 1.9 per cent). It was not by chance that in 2016 over 45 transnational enterprises had declared losses in their operations in the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, or had definitively ended their operations in the country. Over and above the economy, the country was immersed in a deep-rooted political and social crisis, verging on a humanitarian crisis. Many Venezuelans were dying due to the lack of medicine and 9.6 million were eating two or fewer meals a day. The 2016 Living Conditions Survey (ENCOVI) had found that 93 per cent of households did not have sufficient income to cover food and that 82 per cent of the population was living in poverty. Some 88 per cent of young persons wished to leave the country in search of better opportunities elsewhere. It was therefore understandable that there had been over 70 uninterrupted days of street protests. The loss of over 70 lives, mostly of very young people, was to be deplored. She told the Government that it was now time to engage in genuine social dialogue, and not merely information meetings without a set agenda, action or specific objectives. She added that in parallel the threats and insults were continuing against the leaders of FEDECAMARAS through the State social communication media, in which they were accused of being murderers, conspirators and instigators of coups d’état. She emphasized that FEDECAMARAS agreed to participate in the meeting to be held on 13 June 2017, but had not received a programme for the meeting. Recently, the President of the Republic had accused FEDECAMARAS of joining the opposition because it had refused to participate in the National Constituent Assembly convened by the Government, which had been challenged by various figures, including the Attorney-General of the Republic and several magistrates of the Supreme Court of Justice, and was subject to various legal actions calling for it to be found unconstitutional. She emphasized that FEDECAMARAS was not applying double standards. It would not participate in and validate a process intended to dictate a new Constitution without the approval of the Venezuelan people. However, it was necessary to discuss the means of resolving the serious problems that were in the common interest and which affected the whole of the country. In particular, FEDECAMARAS wished to discuss the reactivation of the production system, structural measures to address inflation, the recovery of the purchasing power of wages, plans to attract and maintain investment, the cessation of the forced occupation of enterprises and respect for free entrepreneurial initiative. It was essential and urgent to engage in a process of genuine, effective, responsible, serious and legitimate social dialogue. It was also necessary to build the essential basis of trust for such a dialogue, as an employment policy that was not based on consultation would not be effective, based as it was merely on wage increases every two or three months, which were nullified by inflation. Employers and workers needed to participate in the design of public policies to create the basic conditions to guarantee the sustainability of enterprises and decent work, thereby offering a decent life to Venezuelans. In conclusion, she called on the Committee on the Application of Standards, as the Government had not accepted the high-level tripartite mission requested the previous year, to request the Governing Body to examine once again at its next session the establishment of a Commission of Inquiry.

The Worker member of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela denounced the employers’ organization FEDECAMARAS for trying to use the Committee for political ends. For the last 15 years, FEDECAMARAS had been refusing to recognize the Constitution of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, the public authorities and the Basic Labour Act (LOTTT), which guaranteed the application of all ILO fundamental Conventions. FEDECAMARAS, far from pursuing a policy that would promote employment and the application of the Convention, had embarked on an economic war with the aim of ousting the Bolivarian revolution from power and, alongside multinationals, of appropriating the country’s immense natural resources. In that respect, he highlighted the dismissal of more than 9,000 workers by one of FEDECAMARAS’ affiliated enterprises, known for being the largest private sector producer of food in the country. Moreover, he denounced the perpetration of acts of violence by FEDECAMARAS against medium-sized trade and production enterprises, to which the Government had needed to grant bank loans to recover the jobs lost. All such actions threatened to undermine the great progress made by the Venezuelan people, which included larger and permanent pay rises, job stability, the lowest unemployment figures in the region, free and high-quality education, and free access to health care. The President of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela had publicly invited Venezuela’s entrepreneurs to join the national body for tripartite dialogue, the CNEP, which brought together the workers of the Bolivarian Socialist Confederation of Workers (CBST), some of the employers affiliated to FEDECAMARAS, and the Government, with a view to formulating economic policies that would replace the capitalist model of production. In his speech to the plenary of the Conference on 7 July 2017, the President of FEDECAMARAS had said that legitimate social dialogue should be established in the country; that the State and the public authorities, which should be independent, should be restructured; that there should be a change of economic model; that inflation should be tackled; and that the National Constituent Assembly convened by the President of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela was unlawful. Such a statement by the President of FEDECAMARAS was a call to confrontation, not dialogue. FEDECAMARAS had also refused to participate in the initiative for broad, in-depth social dialogue in the National Constituent Assembly. Venezuelan workers, and the people in general, did not want interference in their internal affairs. It was for them to resolve their problems through dialogue. Together with the Government, workers’ organizations would ensure that the Convention was applied. In that regard, he highlighted the fierce fight within the framework of the Bolivarian revolution to win many of the rights previously denied by FEDECAMARAS. Among those rights, he highlighted the increase in the minimum wage on 34 occasions in 18 years, which had benefited 14 million workers; the negotiation of 2,177 collective agreements in four years, providing protection for more than 8 million workers; the construction of 1.5 million homes for workers; the provision of buses and taxis for trade unions for collective passenger transport; the constant creation of new jobs in agricultural production; credit support for SMEs; the promotion of workers’ production councils as organizations for the working class to direct the planning and monitoring of production processes; and the creation of the CNEP. For all those reasons, he roundly rejected the complaint presented by the employers’ organization FEDECAMARAS.

The Government member of Panama, speaking on behalf of the group of Latin American and Caribbean countries (GRULAC), observed that the 2016 report of the Committee of Experts only requested additional information, and did not indicate any alleged violation of the Convention. In its report, the Committee of Experts noted the information provided by the Government on the adoption of various measures within the framework of the Convention, including: the Second Plan for the Economic and Social Development of the Nation 2013–19; the implementation of strategic measures known as the “Bolivarian Economic Agenda”; the creation of the CNEP in 2016 as a forum for tripartite dialogue to address the development of strategic economic areas in the country; and the Act for Productive Youth, No. 392 of 2014. He was confident that the Government would continue to provide information on the application of the Convention and encouraged it to strengthen tripartite social dialogue. He drew attention to the assistance provided by the Office for the tripartite meeting requested by the Government, which would be held the following week during the Conference, with the participation of Venezuelan employers’ and workers’ delegations.

The Government member of Cuba, expressing support for the statement by GRULAC and welcoming the information provided by the Government, considered that the Conference Committee, when analysing this case, should take into account the information supplied by the Government in its report, which appeared to be noted in the comments by the Committee of Experts in 2016. This information included the employment policy, the main objectives and lines of action of which were reflected in the Plan for the Economic and Social Development of the Nation, 2016–20; the increases in the minimum wage; regulations on employment protection; the adoption of an enhanced plan to protect employment, wages and pensions; a strategy to promote the entry into the labour market of young people; and the creation of the CNEP as a forum for tripartite dialogue on the development of strategic economic areas in the country. The Government had met its obligations in relation to employment policy, despite the climate of violence and the economic and media war, which were being manipulated from outside the country with the aim of destabilizing Venezuelan society. She concluded that there was no justification for the case to be discussed by the Committee on the Application of Standards. As, in accordance with article 22 of the ILO Constitution, the information requested from the Government by the Committee of Experts could be included in the next report, she called on the Committee on the Application of Standards to ensure compliance with legal procedures.

The Employer member of Peru said that the information provided by FEDECAMERAS showed that the economic and employment policy applied in the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela did not promote employment, and certainly not productive employment, which meant that in practice, employment was not likely to be freely chosen. He added that the Government had repeatedly failed to comply with the requests of the Committee of Experts relating to the establishment of a body for social dialogue with the most representative workers’ and employers’ organizations. He therefore called on the Committee on the Application of Standards to urge the Government to comply with the Convention and to use all available ILO mechanisms to ensure that the Government consulted the most representative workers’ and employers’ organizations to draw up economic and employment policies.

The Government member of Nicaragua supported the statement by GRULAC and thanked the Government for the information provided. He reiterated his concern at the attempts to politicize the work of the ILO, considering that the discussion of the case had been forced without any technical grounds. He recalled that the Committee of Experts had not noted any non-compliance with the Convention and had merely requested additional information and examples of application. He referred to the intervention by the Employer members at the 104th Session of the International Labour Conference concerning the role of the Committee on the Application of Standards in relation to the Convention, which should be limited to controlling the existence of an employment policy with the objective of full and productive employment, and that it should not judge the validity, efficiency or justification for the measures adopted. Based on those comments, and in light of the information provided by the Government, there should be no doubt that the Government was in compliance with the Convention. He welcomed the tripartite meeting which, with the support of the ILO Director-General, would be held on 13 June 2017 between the Government and the Venezuelan employers’ and workers’ delegations. He hoped that the meeting would help to strengthen tripartite social dialogue in the country. Finally, he invited the Committee on the Application of Standards to carry out a balanced and fair evaluation of the case and urged it not to go along with political manoeuvres which distanced the ILO from the noble objective for which it had been founded.

The Employer member of Honduras noted that the country did not have an active employment policy for the promotion of full, productive and freely chosen employment, and that the Government did not maintain social dialogue with the main partners in the country. He recalled that this governance Convention was a priority for the ILO and that, since 1990, the Committee of Experts had made 14 observations on its application. He added that, although in 2016 the Conference had urged the Government to accept a high-level tripartite mission, the Government had not yet given effect to that request. He emphasized that the Committee on the Application of Standards needed to secure from the Government acceptance of the mission or of ILO technical assistance for the establishment of a tripartite round table dialogue. If the Government would not accept either of these proposals within the framework of the Conference, the issue would need to be referred to the next session of the Governing Body to examine the establishment of a Commission of Inquiry to examine the implementation of the Convention.

The Government member of Mauritania indicated that the Government had provided information on the significant efforts made to ensure full employment, and thus to continue guaranteeing the dignity of all the citizens of the country. The Committee of Experts had received the 2016 report on the application of the Convention, which highlighted the progress made in the field of employment promotion. Moreover, the 2016 observations of the Committee of Experts had been confined to asking the Government for further information. The presentation of the employment policy had received the recognition that it deserved, which was undoubtedly why the Committee of Experts had not noted any failure to apply the Convention, confining itself to asking the Government for more precise examples. With a view to consolidating the conditions required for a successful employment policy, the Government had strengthened social dialogue. It was therefore necessary to encourage the employers to agree to associate with the workers and the Government in order to determine the best ways and means of achieving the goals of this policy. In light of the above, it could be deduced that the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela had a very solid employment policy, with good wages, buoyant youth employment and a satisfactory situation of the elderly and retirees.

The Worker member of Honduras said that, despite the application of labour laws, the country was once again the victim of a political game. He highlighted the significant progress made in social protection and the defence of labour rights, as well as the role that had been played by the CBST. He indicated that, although the report of the Committee of Experts had not mentioned any non-compliance with the Convention, worrying reports from trade unions indicated that some employers affiliated to FEDECAMARAS had been sabotaging the production of goods and services, closing their enterprises and throwing hundreds of workers onto the street. However, he acknowledged the actions of other employers affiliated to FEDECAMARAS, which were maintaining high levels of productivity in their enterprises, respecting the protection of workers and participating with the Government and workers in the CNEP.

An observer representing the International Organisation of Employers (IOE) recalled that the Convention required the declaration and pursuit of an active policy designed to promote full, productive and freely chosen employment. Such a policy should aim to ensure that there was work for all who sought employment, productive work, freedom of choice in employment, and the opportunity for workers to qualify for and use their skills in a job for which they were well suited. It also required consultation with the social partners. Productive and sustainable employment was the basis for decent work, wealth creation and social justice. Employment was the result of investment and a measure of the success of an employment policy was whether it encouraged or discouraged investment and job creation.

This was the second consecutive year that the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela had come before the Committee. The Government had not implemented the Committee’s 2016 conclusions and the situation in the country had since worsened. The opposition-led Congress had reported that consumer prices had jumped 741 per cent year-on-year in February 2017. Since 2014, both overall and extreme poverty had deteriorated to the worst levels seen in at least a decade and a half. Thousands of businesses in the private sector had shut down, jobs had been lost and informality had increased. The social and economic situation in the country was dramatic and had deteriorated further. She called on the Government to comply with the provisions of the Convention in both law and practice, by pursuing an active policy designed to promote full, productive and freely chosen employment. She recalled the role of representative workers’ organizations and FEDECAMARAS in this regard, as well as the recommendations of the ILO Governing Body, ILO supervisory bodies and the report of the high-level mission that had visited the country in 2014.

The Government member of the Islamic Republic of Iran observed that the measures taken by the Government demonstrated its willingness to enhance the situation and deserved due consideration by the Committee. Noting the statistics provided by the Government in its report and the measures taken to promote youth employment, he welcomed the creation of the CNEP to deal with the development of strategic economic areas through tripartite dialogue. The CNEP had already held over 300 meetings. Given that the Convention entailed an array of technical elements, its proper and effective application required technical assistance from the Office. He therefore called on the Office to provide further technical assistance to the Government and reiterated his support for the Government’s continued efforts to enhance national conditions.

The Worker member of Colombia said that the Venezuelan working class was migrating due to the lack of opportunities, food and medical services, and he recalled that in 2016 the Conference had deplored the social and economic crisis affecting the country, as well as the absence of an active employment policy intended to promote full, productive and freely chosen employment. The Committee should urge the Government to accept ILO technical assistance and make definite arrangements for a high-level tripartite mission. He concluded that it was unacceptable for those known as coup plotters and terrorists to be brazen enough to protest at an unacceptable situation.

The Government member of the Plurinational State of Bolivia endorsed the statement by GRULAC and emphasized that in its report the Committee of Experts had made no mention of any specific failure to apply the Convention. The Convention did not oblige States to follow a particular economic and social model, but rather encouraged the implementation of employment policies within the framework of each State’s sovereignty. She emphasized that public policies aimed at achieving and guaranteeing progressive human rights should be analysed while respecting the sovereign discretion of each State, and that the examination undertaken by the Committee of Experts needed to be objective, exhaustive and limited to legal considerations that fell within its mandate.

The Worker member of Benin emphasized that the observation made by the Committee of Experts in 2017 indicated that the Government had provided up-to-date information regarding the Convention, that an employment policy existed in the form of the economic and social development plan, that the social partners had been informed of this policy, as indicated during the discussion in the Conference Committee in 2015, and that they were heard in the CNEP. For these reasons, the discussion of the case of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela was not justified. Thousands of workers were dismissed in other countries without their cases being discussed by the Committee. The employers of Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela wanted to reduce the number of employees in the country. However, they could not dismiss a single worker without authorization from the Government. Minimum wages and pensions had been increased by presidential decree and collective agreements had been negotiated. There were places in the world where workers were far less fortunate, and yet the Conference Committee did not discuss those cases. It was therefore unjustified to condemn the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela. The employers wanted the country to lose everything that the people had won: gains that were admired by countless workers. Workers the world over stood in solidarity with the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela.

