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

Tripartite Consultation (International Labour Standards) Convention, 1976 (No. 144) - Portugal (Ratification: 1981)

Display in: French - Spanish

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

The Committee notes the observations of the General Workers’ Union (UGT), transmitted by the Government in its report, which provide information on the issues addressed in this comment.

Article 5 of the Convention. Effective tripartite consultations. The Committee notes the indication in the Government’s report that it has engaged in consultations with the most representative workers’ and employers’ organizations on each of the issues set out in Article 5 of the Convention. The Committee also notes the Government’s indication that, during the 107th, 108th, 109th and 110th Sessions of the International Labour Conference, the Government held information sessions and technical discussions with the social partners, in order to organize the Government delegation for the Conference. The Government also informs that a study is ongoing into the feasibility of ratifying the Violence and Harassment Convention, 2019 (No. 190). The Committee notes that Portugal ratified the Work in Fishing Convention, 2007 (No. 188), on 26 November 2019 and the Protocol of 2014 to the Forced Labour Convention, 1930, on 23 December 2020. The Committee also notes that, in its observations, the UGT reiterates that with respect to ratified Conventions and unratified Conventions and Recommendations to which effect has not yet been given consultation procedures are respected in a timely and appropriate manner. However, it considers that the procedure for the ratification of Conventions should be simpler and shorter, and that the information on the basis for the decision to ratify or not a given Convention should be clearer and shared in due time with the social partners. The Committee takes note of the Government's reply to these observations, in which it reiterates that studies on the feasibility of ratifying new Conventions are complex, since they involve the consultation of several departments of the public administration depending on the matters covered by the Conventions under consideration. In addition, it indicates that the possibility of making legislative amendments identified by the study as necessary must often be assessed and that this assessment varies depending on the content of the Convention. The Government reiterates that the public administration often lacks the necessary human resources to be able to carry out feasibility studies quickly. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide detailed and updated information on the content and outcome of the tripartite consultations held on each of the matters covered by Article 5(1) of the Convention. In particular, the Committee requests the Government to provide updated information on the consultations held on the possibility of ratifying the Violence and Harassment Convention, 2019 (No. 190).

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

The Committee notes the observations of the General Workers’ Union (UGT), and the brief observation of the Confederation of Portuguese Industry (CIP), transmitted by the Government. It also notes that the International Organisation of Employers (IOE) supports the observations of the CIP.

Article 5 of the Convention. Effective tripartite consultations. The Committee notes, that in its observations, the CIP indicates that improvements have been made to bring together the social partners and the Government through the holding of tripartite meetings. It also notes the observations of the UGT which indicate that, for Conventions which have been ratified or which are to be denounced, the consultation procedures are respected in a timely and appropriate manner. However, the UGT reiterates its previous observations on the procedure followed for the ratification of Conventions, which it considers to be long, complicated and lacking in transparency. The Committee notes the Government’s reply, which repeats that feasibility studies on the ratification of new Conventions are complex, as they involve the consultation of several ministerial departments, depending on the subjects addressed by the Conventions in question, that it is often necessary to assess the possibility of making the legislative amendments identified as being essential in the studies, and that this assessment varies depending on the content of the Convention. Moreover, the public administration often lacks the human resources needed to carry out feasibility studies rapidly. The Committee also notes the Government’s reply indicating that it has held consultations with the most representative employers’ and workers’ organizations on all of the matters listed in Article 5 of the Convention. The Government points out that a feasibility study on the ratification of the Protocol of 2014 to the Forced Labour Convention, 1930, is in progress. The Government adds, with regard to the Tripartite Declaration of Principles Concerning Multinational Enterprises and Social Policy, that two consultations with the social partners concerning the Government’s reply to the questionnaire on the subject were held on 9 and 15 March 2017. The Committee also notes the fact that, in the context of the 106th Session of the International Labour Conference June 2017, the Government held an information session and a technical discussion with the social partners, with a view to determining the composition of the Government delegation during the Conference. Lastly, the Committee notes that on 13 June 2017, the Government held tripartite consultations on violence and harassment in the world of work, on which the first discussion will be held at the 107th Session of the Conference. The Committee requests the Government to provide detailed and up-to-date information on the content and outcome of all tripartite consultations held on each of the matters covered by Article 5(1) of the Convention. The Committee also reiterates its hope that progress will continue to be made with regard to tripartite consultations on international labour standards, as required by the Convention, and it requests the Government to continue to keep the Office informed of any developments.

