Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 2013, Publication: 102nd ILC session (2013)

A Government representative emphasized that since 2009 the country’s labour administration, which had previously been somewhat abandoned, had received special attention from the President of the Republic and valuable ILO technical assistance and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). He asserted that the allegations presented by the General Confederation of Workers of Mauritania (CGTM) regarding the lack of independence of labour inspectors and the lack of resources for them to do their work were inaccurate and smacked of disinformation. The 40 labour inspectors and controllers recently recruited had been selected through a highly selective competition, after which they had been provided with more than two years’ high quality theoretical and practical training. Through a UNDP-administered project to improve workers’ skills in the administration and in public services, the regional labour inspectorates now had significant equipment and resources for their work. Labour inspectors, who already enjoyed a special status that guaranteed them legal protection, would shortly benefit from a status reinforced by financial benefits which would ensure their independence and impartiality. From the technical standpoint, ILO support in the form of a methodological labour inspection manual had been of great importance. The annual report of the labour inspectorate was almost ready for publication and would in future be sent on a regular basis. However, it had not been possible to put the statistics applied by regional labour inspectorates to good use because of a shortage of labour statisticians, he therefore requested ILO technical assistance to reinforce the capacity of the labour administration in that area. With regard to the CGTM’s allegations concerning occupational diseases, he insisted that they were unfounded and that neither the National Social Security Fund nor the national occupational health office had had cause to cite any occupational diseases in the enterprises referred to by the CGTM. In conclusion, he said that it was his country’s objective to build up a competent and well-equipped labour inspection system working closely with the social partners and that the conclusions of the Conference Committee would serve as a useful catalyst in that regard.

The Worker members regretted that the Government had for over 30 years, despite the insistence of the Committee of Experts, persistently refused to respect the spirit and letter of the Convention. The Government had taken no effective steps to institute a labour inspection system within the measures of Article 1 of the Convention, nor had it fulfilled its obligation under Article 6 to give labour inspectors a status guaranteeing their independence and impartiality. To show just how little importance the Government attached to labour inspection, the 2007 decree granting labour administration a special status did not grant the employees concerned the same allowance to which other administrative bodies were entitled. They referred to cases in which labour inspectors had been refused entry to workplaces in total impunity. They indicated that, in accordance with Article 3(2) of the Convention, labour inspectors should devote most of their time to monitoring workplaces. However, the real problem was that labour inspectors had neither the operational funds, the means of transport or the local offices to discharge their duties. As to human resources, there were only 70 inspectors and controllers for the entire country. They recognized the importance of the methodological manual on labour inspection that the ILO had prepared. But, they noted that it called for the extension of the scope of labour inspection to informal enterprises, the number of which was steadily increasing, which even further highlighted the inadequacy of the means available to the labour inspection services. They reaffirmed the imperative nature of the principle of employment security and the independence of labour inspectors from changes of government or from any external influence. They also expressed regret that the Government had refused to recognize the trade union that inspectors had wished to form. The Government still needed to understand that the publication of an annual report on the activities of the labour inspection services was an obligation under Article 20 of the Convention, as well as a valuable tool for assessing and enhancing the effectiveness of inspection activities. Having mentioned a number of other problems, such as difficulties of recruitment and shortcomings in the organization of labour administration, they emphasized that the allocation of funds by the Government remained the key to ensuring that the State was able to discharge its obligations under the Convention. The Committee must identify all such shortcomings and failures so as to request the Government to take all necessary steps to give full effect to a Convention the importance of which could not be underestimated.

The Employer members reviewed the background of the case, which had been double-footnoted in 2012. Although the Convention had been ratified in 1963 and the Government had shortly thereafter drawn up implementing regulations with ILO assistance, the Committee of Experts had made 14 observations drawing attention to problems of implementation. The Employer members had noted with regret in 2000 that, in view of the time that had passed since ratification and the adoption of the regulations, there had been a significant lack of progress. The lack of labour inspectors on the ground meant that the Government could not supply reports to the Committee of Experts for evaluation, and the absence of such reports indicated the absence of a functioning labour inspection system. Although the Government had indicated that it had an inspection service comprising eight regional offices coordinated by a central service, it was not able to provide details and statistics to support that claim. Despite the adoption in 2007 of special regulations for the labour administration establishing the status of labour inspectors and controllers, it remained clear to the Committee that labour inspectors still did not have the independence necessary to properly perform their functions. The Employer members noted the comments of the CGTM emphasizing that labour inspectors had less than satisfactory conditions of work and lacked financial and material resources. This year, the Government representative had stated that 40 labour inspectors had been recruited since 2009 and had undergone a two-year training course, but no such information had been included in the Government’s reports submitted from 2009 to 2012. The Government had also advised that a number of ILO training courses had been undertaken since 2008, labour inspectors had received a methodological guide, a “tool kit” for inspectors had been devised and would be received during the course of 2013 and that, with World Bank assistance, there had been improvements in the equipment of labour inspectors. However, no information had been provided on the nature of this equipment or whether it had been deployed and training provided to inspectors in its use. The Employer members called upon the Government to provide information on projects and initiatives without delay, and to implement with ILO technical assistance the Decent Work Country Programme, which was in the process of being concluded. Finally, they urged the Government to ensure the implementation of the measures called for in previous comments of the Committee of Experts, including the need for effective cooperation between the labour inspectorate and the judiciary, the availability of statistics concerning workplaces liable to inspection, and the need for the publication of an annual report on the operation of the inspection services.

A Worker member of Mauritania emphasized that the role of labour inspectors was even more vital in Mauritania because the legislation was constantly being violated and there was no culture of social dialogue and collective bargaining. Moreover, the country was very large and road infrastructure was poor, numerous multinational enterprises had set up in the country, which had increased subcontracting and precarious work, and forced labour was widespread. Despite that, and the many calls from the supervisory bodies and trade unions, the Government had remained inflexible and refused to take the necessary measures to ensure that the labour inspection services were in a position to cover the entire country effectively and guarantee legal protection for workers. For that purpose, the inspection services needed to have sufficient trained staff, adequate material and logistical resources and the power to issue warnings and penalties to enterprises that failed to respect labour legislation. Of the 13 regions, seven had inspection offices, but three were ill-suited to the task. Some had no vehicles, which meant that inspectors could not respond to requests and complaints from workers in remote areas. As a result, and as the situation had not improved, the Government should be called upon to take rapid action to create appropriate working conditions for inspectors, recruit a sufficient number of inspectors, guarantee continuous training, open properly equipped offices where they did not exist and enhance the powers of inspectors to impose sanctions.

Another Worker member of Mauritania acknowledged that labour inspection was facing several problems, which could only be resolved through common efforts. The Government had made some efforts, particularly by recruiting a number of labour inspectors, but much remained to be done, especially for training. However, he wished to highlight that national political interests should not be brought before this international body, where some parties might be tempted to exaggerate problems for reasons of political expediency.

The Worker member of France emphasized that any legislation should be accompanied by a labour inspection system to monitor its application, in both law and practice. For some years, the Committee of Experts had been requesting the Government to make efforts to give effect to the provisions of the Convention. The function of inspection services was made even more difficult by the immense territory they had to cover with very few resources, which made supervision almost impossible. Moreover, they should be free to carry out supervision and to report any violations they identified in full transparency. The Government had confined itself to reiterating its 2009 statements concerning the recruitment of 40 labour inspectors. However, the Government had been requested to take the necessary steps to ensure that labour inspectors received adequate training and had the powers and resources necessary to take effective action. The Government had made no progress in that regard. As a result, it should again be requested to take prompt action to enable labour inspectors to fulfil their supervisory and advisory functions by providing them with material resources, and to focus on inspection with a view to eliminating child labour, which was becoming increasingly widespread.