The Government member of Pakistan appreciated the statement by GRULAC and welcomed the steps taken by the Government to enforce labour standards in the country through legislative and policy measures, and the constructive engagement with the ILO supervisory bodies. The Government’s agreement to avail itself of ILO technical assistance to resolve these issues through tripartite dialogue was commended. She noted with appreciation the timely submission of reports and information, and the fact that the Committee of Experts’ latest observation did not mention non-compliance. She looked forward to the forthcoming discussions that would be held on 13 June 2017 between the Government, employers and workers, and hoped for a positive outcome.

An observer representing the World Organization of Workers said that the recommendations of the Conference Committee and the other ILO supervisory bodies had been ignored by the Government and that the situation in the country had deteriorated. Almost 7.7 million people were unemployed or working in the informal economy; 60 per cent of households ate only two meals a day; and hundreds of families were now sifting through rubbish to survive in one of the most resource-rich countries in the world. She emphasized the need for change in the country’s economic and social policies and expressed support for a high-level tripartite mission.

The Government member of Myanmar commended the Government for the timely submission of its report and noted that the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela had a sustained employment policy in the framework of its Second Socialist Plan for the Economic and Social Development of the Nation 2013–19. She encouraged objective and constructive dialogue between employers and the Government on compliance with the Convention, particularly on employment policy challenges. She further welcomed the tripartite meeting and hoped to see fruitful results, which would eliminate the need for future examination of the case by the Committee.

The Employer member of Chile recalled that it was the second consecutive year in which the Committee was examining non-compliance with the Convention by the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela. The international community had witnessed the dramatic deepening of the social and economic crisis, and its effects on workers and employers. The absence of an active employment policy intended to promote productive employment was an obstacle to stimulating economic growth and development, raising standards of living, meeting labour needs and overcoming the serious situation of unemployment and underemployment in the country. In addition, the absence of social dialogue in the country continued to have negative effects on employment, as the Government was still not consulting FEDECAMERAS, the most representative employers’ organization, in the formulation of an (as yet non-existent) employment policy. The Venezuelan Government had recently decided to convene a National Constituent Assembly to formulate a new constitution in the country, an initiative which from the outset had been questioned by civil society as it did not respect the procedure set out in the current Constitution. It was in that context that the Government had invited FEDECAMERAS to participate, claiming that in this way it was complying with the requirement to promote social dialogue and to consult, as set out in the Convention. He called on the Government to accept the ILO tripartite mission and to hold genuine tripartite consultations with a view to implementing an active employment policy.

The Government member of the Russian Federation noted the Government’s commitment to constructive cooperation with the ILO and the social partners, including FEDECAMARAS. The Government had continuously worked on the basis of tripartite dialogue with the aim of re-establishing trust and forging consensus. The Committee of Experts had not observed any failure by the country with respect to its obligations under the Convention, which made it difficult to understand the reasons for the inclusion of the case in the list. Effective implementation of the Convention depended on the level of economic and social development of each country. It was a framework Convention that could not be analysed in terms of national-level implementation. In this view, the Committee of Experts could not judge the content of employment policies under the Convention, and repeated examination of this issue by the Conference Committee would not promote ratification of the Convention by other member States. Reiterating his concern at the repeated attempts to use the ILO for political purposes, he welcomed cooperation between the Government and the ILO to implement labour standards in the country and hoped that such cooperation would continue.

The Worker member of the Dominican Republic indicated that successive governments in the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela had achieved greater distributive justice through wage increases, which had reduced inequality. They had also enabled women and young people to assert their rights, which had decreased unemployment and given many people access to literacy and health care. This had caused irritation in certain sectors that had always benefited from the lack of protection of workers in the region. He considered it important that the Employer members had said that the purpose of entrepreneurship was not to interfere in political issues, but to generate wealth. He recalled that a Venezuelan employer had staged a coup d’état in 2002, lasting 48 hours, with the aim of replacing the legitimately elected Government. He expressed astonishment at the case of the Venezuelan citizen who had been burned alive because he was suspected of being a Government sympathizer, and called for an end to that type of act.

The Government member of Burundi indicated that the observation made by the Committee of Experts in 2017 requested the Government to provide detailed information on certain aspects of the Convention, but did not refer to a failure to comply with it. Under Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention, employment policy was specific to each country, took account of the stage and level of economic development, and was pursued by methods that were appropriate to national conditions and practices. The Convention provided for the consultation of representatives of employers and workers in order to take into account their experience and views. These consultations were not however binding, and the Convention did not create any obligation to negotiate the employment policy. The role of the Committee of Experts and the Conference Committee with respect to the Convention was to ensure that member States had the explicit intention to guarantee full and productive employment, which had clearly been demonstrated by the Government. It was not within the remit of the Committee of Experts to assess the validity, effectiveness or justification of the measures adopted in accordance with the Convention. The latter was a promotional instrument which did not specify the content of employment policy, but took into account the political, economic and social context of the country. It was regrettable that this was clearly a political case brought by the Employers’ group against the Government. The discussion of the case yet again by the Conference Committee was unjustified. Lastly, he asked the Government to provide more information on the application of the Convention in its regular report.

The Worker member of Paraguay recalled that, at the previous Conference, the CGT had undertaken to file a complaint against the Government under article 26 of the ILO Constitution for repeated violations regarding freedom of association, discrimination at work and wage protection, with the aim of pressurizing the Government to accept that it was not possible to achieve peace without social justice. Unfortunately, the Governing Body had decided to divide the complaint between the Committee on Freedom of Association and the Committee of Experts. She indicated that the Government was ignoring the recommendations of the ILO, thus exacerbating the situation in the country, which was currently in the throes of a crisis, with the public protesting in the streets and demanding food, health care, medicines, jobs and security. She requested the Government to listen and to adopt the recommendations of the ILO mission that had visited the country, which had noted the absence of an employment policy that was needed to address the increasing poverty affecting an estimated 53 per cent of the population. The imposition of a minimum wage, without consulting the working class, and without complying with the Convention, together with high inflation, had resulted in a fall in purchasing power.

The Government member of Egypt, noting the overview provided by the Government of the measures taken under the Convention, recognized the efforts made to establish tripartite social dialogue with the social partners and to adopt an employment policy that would end unemployment. He encouraged the Government to continue its endeavours to comply with the Convention and to continue to avail itself of ILO technical assistance.

The Worker member of Nicaragua expressed his opposition to the inclusion of the case of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela on the list of cases to be examined by the Committee, as it had political overtones and was aimed at undermining the stability of the country. He reiterated the arrogant attitude demonstrated by the employers through its groundless support for the case. This group of employers, which was part of the economic war against the Government, called for dialogue in the ILO, but then declined to attend or impose conditions when the Government or the workers invited it to engage in dialogue to find solutions to economic issues. The case was not based on any violation, as increasing the minimum wage, in response to the employers’ approach of side-stepping this right, demonstrated the Government’s interest in restoring the purchasing power of workers. Behind the alleged defence of human rights, action was being taken by external forces to create conditions that threatened the peace and tranquillity of the Venezuelan people. The far right had a clear interest in and desire to carry out a coup d’état, and used these forums to create the conditions to justify such action. Those who said that the protests in the country were peaceful were the ones who were burning and looting businesses. He emphasized that a Nicaraguan journalist had been shot during the protests.

The Employer member of Uruguay observed that the questioning of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela at the ILO was no longer the sole concern of the Employer members. Complaints were now also being made by workers. He considered that the supervisory system of the ILO offered an opportunity for member States to improve their policies by ensuring conformity with the ratified Conventions. With regard to Convention No. 122, the Committee of Experts had requested the Government to take the various types of action recommended by the Committee on the Application of Standards, which had still not been implemented and should be achieved through social dialogue. Points of contact were urgently needed for the social partners, whether through technical assistance, a mission or a Commission of Inquiry. In view of the situation in the country, he hoped that nothing said in the Committee on the Application of Standards would breed further division, and that the representatives of the Government, workers and employers would make constructive use of the various interventions, especially the aspects which could improve social dialogue.

An observer representing the World Federation of Trade Unions (WFTU) observed that the countries of some of the organizations that were denouncing the Government had not ratified the Convention. They accused the Government of not having a policy for the promotion of full employment, but no member of the ILO had achieved this objective. The Government reported that it was implementing an employment policy in so far as national economic and practical conditions allowed. There were other countries, especially in Latin America and the Caribbean, with worse employment indicators. In the ILO publication 2016 Labour Overview of Latin America and the Caribbean it was noted that the unemployment rate in the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela was 7.5 per cent, which positioned it in ninth place among the 20 countries of the Latin-American region. He considered that the Government was being judged harshly and obligations were being imposed which were not included in the Convention, such as achieving full employment, immediately creating a tripartite social dialogue body and guaranteeing youth employment and employment in SMEs. The accusations were a pretext to call into question all of the Government’s actions. Those who took to the streets in the country, paralyzed the economy, impeded work and tried to topple the Government by any means, were the same people who were demanding full employment at the Conference. The ILO must not be used for such purposes. The country’s economic and social crisis could not be solved from the outside, but needed to be addressed by its own citizens in exercise of their own sovereign rights. He considered that the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela should not therefore be one of the 24 cases selected by the Committee on the Application of Standards. He requested that the country not be sanctioned in any way in the conclusions adopted by the Committee.

The Government member of Algeria welcomed the tangible progress made by the Government, particularly its political will to implement employment policy within the framework of a coordinated economic and social policy, and noted with satisfaction the participation of the social partners in the CNEP, a forum for exchange and tripartite dialogue that dealt with the development of the country’s strategic economic zones. The Government was encouraged to persevere in its initiative to introduce an employment policy, the purpose of which was to reduce the unemployment rate and ensure the well-being of the country’s workers.

The Worker member of Cuba noted that Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention provided for an employment policy specific to each country, taking into account the level and stage of economic, political and social development. He recalled that in the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela there had been an economic war, motivated by the refusal of a production model that was distinct from interests of capital and was based on social justice. Attempts had been made to heighten social conflict, provoking disturbances of the public order. He considered that in this case precedence was being given to political rather than technical considerations, as neither the letter of the Convention nor the comments of the Committee of Experts left room for much debate. For over 15 years, the country had been on the preliminary or final lists of cases to be discussed by the Committee. On this occasion, the Committee of Experts had not identified any non-compliance. He called on the members of the Committee not to allow a repeat of this situation at the next session of the Conference, as it endangered the ILO’s tripartite machinery.

The Government member of Ecuador endorsed the statement by GRULAC and recalled that the Committee of Experts had not identified any non-compliance with the Convention, and had simply requested additional information and examples of the application of the Convention. He therefore considered that there was a political motive behind the unwarranted inclusion of this case. He noted the holding of a significant meeting on 13 June 2017, within the framework of the Conference, between the Government and the Venezuelan employers’ and workers’ delegations with a view to strengthening tripartite social dialogue in the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela. He noted, however, that this new call to the Committee on the Application of Standards could tarnish and prejudice the outcome of the meeting and affect the much needed tripartite dialogue in the country. He concluded that any international agenda in support of peace in the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, including on labour issues, needed to be designed jointly by the Government and encompass a constructive approach to the channels to be used.

The Employer member of Mexico said that the country was not applying the Convention and that, although the Governing Body had expressed confidence that the Government would promote effective dialogue, the Government had neither drawn up an action plan in consultation with the social partners nor constituted a tripartite round table for dialogue. He emphasized that the Government’s word alone was not enough to ensure that it met its obligations.

The Government member of Ghana recalled that the Convention provided a foundation for laws, employment regulations and instruments to govern the world of work, including by providing a platform for ensuring freedom of association and collective bargaining. It was essential for all governments, including the Government of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, to uphold the Convention and help to calm relations between and among partners in the world of work. The Government had taken note of the concerns of the Committee with regard to labour market trends, youth employment and the participation of the social partners, and it had begun to take action in response to the Committee of Experts’ requests. Some statistical reports had been supplied on trends, and the Government had furnished information on a 2014 Act on youth employment, which seemed to have provided entry to the labour market and which could go further to ensure decent work. He urged the Government to further engage with the ILO to address the concerns that had been raised and meet the aspirations it had set.

The Employer member of Spain observed that the Committee was considering the Government’s failure to apply the Convention for the second time in a row. He emphasized that it was not for the Committee to judge the suitability of the country’s employment policies, but to determine whether the Government was formulating such policies in collaboration with Venezuelan entrepreneurs represented by FEDECAMARAS. The economic and social situation in the country was dramatic. The lack of a balanced macroeconomic policy, the absence of a business environment enabling the local production base to create jobs, and the lack of active unemployment policies had resulted in important economic sectors in the country being paralysed and had led to a serious problem of shortages, which was inexorably undermining the country’s production base. Moreover, there was no structured social dialogue that would allow the necessary steps to be taken for the country to emerge from the profound crisis it was experiencing. For 17 consecutive years, FEDECAMARAS, the most representative employers’ organization in the country, had been excluded from social dialogue. The Government’s lack of will to initiate open and constructive social dialogue was thrown most sharply into relief by its unwillingness to accept a high-level mission or assistance from the ILO to establish a tripartite round table, as the Committee had suggested to the Government the previous year. He requested the Committee to recommend recourse to the alternative mechanisms available within the ILO, unless the Government accepted those suggestions within the framework of the Conference.

The Government representative expressed gratitude for the interventions of GRULAC, the Government and Worker members which, in their majority, and with qualifications, had come out in support of his Government. He reiterated that the Convention was promotional in character and only required Governments to adopt an employment policy, without specifying its content. Full employment needed to be based on broad policies which took into account the political context, the level and stage of economic and social development, inflation and respect for human rights. The methods of application also needed to be appropriate to national conditions and practice. Neither the Committee of Experts nor the Committee on the Application of Standards were competent to judge the validity, effectiveness or justification of the measures adopted in relation to the Convention. He reiterated that the Committee of Experts had not identified any failure of compliance, and yet it had been decided to include the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela among the cases to be examined, without waiting for the information requested to be provided. That revealed the importance of the political, rather than technical motivations of the employers, and more specifically of FEDECAMARAS. He recalled the continual opposition of FEDECAMARAS, which had even led the coup d’état of April 2002, and had pushed shortly after its failed coup for a strike by employers which had cost US$20 billion and resulted in the closure of enterprises and unemployment for thousands of workers. For over two months, opposition parties in the country had been launching protests, which had mostly ended up being violent, giving rise regrettably to 66 deaths up to the present. It was pitiful that this violence had not been challenged or condemned by FEDECAMARAS or by certain minority trade union organizations. The Government had taken firm steps to operate in an environment of dialogue and peace, but FEDECAMARAS was excluding itself. On every occasion that the case had been on the list to be discussed by the Committee on the Application of Standards, it had been at the behest of the Employer members. Moreover, in past sessions, Employer spokespersons had indicated that the Government would be called up on a permanent basis, irrespective of the Convention. Only the CBST, which was the most representative trade union organization, the Single Confederation of Workers of Venezuela (CUTV) and figures from the CTV had participated in the negotiation process to reform the Constitution. The National Constituent Assembly was the highest legislative body, with broad powers to change the economic model, which was one of the most controversial aspects of the national political process. For that reason, he could not condone the attitude of FEDECAMARAS which, although invited, had refused to participate. He added that the invitation to the National Constituent Assembly was being maintained, with five seats reserved for Employers and 79 for Workers. In conclusion, he expressed the hope that the conclusions of this long discussion would be objective and balanced, and not affected by negative and subjective considerations against the Government. He trusted that it would no longer be necessary to examine the case again in future. He had appeared before the Committee on the Application of Standards with great readiness and in a spirit of democracy, as he would continue to do as often as necessary, to reaffirm that the Government would not place private, capitalist and individual interests over those of the working class and the Venezuelan people.

