Texts of pending comments

Article 5 of the Convention. Compensatory rest. In previous comments, the Committee had noted that the Employment Rights Act 2008 did not contain a general provision guaranteeing compensatory rest in the case of total or partial exceptions to the ordinary weekly rest period. The Committee notes that such provision was not included in the Workers’ Rights Act 2019, which repealed and replaced the Employment Rights Act 2008, either. In addition, the Committee notes that a number of Remuneration Regulations that allow for exceptions to the weekly rest day in special circumstances do not provide for compensatory rest either. The Committee notes that the Government in its report indicates that according to section 24 A of the Workers’ Rights Act 2019, part time off may be granted to a worker in lieu of remuneration for overtime. The Committee also notes that this measure, which applies for the COVID-19 period, will lapse on 31 December 2021. The Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that workers who are deprived of their weekly rest be granted compensatory rest irrespective of any monetary compensation, as required by this Article of the Convention.

In order to provide a comprehensive view of the issues relating to the application of the ratified Conventions on social security, the Committee considers it appropriate to examine Conventions Nos 12 (workers’ compensation, agriculture), 17 (workers’ compensation, accidents), and 19 (equality of treatment, accident compensation) together.

Article 1 of Convention No 12, and Article 2 of Convention No. 17, in conjunction with Articles 5, 7, 9, 10 and 11 of Convention No. 17. Scope of application of legislation on workers’ compensation. For more than 40 years, the Committee has been drawing the Government’s attention to the lack of compliance of the Workmen’s Compensation Act (Chapter 220), 1931, applicable to certain categories of workers excluded from the National Pensions Act, 1976, with the following provisions of Convention No. 17: Article 5 (compensation in the form of periodical payments in cases of permanent incapacity or death of the injured worker); Article 7 (additional compensation for injured workers who must have the constant help of another person); Article 9 (entitlement to the necessary medical and surgical aid, free of charge); Article 10 (supply and renewal of artificial limbs and surgical appliances); and Article 11 (guarantees in the event of the insolvency of the employer or insurer).

The Committee pointed, in particular, to the unequal treatment in coverage for work accident compensation that ensued for certain categories of workers, and notably for employees of the central government and of parastatal bodies and local authorities earning less than a prescribed amount and workers in the sugar industry. On this basis, the Committee requested the Government to conclude the merger of the Workmen’s Compensation Act (Chapter 220), 1931 and the National Pensions Act, 1976, indicated by the Government as a means to give effect to the above-mentioned provisions of Convention No. 17 since 1999, and to take other measures to bring the national legislation fully in line with Conventions Nos 12, 17 and 19 for all the categories of workers protected by the Conventions.

The Committee notes with interest the indication by the Government, in its report, that the National Pensions Act, 1976, has been amended by the Social Contribution and Social Benefit Act, No. 14 of 2021 (SCSB Act), which covers all industrial injuries and all workers who draw an income, without exceptions (sub-part III of Part III, SCSB Act). In this context, the Government points out that a merger between the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1931, and the SCSB Act, which has amended the National Pensions Act, 1976, is now being considered.

While taking due note of the adoption of the SCSB Act, the Committee observes, that, pursuant to its section 2, public sector employees are excluded from the definition of employees for the purpose of sub-part III of Part III of the SCSB Act, which regulates industrial injury benefits, and that apprentices under a contract of apprenticeship regulated by the Mauritius Institute of Training and Development Act are also excluded from coverage under sub-part III of Part III. The Committee further observes that the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1931, is still in force, which suggests that certain categories of workers continue to be subjected to an unequal treatment in case of industrial injury, and granted a lesser protection than that set out in the Conventions. In this respect, the Committee recalls that, pursuant to Article 2 of Convention No. 17, all workers, employees and apprentices employed by any enterprise, undertaking or establishment of whatsoever nature, whether public or private who suffer personal injury due to an industrial accident, shall be granted compensation, on terms at least equal to those provided by the Convention. As for Convention No. 12, it requires, under its Article 1, the extension to all agricultural wage-earners of laws and regulations making provision for the compensation of workers for personal injury by accident arising out of or in the course of their employment.

In light of the above, the Committee requests the Government to provide clarifications as to the provisions of its national legislation regulating the compensation of workers excluded from the scope of protection of sub-part III of Part III (Industrial Injury Benefits) of the SCSB Act, 2021, for work-related injury. The Committee requests the Government to specify, in particular, the provisions applicable to employees of the central government, parastatal bodies and local authorities, and workers in the sugar industry.

In the event that some workers are still covered by the Workmen’s Compensation Act, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that these workers and their dependents are duly compensated in cases of work-related injury, on terms at least equal to those provided by Conventions Nos 12 and 17.

Article 1(1) of Convention No. 19. Equality of treatment for non-national workers and their dependants. For many years, the Committee has been noting that non-citizen workers employed in export processing zones and who have resided less than two years in Mauritius were not considered as insured persons under the National Pensions Act, and were only entitled to work injury benefits under the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1931, which provided a lesser protection.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication that non-citizen employees residing in Mauritius are covered by the SCSB Act in case of an industrial accident. The Committee notes, however, that non-citizen employees, employed by an export manufacturing enterprise who have resided in Mauritius for a continuous period of less than 2 years, are still excluded from participation in the social insurance system which ensures protection against industrial injuries, pursuant to section 2 of the SCSB Act. The Committee recalls that Article 1(1) of the Convention requires that a ratifying member State must grant to injured workers who are nationals of any other member State that has ratified the Convention, or to their dependants, the same treatment in respect of workmen’s compensation as it grants to its own nationals.

The Committee urges the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that non-citizen workers employed in export processing zones who have resided less than two years in the country are granted the same treatment in industrial injury compensation as nationals and other foreign workers under the SCSB Act, 2021, in application of Article 1 of Convention No. 19.

Conclusions and recommendations of the Standards Review Mechanism. With respect to its previous comment, the Committee recalls the recommendations of the Standards Review Mechanism (SRM) Tripartite Working Group, based on which the Governing Body has decided that Member States for which Convention No. 17 is in force should be encouraged to ratify the more recent Employment Injury Benefits Convention, 1964 [Schedule I amended in 1980] (No. 121), or the Social Security (Minimum Standards) Convention, 1952 (No. 102), and accept the obligations in its Part VI (see GB.328/LILS/2/1). Taking note of the Government’s indication that due consideration would be given to ratification of most up-to-date relevant instruments, the Committee encourages the Government to follow up the Governing Body’s decision at its 328th Session (October–November 2016) approving the recommendations of the SRM Tripartite Working Group, and to consider ratifying Conventions Nos 121 or 102 (Part VI) as the most up-to-date instruments in the area of employment injury benefit, and reminds the Government of the possibility to avail itself of the technical assistance of the Office in this regard.

In order to provide a comprehensive view of the issues relating to the application of the ratified Conventions on labour administration and inspection, the Committee considers it appropriate to examine Conventions Nos 81 (labour inspection) and 150 (labour administration) together.

A. Labour inspection

Labour Inspection Convention, 1947 (No. 81)

Article 5(a) of the Convention. Cooperation between the labour inspectorate and other public bodies. 1. Effective cooperation with competent bodies entrusted with the registration of establishments liable to labour inspection. Following its previous comment, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that the Labour and Industrial Relations Division (LIRD) of the Ministry of Labour, Human Resource Development and Training (MLHRDT) is working on the establishment of a centralized database of undertakings liable to inspection with a view to improving the planning and monitoring of inspection activities. The Committee also notes that the Occupational Safety and Health Division (OSHD) of the MLHRDT indicates that the data mentioned in the record of registration of factories, pursuant to section 88 and 91 of the Occupational safety and Health Act 2005 (OSHA), helps the Division to easily identify hazards with respect to the nature of activities and to plan inspections accordingly. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the progresses made in the establishment of a centralized database of undertakings liable to inspection with a view to better plan and monitor inspection activities. It also requests the Government to indicate how the database and the record of registration are used to ensure effective co-operation between inspection services and other Government services.