The Worker member of Denmark, speaking on behalf of the Worker members of other Nordic trade unions, expressed deep concern at the complete lack of a labour inspection system in Mauritania. He recalled that there were 80 inspectors in total and only one inspector was appointed to cover five regions without access to indispensable transport and communication facilities. The lack of a sufficient number of inspectors made it impossible to guarantee the confidentiality of inspections and to ensure an effective collaboration between inspectors, employers and workers. Furthermore, labour inspectors were the only public employees who had not been granted the allowance awarded to all other administrative departments by a 2007 decree. The inadequacies of the labour inspectorate had a particularly strong impact on child labour in the country. Although the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) and the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child reported a high incidence of child labour, particularly in the agricultural sector, and the existence of caste-based slavery, no child labour investigation had taken place for the past year. He concluded that the Government had offered no proof of its commitment to comply with its obligations under the Convention. The Committee should therefore urge the Government to establish a functioning labour inspection system.

The Government representative wished to dispel some confusion which seemed to have arisen during the discussion concerning the surface area of the country. Although Mauritania was a vast country of 1.3 million square kilometres, only one third of that area was inhabited. The number of employees in the country was 90,000 concentrated in four urban centres. The inspection offices were located in areas where there was a concentration of enterprises and it would be unreasonable to open inspection offices in areas where there were no workers. Moreover, it should be noted that the situation had changed in Mauritania since the examination of the case in 2000 by the Conference Committee. All inspection services now had vehicles and offices which were properly equipped with computers, telephones, etc. With regard to the question of the allowance that had not been paid to labour inspectors, the decree granting the allowance was being finalized. Finally, he acknowledged that the absence of annual reports represented a problem, as such reports enabled an evaluation of the inspection services. ILO assistance would be very useful in that respect and to help the country compile reliable labour statistics.

The Worker members emphasized that the present case was a serious one, as shown by the footnote to the observation of the Committee of Expert. The key question was whether or not inspectors were in a position to discharge their mandate. The Government should therefore take the following measures: the establishment of a labour inspection system based on the socio-economic aims contained in the Convention; the creation of a system to monitor application of the Convention; the strengthening of human resources in the inspection service by recruiting a sufficient number of labour inspectors; the provision to labour inspection services of operational offices; the allocation to inspection services of financial and material resources; and the provision of annual reports to the Office on the activities of the inspection services and a report on the progress achieved for examination by the Committee of Experts at its next session.

The Employer members reiterated that labour inspection was crucial for any labour relations system to function properly. While it might be true, as the Government claimed, that the number of labour inspectors had increased and that the labour inspection services were concentrated in urban areas rather than being spread out, the Government had not provided any indication on the effectiveness of those services. Labour inspection was the face of accountability in matters of labour relations in a country and therefore labour inspectors should be professional and independent, should carry a sense of authority and their work should be backed by effective sanctions.

Conclusions

The Committee noted the statement by the Government representative and the discussion that followed relating to various issues including the effective functioning of the labour inspection system on the territory of the country, the lack of human and material resources including transport facilities, insufficient salaries and benefits and the lack of independence and stability of employment of labour inspectors.

The Committee noted the Government’s indications concerning its efforts to establish an effective and well-structured labour inspection system with the necessary material and human resources. It noted the information on the recent recruitment of 40 additional labour inspectors and controllers and their subsequent training for two years at the National Administration Institute (ENA) in addition to practical training, and the indications that labour inspectors had at their disposal improved equipment and material means, as well as a methodological guide and a “tool kit” that had been drafted with ILO support. The Committee also took note of the information that labour inspectors would soon be granted a particular status with financial advantages of a nature such as to guarantee their independence and impartiality, and that the Government was in the process of finalizing the annual report for submission to the ILO. It noted the Government’s request for technical assistance.

While noting the information on the progress made, the Committee also noted that the issues concerning the insufficient wages and benefits of inspectors, the lack of independence and stability of employment of labour inspectors, as well as the failure to communicate to the ILO annual reports on the work of the labour inspection services were all issues which had already been raised in the discussion of the case in 2000, as well as in the Committee of Experts’ reports for three decades. The Committee deeply regretted the lack of progress made since that time.

With regard to the status and conditions of service of labour inspectors in particular and the recruitment of inspectors with sole regard to their competence and qualifications, the Committee emphasized that failing to provide inspectors with remuneration commensurate with their responsibilities was likely to lead to situations in which labour inspectors would find themselves treated with disrespect, detracting from their authority. Emphasizing that these matters had been pending for decades, the Committee expressed the firm hope that the Government would soon take the necessary action in keeping with Article 6 of the Convention to take the announced measures that offered labour inspectors stability of employment and independence as regards changes of government and improper external influences. It further stressed that the publication of annual inspection reports containing the statistical information required under Article 21 of the Convention was important to enable an objective evaluation of the progress referred to by the Government.

The Committee emphasized the importance of the functioning of an effective labour inspection system in the country and the need to strengthen the human, financial and material means available to the labour inspection services to enable them to cover all workplaces liable to inspection. It expressed the firm hope that labour inspectors would have suitably equipped offices and would be able to carry out effective inspections and to prepare and send annual inspection reports to the ILO. It also requested the Government to provide a detailed report to the Committee of Experts addressing all the issues raised by this Committee and the Committee of Experts for examination at its next meeting. The Committee asked the ILO to provide technical assistance to the Government as requested by it to strengthen the labour inspectorate. It requested the Government to put in place a national mechanism to follow up on the application of the Convention in the country.

Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 2000, Publication: 88th ILC session (2000)

A Government representative of Mauritania declared that his country had undertaken a series of legislative reforms, including the adoption of framework legislation regarding civil servants in 1993. This legislation required the adoption of regulations. The regulations respecting civil servants should be adopted this year. As civil servants, labour inspectors would be covered by these regulations. Furthermore, he noted that the draft regulations elaborated in 1985 with ILO assistance on the status of labour inspectors were no longer up to date. In this context, he requested assistance from the ILO with a view to modernizing the 1985 draft. He also referred to a project to redynamize the labour administration, for which he also requested technical assistance from the ILO with a view to bringing it up to date and implementing it.

The Employer members thanked the Government representative for his brief statement on this serious case of failure to observe the Convention. Even though the Conference Committee had not examined the case since 1986, the Committee of Experts had continued to raise the issues. The Employer members regretted to note that the draft regulations respecting the conditions of employment of labour inspectors which had been drawn up with ILO assistance over 30 years ago had still not been implemented and that the last report submitted by the Government in September 1998 had been identical to the one submitted the previous year. This meant in practice that no new report had been supplied which constituted an obvious failure to reply to the comments of the Committee of Experts. The Employer members emphasized that the provisions respecting labour inspection were fundamental to the whole of the ILO's supervisory system. Only through the information provided by labour inspectorates was it possible for governments to know the actual situation with regard to the application of labour legislation in practice. It was evident that the Government had to submit the annual reports of the labour inspectorate as a basis for the assessment by the Committee of Experts of the application of the Convention. The absence of such reports in the case of Mauritania was indicative of the absence of a functioning labour inspection system. The Convention was therefore clearly not being observed. Indeed, it was only possible to apply the specific provisions of the Convention if adequate numbers of properly trained staff were available and employed on a permanent basis, as provided for by the Convention. In practice, there would appear to be hardly any labour inspection system at all in the country. If the Government required technical assistance, this would be unlikely to concern the provisions of the Convention, which were not in themselves difficult to understand. In fact, it was more likely that for financial reasons the Government had found it difficult to set up a labour inspection system. However, it was not the role of the ILO to recruit, train and pay labour inspectors. The Employer members re-emphasized that, through its ratification of the Convention in 1963, the Government of Mauritania had undertaken to establish and maintain a labour inspection system, but that there were serious shortcomings in its implementation of this commitment. Perhaps the Conference Committee should have examined the question at an earlier date. The Employer members called upon the Government representative to provide details of the type of labour inspection system which existed in the country, including its staffing levels, the regularity of inspection visits, the date on which the last annual report on the activities of the inspection services had been issued and the regularity with which such reports were published. In other words, more detail was required on the everyday practice of labour inspection in the country, and indeed on the question of whether it actually existed at all in practice.