The Worker members responded to the claim by the Employer members that the increase in minimum wages had contributed to the economic crisis by calling on them to recall the reference to the Declaration of Philadelphia in this Convention, which reaffirmed the need for wage policies and programmes to ensure that a just share of the fruits of progress were provided to all and a minimum living wage was afforded to workers. Positive advances on employment policy had taken place in the country, particularly in the period through 2014, when the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela had benefited from historically high oil prices, which had enabled increased public spending on ambitious programmes. However, the present economic and political crisis could jeopardize such important achievements. Workers and the poorest in society faced higher rates of unemployment and precarious work, and thousands of workers had been pushed back into the informal economy. This crisis called for social dialogue and tripartism. Recalling that the Government had not accepted the Conference Committee’s recommendation for a tripartite high-level mission, they underlined that the Government had also failed to implement a detailed timetable to re-establish tripartite dialogue to deal with economic policy and industrial relations, and had failed to give effect to the recommendation to establish a round table with the participation of the ILO, following the high-level mission in 2014. The Worker members urged the Government to take concrete measures to develop and adopt an active employment policy designed to promote full, productive and freely chosen employment in compliance with the Convention; to establish a structured body for tripartite social dialogue; to take immediate action to build a climate of trust based on respect for employers’ and workers’ organizations; and to urgently set and implement timeframes for all the commitments that had been made previously to the Governing Body, including consultation with the social partners.

The Employer members said that they had listened carefully to the debate, aware of the interest in the subject, and had noted the clear divergences revealed. They emphasized that, even if there was a situation of non-observance of the Convention, they disagreed with the Government representative’s assessment. After reading out Article 3 of the Convention, they emphasized that it was not being given effect in view of the absence of participation of highly representative organizations, such as FEDECAMARAS, CTV, UNETE, CGT and CODESA. The Committee’s conclusions should reflect this situation. They welcomed the fact that the transitional labour regime was no longer in force, a situation of which they had not been informed and which had been a source of enormous concern. Moreover, they were concerned to observe that the Committee of Experts had not taken due note of the information that FEDECAMARAS had provided on the subject, which should have been underlined more emphatically. In the context of the current discussion in the Committee, FEDECAMARAS had specifically called for the revival of the production sector, a structural approach to tackling inflation, the recovery of the purchasing power of wages, the creation of plans to attract and maintain investment, an end to forced occupations of companies, and respect for free enterprise. They said that they could not agree to a statement which claimed that an employment policy existed in the country simply because a plan had been established in which there was no participation by third parties. Indeed, the Socialist Plan for the Economic and Social Development of the Nation 2013–19 did not envisage much participation by Worker representatives, or by the most representative employers’ organizations. This subject should be examined in the light of the Minimum Wage-Fixing Machinery Convention, 1928 (No. 26), the Tripartite Consultation (International Labour Standards) Convention, 1976 (No. 144), and, of course, the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87). It was essential for there to be consultations with the most representative organizations of employers and workers. They vehemently called for the immediate and effective establishment of genuine tripartite consultations for the consensus-based formulation and implementation of an active employment policy. They also called on the Government to accept the technical assistance and the high-level tripartite mission called for the previous year. They considered that it was urgent for measures to be taken, and it was therefore essential for the Committee’s conclusions to be included in a special paragraph of its report.

Conclusions

The Committee took note of the information provided by the Government representative and the discussion that followed.

The Committee noted with deep concern that the Government has not yet addressed the Committee’s 2016 conclusions.

The Committee took note of the lack of social dialogue in relation to an active employment policy designed to promote full, productive and freely chosen employment.

Taking into account the discussion, the Committee urged the Government of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, with ILO technical assistance, and without delay, to:

- develop, in consultation with the most representative workers’ and employers’ organizations, an employment policy designed to promote full, productive and freely chosen employment, in a climate of dialogue free from any form of intimidation;

- implement concrete measures to put in practice an employment policy stimulating economic growth and development, raising standards of living, and overcoming unemployment and underemployment;

- institutionalize a tripartite round table, with the presence of the ILO, to build a climate of trust based on respect for employers’ and workers’ organizations, with a view to fostering social dialogue and promoting solid and stable industrial relations.

The Committee calls on the Government to comply with Convention No. 122 and to respond to the Committee’s 2016 conclusions without further delay. The Committee also asked the Government to report in detail on the measures taken to implement these recommendations before the next meeting of the Committee of Experts in November 2017.

The Government representative thanked the Committee for the efforts made. He nonetheless rejected the conclusions which had been read in the Committee. Such conclusions which contained information which seemed to be biased, somewhat untruthful, unfounded, and unrelated to Convention No. 122, had been assumed to be true. In particular, the conclusions had not taken into account the statements made by the Government, Workers and other Government representatives. Such a state of affairs reflected a shift from objectivity, transparency and affected the Committee’s credibility. He consequently believed that the Committee’s working methods had to be urgently improved, in order to avoid the formulation of subjective, disproportionate and inapplicable conclusions.

He stated that his Government would continue to comply with ratified Conventions, and develop policies benefiting the working class and the Venezuelan people, and hoped that the results of such efforts would be acknowledged by the ILO. Lastly, he underlined that shortly before the tripartite meeting held with the Director-General, the organization of Venezuelan employers and FEDECAMARAS, the latter indicated it would not attend, arguing that it wished for “a neutral and discrete environment, without any interest of a political nature”. He stressed that FEDECAMARAS’ self-exclusion from tripartite dialogue, had not only helped the employers of Venezuela but was also at odds with previous statements accusing the Government of being against social dialogue. Finally, he asserted that, on the contrary, the Government had always been willing to engage in dialogue, and invited the Committee to indicate in its conclusions an express appeal to FEDECAMARAS to take part in national and international dialogue.

The Employer members stated that they wished to put on the record without reopening the debate that the tripartite meeting which had been convened the previous day between the Government and the social partners regrettably had not included an invitation to all workers’ organizations from the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela present at the Conference. In light of this climate of imbalance in representativeness, the employers’ organization had decided to refrain from participating in the meeting.

Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 2016, Publication: 105th ILC session (2016)



A Government representative reaffirmed the Government’s commitment to observance of the ratified ILO Conventions. He emphasized that it was the first time that the Government had been called before the Committee with regard to Convention No. 122. The Government had already provided the requested information relating to compliance with the Convention by means of the report submitted in 2015, which gave details of a sustained employment policy in favour of the Venezuelan people since 1999. There was no justification for the Government’s inclusion in the list of cases to be examined by the Conference Committee, taking account of the fact that the Committee of Experts had made no reference to non-observance but had noted and recorded the information which had been duly supplied by the Government and, on certain aspects, had merely requested examples or additional information. The Conference Committee should not be occupying itself with examples and mere requests for information, especially when there had been no reference to non-observance on the part of the Government. The regular mechanism for providing additional information and examples relating to the application of the Convention would be through the next report, which would be presented in due course. He noted with regret that the justification for inclusion of his country had a political undercurrent and involved the satisfaction of particular interests, which was contrary to the objectivity, transparency and impartiality that should prevail in all ILO bodies. Those who had exerted pressure to have the Government appear before the Committee were not interested in what the Government had to say about the Convention; their aim was to challenge a Government that was promoting social integration and discarding systems that exploited labour. Even though some employers continued to insist on the Government appearing before the Committee, adding complaints and cases and misusing the ILO supervisory mechanisms, they would not succeed in making the Government favour private, capitalist and individual interests to the detriment of the working class and the Venezuelan people. Moreover, the Committee of Experts’ report contained allegations and information presented by some employers concerning a supposed lack of employment plans and figures were mentioned that the Government did not accept. In order to avoid distracting from its work, the Conference Committee and the Committee of Experts should ask those who were alleging non-compliance with the Convention to provide details, data and evidence, so that objectivity and transparency would be achieved and the right of defence of governments summoned to appear before the Committee would not be violated. Even so, the Government representative said that he would provide updated information on the country’s employment policy. In 1999, when the Venezuelan Government took office, the unemployment rate in the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela was 10.6 per cent. By the end of 2015, that rate had fallen to 6.7 per cent as a result of the employment policies. From 2003 onwards, after the coup d’état and the sabotage of the petroleum industry spearheaded by a group of employers in the country, the informal economy decreased from 52.4 per cent to 40.1 per cent by December 2015 as a result of the intense employment policy. Three out of every four jobs created had been in the formal sector of the economy. In 2000, there had been over 4 million workers in the formal sector; by 2015, the figure had risen to more than 7.8 million workers. In other words, between 1999 and 2015 the labour market had incorporated more than 3 million workers in the formal sector, which represented about 60 per cent of the employed population. With regard to youth employment, the Government was promoting integration not only in social and educational terms but also in employment and socio-productive terms. The youth unemployment rate fell from 23.7 per cent in 2002 to 9.1 per cent in 2015. Six out of every ten unemployed young people were studying; in other words, the majority of unemployed young people in the country were students and the Government had increased the number of young persons who were studying to 71.1 per cent. Furthermore, there were programmes that implemented a policy of occupational training for young persons. The National Institute of Socialist Training and Education (INCES) provided ongoing training throughout the country for young persons with a view to placing them in employment. In 2016, some 50,000 young people would be trained in various occupational fields. Moreover, under the “Knowledge and Work” mission, over 1 million citizens had been integrated into the economic and productive system of the nation. All these results and the reported figures were the result of the employment and social integration policies implemented in the country, reinforcing the national productive sector with increased levels of formal occupation and the creation of new jobs.

Furthermore, regarding the specific examples requested in the Committee of Experts’ report concerning the participation of the social partners, it should be emphasized that, as the ILO had already been informed, in early 2016 the National Council for the Productive Economy (CNEP), a forum for dialogue and consultation, had been established for the purpose of analysing, discussing and proposing guidelines for the development of the country’s economy and the creation of new jobs to overcome the drop in oil prices and the current economic situation. Participants in the CNEP included representatives of the Government, workers and employers, in particular the representatives of public and private enterprises and chambers and federations, which had expressed satisfaction at the initiatives taken. The CNEP was concerned with developing strategic economic areas in the country. Through this important forum for dialogue and consultation, over 90 per cent of employers and representatives of the public and private sector in the country were maintaining an ongoing dialogue with the Government with a view to increasing the production of goods and services, boosting the economy and creating jobs. To quote some figures, in the context of the 15 strategic areas of the CNEP, over 300 working meetings had been held, and more than 3,800 economic and productive entities had participated; hundreds of proposals had been put forward, and work was being done to implement over 150 of those proposals connected with the country’s economic and productive development. In conclusion, the Government representative observed that the sole purpose of the Government’s appearance before the Conference Committee was to deal with matters relating to Convention No. 122. The discussion should be limited to the subjects covered by the Convention and the rules of procedure that applied to the Committee should be observed. If topics connected with other Conventions or separate matters pending before the ILO supervisory bodies were raised, that would be a breach of the rules of procedure.

The Worker members emphasized that this was a difficult period in the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela’s history. The Government was faced with major challenges, particularly with regard to economic recovery. It was important to underscore that, whatever their political convictions, workers and their families were facing a crisis for which they were not responsible. While it was true that the current political stalemate was to the advantage of certain groups, it nevertheless could not be denied that ordinary citizens were the most affected by a clear deterioration in their living standards. In these difficult times, the country’s entire political class, comprising all parties, should rise to the occasion and resist the temptation to use this discontent to its own political advantage. It was therefore important that all parties sought solutions through dialogue and consensus rather than attempting to stir up social unrest and violence. For many years, the country had been aiming to establish constructive social dialogue as one of the pillars in efforts to reach consensus, and to place all diverse opinions at the centre of the debate. The ILO tripartite structure provided an excellent means of facilitating social dialogue and achieving consensus. With regard to the application of the Convention, according to information from the Government, the rate of unemployment fell from 10.6 per cent in 1999 to 5.5 per cent in 2015. The Government also highlighted that its employment policy was fully aligned with actions aimed at reducing poverty, and set out a strategy for the provision of public services relating to education and health care. However, from an economic viewpoint, hyperinflation, food shortages, and deindustrialization had negative repercussions on standards of living and job quality. According to the Central Bank of Venezuela, annual inflation had risen to 141.5 per cent in 2015, a figure which largely reflected food prices. Overall, the latter had risen by 254.3 per cent in 2015, a rate which exceeded wage increases in every respect. The rise in the prices of basic foodstuffs particularly affected poor workers, who in general allocated a larger portion of their income to them. With regard to deindustrialization, in the long term, the resolution to the economic challenges would be found by diversifying the economy so that it was no longer based solely on oil production. The oil sector alone was considered to represent 96 per cent of the total export earnings of the country, a figure which further highlighted the need to incorporate macroeconomic planning into employment policies. It was still difficult to know, however, whether such an approach would be envisaged by the Government with a view to achieving the objectives of the Convention.

Turning to the issue of workers employed in the informal economy, according to official figures, 41.2 per cent of the active population worked in the informal sector in January 2015, which represented a fall of 10.4 per cent in comparison with the same period 11 years earlier; and between 2000 and 2014, a third of new jobs created were in the formal sector. This question was especially relevant in the context of the adoption of the Transition from the Informal to the Formal Economy Recommendation, 2015 (No. 204). One of the core elements of this Recommendation related to the implementation of a comprehensive employment policy framework aimed at helping low-income households to escape poverty, such as minimum wages, social protection schemes including cash transfers, public employment programmes, and enhanced outreach and delivery of employment services to those in the informal economy. While noting the reduction in the number of workers in the informal sector, the Worker members considered that much remained to be done and called on the Government to apply the provisions of this new labour standard. With respect to youth employment, the rate of unemployment published by the National Statistics Institute in the second half of 2013 was 12.8 per cent. However, according to figures provided by the ILO in 2012, the total number of young persons in a situation of difficulty owing to poverty rose to 500,000, 157,000 of whom lived in households receiving an income only just sufficient to cover the cost of a basic food basket. Furthermore, an imbalance had been noted in the proportion of young people within the active population in relation with incomes. Thus, in 2012, the active youth unemployment rate for those with middle and high incomes was 28.8 per cent, but it reached 50.7 per cent for those with a low income. In addition, even when they were lucky enough to have formal employment, young Venezuelan workers were generally employed in the service industry, mainly in the retail trade, a sector with low productivity and where employment was often precarious. Article 3 of the Convention clearly set forth that “representatives of employers and workers, shall be consulted concerning employment policies, with a view to taking fully into account their experience and views and securing their full cooperation in formulating and enlisting support for such policies”. The issue of the lack of social dialogue had been brought to the attention of the Conference Committee on many occasions. It should be emphasized that the economic crisis currently faced by the country could only be overcome if the social partners were involved in decisions relating to employment policy. For this reason, the Worker members had welcomed the agreement concluded at the 326th Session of the Governing Body (March 2016), in which the Government had committed to keeping to a strict schedule of meetings with employer and worker representatives. Lastly, the Worker members expressed the hope that this process would result in tangible progress, in accordance with the objectives set in the agreed programme of work, to ensure that ILO standards were applied and monitored with the participation of employers and workers.