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

Article 5 of the Convention. Effective tripartite consultations. The Committee notes the detailed information provided by the Government on the tripartite consultations held between 2010 and 2014, which gave rise to the ratification in November 2012 of the Protection of Workers’ Claims (Employer’s Insolvency) Convention, 1992 (No. 173), the Maternity Protection Convention, 2000 (No. 183), and the Safety and Health in Agriculture Convention, 2001 (No. 184). The Confederation of Portuguese Industry (CIP) confirms that consultations continue to be held with the social partners, even though such consultations amount merely to the transmission of documents. According to the CIP, the Government should promote more intense dialogue with the social partners so that they participate more actively. The International Organisation of Employers expresses support for the CIP’s observations. The General Confederation of Portuguese Workers–National Trade Unions (CGTP–IN) indicates that written consultation procedures operate relatively well, but that it is clear that such consultations have shortcomings, particularly with regard to the subjects that are to be discussed at the Conference. The Committee refers to its 2010 observation and hopes that the Government will provide information so that the Committee can assess the manner in which the observations of the CIP and the CGTP–IN have been taken into account. The Committee further hopes that progress continues to be made in the tripartite consultations on international labour standards required by the Convention.

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

Consultations required by the Convention. Consultations on unratified Conventions. In its previous comments, the Committee invited the social partners to hold consultations to re-examine unratified Conventions and Recommendations to which effect could be given (Article 5(1)(c) of the Convention). The Committee notes the detailed reply provided by the Government in the report received in July 2010 and the further substantive comments made by the Confederation of Trade and Services of Portugal (CCP) and the General Union of Workers (UGT). The CCP recognizes that consultation mechanisms exist, operate and are well established in Portugal. Nevertheless, it indicates that the comments made during consultations in some cases have little impact. In this respect, the Government reiterates that all the views put forward by the organizations are transmitted with the Government’s reports and replies to the ILO, and that it is not responsible for such comments being reflected in the Organization’s documents. The UGT agrees that consultation procedures on ratified Conventions and denunciations are given effect. Nevertheless, the UGT contends that the procedures for the ratification of Conventions are excessively long and lack transparency. In the view of UGT, it is essential to be informed of the procedures followed for the ratification of Conventions so as to determine responsibilities and remedy the situation. The UGT advocates simpler procedures so that the information on the ratification or non-ratification of a Convention are clearer and known in advance to the social partners. The UGT emphasizes that three Conventions are Unemployment Convention, 1988 (No. 168), the Protection of Workers’ Claims (Employer’s Insolvency) Convention, 1992 (No. 173), and the Maternity Protection Convention, 2000 (No. 183). The UGT welcomes the fact that the Government has provided information to the Standing Committee for Social Dialogue (CPCS) on the process of ratifying two Conventions (the Occupational Health Services Convention, 1985 (No. 161), and the Home Work Convention, 1996 (No. 177)). The Government recalls that the process of ratification involves consultation with various ministerial departments, as well as with the ILO concerning the meaning of certain provisions of Conventions. An assessment also has to be made of whether it is appropriate to introduce legislative amendments when they are identified as being necessary by studies on the feasibility of ratification. On many occasions, the public administration lacks the human resources to carry out feasibility studies rapidly. The Government understands that further use can be made of the CPCS to provide information on ratifications. In the case of Conventions which lie within the competence of the legislative authority or when it wishes to hold a parliamentary debate, the Government proposes ratification for approval by the Assembly of the Republic. It notes that the Assembly of the Republic may also take the initiative of deciding upon the ratification of Conventions. The representative organizations of employers and workers are assured the right to express their views on the approval of new Conventions, in accordance with the Labour Code. The Committee invites the Government to continue providing information on the tripartite consultations required by Article 5(1) of the Convention, and hopes that information will be provided in the next report on the progress achieved in relation to the matters raised in this observation, including information related to continuing examination of unratified Conventions (Article 5(1)(c)).