2. Effective cooperation between the labour inspection services and the justice system. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in reply to its request on the reason of the decrease in criminal cases referred to court by the Inspection and Enforcement Section. In this regard, it notes that according to the Government this decrease may be due to multiple causes, including the fact that employers are becoming more aware of the provisions of the law. This can be explained, according to the Government, by the increased contact with labour inspectors during inspections visits; by increased sensitization campaigns and training and by easier access to information on legislation on the website of the Ministry. The Government also refers to the willingness of employers to take remedial actions and to comply with “compliance notices” issued by the MLHRDT or other requests for compliance from the labour inspectors regarding infringement of the legislation. In addition, the Committee notes the information provided by the Government on the cooperation between the LIRD and the justice system, in particular the training courses organized by the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (ODPP) for the officers of the LIRD. The Committee notes that the Government report contains information concerning the numbers of civil cases referred by the labour inspectors to Chambers and Open Court, the numbers of cases disposed of and the amount recovered, for the period between 2017 to May 2021. However, the Committee notes that the Government report does not contain data on the breakdown of criminal cases referred for prosecution by the OSHD and the LIRD. Therefore, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the number of criminal cases referred to the judiciary by labour inspectors and to include statistics on the outcome of the cases referred, including the penalties imposed and fines collected.

Articles 10, 11 and 16. Material resources of the labour inspectorate and visits of inspection. Following its previous comment, the Committee notes the information provided by the Government on the human resources of the labour inspectorate and their geographical distribution. The Committee also notes the information provided by the Government regarding the creation in 2016 of the Employees’ Lodging Accommodation Unit and the Construction Unit, both under the OSHD. According to the Government, the Employees’ Lodging Accommodation Unit comprises of 12 officers while the Construction Unit, counts eight officers. The Committee notes that for the financial year 2020/2021, the Labour and Industrial Relations Officers team encompasses a total number of 129 officers and the Occupational Health and Safety team a total number of 64 officers. However, the Committee notes that according to the Government report a number of posts, both in the LIRD and in the OSHD, remain vacant and that some of those positions are still unfunded. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the strength of the labour inspectorate. It also requests the Government to continue to adopt the necessary measures to ensure that adequate budgetary resources are allocated for the funding of the vacant positions.

Articles 14 and 21(g). Recording and notification of cases of occupational disease. In its previous comment, the Committee noted that statistics on occupational diseases are maintained by the Occupational Health Unit within the Ministry of Health and Wellness. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that pursuant to section 86 of the OSH Act 2005, employers are required to notify the Director of Occupational Safety and Health, of cases of occupational disease. In this regard, the Government indicates that no occupational diseases have been notified for the period 1 June 2017 to 31 May 2020. The Committee requests the Government to provide an assessment on the reasons for the lack of reporting of any cases of occupational disease and to provide information on any violations of the employer’s duty to notify cases of occupational disease. The Committee further requests the Government to provide detailed information on the recording and procedure for the notification of cases of occupational disease.

Articles 20 and 21. Content and publication of an annual report. Following its previous comment, the Committee notes the statistical information provided by the Government in its report, including the number of inspection visits undertaken, the number of complaints, the number of civil cases referred to and disposed of in Chambers and Open Court and the number of occupational accidents. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that monthly reports prepared by inspection officers are submitted to the Statistic Unit of the MLHRDT for compilation and preparation of annual report. The Committee also notes that according to the Government the annual reports for period July 2016 to June 2017 and period July 2019 to June 2020 have already been published on the website of the MLHRDT and that the annual report for period July 2020 to July 2021 is under preparation. The Committee requests the Government to transmit copies of the annual inspection report to the Office maximum within three months from its publication. It also requests the Government to adopt the necessary measures to ensure that the labour inspection report contains complete information on all the subjects listed in Article 21(a)–(g), including the number of workplaces liable to inspection, the number of workers employed therein, statistics on occupational diseases, as well as data on the violations detected and the number and nature of the penalties imposed.

B. Labour administration

Labour Administration Convention, 1978 (No. 150)

Article 6(2)(a) of the Convention. National Employment Policy. Following its previous comment on the development of the National Employment Policy (NEP), the Committee notes the Government’s indication that to reactivate the formulation of the NEP, the Ministry in collaboration with ILO, organized a tripartite workshop in May 2018 with a view to agree on the key priority areas and structure that should be incorporated in the NEP. The Committee notes the ongoing development of the NEP and that the finalization of the drafting is expected by end of December 2021. In addition, the Government indicates that the ratification of the Employment Policy Convention, 1964 (No. 122) will be considered once the formulation and development of the National Employment Policy is finalized. While taking due note of this information, the Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the development of the NEP and to provide information on its implementation, once adopted.

Article 9. Supervision of parastatal agencies active in the area of employment policy. In its previous comment, the Committee noted that the National Empowerment Foundation (NEF) has been assigned the main role of promoting a better match between the demand and supply of labour and training. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that there is a close collaboration between the NEF and the Ministry of Labour with regard to directing beneficiaries to potential employers. In addition, the Committee notes the information provided on the training programmes implemented, the stakeholders involved in training and the number of beneficiaries trained. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the manner in which the activities of the NEF are supervised and the manner in which coordination is ensured between the NEF and the central labour administration.

Article 12(1)(b) and (2) of the Convention. Powers of entry of inspectors into premises which they may have reasonable cause to believe to be liable to inspection. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that, pursuant to section 4 of the Occupational Safety and Health Act (Employees’ Lodging Accommodation) Regulations 2011, an authorized officer may enter, with the consent of the head of any undertaking, any building used as lodging accommodation, in order to undertake an inspection or investigation as may be necessary. The Committee notes that, contrary to the information previously provided, the Government indicates that the existing provisions requiring prior notification to carry out inspection in employees’ lodging accommodation are being maintained, as the accommodation is a dwelling place provided to an employee and entering such a place without consent may cause prejudice to the privacy of lodgers. In this regard, the Committee recalls that, pursuant to Article 12(1)(b) and (2) of the Convention, labour inspectors provided with proper credentials shall be empowered to enter by day any premises which they may have reasonable cause to believe to be liable to inspection. Thus, they should be authorized to abstain from notifying their presence to the employer or his/her representative if they consider that such a notification may be prejudicial to the performance of their duties. The Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to amend the Occupational Safety and Health Act (Employees’ Lodging Accommodation) Regulations to achieve full conformity with Article 12 of the Convention, and to provide information on any progress made in this regard.

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

The Committee notes the observations made by the Confederation of Free Trade Unions and the State and Other Employees Federation, dated 26 August 2021, concerning matters examined by the Committee in the framework of the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).

Legislative developments. In its last comment, the Committee noted the Government’s indication that a revision of the Employment Rights Act (2008) and the Employment Relations Act 2008 (ERA 2008) was under way. The Committee takes note of the Government’s indication that: (i) the Employment Rights Act (2008) was replaced by the Worker’s Rights Act 2019 (Act N° 20) with effect as of 24 October 2019; and (ii) the ERA 2008 was amended by the Employment Relations (Amendment) Act 2019 (Act N° 21) with effect as of 23 August 2019.

The Committee further notes that section 28(j) of the ERA 2008, as amended in 2019, provides for the establishment of the National Tripartite Council, which aims at promoting social dialogue and consensus building on labour, industrial relations or socio-economic issues of national importance and other related labour and industrial relations issues. Observing that the Council shall make recommendations to the Government on issues relating, inter alia, to the review of the operation and enforcement of the labour legislation, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the recommendations made by the Council in relation to matters covered by the Convention, including any discussion and recommendations related to giving effect to the Committee’s comments.