The Employer members welcomed the presence of the Minister representing the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela and the information that the Conference Committee had received. It was the first time that the Government was responding to observations on the Convention that had been addressed to it on 14 occasions in the past. It was a governance Convention, and not a fundamental Convention, but it was one of the four major Conventions dealing with active employment policy that is conducive to economic and social well-being. Hence the exceptional importance of discussing the matter. Contrary to the Government’s assertion, the decision to include the case was not taken on a mere whim. The reason for doing so was all too clear. In view of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela’s social indicators, there is a need for the Committee to call on the Government to engage in social dialogue. When the Employer members considered a case, they did not do so with any private interests in mind but quite independently of the ideological or political line followed by the Government. It was the duty of the Conference Committee to assess outcomes irrespective of any such ideological or political viewpoint, and for that, it was important to understand exactly what the Convention was dealing with. The Convention took its inspiration from the ILO Constitution and the Declaration of Philadelphia, notably from the need to further, among the nations of the world programmes that could achieve full employment, the raising of standards of living and, for the workers, the guarantee of a decent wage. The Declaration of Philadelphia itself emphasized that it was incumbent on the ILO to examine and consider the effect of economic and social policies on the employment policy pursued by States. The Convention followed different approaches. Articles 1 and 2 referred to the need to establish employment policies that stimulated growth and development. The Convention also provided for raising living standards and resolving employment problems with a view to attaining full, productive and freely chosen employment. Article 2 referred to the importance of reviewing the measures adopted regularly so as to coordinate economic and social policies. Finally, the Convention made a particular point of social dialogue and, notably in the area of employment, called for worker and employer representatives to be fully consulted in an effort to reach consensus.

The country’s macroeconomic and labour statistics were cause for considerable concern. In 2014 the economy declined by 4.3 per cent; in 2015 by 5.6 per cent; in 2016 it was expected to drop by a further 8 per cent. To reverse the trend, counter-cyclical measures were needed – in terms of fiscal, credit and macroeconomic policies, for example. The Employer members wished to have access to more information on the counter-cyclical measures that the Government had adopted or was planning to adopt. Per capita income was currently around US$202 a year, far below the international indicators measuring the poverty level. The fiscal deficit was 20 per cent and inflation was 337.4 per cent – the highest in the world. The inevitable outcome of inflation was reflected in the steady growth of poverty. According to an independent survey of living conditions (there being no official statistics), current trends pointed to an unusual increase in poverty. Such a situation discouraged investment and had a direct impact on employment generation. There was no incentive to counter the variations in the inflation rate. Recruitment was at a standstill and that, as had happened in recent years, tended to encourage informal activities. Without a sufficient influx of dollars for external trade, the resulting foreign currency shortage meant that the supply of basic goods in supermarkets ran out. Long queues for food had even led to an increase in violence. All those factors were indicative of a major crisis in the country that called for rapid adjustment and, naturally, a revival of social dialogue with the most representative organizations such as Federation of Chambers and Associations of Commerce and Production of Venezuela (FEDECAMARAS) and the Workers’ Confederation of Venezuela (CTV), which were also concerned in the case under discussion. With those considerations in mind, the Employer members invited the Government to open the way to dialogue with representative workers’ and employers’ organizations. They accordingly called on it to reiterate the commitments it had entered into with the ILO in the past, most recently in March 2016, when it had been understood that the Government would be engaging in renewed dialogue with the most representative organizations on 4 April; so far, however, no such dialogue had come about.

A Worker member of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela expressed his surprise at the inclusion in the list, at the request of the Employers, of the case of his country for the alleged non-compliance with the Convention, given that the country had been engaged in an accelerated process to improve social indicators since the changes that had been introduced in 1999. This process had led to the rapid reduction of poverty and a decrease in unemployment to a steady rate of between 5 and 6 per cent. A section of Venezuelan employers who belonged to FEDECAMARAS had attempted an economic sabotage, the prime goal of which was to topple the power in the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela. To achieve their aim, some employers had been reducing the production of basic goods and services for the population, on the grounds that the Government was not providing them with the foreign exchange for the import of primary supplies and materials necessary to maintain their production processes, despite the fact that these enterprises had received billions of dollars to that end. In response to the closures of enterprises by some employers represented by FEDECAMARAS, the Government had undertaken procedures with regard to the closed plants to reopen them, re-establish production and protect jobs. This group of employers was throwing thousands of workers onto the streets, while at the same time addressing the Committee to denounce the Government for failing to safeguard employment. Furthermore, representatives of FEDECAMARAS had requested the repeal of the Basic Act on Labour and Men and Women Workers in force since 2012, which was known worldwide for its provisions fully safeguarding workers’ rights. He wondered who would sanction employers who sabotaged the economy by reducing production and shamelessly aimed to evade application of the labour laws, and who could require employers to comply with the Conventions.

However, another significant section of the employers affiliated with FEDECAMARAS did indeed participate in the promotion and growth of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela’s productive processes, increasing employment and strengthening production. In addition, a tripartite dialogue body, the CNEP, existed in which the Bolivarian Socialist Confederation of Workers (CBST), productive employers and the Government also participated and engaged in discussions on investment plans, new employment, and investment in foreign currency and facilities for the export of the private sector and state enterprises. He highlighted that, unlike the leaders of FEDECAMARAS, some employers affiliated to FEDECAMARAS maintained a cooperative relationship with workers, despite the ideological and political differences they might have, thereby enhancing social dialogue. The majority trade union, the CBST, had expressed to the Government its steadfast refusal to meet with the employer sector represented by the FEDECAMARAS leadership and its firm intention to maintain harmonious relations with those who were willing to produce in the country, in respect of workers’ rights and the full application of ILO standards. He concluded by affirming that a clear policy for the generation and growth of productivity and stable employment existed, and worked closely with the CNEP, the tripartite body through which agreements on fundamental social and macroeconomic policies were reached. He rejected the attacks by employers against the Government, whose labour and social policies were in accordance with the Convention.

Another Worker member of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela expressed surprise that his country was again on the list of countries called before the Conference Committee. FEDECAMARAS and its allies had once more made it their political objective to continue creating instability and were attempting to get rid of a workers’ government that had made significant social progress, particularly with regard to Convention No. 122. The Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela had set an example in terms of decent employment and work, youth employment and the improved quality of life of the population. The unemployment rate was currently 7.1 per cent, employment policies had been strengthened since the revolutionary Venezuelan Government had come to power, and all the social inclusion policies pursued by former President Hugo Chávez sought to improve social justice and the quality of life of the population, as could be seen from the Basic Act on Labour and Men and Women Workers, which was the most advanced piece of legislation in terms of social justice and the protection it afforded for the rights embodied in the ILO’s Conventions. FEDECAMARAS had infringed the Act just as it disregarded all of the policies the Government had pursued since the revolution, and it had attempted to blackmail the Government into repealing the Act in exchange for engaging in dialogue, which it had avoided since becoming actively engaged in economic warfare. President Nicolás Maduro had repeatedly appealed to all those who were willing to give him their support and cooperation in order to meet the challenges facing the country, but a section of the employer sector had unfortunately stayed away. FEDECAMARAS preferred to continue gambling with the fate of the nation. The country was going through difficult economic times, and the working class found itself in the middle of an economic war that had placed it in a fierce battle against major domestic and foreign private investors who had turned their backs on the Venezuelan people and were abetting foreign attempts to provoke domestic disorder. The Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela’s working class was prepared to fight for the great achievements that the revolution had brought.

The Employer member of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela considered that the Government was failing to fulfil its obligation as laid down in the Convention to consult the representatives of the employers and workers in formulating its employment policy. Despite its unquestionable representativeness, FEDECAMARAS had not been consulted by the Government on any matter for 17 years. Moreover, the supposedly extensive consultation with all sectors, as claimed by the Government, had never been conducted formally or documented. The Government was failing to establish a coordinated employment policy that enabled jobseekers to be employed in accordance with their abilities, in productive activity that was freely chosen, and to derive income from it that enabled a decent standard of living. The country had experienced two successive years of economic recession, with a fall in gross domestic product (GDP) of nearly ten per cent. In 2015 the official inflation rate was 180 per cent, the highest in the country’s history. The purchasing power of the Venezuelan people had been smashed to smithereens. At present, the minimum wage was about US$27 dollars per month, which was the equivalent of 0.92 Venezuelan bolívar (VEF) per day. Almost 14 minimum wage equivalents were needed to pay for the basic basket of goods. This was far removed from a daily income of US$1.25 per day, which was the usual indicator of extreme poverty. Moreover, 60 per cent of the statutory monthly minimum income did not derive from wages and did not generate any social protection benefits. Formal employment in the private sector had decreased sharply. As at March 2016, a total of 282,400 formal jobs had been lost. The number of employers had fallen by 110,000 in 2015. The lack of a coherent employment policy had caused an enormous increase in poverty. The poverty index had risen from 53 per cent in 2014 to 76 per cent in 2015, and extreme poverty had more than doubled, from 25 per cent in 2014 to 53 per cent in 2015. In the foodstuffs sector, production had dropped by 22 per cent from January to April 2016. Many food-producing plants were inoperative for lack of raw materials, with the risk that 200,000 additional direct jobs and 1 million indirect jobs could be lost in the food sector alone. In addition, the malfunctions in the public electricity and water utilities were affecting enterprises’ operating capacity by interrupting their activities in the periods of rationing fixed by the Government. The private sector was suffocating from price controls, it was being persecuted and criminalized, it was denied the foreign currency needed for purchasing raw materials for production, and it was obliged to sell at a loss. The situation had got even worse since January 2016, when the Government had declared a state of economic emergency with the suspension of constitutional guarantees in the economic sphere for 240 days, disregarding any formal consultation with the legitimately constituted public powers and the social partners.

All of the above showed that there was no sound policy to promote decent employment, nor any implementation of the dialogue required by the Convention. In March 2016, the Government had submitted a proposal to the ILO to establish a dialogue round table and a schedule of meetings. However, to date, the first meeting had not even taken place despite the insistence of FEDECAMARAS. On the contrary, the President of the Republic persisted in saying that there would be no dialogue with FEDECAMARAS. The CNEP, which had been established by the President in January 2016 and in which FEDECAMARAS had not been invited to participate, had not made any significant progress. In order to achieve a positive change for the future of the country, the speaker urged the Government, workers and employers to reach a basic consensus for the adoption of specific measures aimed at ensuring employment and economic growth for the country. The employers, with FEDECAMARAS as their chief representative, constantly demonstrated their commitment to participating in social dialogue. Conditions in the country were such as to justify assistance from the ILO and trigger its input and mechanisms to ensure that the Government complied with the Convention, especially in the area of social dialogue.

The Government member of Mexico, speaking on behalf of group of Latin American and Caribbean (GRULAC) countries, welcomed the information provided by the Government with respect to its compliance with the Convention and observed that the Committee of Experts’ report merely requested further information without making a specific statement as to the country’s alleged non-compliance with the Convention. In its report, the Committee of Experts mentioned the Government’s information regarding its implementation of a new social strategy focusing on the key points: employment, the quality of employment, action on education, the provision of quality education free of charge and the total elimination of poverty. The Government reported that the youth employment rate was 87.2 per cent, which amounted to 31.6 per cent of total employment. As to the development of small and medium-sized enterprises, the Government reported that at round table meetings held with the employers agreements had been concluded on boosting productive employment by means of financial and institutional support for enterprise-creation projects. Regarding the participation of the social partners, the Committee of Experts merely requested specific examples. He trusted that the Government would continue to submit updated information on the application of the Convention.

The Government member of Nicaragua, endorsing the statement made by GRULAC and expressing support for the Government, recalled that the Committee of Experts had not observed any failure to apply the Convention but had simply requested additional information and examples. As such, the unjustified inclusion of the case, which was politically motivated, as it had been the previous year, was striking. The Government of Nicaragua considered that resolving such cases should fall to the parties, without external interference or international pressure, within a framework of mutual respect based on peace, dialogue and consensus. He invited the Committee on the Application of Standards not to continue examining this type of case and not to let itself be influenced by political manoeuvring that diverted the ILO from the noble objective for which it was founded.

The Government member of Cuba aligned herself with the statement made by the Government member of Mexico, on behalf of GRULAC. The Committee of Experts did not mention the non-compliance on the part of the Government in relation to the Convention, and there was therefore little technical substance to warrant its inclusion in the list of cases of serious failure to comply with Conventions. She considered a solution could be reached without the involvement of the Conference Committee since the Government had committed to identifying solutions by means of inclusive social dialogue. She was convinced that the Government would be able to present information that demonstrated its compliance with the Convention and urged the Conference Committee to close the case.

The Government member of Mauritania said that the information provided by the Government shed light on the significant progress made by the country in the areas of employment and action against unemployment. These achievements were the culmination of the implementation of a new social strategy based on the guidelines contained in the Economic and Social Development Plan, which gave priority to the creation of high-quality jobs and the provision of free high-quality education. A series of measures had been taken in the wake of tripartite discussions with a view to reviving productivity and the creation of employment. The Conference Committee’s conclusions should take into account the major efforts made by the Government.

The Worker member of Cuba said that he was not in agreement with the continued discussion of this case before the Conference Committee since there were no technical grounds for it. He indicated that the observations of the Committee of Experts regarding Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention did not question the procedures or compliance with a Convention but rather the economic model applied in the country over recent years. He considered that the Conference Committee was not the proper forum to settle conflicts relating to the definitions of economic and political systems. Part of the employers’ organization had generated chaos and crisis through the shortages of products and services in the country, and he questioned the possibility of pursuing an employment policy when a part of the employer sector was willing to give in to important financial losses to repudiate the economic model established in 1999. He requested the Committee to take these elements into account when adopting the conclusions on the case.

An observer representing the International Organisation of Employers (IOE) recalled that the Convention required ratifying Members to declare and pursue an active policy designed to promote full, productive and freely chosen employment and to take measures to apply the policy in consultation with workers’ and employers’ representatives. She stressed that productive and sustainable employment was the basis for decent work, wealth creation and social justice and that the encouragement of investments was a precondition for employment. She emphasized that the social and economic situation in the country was of the deepest concern, not only for employers, but for the society as a whole. There were multiple challenges for establishing sustainable enterprises as well as for creating and maintaining jobs, while there were no policies to boost investment, sustainable enterprises and employment. Price controls, along with the shortage of foreign exchange, led to acute shortages of basic goods. Inflation was very high, the GDP had shrunk dramatically in 2015 and extreme poverty had reached its worst levels in 15 years. Meanwhile, thousands of businesses had shut down, 256,000 jobs had been lost and informality had increased to 42.4 per cent. She invited the Government to comply without delay with the provisions of the Convention both in law and practice by pursuing an active policy designed to promote full, productive and freely chosen employment, in consultation with the most representative workers’ organizations and with FEDECAMARAS, in line with the numerous and unattended recommendations of the ILO Governing Body, the ILO supervisory bodies and the report of the high-level tripartite mission that had visited the country in 2014.

