All Comments

Home Page | Français | Español |

ILO is a United Nations Agency

RSS Feed | Newsroom | Contact us

NORMLEX

Information System on International Labour Standards

Instruments
Key documents
Ratification of ILO Conventions
Supervising the application of International Labour Standards: Supervision by country; Search comments by the supervisory bodies; Complaint procedures; Freedom of association cases; Representations (Art. 24); Commission of Inquiry (Art. 26)
Regular reporting
Country profiles
Comparatives
Maritime Labour Convention (2006)

MLC, 2006

NATLEX *new look*
National Legislation on Labour and Social Rights

LEGOSH
Global database on occupational safety and health legislation

EPLex
Employment protection legislation database

Compendium of court decisions

NORMLEX Home > Country profiles > > Comments > All Comments

Hours of Work (Industry) Convention, 1919 (No. 1) - Syrian Arab Republic (Ratification: 1960)

Display in: French - Spanish

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

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It hopes that the next report will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous comments.

Repetition
Article 2 of the Convention. Daily and weekly limits on hours of work. The Committee notes the promulgation of the new Labour Code No. 17 of 2010. It notes that section 106(a) of the new Labour Code provides that a worker shall not work more than eight hours per day or 48 hours per week. In this regard, the Committee wishes to recall that Article 2 of the Convention sets a double limit – daily and weekly – to the working hours. This limit is cumulative and not alternative as it appears under section 106(a) of the new Labour Code. The daily and weekly limits should therefore be eight hours per day and 48 hours per week, and not eight hours per day or 48 hours per week. Moreover, it notes that section 106(b) of the Labour Code provides that hours of work and rest breaks should be scheduled in such a way that a worker does not spend more than ten hours per day at the workplace. In this respect, the Committee wishes to point out that Article 2(b) of the Convention permits the daily limit of eight hours to be exceeded by no more than one hour only in the case where the hours of work on one or more days of the week are less than eight hours. The Committee therefore requests the Government to take the necessary measures to bring the national legislation into full conformity with Article 2 and 2(b) of the Convention.
Article 6. Permanent and temporary exceptions. In its previous comment, the Committee had requested the Government to provide information on any development in relation to the process of amending Order No. 243 of 8 May 1966, Order No. 135 of 13 February 1981, and Order No. 720 of 1973, as amended by Order No. 775 of 1974, issued under Labour Code No. 91 of 1959. In its reply the Government indicates that all the above-mentioned orders were repealed with the promulgation of the new Labour Code No. 17 of 2010. It also refers to Order No. 9 of 2010, which determines the categories of workers, industries and tasks in which hours of work may be increased or decreased, and Order No. 7 of 2010, which determines the cases or tasks which require working without a rest period on technical or operational grounds. The Committee requests the Government to specify the scope of application of paragraph a(2) of section 112 of the Labour Code No. 17/2010 which provides that workers carrying out preparatory or complementary work that has to be done before or after working hours are not covered under Chapter 1 of Title VII of the Labour Code, and to indicate how it is implemented in practice.

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

Article 2 of the Convention. Daily and weekly limits on hours of work. The Committee notes the promulgation of the new Labour Code No. 17 of 2010. It notes that section 106(a) of the new Labour Code provides that a worker shall not work more than eight hours per day or 48 hours per week. In this regard, the Committee wishes to recall that Article 2 of the Convention sets a double limit – daily and weekly – to the working hours. This limit is cumulative and not alternative as it appears under section 106(a) of the new Labour Code. The daily and weekly limits should therefore be eight hours per day and 48 hours per week, and not eight hours per day or 48 hours per week. Moreover, it notes that section 106(b) of the Labour Code provides that hours of work and rest breaks should be scheduled in such a way that a worker does not spend more than ten hours per day at the workplace. In this respect, the Committee wishes to point out that Article 2(b) of the Convention permits the daily limit of eight hours to be exceeded by no more than one hour only in the case where the hours of work on one or more days of the week are less than eight hours. The Committee therefore requests the Government to take the necessary measures to bring the national legislation into full conformity with Article 2 and 2(b) of the Convention.