Article 2 of the Convention. Right of workers to establish and join organizations without distinction whatsoever. Migrant workers. In its previous comment, the Committee observed that under section 13 of the ERA 2008 non-citizens needed to hold a work permit in order to be members of a trade union. Having noted the Government’s indication that a revision of the ERA 2008 was under way, the Committee requested the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that all migrant workers, whether in a regular or irregular situation, enjoy, in law and in practice, the right to establish as well as join organizations without distinction whatsoever. The Committee notes that the Government reiterates that non-citizens in irregular situations are allowed to join a trade union once they are in possession of a valid work permit. The Committee observes that section 13 of the ERA 2008, on eligibility to trade union membership, was not amended in 2019 by Act N°21 and that consequently the requirement of holding a work permit in order to be a member of a trade union remains in place. The Committee recalls in this regard that the right of workers, without distinction whatsoever, to establish and join organizations of their own choosing implies that any worker residing in the territory of a State, whether they have a work permit or not, benefits from the trade union rights provided for by the Convention. Regretting that the work permit requirement provided for under the ERA 2008 was not repealed by Act N°21, the Committee reiterates its request to the Government to take all measures in the near future to ensure the recognition of the right of all migrant workers to establish and join organizations of their own choosing. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any developments in this respect.

Self-employed workers. Having observed that there was no legal provision in the labour legislation granting trade union rights to self-employed workers, the Committee requested the Government to hold consultations with social partners and other interested parties with the aim of ensuring, within the framework of the revision of the Employment Rights Act and the ERA 2008, that all workers, including self-employed workers, enjoy the right to establish and join organizations without distinction whatsoever. The Committee takes note of the Government’s indication that workers have the right to join trade unions under section 13 of the ERA 2008 and that individuals other than these workers, such as the self-employed, may form associations under the Registration of Association Act. The Committee recalls that the guarantees of the Convention apply to all workers without distinction whatsoever, including self-employed workers; in this regard, the Committee regrets to note that no modification was undertaken in the latest labour review. The Committee therefore requests again the Government to hold consultations with social partners, including organizations representing self-employed workers if they exist, with the aim of ensuring that all workers, including self-employed workers, enjoy the right to establish and join organizations without distinction whatsoever. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the progress achieved in this respect.

The Committee reminds the Government that it may avail itself of the technical assistance of the Office with respect to all issues raised in its present comments.

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

Article 3. Right of workers’ organizations to organize their activities and formulate their programmes. In its previous comments, the Committee had requested the Government to amend the following provisions of the Employment Relations Act (ERA) 2008 and bring them into full conformity with the Convention:

– Section 78(3) of the ERA, which provided that a ballot shall be successful where it obtains an absolute majority of the workers concerned by the dispute in the bargaining unit. The Committee had requested the Government to ensure that account is taken only of the votes cast in determining the outcome of the strike ballot. The Committee takes note of the Government’s indication that the provision at issue was amended and that the revised section 78(3) of the ERA now provides that the secret ballot shall be successful where it obtains the support of the “majority of workers in the bargaining unit concerned by the labour dispute”, instead of an absolute majority. The Committee recalls that, so as not to unduly limit the right of workers’ organizations to organize their activities, the legislative provisions requiring a vote by workers before a strike should ensure that account is taken only of the votes cast by those deciding whether to have recourse to a strike – whether across the workplace as a whole or in a particular bargaining unit – and not of all workers who are entitled to vote in that workplace or bargaining unit, and that any quorum requirement is fixed at a reasonable level. The Committee requests the Government to clarify whether the majority requirement set out in the revised section 78(3) entails a simple majority of the votes cast, and if so to indicate if there is any quorum requirement; but if not, the Committee reiterates its request to the Government to take steps to amend section 78(3) of the ERA so that only votes cast are counted in reckoning the majority.
– Section 82(1)(b) which allows compulsory arbitration to be introduced at the initiative of the authorities, including the courts and section 82(1)(a) and (2) which allows the Prime Minister to apply to the Tribunal for an order for the establishment of a minimum service in light of the duration of a strike or lockout. The Committee takes note of the Government’s indication that section 82 of the ERA has not been amended. The Government underlines that Mauritius is a small island with few natural resources and that it relies on its human resources. It further indicates that where a strike threatens to affect an industry or a service or employment, the Government may apply to the Employment Relation Tribunal for the establishment of a minimum service unless it is provided under section 81 of the ERA on procedure agreement. While taking note of these indications, the Committee recalls that a system of compulsory arbitration which makes it possible to prohibit virtually all strikes, is acceptable only at the request of both parties to a dispute, and in the case of disputes in the public service involving public servants exercising authority in the name of the state or in essential services in the strict sense of the term. The Committee recalls once again that the fact that a service, industry or employment may be affected by the duration of a strike does not in and of itself justify the introduction of a minimum service. The Committee reiterates its request to the Government to take the necessary measures to amend section 82(1)(b) of the ERA so that compulsory arbitration may only be imposed in the above-mentioned circumstances and to amend section 82(1)(a) and (2) of the ERA so that a minimum service may not be imposed for the mere reason that the duration of a strike may affect a service or industry or employment. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any developments in this respect.

In its previous comments, the Committee had noted that sections 67 and 77(b) of the ERA, as amended in 2013, provide that labour disputes may not be reported, nor recourse to strike allowed, when a collective agreement is in force, and had requested the Government to provide information on any existing or envisaged compensatory procedures. The Committee takes note of the Government’s indication that when a collective agreement is in force and the parties have a dispute related to issues covered in the collective agreement, they can apply for a variation of the collective agreement under section 58 of the ERA, as amended in 2019. The Committee observes that this section provides that the parties may jointly vary a collective agreement in the occurrence of circumstances provided for in the agreement, or if there is a substantial change of circumstances that warrants such variation. It further provides that if a party refuses a variation of the agreement, any party may apply to the Employment Relations Tribunal for a variation of the agreement. The Tribunal shall determine an application within 60 days and an order made by the Tribunal is binding on the parties to the collective agreement. The Committee also observes that, as provided for in section 86 of the ERA, as amended in 2019, the Employment Relations Tribunal is an arbitration tribunal that, among other functions, interprets collective agreements, make awards and orders in relation to recognition, check-off agreement, agency shop order, minimum service and any other issues under the Act. The Committee requests the Government to keep it informed of any practical application of the provisions referred to above.

Article 3, 7 and 14(a) of the Convention. Prohibition of the payment of wages in the form of vouchers, coupons or in any other form alleged to represent legal tender. Works stores. Information on wages before entering employment and when any changes occur. The Committee notes that the Workers’ Rights Act 2019 does not contain provisions giving effect to these Articles of the Convention. The Committee therefore requests the Government to provide information on the manner in which it is ensured that: (i) the payment of wages in the form of promissory notes, vouchers or coupons, or in any other form alleged to represent legal tender is prohibited (Article 3); (ii) the workers are free from any coercion to make use of work stores or services and, that when they use them, the goods or services are provided at fair and reasonable prices for the benefit of the workers concerned (Article 7); the workers are informed, in an appropriate and easily understandable manner, before they enter employment and when any changes take place, of the conditions in respect of wages under which they are employed (Article 14(a)).

The Committee notes the observations made by the Confederation of Free Trade Unions and the State and Other Employees Federation, dated 26 August 2021, concerning matters examined in the present comment.

Legislative developments. In its last comment, the Committee noted the Government’s indication that a revision of the Employment Rights Act (2008) and the Employment Relations Act 2008 (ERA 2008) was under way. The Committee takes note of the Government’s indication that: (i) the Employment Rights Act (2008) was replaced by the Worker’s Rights Act 2019 (WRA) (Act No. 20) and (ii) the ERA 2008 was amended by the Employment Relations (Amendment) Act 2019 (Act No. 21).

In addition, the Committee welcomes the establishment of the National Tripartite Council provided for under section 28(j) of the ERA 2008, as amended in 2019, which aims at promoting social dialogue and consensus building on labour, industrial relations or socio-economic issues of national importance and other related labour and industrial relations issues. Observing that the Council shall make recommendations to the Government on issues relating, inter alia, to the review of the operation and enforcement of the labour legislation, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the recommendations made by the Council in relation to matters covered by the Convention, including as to giving effect to the Committee’s comments.