The Worker member of Mexico said that the Convention, ratified by the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela in 1982, had, like many others, become nothing but words, as legislation, on the one hand, and practice, on the other, were verging in opposite directions. Despite repeated calls from the Committee of Experts in that regard, the Government was still failing to abide by the conclusions of the high-level tripartite mission that had visited the country in 2014. However, applying an employment policy based on agreement among the social partners would doubtless contribute to building a climate of peace in the world of work, which the country urgently needed. He further stated that governments must ensure that all ratified ILO Conventions were applied, rather than focusing solely on the fundamental Conventions, and that democracy and freedom of association should be defended in all countries, whatever their form of Government.

The Employer member of Mexico recalled that the Convention was based on the ILO’s mandate, established by the Declaration of Philadelphia. In addition, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights set out that all persons had the right to work, and to freely chosen employment in fair working conditions. He indicated that the Convention required an active employment policy, developed in consultation with employers’ and workers’ organizations. He stated that the economic and social situation of the country was serious and social dialogue was a management tool which would help to resolve serious problems in the country and create the conditions conducive to investment with a view to generating employment.

The Worker member of Brazil called on the Government to find an immediate solution to the serious humanitarian and social crisis dominated by lack of food, medicines and essential items. Although the situation was adversely affecting the whole of Venezuelan society, it was having a particular impact on the most vulnerable people. In order to tackle the crisis, the Government needed to strengthen freedom of association, collective bargaining, social dialogue and democracy in the country and to comply with international labour standards. He asked the ILO to expand its action in the country aimed at ensuring observance of the Convention under discussion and of other standards, and to give its attention to the observations and complaints submitted by CTV, the National Union of Workers of Venezuela (UNETE), the General Confederation of Workers of Venezuela (CGT) and the Confederation of Autonomous Trade Unions (CODESA).

The Employer member of Spain said that employers in Spain were concerned about the application of the Convention by the Government and expressed their support for FEDECAMARAS. The economic and social situation of the country had worsened in recent months. He urged the Government to provide reliable statistical information on employment, particularly youth employment, and to implement active employment policies. Sustainable employment policies needed to be pursued in small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), and social dialogue should be launched with employers’ organizations such as FEDECAMARAS.

The Government member of the Plurinational State of Bolivia supported the statement by GRULAC and emphasized the importance given by his Government to compliance with ILO standards. He regretted that the reasons obliging the Government to come before the Conference Committee were not related to the application of the Convention but rather to diffuse interests aimed at challenging a legitimate Government. He recalled that the responsibility of promoting decent work and generating employment also fell on the employers and he regretted the stigmatization of a democratic Government. He commended the Government’s efforts in promoting progressive policies aimed at expanding workers’ social rights, redistributing revenue, and promoting decent work. He concluded by inviting the Conference Committee to conduct a balanced and fair examination of each case.

The Worker member of Paraguay said that Articles 2 and 3 of the Convention did not prescribe an undefined employment policy but one on which consensus had been reached through tripartite dialogue and consultation. If the conclusions of the report of the ILO high-level tripartite mission that had visited the country in 2014 had been followed, many deaths, tragedies and desperate situations would have been avoided. Productive employment was still lacking, and this in turn added to the scarcity and lack of food for the whole population. She therefore asked the Conference Committee to include a special paragraph in its report that reflected the unprecedented crisis facing the country. She urged the Government to promote serious and respectful dialogue to enable the creation of decent jobs and decent work for all, while upholding freedom of association and collective bargaining, which were the cornerstones of progress.

The Employer member of Peru expressed her deep concern at the serious economic crisis affecting the country and said that hyperinflation constituted the most damaging tax for the poorest people. Emphasizing the violation of Article 3 of the Convention, she thought that if there was a genuine dialogue between the Government, workers and most representative employers’ organizations, such as FEDECAMARAS, the situation of the workers would be very different from what it was now. She therefore called on the ILO to use all the tools and mechanisms at its disposal to establish real social dialogue in the country.

The Worker member of Colombia emphasized that it was vital for the social partners to have an active role in dialogue leading to the formulation of employment policies that stimulated economic development. He considered that that was not the case in the country. He expressed regret that the Government had not heeded the conclusions of the high-level triparite mission that had visited the country in 2014 and that, in spite of having submitted a draft plan of action on social dialogue to the Governing Body at its 326th Session (March 2016), none of the meetings agreed on that occasion had been held. There could be no effective policies to promote productive employment with social dialogue. Employment, decent work and the right to work were intended to meet the needs of the working class and the population in general. He said that the Government’s announcements of supposed employment policies when workers were becoming ever more impoverished counted for nothing. In the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, the common denominator was precariousness and scarcity – an appalling situation bearing in mind that the country was the richest in the region.

The Employer member of Honduras recalled that the Convention imposed the obligation on governments to consult the most representative workers’ and employers’ organizations in formulating a policy designed to promote full, productive and freely chosen employment. FEDECAMARAS was the most representative employers’ organization at the national level. Hence, by excluding FEDECAMARAS from the consultations, the Government was rejecting legitimate and effective social dialogue. There had been no consultation of the employment plans with the most representative employers’ organization. Consequently, the Conference Committee should highlight the situation in a special paragraph of its report in view of the Government’s failure to implement the roadmap which it had signed in March 2016.

The Government member of the Russian Federation, noting the observation of the Committee of Experts, welcomed the Government’s readiness for a substantive and constructive cooperation with both the ILO and the social partners, including FEDECAMARAS. Referring to the Committee of Experts’ report, he stated that there was no specific information concerning non-compliance with the obligations under the Convention. In this regard, it was not clear for what reason the issue was included in the list of cases discussed by the Conference Committee. With this in mind, he expressed concern over the regular attempts to politicize the work of the ILO by forcing a discussion on the compliance of international labour standards by the Government. In conclusion, he expressed satisfaction with the level of cooperation between the Government and the ILO to ensure the application of international labour standards and hoped that this cooperation would continue.

The Government member of Belarus noted the comprehensive approach concerning the implementation by the Government of the measures aimed at ensuring positive outcomes in relation to labour relations in the country. There seemed to be a lack of information concerning the alleged failure to comply with the Convention, and the Committee of Experts only requested information in its observation. He was of the view that the Government complied with the Convention. The Government was actively cooperating with the ILO, in particular through the implementation of the provisions of the Convention in the national legislation. He supported the work of the Government in relation to strengthening social dialogue under difficult economic conditions.

The Worker member of Honduras highlighted the youth employment programmes that the Government was developing within the framework of its social changes, and the significant progress made with respect to social protection and the defence of workers’ rights. He expressed concern that the case of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela was once again being discussed by the Conference Committee, given that the Committee of Experts had not referred to any non-observance of the Convention by the Government and had merely requested the Government to provide information on its policies regarding youth employment, the development of SMEs, and the participation of the social partners. The country had the lowest rate of unemployment on the American continent and the highest rate of youth employment. He was therefore concerned that some employers affiliated with FEDECAMARAS had engaged in sabotaging the acquisition of goods and services, closing their enterprises and dismissing hundreds of workers, while other enterprises affiliated to the same organization maintained high rates of productivity, upheld workforce stability and participated with the Government and workers in the CNEP, a tripartite body.

The Government member of Egypt noted the measures taken by the Government in relation to the application of the Convention. The Government had adopted a national policy aimed at providing employment opportunities in the formal economy, reducing unemployment as well as reducing the number of workers in the informal economy. The speaker hoped that the ILO would provide the necessary technical assistance to the Government to help achieve the objectives enshrined in the Convention.

The Worker member of Peru said that the Government had spent 15 years in the dock before the Conference Committee, a fate it shared with other progressive Governments in the region such as Cuba. He expressed surprise at the fact that FEDECAMARAS and the IOE worried about the situation of workers in the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela when, within the Conference Committee, they had steadfastly refused to recognize the right to strike and they never protested about repressions committed by governments with different political and economic orientations. As such, the case under examination was political in nature. If the IOE and FEDECAMARAS, which complained about the lack of consultation in this country, were really interested in the labour problems of workers, they would have denounced the mass dismissals and violation of the right to bargain collectively that prevailed in many countries and could also have demanded respect for prior consultation in the case of the draconian measures imposed in Greece. The speaker ended his statement by saying that this case was intended to topple a democratic Government.

The Government member of China, referring to the statements made by the Government and by GRULAC, noted that the Government had fulfilled its obligations under the Convention. The Government’s efforts should therefore be recognized by the Conference Committee.

An observer representing the World Organization of Workers (WOW) indicated that for five years the Government had not been providing accreditation for the members of the Trade Union Action Unit of Venezuela and UNETE. In addition, he underscored that the Convention was fundamental for the country, particularly given the serious conditions of unemployment. The Government should have consulted the social partners with regard to the employment policy, as requested by the high-level tripartite mission that visited the country in 2014. UNETE had made recommendations on numerous occasions, particularly within the framework of the rescue plan for national production and employment. Industrial action had also been carried out demanding that dialogue be opened but there had been no response. National production was threatened, state enterprises were paralyzed and the private sector was facing countless limitations, as well as threats of intervention and expropriation. Enterprises that had been nationalized with the help of workers were bankrupt. Many workers had been dismissed or would be dismissed for political reasons. Furthermore, protests had been criminalized and trade union representatives and leaders had been detained. Productive employment as referred to in Article 1 of the Convention was a utopia as salaries had been significantly affected by devaluation. Over 55 per cent of a salary was paid in vouchers and bartering, a practice that had been abandoned for decades, had returned. All these measures had been implemented without consultation with the workers. On those grounds, he requested that this case be included in a special paragraph in the Conference Committee’s report.

The Worker member of Benin said that the case did not really constitute a violation of the Convention, but was instead aimed at raising issues against governments that refused to support private, capitalist interests so as to justify coups d’état, as in Brazil. The speaker said that the efforts of progressive governments should be encouraged. The information sent by the Government demonstrated the efforts made by the Venezuelan workers in the fields of employment, the economy, the development of SMEs and in the participation with the social partners. In conclusion, the speaker said that the Committee should encourage the Government, which was faced with a difficult fight against capitalism, and should focus more on governments that were trying to deregulate labour legislation and undermine the acquired rights of workers.

The Government member of Algeria welcomed the information provided by the Government on the action taken to ensure the application of the Convention. An employment policy had been formulated as part of the Economic and Social Development Plan, with the aim of eradicating poverty and facilitating social integration. The Plan had resulted in the creation of a significant number of jobs and agreements had been concluded with the employers for boosting employment through the development of SMEs. Lastly, he welcomed the Government’s cooperation with the ILO.

The Worker member of Argentina recalled that, according to the report of the Committee of Experts, the Government had not failed to apply the Convention: it had simply been requested to adopt a legislative framework and to provide further information. He maintained that a campaign of stigmatization was being waged against a democratically elected Government, with the aim of destabilization at national and international level. It was claimed that there was a crisis in the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, but the entire world was currently in crisis. The people making those claims were responsible for maintaining levels of employment and they did not hesitate to foment social discontent, closing off sources of employment and funding a campaign to destabilize the country. Social dialogue required the will of all parties and could not function in a conflict scenario. He emphasized that the Government had the will to create a space for social dialogue so as to strengthen the democracy.

The Government member of the Islamic Republic of Iran, thanking the Government for the information provided, emphasized that the measures taken deserved due consideration by the Conference Committee, as they demonstrated the willingness and commitment of the Government to comply with the Convention. Stressing that the Convention entailed a series of technical aspects for its implementation, he called on the Office to provide technical assistance to the Government.

The Worker member of Syria supported the statement made by the Government and considered that this case revealed a political dimension. The Government had regularly submitted reports on the application of the Convention and the Committee of Experts had not mentioned any violation concerning the application of the Convention in its last observation. In its comments, the Committee of Experts referred to the implementation of a strategy which focused on the following key elements: employment; employment quality; provision for education; the guarantee of free, high-quality education; and the definitive elimination of poverty. Moreover, between 2000 and 2014 one third of new jobs created were in the formal economy. Referring to the sections in the observation on SMEs, youth employment and the participation of the social partners, the speaker concluded by indicating that the Conference Committee was faced with a case that had been chosen for political reasons and which constituted an attack on the Government by FEDECAMARAS.

The Government member of Qatar thanked the Government for the information provided before the Conference Committee. He welcomed the measures taken by the Government in order to comply with the Convention and encouraged the Government to continue with its efforts in this regard.

The Worker member of Uruguay noted that, while all the members of the Conference Committee agreed that the country was experiencing a particularly challenging period, there were diverging opinions on the situation. The serious inflation affecting the country’s workers should come as no surprise to anyone, in a context where certain economic actors were hiding commodities. He was astonished by the importance attributed by the employers to the ILO supervisory bodies in this case, a diametrically opposed position to the one they usually assumed. The interest in consultation demonstrated by employers should be followed up with a proposal for consultation on wealth distribution. Lastly, he affirmed that the workers of Uruguay remained entirely unconnected to the initiative to present a complaint under article 26 of the ILO Constitution in relation to the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela.

The Employer member of Chile said that the Government was not respecting Article 3 of the Convention with regard to the adoption of an active policy aimed at encouraging full, productive and freely chosen employment because it was not holding consultations with FEDECAMARAS, the most representative employers’ organization in the country. This had had negative effects on employment, as acknowledged by the President of the Republic, who had declared a state of emergency, with its attendant limitations on constitutional safeguards. The country was facing a shortage of decent work: workers were no longer earning wages that allowed them to meet their basic needs without recourse to state subsidies. Neither did they enjoy an adequate system of protection, because the rate of informal work was very high. Private enterprises were being progressively destroyed through poor governance, the absence of dialogue and the lack of a favourable legal and regulatory environment. These were the minimum conditions identified in 2007 at the ILO for enterprises to be sustainable. The ILO should intervene with all the tools at its disposal so as to contribute, together with the Government and the social partners, to the development of employment policies that were the result of genuine social dialogue.

The Government member of Brazil, speaking in right of reply, said that certain incorrect opinions expressed during the discussion made it necessary to provide some clarification with regard to the trial of the President of Brazil. The proceeding under way complied rigorously with Brazil’s legal standards and procedures under the supervision of the Supreme Federal Court, which guaranteed respect for the Constitution and for due process. So far, the Chamber of Deputies and the Federal Senate had ruled on the admissibility of the case and had established that there was evidence of possible crimes entailing liability. The votes had been preceded by full and detailed debates and the entire process was characterized by full respect for the right to defence.