The Worker members recalled that, even though this case had not been discussed by the Conference Committee for a number of years, the Committee of Experts had made observations in its reports on five occasions in the course of the 1990s. They emphasized the fact that Convention No. 81 was considered to be a "priority" Convention due to its importance for the standard-setting system of the ILO, as well as for national law and practice. Labour inspection was in fact essential to control the application in practice of labour regulations. In order to ensure that labour inspection was carried out in an appropriate manner, Article 6 of the Convention provided that labour inspectors had to enjoy a status and conditions of service such as to assure them of stability of employment and make them independent of changes of government and of improper external influence. When it had been found that this provision was not applied in Mauritania, draft regulations had been drawn up more than 30 years ago with ILO assistance to bring the law into conformity with the Convention. The Worker members deplored the fact that, since then, the Government had provided no information regarding the concrete measures taken to give effect to these intentions. They requested the Government to clarify which measures it envisaged taking to bring the law and practice into full conformity with the Convention.

As regards the annual reports on the work of the inspection services, the Worker members recalled that the Convention provided that such reports had to be published and submitted to the ILO. However, the Government had submitted no such reports to the ILO since 1987. They therefore urged the Government to indicate the measures it intended to take to implement these provisions of the Convention.

The Worker member of Singapore explained that the Convention imposed the obligation upon ratifying countries to maintain a system of labour inspection for the purpose of ensuring compliance with laws adopted on critical aspects of workers' welfare, such as safety and health, hours of work, wages and the employment of children and young persons. The Convention was therefore an important instrument in ensuring that laws respecting substantive aspects of employment did not remain a dead letter. A critical component of labour inspection systems was the need for impartial, independent and fearless labour inspectors who could make fair and effective evaluations of the workplaces which they inspected. Article 6 of the Convention emphasized the importance of labour inspectors enjoying stability of employment, unaffected by any change of government and free from external influences. It was therefore to be deeply regretted that Mauritania took this obligation lightly. It had failed to take adequate steps to implement an employment system for labour inspectors which would enable them to carry out their tasks effectively. While the Government had received assistance from the ILO to bring the Labour Code up to date and to develop regulations respecting labour inspectors, legislation was not sufficient in itself. What was now required was the political will to put the law into practice. She also expressed great concern at the repeated failure of the Government to provide annual inspection reports to the ILO since 1987. It could not be over-emphasized that such reports were critical to the enforcement and supervision of the Convention. The Government's repeated failure to supply reports gave grounds for inferring that it was not complying with the Convention.

The Government representative stated that, if there had been no labour inspection services in his country, his Government would not have ratified the Convention. Although he had no detailed statistics at hand, he still insisted on the fact that labour inspection existed in his country, as evidenced by the eight inspection services spread over the territory. These different services were coordinated by a central service. All the inspection services were composed of civil servants who were trained in labour law. He further reiterated his previous comments that regulations on civil servants implementing the framework legislation of 1993 would be adopted this year. He also renewed the request for assistance from the ILO to update the draft regulations on the labour inspectors drawn up in 1985. Furthermore, he indicated that the revitalization of the labour administration, launched in 1993, had not been pursued due to lack of financing. Finally, he expressed his surprise to learn that certain reports had not reached the ILO and he undertook to ensure in future that all the reports requested reached the ILO.

The Employer members thanked the Government representative for the brief supplementary information which he had added to his initial statement. The Committee now knew that there were eight inspection sections in Mauritania. However, it had been given no indication of how many inspectors there were, their conditions of employment, and particularly whether they were permanent employees, or the regularity with which enterprises were inspected. The Government representative had stated that the draft regulations respecting the conditions of employment of labour inspectors, which had been drawn up some years ago with ILO assistance, were no longer up to date and had not been adopted for that reason. However, this left open the question of the legal basis on which the inspection services were operating. The Employer members recalled that only two reports had been received from the Government by the Committee of Experts in recent years, and that they had been identical. Moreover, since 1987 and despite numerous requests, the Government had not supplied any annual inspection reports to the ILO. The Government must therefore be requested to comply with its obligations under the Convention. It was clear that the real problem consisted of the provision of financing for the inspection service. The Committee was therefore bound to request the Government to supply a detailed report addressing all the issues raised by the Committee of Experts and providing precise information on the situation as regards labour inspection in the country.

The Worker members noted that the debate had been short. This had not been because the situation was not serious, but because the violations of the Convention were evident. They took note of the statement by the Government representative according to which changes in the regulations concerning the status of civil servants were due to be adopted this year. They emphasized that this legislation should enter into force as soon as possible in order to bring the law and practice into conformity with the requirements of the Convention. Finally, they once again urged the Government to supply annual reports on the labour inspection services in order to permit verification of the proper functioning of these services.

The Committee noted the information supplied by the Government representative and the discussion which took place. It noted that for more than 30 years, and despite repeated requests from the Committee of Experts, the Government had failed to take the necessary action in keeping with Article 6 of the Convention to adopt regulations that offered labour inspectors stability of employment and independence as regards changes of government and improper external influences. The Committee also observed that, contrary to the requirements of Articles 20 and 21 of the Convention, no annual inspection reports had been communicated to the ILO since 1987. The Committee also noted that, according to information supplied by the Government, a 1993 study of the human and financial resource needs for labour administration had been sent to the Office with a view to receiving technical assistance to be financed by international donors. It noted that the Government's request for ILO assistance had been renewed. It therefore requested the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure the adoption of regulations concerning labour inspectors in line with Article 6 of the Convention. The Committee expressed the hope that the Office would help the Government secure adequate financial backing for the project to revitalize labour administration. The Committee urged the Government to report in detail to the Committee of Experts in 2000 on the progress made in law and practice in applying this priority Convention, which was critical for the protection of workers.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

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

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

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

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

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

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

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2014, published 104th ILC session (2015)

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

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

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

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

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

With reference to its observation, the Committee requests the Government to supply further information on the following points.

Legislation. In its previous comments the Committee asked the Government to provide information on the process of adoption of regulatory texts relating to labour inspection, as provided for by sections 369 to 381 of the Labour Code of 2004. It notes the Government’s indication that a draft order determining the duties of labour inspectors and controllers and also the structure and working conditions of inspection departments, as provided for by section 369, is still being drawn up and will be adopted once the new Government has taken office. The Committee requests the Government to supply a copy of the definitive text of the order in question once it has been adopted and to provide information in its next report on its impact in practice.

Article 18 of the Convention. Adequate penalties. In its previous comments the Committee asked the Government to indicate the measures taken or contemplated to ensure that the amounts of fines provided for by the Labour Code (Book VII) are updated, where necessary, to maintain a deterrent effect. Since the updated legislative provisions on penalties were not attached to the report, the Committee requests the Government to send them with its next report and to supply information on their application in practice.