Article 1 of the Convention. Adequate protection against acts of anti-union discrimination. In its last comment, the Committee requested the Government to continue to provide statistical data on the number of complaints of anti-union discrimination, their outcome and the number and nature of sanctions imposed or remedies awarded. It also requested it to pursue its efforts, in particular in the export processing zones (EPZs), to ensure that all allegations of anti-union discrimination give rise to expeditious investigations The Committee takes note of the Government’s indication that Act No. 21 introduced the following amendments to the ERA to enhance protection of workers against acts of anti-union discrimination:

– new subsection 31(1)(b)(iii) provides that no person shall discriminate against, victimize or otherwise prejudice a worker or an accredited workplace representative on any employment issue on the ground of his trade union activities;

– new subsection (1A) provides for stringent conditions to curb any decision to terminate workers’ employment in relation to trade union membership or activities; and

– in section 2 of the ERA, the definition of labour dispute has been broadened to include reinstatement of a worker where the employment is terminated on the grounds specified in section 64(1A) (above-mentioned).

The Committee takes note with interest of the abovementioned measures introduced by Act No. 21 to the ERA which complement the protection against acts of anti-union discrimination already provided for in the legislation. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the impact in practice of the legislative amendments and to provide statistical data in that regard, including on the number of complaints of anti-union discrimination, including anti-union dismissals, brought before the competent authorities (labour inspectorate and judicial bodies), their outcome and the number and nature of sanctions imposed or remedies awarded.

In its last comment, the Committee invited the Government to engage in a dialogue with the national social partners with a view to identifying possible adjustments to improve the rapidity and efficiency of the conciliation proceedings. The Committee takes note that the Government indicates that section 69 of the ERA, as amended in 2019, provides for a timeframe for the expeditious resolution of disputes involving anti-union discrimination: 45 days at the Commission for Conciliation and Mediation (CCM) and, if no agreement is reached, the Employment Relations Tribunal (ERT) (an arbitration tribunal) must make an award within 90 days. The Committee also observes that section 87(2) of the ERA, as amended in 2019, has doubled the number of the CCM members and expresses the firm hope that this will contribute to improving the rapidity and efficiency of the conciliation procedures.

Having taken note of allegations made by social partners concerning the excessive length of judicial proceedings in rights disputes (six to seven years), the Committee had requested the Government to take measures with a view to accelerating relevant judicial proceedings and to provide statistical data on their average duration. Regretting that no information was provided in this regard, the Committee requests the Government once again to take measures with a view to accelerating relevant judicial proceedings and to provide statistical data on their average duration, including with respect to cases that may arise in EPZs.

Article 4. Promotion of collective bargaining. The Committee takes note of the Government’s indication that Act No. 21 introduced the following amendments to the ERA concerning collective bargaining:

– Section 51(1)–(4) of the ERA was amended to facilitate the process of collective bargaining by drawing up a procedure agreement in view of signing a collective agreement. According to the Government, this will further encourage the union and management to proceed with the negotiations keeping abreast good faith at all times with a view to reaching a collective agreement.

– Section 88(4)(e) of the ERA was amended to widen the scope of the CCM with the aim at reinforcing the mutual trust between employer and employees.

– Section 69 of the ERA was amended to promote the settlement of labour disputes. Section 69(3) has been specifically introduced to make the recommendation of the President of the CCM binding should both parties to a labour dispute agree to confer upon the President such power. The Government indicates that this provision was added to provide a speedy solution to break the deadlock between the parties instead of having recourse to the Tribunal, thus saving time, which is crucial in industrial matter.

– Section 69(9)(b) was amended to enable both the union or the employer to request the CCM to refer a labour dispute to the ERT (arbitration tribunal) once the conciliation attempt has failed. The Government indicates that prior to the amendment; the CCM could only refer to the ERT cases brought by an individual worker. The Committee observes that, while section 63 of the ERA provides that the parties may jointly refer a dispute for voluntary arbitration, section 69(9)(b), as amended, concerns the referral of a dispute to an arbitration tribunal at the request of one of the parties. Recalling that compulsory arbitration in the case that the parties have not reached agreement is generally contrary to the principles of collective bargaining, the Committee requests the Government to clarify whether the revised section 69(9)(b) does allow for compulsory arbitration at the request of one party.

– Section 87(2) was amended to reinforce the human resource of the CCM. The Committee recalls that in its previous comments it had noted allegations in relation to the lack of human resources at the CCM. As mentioned in the present comment under Article 1 of the Convention, it appreciates that the revised section 87(2) has doubled the number of its members. The Committee regrets to note, however, that the revised section 87(2) has removed the requirement for the Minister to hold consultations with the most representative organizations of workers and employers in relation to the appointment of conciliators or mediators. The Committee requests the Government to clarify the rationale behind the removal of consultations to social partners under this section.

The Committee takes due note of the above-mentioned amendments and expresses the hope that, as indicated by the Government, they will contribute to facilitating collective bargaining. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the impact of the legislative amendments in practice.

In its previous comment, the Committee expressed its expectation that the Government would continue to carry out and strengthen inspections and sensitization activities with respect to collective bargaining. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that: (i) 132 sensitization activities carried out between 2017 and 2021 benefited 2,660 workers in the EPZ/textile sector; and (ii) 161 inspection visits carried out in the EPZ sector covered 21,273 local workers and 1,284 inspection visits in undertakings in the manufacturing sector covered 231,793 migrant workers. The Committee notes that 64 collective agreements have been registered with the Ministry of Labour from 2017 to 2020 and that neither of them pertains to the EPZ sector. The Committee also notes the Government’s indication that the COVID-19 pandemic has somehow affected the activities of the Ministry. The Committee takes note of the information provided and requests the Government, in consultation with the social partners, to strengthen these activities, in particular in the EPZs, textile sector, sugar industry, manufacturing sector and other sectors employing migrant workers. It also requests the Government to continue to supply statistics on the functioning of collective bargaining in practice (number of collective agreements concluded in the private sector, especially in EPZs; branches and number of workers covered).

Interference in collective bargaining. In its previous comment the Committee expressed the hope that the Government would continue to refrain from unduly interfering in and give priority to collective bargaining of a voluntary nature as the means of determining terms and conditions of employment in the sugar sector in particular and in the private sector in general. The Committee also requested the Government to provide its comments on observations made by Business Mauritius that the Remuneration Orders of the National Remuneration Board (NRB) were so elaborated and prescriptive that they acted as a disincentive to collective bargaining. The Committee notes that the Government states that: (i) as from 24 October 2019, the core conditions of employment of workers under Remuneration Orders (ROs) have been harmonized with the adoption of the WRA; (ii) the ROs have been repealed and replaced by 32 Remuneration Regulations, which provide for conditions of employment specific to the sector; (iii) a National Minimum Wage (NMW) was introduced as from January 2018 and was last reviewed in January 2020 and (iv) payments of additional remuneration continue to be made following recommendations by a national tripartite forum, chaired by the Prime Minister. The Committee expresses the firm hope that these developments will contribute to prioritizing bipartite collective bargaining of a voluntary nature as the means of determining terms and conditions of employment in the private sector in general.

Article 6. Collective bargaining in the public sector. In its previous comments, the Committee invited the Government, together with the professional organizations concerned, to study ways in which the current system could be developed to effectively recognize the right to collective bargaining of public servants who are not engaged in the administration of the State. The Committee notes that the Government states that: (i) salary determination in the private sector is completely different than in the public sector; (ii) in the private sector, the wage fixing institution establishes a floor wage and this eventually gives room to collective bargaining; and (iii) this system cannot be imported to the public sector as the Pay Research Bureau (PRB) establishes a ceiling wage for public sector employees. The Committee notes that the Confederation of Free Trade Unions and the State and Other Employees Federation precisely highlight that collective bargaining does not exist in the public service since the setting up of the PRB. The Committee takes note that the Government states that with a view to promoting social dialogue in the public service, an Employment Relations Committee (ERC) is being set up by the Ministry of Public Service, Administrative and Institutional Reforms comprising representatives from Management and the four most representative federations of the Civil Service. Such Committee would, inter alia, consider any matter relating to or arising out of the course of employment of public officers and would make recommendation to appropriate instances. The draft regulation has been finalized after consultations with different stakeholders and is presently at the level of the Attorney-General’s Office for vetting. The Committee welcomes these developments, which aim at promoting social dialogue in the public service. It requests the Government to transmit a copy of the ERC once it has been adopted. The Committee must recall, however, that, pursuant to Article 6 of the Convention, all public servants, other than those engaged in the administration of the State, should enjoy collective bargaining rights, and that, under the Convention, the establishment of simple consultation procedures for public servants who are not engaged in the administration of the State (such as employees in public enterprises, employees in municipal services, public sector teachers, etc.), instead of real collective bargaining procedures, is not sufficient. The Committee therefore invites once again the Government, together with the professional organizations concerned, to take the necessary measures to effectively recognize the right to collective bargaining of public servants who are not engaged in the administration of the State.