The Government representative said that the Committee of Experts, in its report, had not mentioned any failure to apply the Convention by the Government, but had only requested examples or further information in that respect. Despite that, the country had been included in the list of individual cases, without waiting for such information and examples to be provided in its next report on the Convention. This proved that the fundamental policies of employers, specifically FEDECAMARAS, an organization that used the ILO as an institution to further its own interests, had prevailed over technical considerations. He maintained that FEDECAMARAS often acted more as a political party than an employers’ association and he recalled that the organization’s leadership had supported the economic and productive sabotage of the largest food production enterprise in the country. Contrary to what the Employer members said, social dialogue did exist in the country. Every week, meetings of the most prominent entrepreneurs were held, including many representatives of enterprises, chambers and federations affiliated to FEDECAMARAS, and they discussed policies of national interest together with the Government and the main workers’ organization. He said that the Government had repeatedly stated its willingness to engage in dialogue, but within a framework that respected the law, although it considered that such dialogue would be very difficult when a part of the aforementioned employers’ organization continued to shield enterprises that sabotaged and destabilized the country’s economy, to the detriment of the Venezuelan people.

The speaker said that the employers had presented figures and estimates from unofficial and biased sources which was why his Government did not recognize them. The fall in petrol prices had had a negative impact on the country, as had the sabotage of production and the economy carried out by some employers, including a section of FEDECAMARAS. Within the National Council on Productive Economy, a tripartite social dialogue body to develop policies and stimulate the Venezuelan economy in consultation with employers’ and workers’ representatives, proposals had been submitted by employers relating, for instance, to the currency exchange system, simplifying export procedures, repatriating capital and flexibility in taxation, among other things. In this manner, the entrepreneurs with the greatest economic influence in the country, who wanted to strengthen the Venezuelan economy, the main workers’ organization and the Government were committed to transforming the national production apparatus to make it more diversified and less dependent on petrol income. The speaker expressed the hope that the conclusions on the case, as the fruit of a broad debate, would be objective and balanced, with no negative statements against the Government, which would allow them to be analysed more effectively within the framework of applying the Convention. He trusted that there would be no need for the Conference Committee to consider the case again, as it was for the Committee of Experts to follow it up through the Government’s reports. He restated his Government’s commitment to applying the Convention and other ILO Conventions his country had ratified and reaffirmed that the Government would not favour private interests over those of the working class and the Venezuelan people.

The Worker members, thanking the Government for the detailed information provided to the Conference Committee, welcomed the achievements of the Government in reducing poverty and inequality, and in increasing citizen participation and self-governance, particularly all efforts made in order to promote decent work as a means to achieve social justice. However, the economic and political crisis could jeopardize such important achievements, as workers and their families were paying the price of the crisis. Noting with interest the commitments made by the Government concerning informal and precarious work, they indicated that the reduction of the share of informal work from 51.6 per cent in 2004 to 41.2 per cent in 2015 was an important development to be welcomed by the Conference Committee. They invited the Government to continue to provide information in this regard and to follow the provisions of Recommendation No. 204. As unemployment was more severe among young people, they recalled that the Committee of Experts had requested the Government to implement policies aimed at minimizing the impact of unemployment on young workers and facilitating their integration in the workforce with respect to fundamental rights at work and social protection. Recalling that the Government had agreed in the 326th Session of the Governing Body (March 2016) to a detailed timetable in order to re-establish tripartite dialogue and to deal with matters relating to industrial relations including economic policy, they took note with concern that no tangible progress had been made in that regard. Taking into full consideration the observations of the Committee of Experts, the Worker members urged the Government to: (i) establish a structured body for tripartite social dialogue in the country and take immediate action to build a climate of trust based on respect for employers’ and trade union organizations with a view to promoting solid and stable industrial relations; and (ii) urgently implement all commitments made in the past Governing Body session so as to follow the plan of action for consultation with the social partners, including stages and specific time frames for its implementation.

The Employer members highlighted the considerable interest generated by the case and drew attention to three factors relating to the failure to apply the Convention. Although, by virtue of Article 1 of the Convention, governments must stimulate economic growth and development, quite the opposite was being seen in the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela. Under Article 2 of the Convention, economic and social measures must be reviewed to ensure that they were coordinated. However, undertaking such a review required genuine social dialogue, which could not take place in the National Council on Productive Economy, where groups whose voice was not in tune with the Government could not take part. Article 3 of the Convention, lastly, provided that the social partners should be consulted on employment policy. In that respect, the commitment expressed by the Government in March 2016 had not materialized, which was a clear violation of the Convention. The speaker said that the Conference Committee’s conclusions in the case should include: (i) the observation, shared by the Worker spokesperson, that the deterioration in economic indicators affected the majority of the country’s population and the development of trade; (ii) the need to take urgent steps to stimulate economic growth and development; (iii) the need to periodically review measures taken in the area of economic and social policy in consultation with the social partners, including the CTV, UNETE and FEDECAMARAS; (iv) the request for an employment policy to be formulated in full consultation with the social partners, including the CTV, UNETE and FEDECAMARAS; (v) the invitation to the Government to accept a high-level mission to observe the measures taken to give effect to the Convention; and (vi) mentioning the case in a special paragraph of the Committee’s report.

Conclusions

The Committee took note of the information provided by the Government representative and the discussion that followed on issues raised by the Committee of Experts.

The Committee took note with deep concern of the social and economic crisis affecting the country and the absence of an active employment policy designed to promote full, productive and freely chosen employment. The Committee deplored the absence of social dialogue with the most representative workers’ and employers’ organizations with a view to taking measures to apply an active employment policy.

Taking into account the discussion of the case, the Committee urged the Government to:

• - with the assistance of the ILO, develop, without delay, in consultations with the most representative workers and employers organizations, an employment policy designed to promote full, productive and freely chosen employment;
• - implement, without delay, concrete measures to put in practice an employment policy with a view to stimulating economic growth and development, raising levels of living, meeting manpower requirements and overcoming unemployment and underemployment;
• - establish without delay a structured body for tripartite social dialogue in the country and take immediate action to build a climate of trust based on respect for employers and workers organisations with a view to promoting solid and stable industrial relations;
• - implement all commitments made in the last session of the Governing Body to follow the plan of action for consultation with social partners that includes stages and specific time frames for its implementation; and
• - report in detail to the Committee of Experts before September 2016 on the application in law and practice of Convention No. 122.

The Government should accept an ILO tripartite high-level mission before the next International Labour Conference in order to assess progress towards compliance with these conclusions.

The Government representative rejected the conclusions adopted by the Committee. Inaccurate information with no bearing on the Convention had been taken as truth. Moreover, the conclusions had not taken into account the statements of the Government, the Worker members and other Government members.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2022, published 111st ILC session (2023)

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

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2017, published 107th ILC session (2018)

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

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2015, published 105th ILC session (2016)

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

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

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

1. Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention. Implementation of an employment policy in the framework of a coordinated economic and social policy. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in August 2008 in reply to the direct request of 2007. The Committee notes that, according to the information provided by the Government, between January 2004 and December 2007, the employed population increased from 9,793,825 persons to 11,707,121, with more than 1,900,000 new jobs being created. According to the Government’s explanations, the reduction in the active population has contributed to the significant reduction in unemployment and the unemployment rate fell between January 2004 and December 2007 from 19.1 per cent to 6.2 per cent. These results were achieved through the improvement of economic growth processes which included strengthening transformation relating to the recovery of industrial parks, contribution incentives, the modernization of telecommunications, the implementation of a new view of agricultural production, as well as activities to facilitate the financing of production through access to credit for small and medium-sized industries. Among the strategic objectives of the Che Guevara Mission, the Government also mentions the objective of placing employment at the centre of economic and social policy at the national, regional, local and communal levels. The Committee requests the Government to continue providing information on the steps taken to generate productive, stable and high-quality employment. It reiterates to the Government its interest in receiving information on the extent and distribution of the labour force, employment, unemployment and underemployment and the manner in which such information has been used as a basis for regularly reviewing the employment policy measures that have to be adopted as an integral part of a coordinated economic and social policy to achieve the objectives set out in the Convention.

2. Workers in the informal economy. The Committee notes the slight decrease in informal employment in response to Government programmes aimed at strengthening productive activity, ensuring widespread social security coverage and providing support for small and medium-sized enterprises. The Committee notes that, despite the measures implemented, informal workers account for almost half the economically active population, and around 5.5 million persons are working in the informal economy. The Committee requests the Government to provide information in its next report on the steps envisaged to facilitate access by workers in the informal economy to resources, product markets, credit, infrastructure, training, technical knowledge and advanced technology. It also requests the Government to include information in its next report on the impact in terms of generating employment of the steps taken under resolution No. 2888 of 2003, as well as other steps that it is taking to promote and develop the activity of micro and small enterprises.

3. Employment promotion and vulnerable groups. The Committee notes the downward trend in the unemployment rate of persons over the age of 45 years. It also notes the steps taken to recognize home work as an economic activity and the action aimed at getting women in extreme poverty into work. Furthermore, measures have also been taken to promote the integration of persons with disabilities into the labour market and their inclusion in vocational training plans. The Committee notes that the rate of youth unemployment (between 15 and 24 years of age) fell to 11.5 per cent in 2007. The Committee requests the Government to provide information in its next report on the steps taken to ensure that the most vulnerable workers find lasting employment, in particular that young persons do not find themselves in precarious jobs and have the possibility of acquiring sufficient knowledge to enable them to remain in the labour market.

4. Article 3. Consultation of social partners on employment policy. The Government indicates that social dialogue is an essential mechanism for contributing to the strengthening and recovery of the national economic fabric. This transformative mechanism is effective with regard to the participation of workers. In this context, the Committee notes the Framework Agreement for Co‑responsibility for Industrial Transformation, the objectives of which include protecting and generating new employment. The Committee reiterates the importance of securing the full cooperation of the representatives of the persons affected in formulating employment policies, including enlisting the necessary support for their implementation. It invites the Government to provide information on the results of the consultations held with the social partners and with representatives from other sectors of the economically active population, such as those working in the rural sector and in the informal economy, in relation to employment policies.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2007, published 97th ILC session (2008)

1. Article 1 of the Convention. Application of employment policy in the framework of a coordinated economic and social policy. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government’s report for the period ending September 2006 in reply to the comments made in the direct request of 2005. The Committee notes that, according to the information provided by the Government in its report, with the more rapid increase in economic activity, the trend has been maintained for the growth of employment levels and open urban unemployment has fallen in recent years to an annual average of 12.9 per cent in 2005 and 10.4 per cent in the third quarter of 2006. The Committee also notes the interest of the State in expanding public expenditure towards productive investment, the financing of socio-productive training plans and the creation of micro-enterprises and cooperative associations as a means of giving effect to the right to work. The Committee notes the signing of the Framework Agreement for Co-responsibility for Industrial Transformation and the progress achieved in the protection and generation of new direct and indirect employment. Measures have also been adopted to finance micro-enterprises, cooperatives and other types of productive associations, while negotiating tables have been convened. The Committee requests the Government to indicate in its next report the results achieved in terms of the creation of productive and lasting employment through the measures adopted and the manner in which progress has been made in raising living standards, meeting the needs of the labour force and resolving the problem of unemployment and underemployment in the country.

2. Employment promotion and vulnerable groups. The Committee notes that the participation rate of women in the labour market is lower than that of men, with figures of 37 per cent for women and 68 per cent for men. The Government emphasizes in its report that the unemployment rate of women, which was 14.9 per cent in 2005, continues to be higher than that of men, with a gap of 3 percentage points. Youth unemployment (between 15 and 24 years of age) is high at 22.2 percentage points, but fell by 2 percentage points in 2006. The rate of formal employment is 46 per cent of the active population, demonstrating that the informal economy is still significant. The Committee requests the Government to keep it informed of the measures that are being adopted to increase employment opportunities and improve working conditions in the informal economy. The Committee once again requests the Government to include information in its next report on the situation, level and trends of employment, unemployment and underemployment of specific categories of workers (women and young persons in the poorest sectors of the population and workers in the rural sector and the informal economy). The Committee would also be grateful to be provided with information on studies carried out to assess the extent and distribution of the labour force, employment, unemployment and underemployment and the manner in which such studies have been used as a basis for keeping under regular review the measures that the Government has to adopt as an integral part of a coordinated economic and social policy to achieve the objectives set out in the Convention.

3. Article 3. Consultation of social partners on employment policy. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government on participative democracy and transformative social dialogue which is enabling workers to develop new forms of political and social participation. In its report, the Government expresses its opinion on the limitations of the traditional machinery for representative democracy and refers to agreements to promote social dialogue. The Committee requests the Government to provide information in its next report so that it can examine the manner in which social dialogue contributes to the design and implementation of employment policies and it hopes that the Government will identify the measures adopted to consult representatives of workers in the rural sector and the informal economy in relation to their prospects of obtaining decent work.

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

1. Application of the employment policy within the framework of a coordinated economic and social policy.  The Committee takes note of the information provided by the Government in September 2004 with regard to its 2003 observation. The Committee notes with interest the reference to Convention No. 122 upon the adoption of Decree No. 2898 of 28 April 2004 which establishes a Presidential Commission for the support and incorporation of small- and medium-scale industries, cooperatives, micro-enterprises, family enterprises and other associative forms with regard to activities linked to agriculture, industry, tourism, infrastructure, manufacture of goods and provision of services in the country. This Presidential Commission will be responsible for implementing a special plan known as "Misión Vuelvan Caras" (Mission Returning Faces) to incorporate community associations into the process of the economic and social transformation of the State through the creation of centres of endogenous development and new sources of work. The Committee reiterates its request that, in its next report, the Government give details regarding the relations that have been established between the objectives of its employment policy and the other social and economic objectives, taking into account the fact that the Convention requires that labour policy measures be determined and regularly revised "within the framework of a coordinated economic and social policy" (Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention). The Committee asks the Government to provide the results obtained with regard to the creation of productive and sustainable employment, through the actions of the "Misión Vuelvan Caras" programme, as well as through the State Special Purchasing Plan, the "Monta Tu Negocio" (Start your Own Business) programme and the "Fábrica de Fábricas" programme (Business Factory) programme referred to by the Government in its report.

2. According to information published by the United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC) in its Economic Survey of Latin America and the Caribbean, 2004-05, the increase in economic activity was reflected in the fall in the unemployment rate, from 16.8 per cent in the second quarter of 2003 to around 12.5 per cent in the fourth quarter of 2004. The level of informal employment, which was over 50 per cent at the end of 2003, fell to 47 per cent on average by the end of 2004. In May 2005, the unemployment rate stood at 12.6 per cent. Annual economic growth for 2004 stood at 17.9 per cent and in the first quarter of 2005 the economy grew by 7.9 per cent, driven by the non-oil sector, in particular the following subsectors: construction; trade; transport and financial institutions. Growth of around 7 per cent is forecast for 2005. The Committee requests the Government to include in its next report information on the situation, level and trends of employment, unemployment, and underemployment which are required by the report form, indicating the extent to which particular categories of workers are affected (women and young people belonging to the poorest sectors of the population and workers in the rural sector and the informal economy).

3. Participation of the social partners in the formulation and application of policies. In response to the 2003 observation, the Government indicates that the round-table discussions have contributed to re-establishing trust between employers and workers with regard to Government management and have encouraged both sectors to take an active part in the implementation of the country’s plans for economic and social development. The Committee asks the Government to include updated information in its next report on the way in which social dialogue contributes to the adoption and application of employment policies and reiterates its interest in receiving data on the measures adopted regarding consultations with representatives of the rural sector and the informal economy with regard to opportunities for obtaining decent work (Article 3).