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

Tripartite consultations required by the Convention. Consultation on unratified Conventions. The Committee notes the detailed report sent by the Government for the period ending May 2008 and the observations from the Confederation of Portuguese Industry (CIP) and the General Union of Workers (UGT) attached to this report. The CIP declares that its opinions are rarely received favourably by the Government. In reply, the Government asserts that it has taken into account the information and opinions sent by a number of social partners and has sent these to the ILO. The UGT declares that it has advocated without success the ratification of a number of Conventions – namely, Conventions Nos 161, 168, 173, 177 and 183. The Committee invites the social partners to hold tripartite consultations in order to re-examine unratified Conventions and Recommendations to which effect has not yet been given, to consider what measures might be taken to promote their implementation and ratification as appropriate (Article 5, paragraph 1(c), of the Convention). The Committee hopes that the next reports will continue to provide detailed information on the form and content of formal consultations held on the matters covered by the Convention.

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

Tripartite consultations required by the Convention. The Committee notes the Government’s detailed report for the period ending May 2006, along with the observations made by the Confederation of Portuguese Industry (CIP) and the General Union of Workers (UGT). It also notes the Government’s comments on the observations made by the occupational organizations. The Committee trusts that the Government and the social partners will continue to supply detailed information in future reports on the form and content of the consultations held on the matters covered by the Convention.

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

The Committee notes the Government’s detailed report and the comments of the Confederation of Portuguese Industry (CIP) on the consultation procedures. It refers to its direct request of 2000 and requests the Government to continue providing information on the application of Article 2 of the Convention and the consultations held on the matters covered by the Convention.

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

The Committee notes with interest the report from the Government for the period ending in June 1999 which contains detailed information in reply to its previous direct request. The Committee particularly notes that, taking account of its earlier comments, the Government has consulted with the representative organizations, especially the General Confederation of Portuguese Workers (CGTP) and the Confederation of Portuguese Industry (CIP), on the form which consultation procedures should take. Recalling that, in its last General Survey concerning the Convention and Recommendation No. 152, it stated that it would be clearly contrary to the aims of the Convention to interpret Article 2(2) of the Convention as excluding any possibility of re-examining existing procedures (paragraph 71), the Committee also noted a general agreement, during the preparatory work for the adoption of the Convention and Recommendation, on the fact that the consultations envisaged encompassed those which took place in writing (paragraph 52), and that, at all events, the very flexible wording of the Convention leaves considerable latitude to the Members with regard to the choice of consultations procedures (paragraph 53). The Committee requests the Government to continue to supply detailed information in its next reports on the consultations held on the questions covered by the Convention.

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

1. The Committee notes the Government's report and the information supplied in response to its previous direct request. It also notes the observations made by the General Confederation of Portuguese Workers (CGTP) sent with the report, and the communication from the Confederation of Portuguese Industry (CIP) sent directly to the Office, a copy of which was sent to the Government.

2. The Committee appreciates the information supplied in the report on the consultations held on the matters set out in Article 5, paragraph 1, of the Convention. The Government is asked to continue to provide such information in all its future reports.

3. Further to the observations made in 1995 by the CIP and General Union of Workers (UGT), the Government invited the other representative organizations to express their views on the procedures for the consultations. The Committee notes the CGTP's reply stating that they were effective.

4. The CIP, in its communication, deems that its previous observations remain relevant and suggests a discussion on the possibility of holding more regular consultations and abandoning the procedure of written communications. The Committee would encourage the Government to hold discussions with the other representative organizations on these proposals. It hopes that this will enable a solution to be found to the concerns once again raised and that in its next report the Government will provide information on any such consultation, which would be in keeping with the prescriptions of Article 2, paragraph 2.