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

Article 6 of the Convention. Status of labour inspectors and controllers. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that no provision had been made for allowances in new Decree No. 021/2007/PM of 15 January 2007 issuing the specific conditions of service of the labour administration, which establishes the status of labour inspectors and controllers, whereas all the other administrative departments had been awarded an allowance in the context of another decree adopted in 2007. The Committee notes the Government’s reply stating that it will make a point of rectifying this error. The Committee therefore requests the Government to take steps in the very near future to ensure that allowances are granted to labour inspectors with regard to the specific nature of their duties and to keep the Office informed of any developments in this respect.

Article 7(3). Training of inspectors. With reference to its previous comments, the Committee notes with interest the information supplied by the Government to the effect that the ADMITRA project, in cooperation with the Ministry of Public Service and Employment, has organized a major workshop on inspection methods for labour inspectors and trainee labour inspectors from the National School of Administration (ENA). Moreover, a workshop in “training engineering” was held for labour inspectors and trainers from the ENA, which will enable them in turn to train their colleagues. It also notes with interest that in 2011 a total of 40 new young inspectors and controllers who have passed an external competition will strengthen the numbers of the labour inspection staff. The Committee requests the Government to continue its efforts to provide initial and further training for inspection staff, if necessary with technical assistance from the Office, and requests the Government to keep it informed of any developments in this respect, including the content and methodology of the training.

Articles 20 and 21. Annual report on the work of the labour inspectorate. With reference to its previous comments, the Committee notes with interest the summary report from the regional labour inspectorates for 2008. However, it notes that, contrary to the Government’s indications, the provisional table of implementing regulations for the updated law concerning penalties were not attached to its report. The Committee requests the Government to continue to supply information on any progress made with a view to the publication by the central inspection authority of an annual report, as provided for by Article 20, containing the information required in relation to the matters covered by Article 21, or on any obstacles encountered in this respect. It reminds the Government of the possibility of requesting technical assistance from the Office in connection with the establishment of a system for the compilation of data enabling the central authority to draw up such a report.

Labour inspection and child labour. In its previous comments, the Committee stressed the importance of the role of labour inspection staff in protecting the safety, health and well-being of children. It asked the Government to take the necessary steps to ensure that labour inspectors and controllers will be given the necessary training, powers and resources to take effective action in this respect. However, the Committee notes that the Government’s report does not refer to this matter. The Committee therefore again requests the Government to take steps as soon as possible to enable labour inspectors to effectively enforce the legislation relating to child labour.

The Committee is raising other points in a request addressed directly to the Government.

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

With reference to its observation, the Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide additional information on the following points.

Legislation. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the process of the adoption of the regulations on labour inspection envisaged by the Labour Code of 2004 (sections 369 to 381), with an indication of whether the order determining the powers of labour inspectors and supervisors and the organization and operation of inspection units, envisaged in section 369, is currently under preparation.

Article 3, paragraph 2, of the Convention. Further duties entrusted to labour inspectors. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the manner in which it is ensured that the duties of inspectors relating to the settlement of collective labour disputes do not take up too large a proportion of the human and material resources which should be principally devoted to supervisory and advisory activities, and do not prejudice the authority and impartiality which are necessary to inspectors in their relations with employers and workers.

Article 18. Adequate penalties. In the absence of a reply from the Government on this point, the Committee once again requests it to indicate the measures adopted or envisaged to ensure that the financial level of the fines envisaged in the Labour Code (Book VII) is adjusted as necessary to conserve its dissuasive nature.

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

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in reply to its previous comment, the observations communicated on 3 September 2007 by the General Confederation of Workers of Mauritania (CGTM) on the operation of the labour inspection system and the observations made by the Association of Labour Inspectors and Supervisors of Mauritania (AICTM) in April 2007 on the status of labour inspectors and controllers.

1. Articles 1, 3, 10 and 11 of the Convention. Labour inspection system.  Human and material resources of the inspection system. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that the inadequacy of the human and financial resources of the labour inspectorate constituted a major obstacle to the discharge of its functions. It notes the statement by the CGTM in the observations provided to the Office in September 2007 that the limited geographical coverage of the labour inspection system gives rise to difficulties in examining the cases of workers, who are often far from inspection offices. The CGTM emphasizes in this respect the inadequacy of the transport and communication facilities made available to inspectors and supervisors, but indicates that, despite this regrettable material situation, those labour inspectors who are in place play a significant role in the settlement of labour disputes.

The Committee notes with interest the announcement by the Government of the recruitment of ten labour inspectors and ten labour controllers, who will be trained at the National School of Administration (ENA) and abroad, and of the purchase of vehicles and office equipment. It hopes that the increase in staff numbers and the improvement in the material working conditions of inspection staff will make it possible to reinforce the effectiveness of their prevention and supervision activities, particularly by extending their geographical coverage, and that these efforts will be supported by the mobilization and allocation of resources in the context of technical cooperation projects and international financing.

2. Article 6. Status of labour inspectors and controllers. With reference to its previous comments, the Committee notes with interest the adoption, following several years of preparation, of Decree No. 021/2007/PM of 15 January 2007 issuing the specific conditions of service of the labour administration, which establishes the status of labour inspectors and supervisors. This text contains provisions on grades, promotion procedures and training requirements, and establishes the conditions and procedures for recruitment and the functions and responsibilities of each category of the inspection staff (principal inspector, inspector, principal controller and controller). According to the AICTM, no specific allowance has been established by these conditions of service, whereas all the other administrative bodies benefited from an allowance under a decree adopted in 2007. Noting that the allowances and bonuses which had been envisaged in the draft decree do not appear in the adopted text and that the Government indicates in its report that it will endeavour to envisage allowances for this body of officials so as to ensure their independence and impartiality, the Committee trusts that the Government will adopt measures in this respect in the near future.

3. Article 7, paragraph 3. Training of inspectors. The Committee notes the detailed information provided by the Government in reply to its requests concerning the courses and seminars followed recently by a number of inspectors and controllers at the African Regional Centre for Labour Administration (CRADAT) in Yaoundé and the ILO Training Centre in Turin. It also notes that under section 14 of Decree No. 021/2007/PM, inspectors and controllers are under the obligation to follow training and further training sessions in the context of a training plan established by the competent ministry. While taking due note of these provisions, the Committee hopes that the Government will be able to continue its efforts to ensure the training and further training of inspection staff and requests it to provide information on the preparation of the envisaged training plan and on the subjects covered.

4. Articles 20 and 21. Annual report on the work of the inspection services. In reply to the Committee’s previous comment, the Government indicates that it has not been possible, due to lack of resources, to produce an annual report on the work of the inspection services in recent years, but emphasizes that the central administration has always endeavoured to provide a summary report of their activities. The Committee requests the Government to provide with its next report the summary reports available for 2005, 2006 or 2007. It once again hopes that the Government will rapidly take measures to establish the conditions in which the central labour inspection authority can collect data on the activities of the services under its control with a view to the publication of an annual report on the work of the inspection system, particularly with the technical assistance of the ILO in the context of the project for the modernization of labour administration and inspection.

5. Labour inspection and child labour. According to the Government, the results of the study on child labour conducted with the cooperation of UNICEF, to which the Committee referred in its previous observation, are currently being validated. The conclusions of the study show that labour inspectors have not been made aware of the issue of child labour and lack the means to combat child labour. The Committee notes that the Government has requested ILO technical assistance (the OIT/IPEC programme) in this field. Emphasizing the importance of the role of labour inspectors in protecting the safety, health and well-being of children, the Committee trusts that the Government will take the necessary measures to ensure that labour inspectors and controllers are provided with the necessary training, powers and resources to take effective action in this respect.