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

1. With reference to its 2001 observation, the Government supplied a report in October 2002 in which it provided details on the modernization of the General Directorate of Employment for the establishment of a system of labour mediation and an observatory of employment and labour migration. This technological platform operates in Caracas and eight cities in the country. The labour mediation project is being undertaken with the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). The documents attached to the Government’s report show that the activity rate was 68.7 per cent in April 2002, with the employed population accounting for 84.1 per cent of the economically active population. A total of 1,816,289 persons were unemployed. The unemployment rate for women (17.3 per cent) remained above that for men (14.9 per cent). According to the data published by the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC) in its Economic Survey of Latin America and the Caribbean, 2001-2002, the unemployment rate rose to 16.4 per cent in January 2002, compared with 15.8 per cent the previous year. In contrast, the unemployment rate for the first seven months of 2002 was lower than for the same period in 2001. There was a significant rise in August 2002, but the figure fell for the rest of the year, ending up at 11.5 per cent in December.

2. In its report, the Government states that as part of its continued policy to generate productive employment it has implemented measures with the objectives of reactivating the productive system of the public sector and generating direct employment. The Committee notes with interest that Decree No. 1944 of 2 September 2002 established an Employment Promotion Plan, which refers explicitly to Convention No. 122 in its preamble and has the objective of promoting employment in the private sector through the creation of demand for employment for the placement of the unemployed. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would continue to indicate in its next report the links established between employment policy objectives and other social and economic objectives, taking into account the requirement set out in the Convention that employment policy measures shall be decided on and kept under review "within the framework of a coordinated economic and social policy" (Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention). It would be grateful if the Government would indicate the manner in which the programmes mentioned in the report (and particularly the Employment Promotion Plan) have contributed to the creation of productive and lasting jobs.

3. In this connection, the Committee would also be grateful if the Government would continue providing information on the activities undertaken by the Presidential Commission for the Promotion of the Mass Employment Plan and the subcomissions on social cohesion and employment, established within the framework of the National Dialogue Round-Tables, with a view to the holding of the consultations required by Article 3 of the Convention. The Committee observes that to give effect to this important provision of the Convention, the consultations held with the persons affected (including representatives of the informal economy and the rural sector) must have the objective of taking fully into account their experiences and views and, in addition, of securing their full cooperation in formulating and implementing an active policy to promote full, productive and freely chosen employment.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2001, published 90th ILC session (2002)

1. In reply to its 1999 observation, the Government has provided a brief report for the period ending August 2000, in which it only indicates that a Presidential Commission for the Promotion of the Mass Employment Plan has recently been created and entrusted with evaluating the existing situation, submitting relevant recommendations and following up the measures adopted with a view to the provision of guidance. The Committee notes that the high levels reached by the price of oil led to an important rise in the gross national income and an acceleration of economic activity. However, the unemployment rate, which has doubled since the beginning of the 1990s, remains at high levels (11.3 per cent in 1998; 14.9 per cent in 1999; 14.6 per cent in 2000), informal employment has continued at above 53 per cent of the economically active population and the agricultural sector has also lost jobs. The Committee would therefore be grateful if the Government would provide information in its next report on the situation, level and trends of employment, unemployment and underemployment in Venezuela, disaggregated by their effect on women and young persons. Please also include information in the next report on the impact on employment of the structural reforms which have been undertaken, as well as information on the labour market measures and programmes carried out to match labour supply and demand so as to ensure that the categories of workers affected by structural transformations and changes in international trade are able to enter and remain in the labour market (Article 1 of the Convention).

2. The Committee refers once again to the representation made under article 24 of the Constitution of the ILO by the Latin American Central of Workers (CLAT) and the Latin American Federation of Trade Workers (FELTRALCOS) (document GB.273/14/5, adopted in November 1998), indicating that it would be in conformity with the measures required by the Convention for the Government to take advantage of the effort made by the workers in the informal sector to organize themselves with a view to seeking, through dialogue, in the spirit of Article 3 of the Convention, solutions to the employment problems arising from the existence of a very substantial informal sector. The Committee urges the Government to include full and detailed information in its next report on the employment policy measures adopted in relation to the informal sector.

3. The Committee trusts that in 2002 the Government will provide a detailed report on the application of the Convention containing all the information requested in the report form for each of the provisions of the Convention, including information on the activities of the Presidential Commission for the Promotion of the Mass Employment Plan and the manner in which its activities have taken into account the provisions of Articles 1, 2 and 3 of the Convention and, in general, the need to promote decent work.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1999, published 88th ILC session (2000)

1. The Committee notes the communication received from the World Confederation of Labour (WCL) in February 1999, which refers to the dismissal of employees from the legal sector as a consequence of the restructuring of the Judicial Council and closing of local law courts. The WCL considers that the dismissals constitute a violation of the principles established in the Convention. In its reply the Government states that the reorganization of the Judiciary was undertaken without redundancies. The local law courts were replaced by new municipal law courts staffed with the employees from the former institutions.

2. The WCL also refers to the representation submitted, under article 24 of the Constitution of the ILO, by the Latin American Central of Workers (CLAT) as regards application of the Convention. The Committee recalls that the tripartite committee set up by the Governing Body of the ILO to examine the representation submitted by the CLAT and the Latin American Federation of Trade Workers (FETRALCOS) expressed the opinion that it would be in conformity with the requirements of the Convention for the Government to take advantage of the effort made by the workers in the informal sector to organize themselves to seek, through dialogue, in the spirit of Article 3 of the Convention, solutions to the employment problems arising from the existence of a very substantial informal sector (document GB.273/14/5, adopted in November 1998). The Committee trusts that the Government will include in its next report complete and detailed information on the employment policy measures adopted with regard to the informal sector, as well as the manner in which the representatives of persons affected in this sector are consulted in respect of employment policy.

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

1. The Committee notes the Government's report for the period ending June 1998. According to the information provided by the Government in its report, the number of persons in employment increased by approximately 60,000 between the second half of 1996 and the second half of 1997, resulting in a reduction in the open unemployment rate of 1.8 per cent. The Committee notes that the open unemployment rate was 13 per cent at the end of 1997 and the beginning of 1998, with much higher rates for young people, women and certain sectors, such as construction (according to the data supplied by the ILO's Andean Multidisciplinary Advisory Team). Of every ten new jobs created between 1990 and 1996, seven were in an activity of an informal nature, two were in the private formal sector and one in the public sector. As a consequence, the Committee would be grateful if the Government would describe in its report the relationships which have been established between employment policy objectives and other economic and social objectives, taking into account the requirement set out in the Convention that employment policy measures shall be decided on and kept under review "within the framework of a coordinated economic and social policy" (Articles 1 and 2). In particular, it would be grateful if the Government would describe the manner in which the programmes referred to in its report (PROINSOL and PROMUEBA), the process of the opening up of the oil sector and the reform of labour legislation have affected the creation of productive and sustainable jobs. Please also indicate the action taken as a result of the technical advice and assistance received from the Office in the field of employment policy (Part V of the report form).

2. The Government emphasizes in its report the adoption of the Tripartite Agreement on Integrated Social Security and Wages Policy of March 1997 and the Tripartite Agreement on Stability in Employment (ATES) of July the same year. A tripartite technical commission was entrusted with the formulation of an agreed employment policy and submitted its report in December 1997. The Committee notes with interest this initiative, which is in the spirit of Article 3 of the Convention -- to secure the full cooperation of the representatives of employers and workers in formulating and enlisting support for the employment policy. The Committee trusts that the Government will indicate any progress which is achieved in putting into practice the agreed employment policy, which is endorsed by the social partners.

3. In this respect, the Committee notes the recommendations of the tripartite committee set up by the Governing Body to examine the representation made under article 24 of the ILO Constitution by the Latin American Central of Workers (CLAT) and the Latin American Federation of Trade Workers (FETRALCOS) alleging non-observance by Venezuela of Convention No. 122 (document GB.273/14/5, adopted in November 1998). The Committee notes that the above committee expressed the opinion that it would be in conformity with the measures required by the Convention for the Government to take advantage of the effort made by the workers in the informal sector to organize themselves to seek, through dialogue, in the spirit of Article 3 of the Convention, solutions to the employment problems arising from the existence of a very substantial informal sector. The Committee fully endorses the recommendation of the above committee and requests the Government to include full and detailed information in its report on the employment policy measures adopted for the informal sector, as well as the manner in which the representatives of the persons affected in this sector are consulted.

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

1. Further to its observation, the Committee notes the Government's growth strategy which, in the framework of the IXth Plan (1995-98), aims to combat unemployment and precarious employment by emphasizing the promotion of private investment and envisages the creation of 1.5 million new jobs. It requests the Government to indicate, in the light of the objectives laid down in Article 1 of the Convention, to what extent these aims are being achieved and any difficulties encountered.

2. The Committee notes the implementation of specific programmes such as the youth employment scheme, the employment reinsertion plan and the temporary employment plan as well as the measures for promoting cooperatives and micro-business. It would be grateful if the Government would supply a detailed description of the measures it mentions, showing their results.

3. Article 3. Referring to the requests it has been making for several years, the Committee requests the Government to put in its next report information on how employers' and workers' representatives, as well as the representatives of people employed in the rural and informal sectors, are consulted in practice on the subject of employment policies with a view to taking fully into account their experience and views, and securing their full cooperation in formulating and enlisting support for such policies. Please indicate whether formal consultation procedures have been instituted for this purpose.

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

1. The Committee notes the Government's report for the period ending June 1996 and the information sent in reply to the previous observations and direct requests. It notes, however, that the report does not include the statistical information required by the report form adopted by the Governing Body (see under Article 1 of the Convention). The Committee once again requests the Government to supply the fullest possible data on the situation, employment levels and trends, both globally and in regard to particular categories of workers.

2. The Committee notes the creation of state employment coordination bodies responsible for analysing regional characteristics of the labour market with a view to formulating appropriate employment policies. It requests the Government to indicate how these coordinating bodies contribute to determining and, in the framework of a coordinated economic and social policy, regularly reviewing the measures to be adopted with a view to promoting full, productive and freely chosen employment, in accordance with Article 2.

The Committee is raising other questions in a direct request.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1995, published 83rd ILC session (1996)

The Committee refers to its observation and trusts that the Government will include in its report the information required by the report form for the Convention, and that it will also supply information on the following matters:

1. The "Strategic Hexagon" of the VIIth National Plan (submitted to Congress in January 1990) states that the fundamental basis for improving the quality of life of the population is to create the conditions in which all Venezuelans can have access to stable and well-remunerated jobs. Among the most important problems relating to the labour market, emphasis is placed on the fact that four out of every ten Venezuelans are outside the formal sector of the economy. The Committee trusts that the Government will continue to supply documents containing specific provisions which have as their objective an active policy designed to promote full, productive and freely chosen employment (Part I of the report form). In this context, the Committee would be grateful if the Government would supply information on the impact of the "strategic operations of the social commitment" envisaged in the VIIth National Plan.

2. The Government refers in its report to the economic restructuring policy which has given rise to the processes of reactivating industry, rationalization and the privatization of public enterprises, as well as economic deregulation and an opening up to international markets. The Committee recalls that adjustment policies should maintain a relationship with the promotion of employment and the satisfaction of basic needs (paragraph 37(h) of the Employment Policy (Supplementary Provisions) Recommendation, 1984 (No. 169)). The Committee therefore trusts that the Government will describe the mutual relationships which have been established between employment objectives and other economic and social objectives, in accordance with Article 1, paragraph 3, of the Convention.

3. The Government refers in its report to various statistical tables relating to the situation, level and trends of employment, unemployment and underemployment in the various sectors. The International Labour Office, in a letter in September 1992, indicated to the Government that copies of the statistical tables referred to had not been received. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would make the necessary efforts to include statistical information on the extent to which specific categories of workers are affected (women, young persons, workers affected by restructuring measures, older workers and disabled workers).

4. The Committee notes that, in accordance with resolution No. 3294, of 24 August 1992, the Ministry of Labour acknowledges the importance and need to have available statistical information of a continuous, appropriate and adequate nature, on the employment situation of the country. It considered that "in order to prepare and apply a policy designed to achieve and maintain full employment it is necessary to have available statistics on labour matters". The Committee trusts that the collection and analysis of statistical information will be duly taken into account when deciding upon and reviewing the principal measures of the employment policy within the context of a coordinated economic and social policy (Article 2).

5. Please state whether measures have been adopted under section 25 of the Organic Labour Act and the impact that they have had.

6. Among the special employment generation programmes, the Government refers to the social security scheme established for unemployment (Decree No. 599, of November 1989, as amended). In 1990 it allocated 3,182 million Bolivares to social insurance for unemployment and the amount allocated in 1991 increased to 4,063 million Bolivares. It also refers to programmes of local social investment and promotion and support for the popular economy, which are designed principally for workers in the informal sector. The Committee would be grateful to receive more information on the achievements of the above programmes in relation to productive and freely chosen employment. The Committee recalls that when, in the context of an overall employment policy, governments adopt measures with a view to satisfying the needs of categories of persons who frequently encounter difficulties in finding lasting employment (women, young persons, disabled workers, older workers, the long-term unemployed and migrant workers who are legally resident), care must be taken to ensure the compatibility of these measures with the provisions of international labour Conventions and Recommendations respecting the employment of these categories of workers and with the conditions of employment established in accordance with national law and practice.

7. Article 3. The Government states that the Executive has constantly promoted dialogue with the representatives of employers and workers through the continual consultations on the creation of new sources of labour. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would supply further information on actual examples and the formal procedures for consultation pursued with the representatives of the persons affected, including representatives of persons who work in the rural sector and in the informal sector, on the matters covered by the Convention.

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

The Committee refers to its observation and trusts that the Government will include in its report the information required by the report form for the Convention, and that it will also supply information on the following matters:

1. The "Strategic Hexagon" of the VIIth National Plan (submitted to Congress in January 1990) states that the fundamental basis for improving the quality of life of the population is to create the conditions in which all Venezuelans can have access to stable and well-remunerated jobs. Among the most important problems relating to the labour market, emphasis is placed on the fact that four out of every ten Venezuelans are outside the formal sector of the economy. The Committee trusts that the Government will continue to supply documents containing specific provisions which have as their objective an active policy designed to promote full, productive and freely chosen employment (Part I of the report form). In this context, the Committee would be grateful if the Government would supply information on the impact of the "strategic operations of the social commitment" envisaged in the VIIth National Plan.

2. The Government refers in its report to the economic restructuring policy which has given rise to the processes of reactivating industry, rationalization and the privatization of public enterprises, as well as economic deregulation and an opening up to international markets. The Committee recalls that adjustment policies should maintain a relationship with the promotion of employment and the satisfaction of basic needs (paragraph 37(h) of the Employment Policy (Supplementary Provisions) Recommendation, 1984 (No. 169)). The Committee therefore trusts that the Government will describe the mutual relationships which have been established between employment objectives and other economic and social objectives, in accordance with Article 1, paragraph 3, of the Convention.