The Committee reminds the Government that it may avail itself of technical assistance from the Office with respect to all issues raised in its present comments.

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government, which answers the points raised in its previous direct request and has no further matters to raise in this regard.

Articles 2 and 5(1)(a)–(e) of the Convention. Effective tripartite consultations. The Government reports that the Labour Advisory Council has been replaced by the National Tripartite Council (NTC), established pursuant to section 98A of the Employment Relations (Amendment) Act 2019. The Committee notes that the mandate of the NTC includes, inter alia, making recommendations to the Government on labour, industrial relations, and health and safety issues at the national and international levels, particularly in relation with the ILO, the African Union and the Southern African Development Community (SADC). In response to the Committee’s 2018 direct request concerning consultations on the prospects of ratifying the Employment Policy Convention, 1964 (No. 122), the Government reports that the elaboration of a National Employment Policy (NEP), initiated in 2010, is still underway. The Committee recalls that the Ministry of Labour, Industrial Relations, Employment and Training (MLIRET) in collaboration with the ILO, organized a tripartite workshop in May 2018 for all the constituents to agree on the key priority areas and structure of the NEP and that, subsequently, it was agreed that a tripartite NEP drafting oversight committee would be set up to ensure that the NEP formulation process would be based on consultations throughout. The Committee notes that, in January 2021, the Government determined to retain a consultancy firm to draft the NEP, which is expected to be finalized by the end of December 2021. The Government adds that the ratification of Convention No. 122 will be envisaged once the NEP is formulated. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that tripartite consultations were held during the reporting period in relation to the ILC agenda item “Ending violence and harassment against women and men in the world of work”; on the proposal to the competent authority in connection with the submission of the Violence and Harassment Convention, 2019 (No. 190) and Violence and Harassment Recommendation, 2019 (No. 206); on questions arising out of reports to be made to the ILO under articles 19 and 22 of the ILO Constitution; and on the abrogation of a number of ILO Conventions and the withdrawal of a number of Recommendations. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the content and outcome of tripartite consultations held on all of the matters concerning international labour standards covered by Article 5(1)(a)–(e) of the Convention, including tripartite consultations held in relation to the proposal to the competent authority concerning Convention No. 190 and Recommendation No. 206 and on prospects of ratification of Convention No. 122. In addition, the Committee invites the Government to indicate whether and in what manner the constituents will be consulted in relation to the formulation of the draft National Employment Policy.

The Committee takes note of the supplementary information provided by the Government in light of the decision adopted by the Governing Body at its 338th Session (June 2020). The Committee proceeded with the examination of the application of the Convention on the basis of the supplementary information received from the Government in 2020, as well as on the basis of the information at its disposal in 2019.

Articles 2 and 4 of the Convention. Vocational rehabilitation and employment policy. Equality of opportunity and treatment. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to provide information on developments in relation to the Disability Strategy and Action Plan 2014–24 and to report on the measures taken in cooperation with the social partners in the context of the national policy on vocational rehabilitation and employment of persons with disabilities, with specific reference to educational and training opportunities, both in the public and private sectors. The Committee notes with interest the implementation of the Disability Strategy and Action Plan 2014–2024 and the Action Plan on Disability 2016–2020 developed in consultation with all stakeholders. The Government indicates that 74 per cent of the objectives set out in the Action Plan on Disability 2016–2020 have already been implemented and those that are still outstanding are being incorporated into the new Action Plan 2021–2025. It adds that the new Action Plan will be drafted in consultation with the relevant stakeholders and implemented under the supervision of a monitoring committee. The Government further indicates that a Disability Bill aimed at promoting and protecting the rights of persons with disabilities as well as eliminating disability-related discrimination is being finalized, and a National Disability Database to track services rendered to persons with disabilities is operational. The Committee notes that the Database has already registered some 58,000 beneficiaries. The Committee notes that, according to statistics from the Training and Employment of Disabled Persons Board (TEDPB), 1,100 persons with disabilities are already registered with the TEDPB. The objectives of the TEDPB include operating and promoting schemes and projects for the training and employment of persons with disabilities. With respect to the vocational rehabilitation and employment of persons with disabilities, the Government indicates that the Employment Service of the Ministry of Labour, Industrial Relations, Employment and Training (MLIRET) registers jobseekers, including persons with disabilities, and facilitates their placement in productive and decent jobs. Upon request, lists of registered and qualified jobseekers, including persons with disabilities, are forwarded to private sector employers for subsequent selection and placement. It is to be noted that job vacancies are also disseminated on television on a daily basis through the programme “Magazine de l’Emploi et des Metiers” and are affixed on the notice boards of the 13 Employment Information Centres. Lists of vacancies are also disseminated by email to Youth Centres, Citizens Advice Bureau Offices, Women’s Centres and NGOs. The Committee notes the detailed statistics provided by the Government on the number of persons with disabilities (disaggregated by sex) placed in employment in various establishments and organisations from 2011 to 2018. In this regard, the Government indicates that since from 2015 to 2020, 315 persons with disabilities have participated in training programmes. In addition, 347 persons with disabilities were placed in employment from August 2014 to September 2020. However, the Committee notes that according to the statistics provided, the ratio of men with disabilities accessing employment (229 persons) is much higher than that of women (81 persons). The Government indicates that the TEDPB continues to promote the employment of persons with disabilities through the TEDP Act, which requires that employers with 35 or more workers must meet a 3 per cent quota of persons with disabilities. The Committee notes that in 2020, the Mauritius Institute of Training and Development (MITD) is running courses for persons with disabilities, which include courses on housekeeping, hairdressing, computer awareness and IT, automotive electricity and electronics, garment making and waiter training. It further notes that the TEDPB has employed an “Employment Disability Officer” to monitor the training programmes, to facilitate the employment of persons with disabilities while sensitizing employers on the TEDP Act. The Officer is also responsible for enlisting the services of relevant resource persons and training institutions with a view to providing needed training to person with disabilities. The Committee requests the Government to provide up-to-date, detailed information on the measures taken or envisaged in the context of the Disability Strategy and Action Plan 2014–24 and the new Action Plan 2021–2025, particularly to increase the participation rate of women with disabilities in the labour market and to ensure effective equality of treatment between men and women workers with disabilities as well as between workers with disabilities and those without disabilities. The Committee further requests the Government to provide information on the concrete impact of the pandemic on the employment situation of workers with disabilities and the diverse measures and benefits that have been made available to them to enable them to cope with the negative impacts of the crisis. The Committee also requests the Government to continue providing information on the application of the Convention in practice, including, for example, statistics disaggregated by sex, extracts from reports, and information on the status and impact of the measures adopted to promote the employment of persons with disabilities in the open labour market and all other matters related to the application of the Convention in practice. The Committee reiterates its previous request that the Government provide information on measures taken to evaluate vocational guidance, training, placement, employment and other related services to enable persons with disabilities to secure, retain and advance in employment.

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government, which answers the points raised in its previous direct request and has no further matters to raise in this regard.

The Committee notes the Government’s first report.