The Committee is addressing a request directly to the Government on other matters.

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

With reference to its observation, the Committee notes with interest the provisions of the new Labour Code defining the functions of labour inspectors, their obligations and prerogatives. It hopes that the regulations to be adopted under the Labour Code will be issued in the near future and that copies will be supplied rapidly to the ILO.

Prevention of industrial accidents and cases of occupational disease. The Committee notes that, according to the summary report of the regional labour inspectorates for 2004, the number of industrial accidents and cases of occupational disease has undergone a substantial increase. It requests the Government to indicate the measures adopted to intensify inspections in workplaces with a high potential risk to the health and safety of workers.

Article 18 of the Convention. Adequate and effectively enforced penalties. The Committee notes that the penalties applicable for violations of the legal provisions covered by the Convention are established in Book VIII of the Labour Code. It would be grateful if the Government would indicate the measures adopted or envisaged to ensure that the financial amounts of the penalties are adjusted as necessary to conserve their dissuasive nature despite inflation.

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

The Committee notes the Government’s reports provided on 28 September 2004 and 11 October 2005 and the summary reports of the activities of regional labour inspectorates for 2003 and 2004. It also notes Act No. 2004/017 of 2004 issuing the Labour Code, and the observations on the application of the Convention communicated to the ILO by the World Confederation of Labour (WCL) on 29 August 2005 and forwarded to the Government on 4 October 2005. The Committee further notes the proposals made by the ILO fact-finding mission to Mauritania (May 2006), undertaken following the discussion held in the Committee on the Application of Standards of the International Labour Conference in June 2005 (93rd Session) on the application of the Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29).

1. Situation of the labour inspection system. According to the WCL, the current situation of labour inspection in the country cannot in any manner respond to the strict minimum level of need. It reports that the inspection services do not have either the resources or the structure to enable labour controllers and inspectors to discharge their functions. Very few inspection services are distributed throughout the country. The sole inspector appointed to cover five regions in the centre and east of the country does not have transport facilities, and the possibilities of communication with workers are therefore very limited. According to the WCL, no training has been undertaken for inspectors and no inspection officials recruited. The WCL considers that the low level of action by the inspection services is at the origins of enormous problems for workers and the poor management of labour disputes.

Further to its previous observation, the Committee also notes with concern the information contained in the report of the ILO fact-finding mission to Mauritania and the summary reports of regional inspection services referred to above describing an embryonic labour inspection system both in terms of human resources and financial, material and logistical resources. The reports of the regional inspection services also show that, due to the critical lack of inspection staff and administrative officials, it is impossible to guarantee the required confidentiality in relations with users and that the most elementary facilities are lacking, such as decent sanitation, electricity, water, telephone lines, furniture (chairs and cupboards), electronic office equipment and transport facilities. The conditions of service of inspection officials are such that they have no hesitation in leaving the service to take up employment in the private sector in view of the benefits on offer. The Committee notes the suggestion made by the ILO mission to update an earlier audit of the labour inspectorate (to which the Government refers in its report provided in September 2004, the recommendations of which were not given effect, due to lack of resources) and to call on other interested United Nations agencies and donors to mobilize the necessary resources to strengthen the labour inspectorate. The Committee hopes that this appeal will be heeded rapidly and that the Government will soon be in a position to provide information on the outcome of the action taken in this respect.

2. Specific status of labour inspectors. Further to its previous comments on this subject and the conclusions of the discussion in the Committee on the Application of Standards of the International Labour Conference in June 2000, the Committee notes that, according to information posted by the Government on its web site, the specific status of labour inspectors was approved by the Council of Ministers on 11 October 2006. According to the Government, this status should substantially improve the conditions of service of labour inspectors and controllers. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide a copy of the definitive text when it has been published.

3. Article 7 of the Convention. Training of labour inspection personnel. The Committee notes with interest that labour inspectors and controllers benefit from further training at the National School of Administration (ENA) at Nouakchott and the African Regional Centre for Labour Administration (CRADAT) in Yaoundé through seminars and workshops organized by the ILO, the Arab Labour Organization and UNICEF. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide precise and detailed information on the contents of the training activities and their duration, and on the personnel concerned.

4. Articles 20 and 21. Annual inspection report. As no annual inspection report has been provided to the ILO since 1987, the Committee hopes that the Government will rapidly take measures to establish conditions in which the central labour inspection authority can collect data on the activities on the services under its control with a view to the preparation of a report. The level of detail of the information that the report should contain so that it can be used as an instrument for the evaluation of the labour inspection system, is indicated in Part III of the Labour Inspection Recommendation, 1947 (No. 81).

5. Labour inspection and child labour. Noting with interest the indication that a study on child labour was conducted with the cooperation of UNICEF, the Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide information on the conclusions of the study and indicate the role that will be entrusted to labour inspectors and controllers in combating child labour in the enterprises covered by the Convention.

The Committee is addressing a request directly to the Government on certain matters.

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

With reference to its previous comments, the Committee notes the Government’s report and the attached documents. It notes that, three years after the date announced by the Government in an earlier report, and following the discussion in the Committee on the Application of Standards in the International Labour Conference in June 2000, the specific conditions of service of labour inspectors have still not been adopted. It also notes with concern the information contained in the reports of the activities of the regional labour inspectorates concerning their lack of the human, material and logistical resources indispensable for their operation. The maintenance, rent and provision of water and electricity for the premises, which are generally old, short of office furniture and devoid of user reception facilities, are not covered in the labour administration budget, but depend on the assistance provided by the community or the wilaya. The lack of vehicles precludes any professional travel by inspectors to areas liable to inspection and far from their offices. Moreover, due to the lack of office and security staff, inspection services are closed to the public during the absence for professional reasons of the sole labour inspector. Furthermore, the confidential nature of certain information cannot be guaranteed, in accordance with Article 15(b) and (c) of the Convention, as the typing of inspectors’ correspondence is entrusted to third parties. The number of inspections is, under these conditions, derisory with relation to needs, which are not even quantified, as there is no register of workplaces. For example, the Gorgol inspectorate, covering three wilayas,  only carried out eight inspections in 2002.

The Committee notes with interest the concern expressed in one of the activity reports to develop workers’ education and familiarize employers with a view to fostering a harmonious social climate, and that the attention of the competent authority was drawn to the legal shortcomings which, in the labour inspector’s view, are responsible for situations that are prejudicial to workers and to a case of confusion relating to the initiation of legal proceedings by the labour inspectorate.

The Government indicates in its report that the Convention is applied in accordance with the legislative provision and regulations that are in force and that the employers’ and workers’ organizations to which the report has been transmitted have made no observations concerning the application of the Convention. The Committee notes that, in one of the regional reports on the work of the inspection services transmitted by the Government, the relations between the labour inspectorate and the regional structure of the General Confederation of Mauritanian Workers (CGTM) are marked by conflicts and a climate of intimidation, while the other trade union structures have never contacted the labour inspection services concerned. The Committee is bound to remind the Government of the obligation, by virtue of the ratification of the Convention, to adopt all the necessary measures to apply its provisions, in both law and practice, with a view to achieving its primary objective, namely compliance with the legal provisions relating to conditions of work and the protection of workers enforceable by the labour inspectorate in the industrial and commercial workplaces liable to their inspection.