3. The Government refers in its report to various statistical tables relating to the situation, level and trends of employment, unemployment and underemployment in the various sectors. The International Labour Office, in a letter in September 1992, indicated to the Government that copies of the statistical tables referred to had not been received. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would make the necessary efforts to include statistical information on the extent to which specific categories of workers are affected (women, young persons, workers affected by restructuring measures, older workers and disabled workers).

4. The Committee notes that, in accordance with resolution No. 3294, of 24 August 1992, the Ministry of Labour acknowledges the importance and need to have available statistical information of a continuous, appropriate and adequate nature, on the employment situation of the country. It considered that "in order to prepare and apply a policy designed to achieve and maintain full employment it is necessary to have available statistics on labour matters". The Committee trusts that the collection and analysis of statistical information will be duly taken into account when deciding upon and reviewing the principal measures of the employment policy within the context of a coordinated economic and social policy (Article 2).

5. Please state whether measures have been adopted under section 25 of the Organic Labour Act and the impact that they have had.

6. Among the special employment generation programmes, the Government refers to the social security scheme established for unemployment (Decree No. 599, of November 1989, as amended). In 1990 it allocated 3,182 million Bolivares to social insurance for unemployment and the amount allocated in 1991 increased to 4,063 million Bolivares. It also refers to programmes of local social investment and promotion and support for the popular economy, which are designed principally for workers in the informal sector. The Committee would be grateful to receive more information on the achievements of the above programmes in relation to productive and freely chosen employment. The Committee recalls that when, in the context of an overall employment policy, governments adopt measures with a view to satisfying the needs of categories of persons who frequently encounter difficulties in finding lasting employment (women, young persons, disabled workers, older workers, the long-term unemployed and migrant workers who are legally resident), care must be taken to ensure the compatibility of these measures with the provisions of international labour Conventions and Recommendations respecting the employment of these categories of workers and with the conditions of employment established in accordance with national law and practice.

7. Article 3. The Government states that the Executive has constantly promoted dialogue with the representatives of employers and workers through the continual consultations on the creation of new sources of labour. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would supply further information on actual examples and the formal procedures for consultation pursued with the representatives of the persons affected, including representatives of persons who work in the rural sector and in the informal sector, on the matters covered by the Convention.

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

The Committee notes that the Government's report has not been received. It must therefore repeat its previous observation which read as follows:

With reference to its previous comments, the Committee notes the detailed information contained in the Government's report. The Government refers to the results achieved through the structural adjustment measures which have been applied since 1989 and have made it possible to re-establish a macroeconomic balance and attain sustained growth of production. The Government states in its report that a high proportion of workers in the informal sector of the economy do not enjoy the desirable working conditions of stability and an adequate income, that the unemployment rate remains at a high level, and that there is pressure for greater flexibility and deregulation of the labour market. The Committee notes that the Organic Labour Act of 1990 states that everybody has the right to work (section 24) and that the State shall make every effort to create and encourage conditions favourable to raising the level of employment to the greatest possible extent (section 25). As it has been doing for several years, the Committee proposes to continue the dialogue by directly requesting the Government to supply information on various aspects of the impact on employment of the measures adopted under structural adjustment programmes, the revision of these measures within the context of a coordinated social and economic policy, and the consultations which have been held with representatives of the persons affected concerning the employment policy (Articles 1, 2 and 3 of the Convention).

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1995, published 83rd ILC session (1996)

The Committee notes with regret that the Government's report has not been received. It must therefore repeat its previous observation which read as follows:

With reference to its previous comments, the Committee notes the detailed information contained in the Government's report. The Government refers to the results achieved through the structural adjustment measures which have been applied since 1989 and have made it possible to re-establish a macroeconomic balance and attain sustained growth of production. The Government states in its report that a high proportion of workers in the informal sector of the economy do not enjoy the desirable working conditions of stability and an adequate income, that the unemployment rate remains at a high level, and that there is pressure for greater flexibility and deregulation of the labour market. The Committee notes that the Organic Labour Act of 1990 states that everybody has the right to work (section 24) and that the State shall make every effort to create and encourage conditions favourable to raising the level of employment to the greatest possible extent (section 25). As it has been doing for several years, the Committee proposes to continue the dialogue by directly requesting the Government to supply information on various aspects of the impact on employment of the measures adopted under structural adjustment programmes, the revision of these measures within the context of a coordinated social and economic policy, and the consultations which have been held with representatives of the persons affected concerning the employment policy (Articles 1, 2 and 3 of the Convention).

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1993, published 80th ILC session (1993)

The Committee refers to its observation and trusts that the Government will include in its next report the information required by the report form for the Convention, and that it will also supply information on the following matters:

1. The "Strategic Hexagon" of the VIIth National Plan (submitted to Congress in January 1990) states that the fundamental basis for improving the quality of life of the population is to create the conditions in which all Venezuelans can have access to stable and well-remunerated jobs. Among the most important problems relating to the labour market, emphasis is placed on the fact that four out of every ten Venezuelans are outside the formal sector of the economy. The Committee trusts that the Government will continue to supply documents containing specific provisions which have as their objective an active policy designed to promote full, productive and freely chosen employment (Part I of the report form). In this context, the Committee would be grateful if the Government would supply information on the impact of the "strategic operations of the social commitment" envisaged in the VIIth National Plan.

2. The Government refers in its report to the economic restructuring policy which has given rise to the processes of reactivating industry, rationalization and the privatization of public enterprises, as well as economic deregulation and an opening up to international markets. The Committee recalls that adjustment policies should maintain a relationship with the promotion of employment and the satisfaction of basic needs (paragraph 37(h) of the Employment Policy (Supplementary Provisions) Recommendation, 1984 (No. 169)). The Committee therefore trusts that the Government will describe the mutual relationships which have been established between employment objectives and other economic and social objectives, in accordance with Article 1, paragraph 3, of the Convention.

3. The Government refers in its report to various statistical tables relating to the situation, level and trends of employment, unemployment and underemployment in the various sectors. The International Labour Office, in a letter in September 1992, indicated to the Government that copies of the statistical tables referred to had not been received. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would make the necessary efforts to include statistical information on the extent to which specific categories of workers are affected (women, young persons, workers affected by restructuring measures, older workers and disabled workers).

4. The Committee notes that, in accordance with resolution No. 3294, of 24 August 1992, the Ministry of Labour acknowledges the importance and need to have available statistical information of a continuous, appropriate and adequate nature, on the employment situation of the country. It considered that "in order to prepare and apply a policy designed to achieve and maintain full employment it is necessary to have available statistics on labour matters. The Committee trusts that the collection and analysis of statistical information will be duly taken into account when deciding upon and reviewing the principal measures of the employment policy within the context of a coordinated economic and social policy (Article 2).

5. Please state whether measures have been adopted under section 25 of the Organic Labour Act and the impact that they have had.

6. Among the special employment generation programmes, the Government refers to the social security scheme etablished for unemployment (Decree No. 599, of November 1989, as amended). In 1990 it allocated 3,182 million Bolivares to social insurance for unemployment, and the amount allocated in 1991 increased to 4,063 million Bolivares. It also refers to programmes of local social investment and promotion and support for the popular economy, which are designed principally for workers in the informal sector. The Committee would be grateful to receive more information on the achievements of the above programmes in relation to productive and freely chosen employment. The Committee recalls that when, in the context of an overall employment policy, Governments adopt measures with a view to satisfying the needs of categories of persons who frequently encounter difficulties in finding lasting employment (women, young persons, disabled workers, older workers, the long-term unemployed and migrant workers who are legally resident), care must be taken to ensure the compatibility of these measures with the provisions of international labour Conventions and Recommendations respecting the employment of these categories of workers and with the conditions of employment established in accordance with national law and practice.

7. Article 3. The Government states that the Executive has constantly promoted dialogue with the representatives of employers and workers through the continual consultations on the creation of new sources of labour. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would supply further information on actual examples and the formal procedures for consultation pursued with the representatives of the persons affected, including representatives of persons who work in the rural sector and in the informal sector, on the matters covered by the Convention.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1993, published 80th ILC session (1993)

With reference to its previous comments, the Committee notes the detailed information contained in the Government's report. The Government refers to the results achieved through the structural adjustment measures which have been applied since 1989 and have made it possible to re-establish a macroeconomic balance and attain sustained growth of production. The Governments states in its report that a high proportion of workers in the informal sector of the economy do not enjoy the desirable working conditions of stability and an adequate income, that the unemployment rate remains at a high level, and that there is pressure for greater flexibility and deregulation of the labour market. The Committee notes that the Organic Labour Act of 1990 states that everybody has the right to work (section 24) and that the State shall make every effort to create and encourage conditions favourable to raising the level of employment to the greatest possible extent (section 25). As it has been doing for several years, the Committee proposes to continue the dialogue by directly requesting the Government to supply information on various aspects of the impact on employment of the measures adopted under structural adjustment programmes, the revision of these measures within the context of a coordinated social and economic policy, and the consultations which have been held with representatives of the persons affected concerning the employment policy (Articles 1, 2 and 3 of the Convention).

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

The Committee notes with regret that the Government's report has not been received. It must therefore repeat its previous observation which read as follows:

1. The Committee notes the Government's report. In reply to the specific questions raised in 1987 in a direct request, the Government has provided brief general information that emphasises the factors and obstacles of an external nature, and in particular the debt burden, and the need for international economic co-operation to ensure the effectiveness of employment policies. 2. With reference to the Committee's previous comments on this problem, the Government's report emphasises that in the context of the international economic crisis experienced over the past six years, any measure that is taken and pursued by the State in the field of employment generation policies will be ultimately conditioned by an international environment characterised by massive problems of indebtedness, a contraction of trade and declining economic activity. In this connection, the Government indicates that as a consequences of the adverse external situation, the measures required of governments by international financial bodies in order to obtain the necessary financial resources for their economic development are diametrically opposed to the principles contained in the Convention. The Government's report also points out that in 1986 Venezuela made the initial proposal for a High-Level Meeting on Employment and Structural Adjustment to be held in the ILO, which took place in November 1987 and was chaired by the Ministry of Labour of Venezuela. The documents placed before the High-Level Meeting for examination and the resulting papers have been of great value to the Government since they have added substance to the information that has been collected quantifying the extent of the employment problem at both the national and international levels. The fact of having recognised the problem of external debt and its consequences as a problem over and above any consideration of a narrow economic nature was a step forward that was absolutely necessary and that the Government considers to be vital for industrialised economies to understand that an international economic order cannot permit a region such as Latin America to remain outside world economic progress. In this context, the Government states that Venezuela as a country is fully identified with the principles of regional solidarity and considers that it was for this reason that the era of international co-operation and consultation began to resolve the problems that prevent development and aspirations towards social justice in the terms set out in the Convention. 3. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would continue supplying information on the relation between employment policies and programmes and structural adjustment policies and programmes and if it would indicate the methods and procedures that have been adopted to ensure that the impact of the latter on employment receive due consideration. Furthermore, more generally, the Committee requests the Government to supply full information in its next report on the application of the Convention, in reply to the matters raised in relation to Articles 1, 2 and 3 of the Convention in a new direct request.

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

The Committee notes that the Government's report has not been received. It must therefore repeat its previous observation which read as follows:

1. The Committee notes the Government's report. In reply to the specific questions raised in 1987 in a direct request, the Government has provided brief general information that emphasises the factors and obstacles of an external nature, and in particular the debt burden, and the need for international economic co-operation to ensure the effectiveness of employment policies. 2. With reference to the Committee's previous comments on this problem, the Government's report emphasises that in the context of the international economic crisis experienced over the past six years, any measure that is taken and pursued by the State in the field of employment generation policies will be ultimately conditioned by an international environment characterised by massive problems of indebtedness, a contraction of trade and declining economic activity. In this connection, the Government indicates that as a consequences of the adverse external situation, the measures required of governments by international financial bodies in order to obtain the necessary financial resources for their economic development are diametrically opposed to the principles contained in the Convention. The Government's report also points out that in 1986 Venezuela made the initial proposal for a High-Level Meeting on Employment and Structural Adjustment to be held in the ILO, which took place in November 1987 and was chaired by the Ministry of Labour of Venezuela. The documents placed before the High-Level Meeting for examination and the resulting papers have been of great value to the Government since they have added substance to the information that has been collected quantifying the extent of the employment problem at both the national and international levels. The fact of having recognised the problem of external debt and its consequences as a problem over and above any consideration of a narrow economic nature was a step forward that was absolutely necessary and that the Government considers to be vital for industrialised economies to understand that an international economic order cannot permit a region such as Latin America to remain outside world economic progress. In this context, the Government states that Venezuela as a country is fully identified with the principles of regional solidarity and considers that it was for this reason that the era of international co-operation and consultation began to resolve the problems that prevent development and aspirations towards social justice in the terms set out in the Convention. 3. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would continue supplying information on the relation between employment policies and programmes and structural adjustment policies and programmes and if it would indicate the methods and procedures that have been adopted to ensure that the impact of the latter on employment receive due consideration. Furthermore, more generally, the Committee requests the Government to supply full information in its next report on the application of the Convention, in reply to the matters raised in relation to Articles 1, 2 and 3 of the Convention in a new direct request.

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

1. The Committee notes the Government's report. In reply to the specific questions raised in 1987 in a direct request, the Government has provided brief general information that emphasises the factors and obstacles of an external nature, and in particular the debt burden, and the need for international economic co-operation to ensure the effectiveness of employment policies.

2. With reference to the Committee's previous comments on this problem, the Government's report emphasises that in the context of the international economic crisis experienced over the past six years, any measure that is taken and pursued by the State in the field of employment generation policies will be ultimately conditioned by an international environment characterised by massive problems of indebtedness, a contraction of trade and declining economic activity. In this connection, the Government indicates that as a consequences of the adverse external situation, the measures required of governments by international financial bodies in order to obtain the necessary financial resources for their economic development are diametrically opposed to the principles contained in the Convention. The Government's report also points out that in 1986 Venezuela made the initial proposal for a High-Level Meeting on Employment and Structural Adjustment to be held in the ILO, which took place in November 1987 and was chaired by the Ministry of Labour of Venezuela. The documents placed before the High-Level Meeting for examination and the resulting papers have been of great value to the Government since they have added substance to the information that has been collected quantifying the extent of the employment problem at both the national and international levels. The fact of having recognised the problem of external debt and its consequences as a problem over and above any consideration of a narrow economic nature was a step forward that was absolutely necessary and that the Government considers to be vital for industrialised economies to understand that an international economic order cannot permit a region such as Latin America to remain outside world economic progress. In this context, the Government states that Venezuela as a country is fully identified with the principles of regional solidarity and considers that it was for this reason that the era of international co-operation and consultation began to resolve the problems that prevent development and aspirations towards social justice in the terms set out in the Convention.

3. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would continue supplying information on the relation between employment policies and programmes and structural adjustment policies and programmes and if it would indicate the methods and procedures that have been adopted to ensure that the impact of the latter on employment receive due consideration. Furthermore, more generally, the Committee requests the Government to supply full information in its next report on the application of the Convention, in reply to the matters raised in relation to Articles 1, 2 and 3 of the Convention in a new direct request.