Article 2 of the Convention. Scope of application. The Committee notes the indication by the Government that the provisions of the Convention are applied by the Workers’ Rights Act 2019 (WRA 2019), which covers persons working under an employment agreement or a contract of apprenticeship. The Committee further notes that the WRA 2019 does not apply to public and local government officers; workers of the Pay Research Bureau, an institution mandated by the Government to review conditions of employment and organizational structures in the public sector; and atypical workers and homeworkers whose basic wage exceeds MUR 600,000 per year (approximately USD 13,866) (section 3 of the WRA 2019). Recalling that, pursuant to Article 2 of the Convention, all employed women, including those in atypical forms of dependent work must benefit from the protection set out therein, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the legislative provisions governing maternity protection for the abovementioned categories of employed women excluded from the scope of the WRA 2019, and the manner in which they guarantee the application of the Convention.

Article 3. Health protection. (i) Work prejudicial to the health of a pregnant or breastfeeding woman and her child or posing a significant risk. The Committee notes that, pursuant to sections 23(3) and 52(8)(9) of the WRA 2019, an employer shall not require a pregnant woman to perform night shift work, overtime work, or work which requires continuous standing. The Committee further notes that pregnant women engaged in the cultivation of field crop shall not be required to lift or carry any material or equipment (section 3 of the Field-crop and Orchard Workers (Remuneration) Regulations 2019). In addition, the performance of light work only is allowed for pregnant women engaged in the livestock industry (section 3 of the Livestock Workers (Remuneration) Regulations 2019). The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any other type of work or occupation that would have been determined by the competent authority to be prejudicial to the health of pregnant and breastfeeding women and their children. The Committee further requests the Government to indicate if there exists a procedure to assess the health risks for a pregnant or breastfeeding worker and her child to perform a particular type of work, and to indicate the relevant legislative provisions.

(ii) Measures ensuring that pregnant or breastfeeding women are not obliged to perform work prejudicial to their health or their children’s. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures empowering pregnant and breastfeeding women to decide not to perform work which is prejudicial to their health or to the health of their children (for example, elimination of work-related risk, an adaptation of conditions of work, a transfer to another post, or paid leave), as provided for in Article 3 of the Convention.

Article 6(6). Adequate benefits out of social assistance funds. The Committee requests the Government to indicate if women who do not qualify for maternity cash benefits under the WRA 2019, and more particularly, women who are employed in the informal economy, are entitled to cash benefits and to indicate the relevant legislative provisions.

Article 6(7). Medical care benefits. The Committee notes the indication by the Government that the population of Mauritius is entitled to free medical services in hospitals, at all times. The Committee also notes that, according to the Customer Charter of the Ministry of Health and Wellness, prenatal and postnatal medical care, as well as hospitalization are included in the list of primary health care services which are provided free of charge.

The Committee observes however that the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, in its 2018 concluding observations, expressed concern at the high rate of maternal mortality and recommended to improve access to basic prenatal and postnatal care and emergency obstetric services provided by skilled birth attendants (CEDAW/C/MUS/CO/8, paragraphs 27–28). The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the measures taken or envisaged to improve the quality and the due provision of maternity medical care benefits, in line with Article 6(7) of the Convention.

Article 8(1). Termination of employment. The Committee notes that, as per section 52(11) of the WRA 2019, an employer shall not give a notice of termination of employment for any reason to a woman worker during her maternity leave and nursing period, unless the grounds of the termination relate to the economic, technological, or structural changes affecting the employer’s activities. The Committee further notes that, pursuant to section 64(1)(a)(b) of the WRA 2019, an employer shall not terminate a workers’ employment contract on the grounds of pregnancy, during her absence on maternity leave or during the nursing period. In case of violation by an employer of section 64(1) of the WRA 2019, the court may order the payment of severance allowance to such worker if she has been employed for at least 12 months (section 70(1)(b) of the WRA 2019). The Committee requests the Government to indicate the recourses available, as well as the remedies afforded to employed women employed for less than 12 months in case of unjust dismissal related to pregnancy or maternity.

The Committee also observes that the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, in its 2019 concluding observations, expressed concern about reports that migrant workers were subjected to termination of employment during pregnancy (E/C.12/MUS/CO/5, paragraph 32). In this context, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the measures taken or envisaged to ensure that pregnant or breastfeeding migrant workers are not subject to unjust dismissal in practice.

Article 9. Prohibition of pregnancy test requirement. The Committee notes that section 5(1)(a)(b) of the WRA 2019 prohibits any discrimination in employment, including access to employment. The Committee further notes that section 5(3)(a) of the Equal Opportunities Act of 2008 prohibits discrimination on the ground of pregnancy or potential pregnancy and family responsibilities. The Committee also observes that the WRA 2019 does not contain provisions prohibiting employers from requiring a test for pregnancy or a certificate of such a test when a woman is applying for employment, as required by Article 9(2) of the Convention. In the absence of such a provision in national legislation, the Committee requests the Government to indicate how it is ensured that women who are applying for employment are not required to do a test for pregnancy or to present a certificate of such a test, pursuant to Article 9(2) of the Convention.

Application of the Convention in practice. Women workers engaged in the informal economy. The Committee notes from the information provided by the Government that, in 2018, the total number of women workers was 100,115, whereas the number of women workers engaged in the informal economy amounted to 17,076. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any measures in place to ensure that women workers in the informal economy benefit, in law and in practice, from the protection guaranteed by the Convention, including information on the activities of the labour inspectorate in this respect.

The Committee notes the Government’s second report on the application of the Maritime Labour Convention, 2006, as amended (MLC, 2006). The Committee also notes the observations made by the State and Other Employees Federation received on 29 September 2021 and requests the Government to provide its comments in this respect. The Committee further notes that the amendments to the Code approved by the International Labour Conference in 2016 and 2018 entered into force for Mauritius on 8 January 2019 and on 26 December 2020, respectively. Based on its second review of the information and documents available, the Committee draws the Government’s attention to the following issues.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. The Committee takes note of the observations of the International Transport Workers' Federation (ITF) and the International Chamber of Shipping (ICS), received by the Office on 1 and 26 October 2020 and 4 October 2021, alleging that ratifying states have failed to comply with certain provisions of the Convention during the COVID-19 pandemic. Noting with deep concern the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the protection of seafarers’ rights as laid out in the Convention, the Committee refers to its general observation of 2020 and its comments in the general report of 2021 on this issue.

In this regard, the Committee further notes that according to Merchant Shipping Notice 5 of 2020, in case a seafarer is not able to leave his/her ship after his/her contract period, a request for further extension shall be made to the Director of Shipping for any extension of the contract and seafarers shall take into consideration that for their own benefits, it might not be possible to repatriate them as soon as their contracts of employment are over due to various reasons caused by the COVID-19 situation and should try to cooperate with owners, managers of ships in charge of their repatriations. However, whenever possible, owners shall sign-off the seafarers as soon as possible after the termination of their contracts of employment and should not take advantage of the situation to delay the sending home those who are eligible. The Committee recalls that the extreme fatigue of seafarers who have been on board beyond the default 11 months maximum period of service on board not only constitutes a situation clearly hazardous for the safety and health of the seafarers concerned, but also profoundly endangers the safety of navigation in general. The Committee accordingly requests the Government to provide information on how it ensures that, in no case, seafarers on board Mauritius-flagged ships are forced to continue working on extended contractual arrangements without their formal, free and informed consent. It further requests the Government to adopt the necessary measures to ensure in practice that seafarers on board Mauritius-flagged ships are not requested to continue working beyond the default 11 months maximum period of service on board.

Article I of the Convention. General questions on application. Implementing measures. The Committee previously emphasized that some aspects of the draft Maritime Labour Act and Regulations provided were not fully in conformity with the Convention and requested the Government to provide a copy of all relevant new legislation or other regulatory instruments implementing the Convention once they are adopted. The Government indicates in its reply that a committee consisting of representatives of the Ministries concerned would be set up in order to examine all the requests and comments received so that the Maritime Labour Bill can be reviewed before its introduction to Parliament. Observing that the Convention was ratified in 2014 and that the Government has still not adopted the required legislation, the Committee requests the Government to adopt without delay the necessary measures to implement the Convention taking into account the points raised below and to provide copy of the relevant texts once adopted. The Committee again reminds the Government that it may avail itself of the technical assistance of the Office.