Being aware of the Government’s difficulties in achieving the conditions necessary for the application of the Convention, the Committee nevertheless notes that international cooperation projects for the reinforcement of the labour administration have been launched, but that, according to the Government’s reports to the ILO under the Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work, the inadequacy of the human and financial resources of the labour inspectorate constitutes a major obstacle to its discharge of its supervisory duties in such fields as child labour and wage discrimination. The Committee hopes that, in the framework of these projects, an appropriate share of resources will be allocated to assessing needs and reinforcing the labour inspection system with a view to progressively extending its supervisory, advisory and information services and contributing to the improvement of the legislation, as envisaged by the Convention. The Committee emphasizes the importance of tripartite collaboration in this respect and hopes that the Government will not fail to adopt measures rapidly for its promotion, in accordance with Article 5(b) of the Convention, and that it will be in a position to announce in its next report the adoption of the specific conditions of service of labour inspectors, in accordance with the provisions of Articles 6 and 7 of the Convention, and the legal provisions conferring upon labour inspectors the powers set forth in Articles 3, 9, 12, 13, 17 and 18 of the Convention and requiring compliance with the obligations set forth in Articles 15, 16 and 19.

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

The Committee notes the Government’s report and replies to its previous comments. It also notes with interest the steps taken by the Government as a follow-up to its previous comments that had emphasized the basic requirements of the Convention as regards the status and conditions of service of labour inspectors. The Conference Committee on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations had also recalled these requirements at the conclusion of its discussions in 2000. At the request of the Government, the ILO has resumed its technical assistance (that had started in 1989 but had no follow-up on the part of the Government), by sending on a diagnostic mission an expert in labour administration in 2000 who examined the drafting of legislative texts. The said expert had made proposals in this respect but the draft legislative texts sent by the Government to the Office did not reflect the solutions proposed to give effect to the requirements of Article 6 of the Convention on the status and conditions of service of labour inspectors, and the requirements of Article 11, paragraphs 1(a) and 2, on the transport facilities necessary for the performance of inspection duties and on the reimbursement of labour inspectors for any travelling and incidental expenses which may be necessary for the performance of their duties. The Committee notes that, following the guidance given by the ILO, the adoption of the draft was delayed and the draft was re-examined as result of a second mission carried out by the same expert sent by the ILO and funded by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). The Committee hopes the Government will be in a position to report, in its next report, on the adoption of provisions that meet the requirements of the Convention and to provide copies of the adopted texts.

The Committee notes the inspection reports of the regional services. Further to its previous comments, the Committee once again requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure the publication and transmission to the ILO of an annual report on the work of labour inspection services within the time limits set by Article 20 of the Convention, and containing all the information required by Article 21(a) to (g) of the Convention.

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

Referring also to its observation under the Convention, the Committee notes with regret that the Government’s report has not been received. It hopes that a report will be supplied for examination by the Committee at its next session and that it will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous direct request, which reads as follows:

With reference to its observation under the Convention, and noting that the Government’s report contains no replies to the requests formulated in its previous comments, the Committee again requests the Government to supply information on the application of the following Articles of the Convention.

  Article 7 of the Convention.  Please indicate the manner in which the retraining of labour inspectors is ensured, specify the number of inspectors concerned by this retraining and supply information on all measures taken or anticipated in this connection.

  Article 8.  Please indicate the manner in which effect is given to this provision, under which women as well as men may be eligible members of the inspection service staff and special duties may be assigned to men and women inspectors.

  Article 10.  Please supply updated information regarding the labour inspection staff and their distribution by inspection service and across the territory, indicating the number of enterprises and of workers dependent on each inspection service.

  Article 11(1).  Please supply details on the number and geographical distribution of labour inspection offices, as well as on the transport facilities available to inspectors for the performance of their duties.

  Article 16.  Please transmit the texts regulating the new system of inspection visits, the establishment of which was announced by the Government in its last report, as well as a model of the forms designed to improve organization of collection of relevant information, in particular regarding occupational accidents and diseases.

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

With reference to its previous observation and the discussion in the Committee at the 88th Session of the International Labour Conference in June 2000, the Committee notes that the Government has not provided, as it was requested to do by the Conference Committee, a detailed report on the progress achieved in law and practice in the application of this priority Convention. Recalling that it was requested to take the necessary measures to ensure the adoption of a status for labour inspectors which is in conformity with Article 6 of the Convention, the Committee is therefore bound to repeat its previous observation, which read as follows:

The Committee notes the Government’s report covering the period ending 1 September 1998 in reply to its earlier comments. The Committee notes that the report is absolutely identical to the one which covered the previous period ending 1 September 1997 and therefore contains no reply to the new requests of the Committee. The Committee reminds the Government of the need to supply regular information on changes and progress achieved in the spheres covered by this Convention as well as specific information on the points raised in the Committee’s comments, where necessary.

1.  The Committee again stressed in its previous observation the essential nature of the principle of stability of employment and independence of labour inspectors as regards all changes of government and improper external influences. It therefore reiterated the hope that regulations would be adopted for inspection staff, compatible with the terms of Article 6 of the Convention and with section 22 of the Labour Code of 1963; a draft of such regulations has already been drawn up with ILO assistance. In view of the Government’s persistent failure, for over 30 years, to act in this regard, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures as soon as possible to ensure correct application of the Convention, and to supply information on all measures taken accordingly.

2.  The Committee notes once again that, since 1987 and despite numerous requests, the Government has not sent a single annual inspection report to the ILO. It again stresses that these reports are an essential means of determining how the inspection system functions in practice and of ensuring that workplaces are inspected as often and as thoroughly as is necessary. The Government is therefore requested to fulfil this obligation and to take the measures necessary to ensure, as soon as possible, that the annual reports on the activities of the inspection services containing all the information required by Article 21(a) to (g), will be published and transmitted to the ILO, in conformity with Article 20 of the Convention.

3.  The Committee is addressing a request concerning certain points already raised in its previous direct requests directly to the Government.

The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the very near future.

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

With reference to its observation under the Convention, and noting that the Government's report contains no replies to the requests formulated in its previous comments, the Committee again requests the Government to supply information on the application of the following Articles of the Convention.

Article 7 of the Convention. Please indicate the manner in which the retraining of labour inspectors is ensured, specify the number of inspectors concerned by this retraining and supply information on all measures taken or anticipated in this connection.

Article 8. Please indicate the manner in which effect is given to this provision, under which women as well as men may be eligible members of the inspection service staff and special duties may be assigned to men and women inspectors.

Article 10. Please supply updated information regarding the labour inspection staff and their distribution by inspection service and across the territory, indicating the number of enterprises and of workers dependent on each inspection service.

Article 11, paragraph 1. Please supply details on the number and geographical distribution of labour inspection offices, as well as on the transport facilities available to inspectors for the performance of their duties.

Article 16. Please transmit the texts regulating the new system of inspection visits, the establishment of which was announced by the Government in its last report, as well as a model of the forms designed to improve organization of collection of relevant information, in particular regarding occupational accidents and diseases.

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

The Committee notes the Government's report covering the period ending 1 September 1998 in reply to its earlier comments. The Committee notes that the report is absolutely identical to the one which covered the previous period ending 1 September 1997 and therefore contains no reply to the new requests of the Committee. The Committee reminds the Government of the need to supply regular information on changes and progress achieved in the spheres covered by this Convention as well as specific information on the points raised in the Committee's comments, where necessary.