Article 6. Permanent and temporary exceptions. In its previous comment, the Committee had requested the Government to provide information on any development in relation to the process of amending Order No. 243 of 8 May 1966, Order No. 135 of 13 February 1981, and Order No. 720 of 1973, as amended by Order No. 775 of 1974, issued under Labour Code No. 91 of 1959. In its reply the Government indicates that all the abovementioned orders were repealed with the promulgation of the new Labour Code No. 17 of 2010. It also refers to Order No. 9 of 2010, which determines the categories of workers, industries and tasks in which hours of work may be increased or decreased, and Order No. 7 of 2010, which determines the cases or tasks which require working without a rest period on technical or operational grounds. The Committee requests the Government to specify the scope of application of paragraph a(2) of section 112 of the Labour Code No. 17/2010 which provides that workers carrying out preparatory or complementary work that has to be done before or after working hours are not covered under chapter 1 of Title VII of the Labour Code, and to indicate how it is implemented in practice.

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

The Committee notes the general human rights situation in the country as referred to in its comments under Convention No. 105. It also 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:

Repetition
Article 6 of the Convention. Permanent and temporary exceptions. The Committee recalls its previous comments in which it drew the Government’s attention to the fact that the terms “intermittent work” and “preparatory or complementary work” are defined in an excessively broad manner in the national legislation and emphasized that their scope went beyond the letter and the spirit of the Convention. It notes the Government’s indications that the texts on which it commented previously were under examination by the Tripartite Consultation and Dialogue Commission and the Ministry of Social Affairs and Labour. It also notes that its comments will be taken into consideration when adopting amendments to these texts. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any development in relation to the process of amending Order No. 243 of 8 May 1966 issued under section 117 of the Labour Code, Order No. 135 of 3 February 1981 issued under section 123 of the Labour Code and Order No. 720 of 1973 issued under section 120 of the Labour Code, as amended by Order No. 775 of 1974. The Government is also requested to provide copies of any reports which may be adopted on this subject by the Tripartite Consultation and Dialogue Commission.

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

Article 6 of the Convention. Permanent and temporary exceptions. The Committee recalls its previous comments in which it drew the Government’s attention to the fact that the terms “intermittent work” and “preparatory or complementary work” are defined in an excessively broad manner in the national legislation and emphasized that their scope went beyond the letter and the spirit of the Convention. It notes the Government’s indications that the texts on which it commented previously were under examination by the Tripartite Consultation and Dialogue Commission and the Ministry of Social Affairs and Labour. It also notes that its comments will be taken into consideration when adopting amendments to these texts. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any development in relation to the process of amending Order No. 243 of 8 May 1966 issued under section 117 of the Labour Code, Order No. 135 of 3 February 1981 issued under section 123 of the Labour Code and Order No. 720 of 1973 issued under section 120 of the Labour Code, as amended by Order No. 775 of 1974. The Government is also requested to provide copies of any reports which may be adopted on this subject by the Tripartite Consultation and Dialogue Commission.

Part VI of the report form. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government concerning the distribution of employed persons by sector of activity and wage level. It also notes the statistical data on weekly hours of work according to the level of training of employed persons. The Committee notes in this respect that table 21 attached to the Government’s report refers to employed persons working over 50 hours a week, of whom 54 per cent have a level of education corresponding to primary education. The data provided by the Government do not, however, indicate the percentage of employed persons who work over 50 hours a week. The Committee requests the Government to provide particulars on this matter and to indicate the measures taken to ensure that work by these persons over and above the limit for normal hours of work established by the Convention, namely 48 hours, is performed in compliance with the conditions imposed by the Convention in relation to the introduction of permanent or temporary exceptions. The Government is also asked to continue to provide information on the application of the Convention in practice, including extracts from reports of the labour inspection services indicating the number of violations reported of the provisions of the Labour Code respecting hours of work and any measures taken in response.