Article VII of the Convention. Consultations. The Committee previously noted the Government’s information that there is no shipowners’ association in Mauritius. Noting that the Government indicates that consultations on the Maritime Labour Bill will be conducted with stakeholders such as shipowners and seafarers’ unions, the Committee recalls that under Article VII of the Convention, any derogation, exemption or other flexible application for which the Convention requires consultations may, where representative organizations of shipowners or of seafarers do not exist within a Member, only be decided through consultation with the Special Tripartite Committee established in accordance with Article XIII of the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on whether organizations – or branches thereof – representing shipowners are established in Mauritius. If this is not the case, the Committee invites the Government to have recourse to the Special Tripartite Committee until shipowners’ organizations are established in the country.

Article II, paragraphs 1(f), 2, 3 and 7. Definitions and scope of application. Seafarers. National determination. The Committee requested the Government to indicate how it ensures that masters benefit from the protection afforded by the Convention. Noting the absence of reply in the Government’s report, the Committee requests the Government to adopt the necessary measures to ensure that all laws and regulations implementing the Convention apply to all seafarers as defined in Article II, paragraph 1 (f), including the master.

The Committee previously requested information on section 2 of the Merchant Shipping Act, which excludes persons who are employed on duties which are not part of a seafarer’s normal duties from the general definition of the term seafarer as well as on the draft Maritime Labour Act, which excludes from the definition of seafarer non-marine personnel employed under outsourced service agreements, the terms of which determine the conditions under which the service provider will supply the necessary personnel. The Committee notes the absence of Government’s reply on this point. The Committee recalls that for the purpose of the Convention, “seafarer” means any person who is employed or engaged or works in any capacity on board a ship to which this Convention applies, including hotel and catering staff and other personnel employed under outsourced services agreements who regularly spend more than short periods aboard. The Committee accordingly requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that non-marine personnel and those employed on duties which are not part of a seafarer’s normal duties are considered seafarers in the laws and regulations implementing the Convention.

Article II, paragraphs 1(i), 4, 5, 6 and 7. Definitions and scope of application. Ships. National determination. Ships under 200 gross tonnage. The Committee requested the Government to provide information on any decisions taken under sections 3(3) and 229 of the Merchant Shipping Act with respect to the application of the Convention to all categories of ships. Noting that the Government does not provide information on this point, the Committee reiterates its previous request.

The Committee previously requested further information on the scope of application of the draft Maritime Labour Act which applies to “a Mauritius ship of more than 200 gross tons engaged in international voyages, wherever it is”, and does not apply to pleasure vessels as defined in the Tourism Authority Act 2006, as amended. The Government indicates that “ship” is defined in part I of the Maritime Labour Bill and that in the case of ships under 200 gross tons which are not engaged in international voyages, measures under Article II, paragraph 6 are still under examination. Noting that the Government does not provide the text of the Maritime Labour Bill, the Committee recalls that the Convention applies to all ships as defined in Article II, paragraph 1(i), regardless of tonnage, whether publicly or privately owned, ordinarily engaged in commercial activities, other than those excluded by Article II, paragraph 4. The Committee also recalls that Article II, paragraph 6, provides additional flexibility, under certain conditions, with respect to the application of “certain details of the Code”, i.e. Standards and Guidelines, but only to ships of less than 200 gross tonnage not engaged in international voyages, and only “to the extent that the subject matter is dealt with differently by national laws or regulations or collective bargaining agreements or other measures”. The Committee underlines, however, that Article II, paragraph 6, does not provide for the exclusion of a category of ships from the protection offered by the Convention. The Committee therefore requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that the national laws, regulations and other measures giving effect to the Convention apply to all ships covered by its provisions. The Committee further requests the Government to provide information on any determination made under Article II, paragraph 6.

Regulation 1.1 and Standard A1.1, paragraph 4. Minimum age. Hazardous work. The Committee requested the Government to indicate the measures taken to comply with this requirement of the Convention. Noting that the Government does not provide information on this point, the Committee requests the Government to adopt without delay the necessary measures to give effect to Standard A1.1, paragraph 4.

Regulation 1.2 and Standard A1.2, paragraph 5. Medical certificate. Right to have a further examination. The Committee previously noted that section 12 of the draft Maritime Labour Act, according to which the review of the medical fitness of the seafarer by another approved medical practitioner shall not be permitted if the Director is satisfied that such a review will not produce a different result, was not in conformity with the Convention. Noting the absence of reply on this issue, the Committee requests the Government to adopt the necessary measures to comply with Standard A1.2, paragraph 5.

Regulation 1.4 and the Code. Recruitment and placement. Noting that ten private recruitment and placement services operate in Mauritius, the Committee requested the Government to indicate the national provisions giving effect to Standard A1.4, paragraphs 2 and 5. The Committee also requested the Government to provide information on the supervision of all recruitment and placement services operating in the territory and the investigation of complaints (Standard A1.4, paragraphs 2, 6 and 7), as well as on the laws, regulations or other measures which conform with the minimum requirements for the operation of private seafarer recruitment and placement services pursuant to Standard A1.4, paragraph 5 (prohibition of blacklists, no fees or charges for the seafarer, the keeping of registers, qualification of seafarers, protection of seafarers in foreign ports, management of complaints, establishment of a compulsory insurance scheme to compensate seafarers). Noting the absence of information on this point, the Committee requests the Government to adopt without delay the necessary measures to implement these requirements of the Convention.

Regulation 2.1 and the Code. Seafarers’ employment agreements. In its previous comment, the Committee noted that the Merchant Shipping Act and the legislative texts in force do not give effect to the detailed requirements of Regulation 2.1 and Standard A2.1, whereas the draft Maritime Labour Act contains provisions implementing the Convention. Recalling once again the crucial importance of seafarers’ employment agreements for seafarers, the Committee requests the Government to adopt the necessary measures without delay to ensure the full conformity of the national legislation with Regulation 2.1 and Standard A2.1. With regard to minimum notice periods, the Committee noted that section 24(3) of the draft Maritime Labour Act provides that, except as may be provided otherwise in any applicable collective agreement, if a seafarer terminates his seafarer’s employment agreement for compassionate or other urgent reasons in accordance with section 2(b), this must be without penalty to the seafarer. The Committee recalled that Standard A2.1, paragraph 6 does not allow collective agreements to provide any kind of penalty against a seafarer who terminates his seafarer’s employment agreement for compassionate or other urgent reasons. The Committee therefore once again requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that the possibility of any kind of penalty against a seafarer who terminates his seafarer’s employment agreement for compassionate or other urgent reasons is removed from the draft Act before its enactment.

Regulations 2.1 and 2.2 and Standards A2.1, paragraph 7 and Standard A2.2, paragraph 7. Seafarers’ employment agreements and wages. Captivity as a result of acts of piracy or armed robbery against ships. In relation to the 2018 amendments to the Code, the Committee draws the Government’s attention to the following questions included in the revised report form for the Convention: (a) do laws or regulations provide that a seafarer’s employment agreement shall continue to have effect while the seafarer is held captive on or off the ship as a result of acts of piracy or armed robbery against ships?; (b) how are the terms piracy and armed robbery against ships defined under national legislation? (Standard A2.1, paragraph 7); and (c) do laws or regulations provide that wages and other entitlements under the seafarers’ employment agreement, relevant collective bargaining agreement or applicable national laws, including the remittance of any allotments, shall continue to be paid during the entire period of captivity and until the seafarer is released and duly repatriated or, where the seafarer dies while in captivity, until the date of death in accordance with national legislation? (Standard A2.2, paragraph 7). The Committee requests the Government to reply to the abovementioned questions, indicating in each case the applicable national provisions.