1. The Committee again stressed in its previous observation the essential nature of the principle of stability of employment and independence of labour inspectors as regards all changes of government and improper external influences. It therefore reiterated the hope that regulations would be adopted for inspection staff, compatible with the terms of Article 6 of the Convention and with section 22 of the Labour Code of 1963; a draft of such regulations has already been drawn up with ILO assistance. In view of the Government's persistent failure, for over 30 years, to act in this regard, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures as soon as possible to ensure correct application of the Convention, and to supply information on all measures taken accordingly.

2. The Committee notes once again that, since 1987 and despite numerous requests, the Government has not sent a single annual inspection report to the ILO. It again stresses that these reports are an essential means of determining how the inspection system functions in practice and of ensuring that workplaces are inspected as often and as thoroughly as is necessary. The Government is therefore requested to fulfil this obligation and to take the measures necessary to ensure, as soon as possible, that the annual reports on the activities of the inspection services containing all the information required by paragraphs (a) to (g) of Article 21, will be published and transmitted to the ILO, in conformity with Article 20 of the Convention.

3. The Committee is addressing a request concerning certain points already raised in its previous direct requests directly to the Government.

[The Government is asked to report in detail in 2000.]

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1997, published 86th ILC session (1998)

With reference to its observation under the Convention, the Committee notes the information provided by the Government in response to its previous comments.

Article 7 of the Convention. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government concerning the training of inspectors, in particular by means of seminars and workshops; it notes that a seminar took place in September 1997 which was supported by the ILO. The Committee hopes that the Government will continue to provide information on the training of inspectors.

Article 10. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government to the effect that the inspectorate has available 24 inspectors and four supervisors, but no inspectors specializing in hygiene and safety at work; in this regard, the administration envisages requesting the ILO's technical support to train certain inspectors. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the number of inspection staff and to indicate also the geographical distribution of the inspection services.

Article 11. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government according to which labour inspectors receive allowances to cover expenses incurred during their missions (Article 11, paragraph 2). The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the offices and transport facilities made available to inspectors (Article 11, paragraph 1).

Article 16. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that, according to the figures provided by the Government, the number of visits made appears to have varied from 226 in 1987 to 2,000 in 1993, and the number of workplaces inspected varied from 228 in 1992 to 1,500 in 1994. The Committee notes with interest the information provided by the Government to the effect that the system of inspection visits has just been reviewed and that a new form for the collection of information concerning occupational accidents and diseases has been adopted, making it possible to compile new regional and central files which enable more reliable data to be obtained. The Committee hopes that the Government will provide information on any progress made in this respect.

Articles 20 and 21. The Committee observes once again that the Government has not provided an annual inspection report on the activities of the labour inspectorate since that submitted for 1987 which was incomplete. The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government to the effect that the central administration draws up a report on the different activities of labour inspectors which contains all the information likely to be used by the authorities concerned. Furthermore, the Government considers that, on the basis of the new system of visits, a report on the inspectorate's activities may be drawn up and will be sent together with the next report. The Committee recalls that these reports are an essential means of determining how the inspection system functions in practice, and also whether it is guaranteed that workplaces are inspected as often and as thoroughly as is necessary. The Committee hopes that the Government will forward to the Office, within the stipulated time-limits, the annual report containing all the information required under the Convention.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1997, published 86th ILC session (1998)

1. Article 6 of the Convention (absence of status guaranteeing stability and independence of inspection staff). In its previous comments, the Committee noted that for more than 20 years the Government stated the following: that it was drawing up regulations for labour inspection staff; that such a project was prepared with the ILO's assistance; and that the issue was examined by a direct contacts mission in 1992. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its last report that, although the draft regulations for inspection staff have not yet been adopted, inspectors are performing their duties with complete independence and impartiality; both the Government and the inspectors themselves are concerned with this issue which was the subject of a seminar organized for the inspectors with the ILO's support, one of the recommendations of which was to adopt such regulations as soon as possible.

The Committee recalls that under this Article of the Convention, the inspection staff shall be composed of public officials whose status and conditions of service are such that they are assured of stability of employment and are independent of changes of government and of improper external influences. This is an essential principle on which the effectiveness of the inspection system is based. The Committee expresses the hope that the necessary provisions will be adopted in the near future and that the Government will provide information on the progress made.

2. The Committee is again addressing a direct request to the Government on the application of Articles 7, 10, 11, 16, 20 and 21 of the Convention.

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

With reference to its observation under the Convention, the Committee notes the information supplied by the Government in reply to its previous comments.

Article 7, paragraphs 1,2 and 3, of the Convention. The Committee notes the Government's statement that labour inspectors benefit from further training courses at the African Regional Centre for Labour Administration (CRADAT) and training seminars at the Turin Centre. The Committee is under the impression that Mauritania has not been a member of CRADAT for several years and that its officials no longer receive training there, and that the Turin Centre does not provide training in the field of labour inspection. It requests the Government to indicate the arrangements that have been made or are envisaged to provide labour inspectors with adequate training for the performance of their duties, including both; (a) arrangements for their initial training at the time of appointment to the service; and (b) arrangements for subsequent training. The Committee requests the Government to supply the Office with a copy of Act No. 93.09 of 18 January 1993 respecting the recruitment of public officials.

Article 10 and Article 11, paragraph 1. The Committee requests the Government to indicate in its next report the strength of the inspection staff and to give general information concerning the number of inspectors of different categories, including inspectors to whom special or technical functions may be assigned, and particulars of the geographical distribution of the inspection staff.

Article 11, paragraph 2. The Committee noted previously the Government's statement that labour inspectors and supervisors are not reimbursed for travel and incidental expenses, but that the draft conditions of service of the inspectorate would provide for allowances and bonuses in place of the reimbursement of expenses. In its report for 1994, the Government states that labour inspectors benefit from mission expenses, which cover all the expenses arising out of travel. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the practical arrangements made in this respect and to supply the Office with a copy of any text governing this matter.

Article 16. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures that have been taken to ensure the adequate frequency and thoroughness of inspection visits and asks it to provide more detailed information on the increase in the number of visits which, according to the figures provided in the Government's reports, varied between 226 in 1987 and 2000 in 1993, while the number of establishments subject to labour inspection varied between 228 in 1992 and 1500 in 1994.

Articles 20 and 21. The Committee notes that the Government has not supplied any annual report on the activities of the labour inspectorate since the 1987 report, which was incomplete. It recalls that these reports are an essential means of determining how the inspection system functions in practice and whether workplaces are inspected as often and as thoroughly as is necessary. It once again hopes that the Government will transmit to the Office, within the time-limits set out in the Convention, annual reports on the activities of the inspection services and that they will contain all the information required by the Convention.

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

Article 6 of the Convention. With reference to its previous comments concerning the status of inspection staff, the Committee notes the information supplied by the Government in its reports. It notes in particular that the Directorate of the Public Service has endeavoured to prepare a draft decree on the conditions of service of the various sections of the public service which would take into account the situation of labour inspectors and controllers, as the Government indicated previously. The Committee recalls that the Government has been reporting the preparation of conditions of service for inspection staff for over 20 years; that a draft text was prepared with the assistance of the ILO taking into consideration the provisions of the Convention and the economic situation of the country; and that the matter was examined by the direct contacts mission which visited the country in 1992. The Committee also recalls that inspectors must benefit from the independence and impartiality that are necessary for the discharge of their duties. It trusts that the necessary measures will be taken in the near future and that the Government will provide information on any development relating to the adoption of the conditions of service of inspection staff.

The Committee is once again addressing a request directly to the Government concerning the application of Articles 7, 10, 11, 16, 20 and 21 of the Convention.