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

The Committee notes the detailed information contained in the Government's report. It would be grateful if the Government would continue to supply such information, particularly on the consultations held during the periods covered by each of the subsequent reports on the matters enumerated in Article 5, paragraph 1, of the Convention.

The Committee also notes the observations made by the Confederation of Portuguese Industry (CIP) and the General Union of Workers (UGT), which were attached to the report. It notes that, according to the CIP, the transmission of documents by the Government to the representative organizations and the written consultation procedures, as it is currently conducted, are not sufficient to establish dialogue, which should necessarily involve real consultations on the above matters. The CIP also regrets that the final content of Government replies to the ILO is not subject to the procedure of tripartite consultation.

The UGT also considers that consultations should involve, in addition to written communications, discussions during meetings between representatives of the Government and the social partners in order to enable the parties to express their opinions more effectively.

The Committee notes the initiative taken by the Government of communicating the above observations to the other representative organizations and inviting them to express their points of view on the matters raised therein.

The Committee hopes that the Government will be in a position to provide information in its next report on such consultations, which are in conformity with the requirements of Article 2, paragraph 2. However, it wishes to point out with regard to the issue of the consultations desired by the CIP on the final content of Government replies, that such consultations are not explicitly envisaged by the provisions of the Convention, but that the representative organizations nevertheless have the possibility of expressing at any time their opinion on the manner in which the Convention is applied, and that the Government is requested under the terms of point VI of the report form, to indicate whether it has received from the organizations of employers or workers concerned any observations of a general kind "in connection with the present or the previous report, regarding the practical application of the provisions of the Convention ...", and to communicate such observations to the Office, together with any comments that it considers useful.

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

The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government in its report and the comments of the General Union of Workers (UGT).

The Government, with reference to the questions raised in the previous direct request, indicates that, following the comments by the UGT, a tripartite meeting has been convened with a view to an exchange of views and a re-evaluation of the application of the Convention.

The Committee notes the comments made on this occasion by, in addition to the UGT, the Portuguese Confederation of Commerce (CCP), the Portuguese Confederation of Farmers (CAP) and the General Confederation of Portuguese Workers (CGTP-IN). These comments deal in particular with consultation procedures (Article 2 of the Convention), the training of participants in these procedures (Article 4) and issuing an annual report (Article 6).

The Committee would be grateful if the Government would continue to supply information on the purpose of consultations (Article 5, paragraph 1) as well as on developments in consultation methods and procedures (Articles 2, 4 and 6).

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

The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government concerning Article 4, paragraph 2, and Article 6 of the Convention. In this connection, it also notes the different points of view expressed on the one hand by the Portuguese Confederation of Industry and the Portuguese Chamber of Commerce and, on the other, by the General Confederation of Portuguese Workers which considers that, generally speaking, the written consultation procedure does not ensure that the Convention is fully applied.

The Committee would be grateful if the Government would continue to supply information on any developments regarding the application of the Convention, particularly as concerns the two provisions mentioned above.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1989, published 76th ILC session (1989)

1. The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government concerning the application of Article 5, paragraph 1, of the Convention.

2. It also notes the Government's reply concerning Article 4, paragraph 2, to the effect that the consultation procedures carried out in writing do not imply any special administrative or financial support beyond the normal requirements for the operation of state services. The Committee wishes to draw the Government's attention to the purpose behind this provision of the Convention and to point out that it concerns the financing of measures which should be taken, in co-operation with the representative organisations of employers and workers, in order to provide appropriate training to enable those participating in the consultation procedures to fulfil their functions effectively. It requests the Government to supply any appropriate information in this respect.

3. Finally, the Committee notes that the Government still has not consulted the representative organisations as to whether it is appropriate to produce an annual report on the working of the consultation procedures, as provided for in Article 6. It requests the Government to indicate the measures that have been taken or are envisaged to give effect to this provision of the Convention.