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

Article 6 of the Convention. Permanent and temporary exceptions. The Committee requests the Government to refer to the comments that it is making under Article 7, paragraphs 1 and 2, of the Hours of Work (Commerce and Offices) Convention, 1930 (No. 30).

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

In addition to its observation, the Committee requests the Government to provide further information on the following points.

Article 2 of the Convention. The Committee notes that section 117, paragraph (a), of the Labour Code, as amended through Legislative Decree No. 24 of 10 December 2000, prescribes that the worker shall not be present at the workplace for a period longer than the legal or the contractual hours of work. Though it appears that the provisions of section 114 of the Labour Code on maximum daily and weekly working hours are binding for everybody, including the contracting parties, there might be a risk that contractual working hours exceed legal working hours. The Committee therefore requests the Government to clarify in its next report how, in law and in practice, such a risk is avoided.

Article 6, paragraph 1(a) and (b). The Committee notes that under section 117, paragraph (c) of the Labour Code, as amended, an exemption of intermittent work from the provisions of section 117, paragraph (a), is provided for, in accordance with paragraph 1(a) of this Article of the Convention. The Committee further notes that under this provision of the Labour Code, the Minister of Social Affairs and Labour shall define, by a decision, such work, and the hours during which the worker is to be present at the workplace. According to Article 6, paragraph 2, of the Convention, the organizations of the employers and workers concerned should be consulted before such a decision of the Ministry of Social Affairs and Labour will be issued. Please keep the Office informed of such consultations and provide a copy of the ministerial decision when it becomes available.

The Committee further asks the Government to indicate whether the temporary exemptions, which have been provided for under section 120 of the Labour Code corresponding to Article 6, paragraph 1(b), of the Convention, have also been determined after consultation of the aforementioned organizations.

The Committee asks the Government to clarify whether section 121, paragraph (a), of the Labour Code, as amended, refers to both temporary and permanent exceptions, as provided for under sections 120 and 117, paragraph (c), of the Labour Code, respectively, or to temporary exceptions only, as provided for under the former version of section 121, paragraph (a), of the Labour Code.

The Committee, in addition, notes that section 121, paragraph (a), of the Labour Code is not clear in respect of pay for work carried out on a rest day. In cases of temporary exemptions (except in cases of accident, urgent work or force majeure), pay for overtime must not be made dependent on any conditions, such as the condition that the worker is normally paid for days of rest, as mentioned in section 121, paragraph (a), of the Labour Code.

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

The Committee notes with satisfaction the progress that has been achieved by amending section 117 of the Labour Code (Law No. 92 of 5 April 1959) through Decree No. 24 of 10 December 2000. The Committee also notes that this amendment complies with Article 2 of the Convention inasmuch as it no longer requires the presence of the worker at the workplace beyond the limits of eight legal working hours per day, in accordance with section 114 of the Labour Code.

In addition, the Committee has raised some further points in respect of sections 117, 120 and 121 of the Labour Code in a separate direct request.

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

The Committee notes the information in the Government’s last report that the new draft Labour Code is being reviewed by the Committee for Consultation and Tripartite Dialogue in order to take full account of the Committee’s comments on the application of the Convention and the Hours of Work (Commerce and Offices) Convention, 1930 (No. 30). It trusts that the Government will very shortly be in a position to adopt the amended draft accordingly and that it will not fail to so inform the ILO.

The Committee wishes to recall that for many years it has been drawing the Government’s attention to the fact that the provisions of section 117 of the present Labour Code, which provide that "hours of work and pauses must be organized in such a fashion that the presence of the worker at the workplace does not exceed 11 hours a day" are liable to result in abuse, and that these provisions need to be amended so as not to require the presence of the worker at the workplace beyond the limits of normal working hours which, in accordance with Article 2 of the Convention, must not exceed eight in the day.