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

Further to its observation, the Committee notes that the Government's report contains no reply to its comments. It hopes that the next report will include full information on the matters raised in its previous direct request, which read as follows:

Articles 10 and 11(1) of the Convention. The Committee notes that about 50 labour inspectors are employed in eight regional inspection offices and that this is considered sufficient. The Committee hopes the Government will continue to provide information in this respect, and on the manner in which it is ensured that the human and material resources available to the inspectorate in each region are adequate.

Article 11(2). The Government states that labour inspectors and supervisors are not currently reimbursed for travel and incidental expenses but that the draft statute would provide for allowances and bonuses to take the place of reimbursements for expenses. The Committee recalls that this Article of the Convention calls for reimbursement to labour inspectors of any travelling and incidental expenses which may be necessary for the performance of the duties. It hopes that measures will shortly be taken through the adoption of the draft or otherwise to ensure the payment of all travel expenses required under the Convention.

Article 16. The Government states that the frequency of visits to establishments subject to labour inspection is about two visits per one or two months, depending on the number of establishments and the nature of the activities involved. The Committee notes from the 1987 Annual Report on Labour Inspection that 226 visits were conducted during that year. The Committee asks the Government to provide the current number of establishments subject to inspection.

Articles 20 and 21. The Government states that the Annual Inspection Report for 1987 has been made available to interested services, institutions and persons but does not indicate that it was published. The Committee recalls the requirement of this Article of the Convention to publish an annual general report on the work of the inspection service. It hopes the Government will communicate subsequent annual inspection reports within the time-limits laid down by the Convention, and that they will contain all the required information.

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

Article 6 of the Convention. The Committee notes the Government's explanations provided to the ILO direct contacts mission in May 1992 and in its most recent report, that the solution to the questions raised in the Committee's previous comments is linked to the adoption of the draft statute of the labour inspectors and supervisors prepared several years ago with ILO assistance. It further notes the Government's view that the current economic situation would not stand the heavy financial burden that would result from the adoption of the draft statute, although the Government would continue its efforts to improve the situation progressively and adopt the statute in the context of the restructuring of the public service in general. The Committee once again recalls that the draft statute is based on a study that took account of the economic situation in the country as well as the provisions of the Convention and the need to ensure decent working conditions for inspectors. It endorses the view expressed during the direct contacts mission that labour inspection is of central importance in ensuring the implementation of standards, and it hopes progress will be made in adopting a new statute soon.

In a new direct request, the Committee has once again referred to other important questions related to Articles 10, 11, 16, 20 and 21.

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

Articles 10 and 11(1) of the Convention. Further to its observation, the Committee notes that about 50 labour inspectors are employed in eight regional inspection offices and that this is considered sufficient. The Committee hopes the Government will continue to provide information in this respect, and on the manner in which it is ensured that the human and material resources available to the inspectorate in each region are adequate.

Article 11(2). The Government states that labour inspectors and supervisors are not currently reimbursed for travel and incidental expenses but that the draft statute would provide for allowances and bonuses to take the place of reimbursements for expenses. The Committee recalls that this Article of the Convention calls for reimbursement to labour inspectors of any travelling and incidental expenses which may be necessary for the performance of the duties. It hopes that measures will shortly be taken through the adoption of the draft or otherwise to ensure the payment of all travel expenses required under the Convention.

Article 16. The Government states that the frequency of visits to establishments subject to labour inspection is about two visits per one or two months, depending on the number of establishments and the nature of the activities involved. The Committee notes from the 1987 Annual Report on Labour Inspection that 226 visits were conducted during that year. The Committee asks the Government to provide the current number of establishments subject to inspection.

Articles 20 and 21. The Government states that the Annual Inspection Report for 1987 has been made available to interested services, institutions and persons but does not indicate that it was published. The Committee recalls the requirement of this Article of the Convention to publish an annual general report on the work of the inspection service. It hopes the Government will communicate subsequent annual inspection reports within the time-limits laid down by the Convention, and that they will contain all the required information.

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

Article 3 of the Convention. In comments it has made for some years, the Committee has called for the separation of manpower offices from labour inspection offices in order that labour inspectors may perform their main duties more efficiently. The Committee now notes with satisfaction that a Ministry of Employment and Planning has been created and the manpower and labour inspection functions have been thereby separated. The Committee hopes the Government will include in future reports details of consequent changes in the organisation and working of the inspectorate.

Article 6. The Committee notes the Government's explanation that the draft statute of the labour inspectors and supervisors (to which it has been referring for a number of years and which remains to be adopted) continues to be studied with a view to making it more realistic in light of the current economic situation of the country. The Committee recalls that the draft is based on a study made by an ILO expert, taking account of the economic situation in the country as well as the provisions of the Convention and the need to ensure decent working conditions for inspectors. It hopes progress will be made towards adopting a new statute in this light, and that it will guarantee inspection staff stability of employment and independence from any change of government and improper external influences.

In a new direct request, the Committee has again referred to other questions related to Articles 10, 11, 16, 20 and 21.

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

The Committee notes that the Government's report has not been received. It hopes that a report will be supplied for examination by the Committee at its next session and that it will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous direct request, which read as follows:

Article 10 of the Convention. So that the labour inspectorate may perform its duties satisfactorily, it should have sufficiently qualified staff in adequate numbers, which does not seem to be the case in all regions. The Committee therefore hopes that the Government will not fail to make every effort to strengthen the labour inspection staff, and requests it to indicate in its next report the number of inspectors and supervisors currently employed in the various regional offices.

Article 11, paragraph 1. The Committee requests the Government to provide detailed information on the material organisation of the labour inspection services and particularly on the means of transport available to labour inspectors and supervisors.

Article 11, paragraph 2. The Government is asked to state under which provisions labour inspectors and supervisors are guaranteed reimbursement of travel and incidental expenses.

Article 16. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the frequency of visits to workplaces liable to inspection in the various regions.

Articles 20 and 21. The Committee takes note of the report on the activities of the labour inspection services in 1987. It asks the Government to indicate whether this report has been published and made available to the services, institutions and persons concerned. Furthermore, the Committee notes that the report does not contain information on all the subjects listed under Article 21, particularly on the items concerning statistics of workplaces liable to inspection and the number of workers employed therein (point (c)) and statistics of occupational diseases (point (g)). It hopes that, in future, annual inspection reports will contain all the information required by Article 21 and that they will be published and transmitted to the ILO within the time-limits laid down in Article 20.

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

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

Article 3 of the Convention. With reference to its previous comments, the Committee notes with concern that there has been no progress in separating manpower offices from labour inspection offices in order that labour inspectors may perform their main duties more efficiently. On the contrary, in the light of the information provided by the Government, the situation appears to be deteriorating: whereas in 1986 such a separation existed in three regions (Nouakchott, Zouérate and Nouadhibou), in 1989 it exists only in Nouakchott. The Committee takes note of the Government's indications that, given the important economic activity and the volume of labour in the various regions, the separation of manpower offices and labour inspection offices is not essential in all regions and that the labour inspectorate carries out its tasks to the satisfaction of the social partners, but expresses the hope that the Government will make every effort to create conditions to enable labour inspectors to perform effectively the tasks set out in Article 3, paragraph 1, of the Convention. In this context, the Committee asks the Government to refer also to its direct request in which a certain number of points are raised concerning the application of Articles 10, 11, 16, 20 and 21 of the Convention. Article 6. The Committee notes with regret that the draft statute of the labour inspectors and supervisors, to which the Government has been referring for a number of years, has not yet been adopted. It trusts that this statute will shortly be promulgated and will ensure the inspection staff stability of employment and make them independent of any change of government and improper external influences.

END OF REPETITION

TEXT

The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the very near future.