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

The Committee has been drawing the Government's attention for many years to the fact that the provisions of section 117 of the Labour Code, which provide that "hours of work and pauses must be organized in such a fashion that the presence of the worker at the workplace does not exceed 11 hours a day", are liable to result in abuse and reminds it of the need to amend these provisions so as not to require the presence of the worker at the workplace beyond the limits of normal working hours which, in accordance with Article 2 of the Convention, must not exceed eight in the day. In this connection, the Committee notes with interest a communication sent by the Government to the ILO in July 1999 which indicates that, taking account of the comments formulated by the Committee in its previous observation, it has begun preparation of a new draft Legislative Decree to amend the Labour Code accordingly. The Committee requests the Government to inform the ILO on the progress achieved in this respect.

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

The Committee notes the Government's report on the application of the Convention. It notes, from the information provided, that section 117 of the Labour Code, which was the subject of its previous comments, has still not been amended to bring it into conformity with the Convention. The Committee has been drawing the Government's attention for many years to the fact that the provisions of this section, which provides that "hours of work and pauses must be organized in such a fashion that the presence of the worker at the workplace does not exceed 11 hours a day", are liable to result in abuse and wishes to remind it once again of the need to amend these provisions so as not to require the presence of the worker at the workplace beyond the limits of normal working hours which, in accordance with Article 2 of the Convention, must not exceed eight in the day.

The Committee notes the Government's communication addressed to the ILO in August 1998 in which it undertakes to take into account the comments of the Committee and the Office by amending the latest versions of the draft texts to bring the national legislation into conformity with the provisions of certain ILO Conventions, including Convention No. 1. The Committee requests the Government to keep the ILO informed of the progress achieved in this respect.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1994, published 81st ILC session (1994)

The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government in its report to the effect that the draft Legislative Decree to amend certain provisions of Labour Code, No. 91 of 1959, including section 117 which the Committee has been commenting on for many years in terms of its conformity with Article 6 of the Convention, has been revised and again submitted to the President of the Council of Ministers. The provision currently in force provides that working hours and pauses must be organized in such a way that the workers presence at the place of work does not exceed 11 hours per day. The Committee has observed that such a situation could lead to abuse and has asked the Government several times to amend this section so that, except where work is "of a specially intermittent nature," the presence of the worker is not required at the workplace outside the authorized hours of work. In this connection, it recalls that Article 2 stipulates that working hours shall not exceed eight in the day and 48 in the week.

The Committee trusts that the above-mentioned draft Legislative Decree will be adopted in the very near future and that it will bring the legislation fully into conformity with the above-mentioned provisions of the Convention, in the light of the Committee's repeated comments.

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

Article 6 of the Convention. The Committee notes the indications in the Government's report that a draft Legislative Decree has been submitted to the President of the Council of Ministers with a view to amending certain sections of the Labour Code, No. 91 of 1959.

For very many years, the Committee has been referring to section 117 of the Labour Code which establishes that working hours and rest periods must be organized in such a way that the presence of the worker at the workplace does not exceed 11 hours per day. The Committee pointed out that such a situation could lead to abuse and has asked the Government on several occasions to amend the above section in such a way that, except where work is "of a specially intermittent nature", the presence of the worker shall not be required at the workplace outside the authorized hours of work. In this connection, it recalls that Article 2 of the Convention specifies that working hours shall not exceed eight in the day and 48 in the week.

The Committee trusts that the Government will take the necessary measures in the near future to bring its legislation into full conformity with the provisions of the Convention.

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

Article 6 of the Convention. The Committee takes note of the information supplied by the Government to the effect that a Tripartite Committee has been established to examine the question of follow-up to the Committee's comments on the application of the Convention.

With reference to its previous observation, the Committee recalls that, in its 1984 report, the Government provided a draft legislative decree, amending section 117 of the Labour Code, which allows the worker to be present at the workplace for up to 11 hours daily. As the Committee has already pointed out several times, this situation is liable to result in abuses since any worker may, in practice, be subject to employment conditions that should only be applicable to workers whose work is particularly intermittent.

The Committee trusts that the necessary measures will be taken in the very near future to amend section 117 of the Labour Code in such a way that, with the exception of cases of intermittent work, the presence of the worker shall not be required at the workplace outside the authorised hours of work. It requests the Government to inform the Office of any new developments in this regard.