Regulation 2.2 and the Code. Wages. The Committee previously noted that, while the Merchant Shipping Act and the legislative texts in force provided by the Government do not give effect to the detailed requirements of Regulation 2.2 and Standard A2.2, the draft Maritime Labour Act contains relevant provisions implementing the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to adopt the necessary measures without delay to ensure the conformity of its legislation with these provisions of the Convention, giving due consideration to the guidance provided in Guideline B2.2.

Regulation 2.3 and the Code. Hours of work and hours of rest. The Committee noted that the Merchant Shipping (Safe Manning, Hours of Work and Watchkeeping) Regulations 2017 do not apply to pleasure craft as defined in the Pleasure Craft Act 1992 and to ships not exceeding 15 net tonnes or under 24 metres in length. Noting that the Government does not provide information in reply to this point, the Committee once again requests the Government to indicate how effect is given to this provision of the Convention in the case of ships that are not covered by the Merchant Shipping (Safe Manning, Hours of Work and Watchkeeping) Regulations 2017.

Regulation 2.3 and Standard A2.3, paragraphs 6 and 13. Hours of work and hours of rest. Division of hours of rest. Exceptions. The Committee previously noted that Regulation 7(5) of the Merchant Shipping (Safe Manning, Hours of Work and Watchkeeping) Regulations 2017 allows for exceptions to the minimum rest periods set out in Standard A2.3, paragraph 6. Recalling that any exception to the limits set out in Standard A2.3, including those provided for in the STCW, as amended, can be made only through collective agreements, the Committee requested the Government to provide information on the manner in which it ensures that any exceptions to the limits on the minimum hours of rest follow the requirements of Standard A2.3, paragraph 13. Noting that the requested information was not provided, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure full conformity with Standard A2.3, paragraph 13 of the Convention.

Regulation 2.3 and Standard A2.3, paragraphs 7, 8, 9 and 14. Hours of work and hours of rest. Drills. On-call Work. Immediate safety and distress at sea. The Committee noted that Regulation 9 of the Merchant Shipping (Safe Manning, Hours of Work and Watchkeeping) Regulations 2017 does not specify the requirements relating to granting compensatory rest in case of call-outs to work, performing emergency duties or minimizing disturbance of rest periods during drills, in accordance with Standard A2.3, paragraphs 7, 8 and 14. Noting that clause 9 of the Collective Agreement 2013–16, transmitted by the Government, grants seafarers the right to be compensated for overtime hours by time off in lieu of payment, but does not contain a definition of overtime, the Committee requested the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to give effect to Standard A2.3, paragraphs 7, 8, 9 and 14. Noting the absence of reply in the Government’s report, the Committee once again requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to comply with these provisions of the Convention.

Regulation 2.4 and the Code. Entitlement to leave. In its previous comment, the Committee noted that, while the Merchant Shipping Act and the legislative texts in force provided by the Government do not give effect to the detailed requirements of Regulation 2.4 and Standard A2.4, the draft Maritime Labour Act contains provisions implementing the Convention. The Committee once again requests the Government to adopt the necessary measures without delay to ensure the conformity of the national legislation with these provisions of the Convention.

Regulation 2.5 and the Code. Repatriation. The Committee noted that, while the Merchant Shipping Act and the legislative texts currently in force provided by the Government do not give effect to the detailed requirements of Regulation 2.5, the draft Maritime Labour Act contains provisions implementing the Convention. The Committee once again requests the Government to adopt the necessary measures without delay to ensure the conformity of the national legislation with these provisions of the Convention.

The Committee also noted that section 54(b) provides that a shipowner is prohibited from recovering the cost of repatriation from the seafarer’s wages or other entitlements except if: (i) permitted by any applicable collective agreement; and (ii) the seafarer has been found, in accordance with any applicable collective agreement, to be in serious default of his employment obligations. Recalling that, only the second hypothesis is envisaged in Standard A2.5.1, paragraph 3, the Committee requests the Government to review the proposed draft Act to ensure that it is in full compliance with this provision of the Convention.

The Committee further noted that section 57(1) of the draft Maritime Labour Act provides a list of the cases in which the flag State and the Government of the Republic of Mauritius, as the case may be, shall arrange for the repatriation of the seafarer. The Committee notes however that the repatriation of a foreign seafarer employed on board a Mauritian ship is not envisaged in section 57. Recalling that, in accordance with Standard A2.5.1, paragraph 5(a), the competent authority of the Member whose flag the ship flies shall arrange for repatriation of the seafarers concerned without regard to the nationality of the seafarer, the Committee requests the Government to indicate how effect is given to this provision of the Convention.

Regulation 2.5 and Standard A2.5.2. Repatriation. Financial security. Abandonment. In its previous comment, the Committee requested the Government to indicate the national provisions implementing the 2014 amendments to the Code of the Convention. The Committee takes note of the Government’s indication in this regard that the draft Maritime Labour Act is being amended concerning the provision of an expeditious and effective financial security system to assist seafarers in case of their abandonment. The Committee requests the Government to adopt the necessary measures to give effect to Regulation 2.5 and Standard A2.5.2 and to reply to the questions identified in its previous request. The Committee also requests the Government to provide a copy of a model certificate or other documentary evidence of financial security containing the information required in Appendix A2-I of the Convention (Standard A2.5.2, paragraph 7).

Regulation 2.7 and Standard A2.7, paragraphs 2 and 3. Manning levels. Excessive hours of work. Food and catering. The Committee requested the Government to provide information on how, when determining manning levels, the competent authority takes into account the requirements set out in Regulation 3.2 and Standard A3.2 concerning food and catering. The Committee notes that section 31 of the draft Maritime Labour Act provides for the requirements that all Mauritius ships have a sufficient number of seafarers to ensure that the ship is operated safely, efficiently and with due regard to security under all conditions. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the procedures adopted to determine, approve or revise manning levels, specifying how they take into account: (i) the need to avoid or minimize excessive hours of work and limit fatigue; and (ii) the requirements set out in Regulation 3.2 and Standard A3.2 concerning food and catering. It also requests the Government to supply for each type of ship (passenger, cargo, etc.), a typical example of a safe manning document or equivalent issued by the competent authority (Standard A2.7, paragraph 1), together with information showing the type of ship concerned, its gross tonnage and the number of seafarers normally working on it.

Regulation 3.1 and the Code. Accommodation and recreational facilities. Noting that the Government does not provide information in respect to its previous comment, the Committee once again requests the Government to indicate how effect is given to the requirements of the Convention respecting accommodation and recreational facilities on board ships flying the Mauritius flag. The Committee also reiterates its request to the Government to review sections 64, 66(q), 68(4), 70 and 75(1)(b) of the draft Maritime Labour Act in order to ensure that exemptions from the requirements regarding accommodation and recreational facilities are only permitted after consultation with the shipowners’ and the seafarers’ organizations concerned and within the limitations provided for under Standard A3.1, paragraphs 19, 20 and 21 of the Convention.

Regulation 3.2 and the Code. Food and catering. The Committee previously noted that the Merchant Shipping Act and the legislative texts in force provided by the Government do not give full effect to the requirements of Regulation 3.2 and the respective provisions of the Code. The Committee also noted the Government’s reference to sections 8, and 79 to 83 of the draft Maritime Labour Act, which contain provisions related to food and catering. The Committee requests the Government to adopt without delay the necessary measures to give effect to the provisions of the Convention and to ensure that: (i) ships that fly its flag meet the minimum standards with respect to food and drink supplies, having regard to the duration and nature of the voyage (Standard A3.2, paragraph 2(a)); (ii) all ships operating with a prescribed manning of ten or more carry a fully qualified cook (Standard A3.2, paragraph 5); (iii) in circumstances of exceptional necessity, the limitation of a dispensation permitting a non-fully qualified cook to service in a specified ship only until the next convenient port of call or for a period not exceeding one month (Standard A3.2, paragraph 6); (iv) documented inspections are carried out in scheduled frequency, in accordance with the ongoing compliance procedure under Title 5 (Standard A3.2, paragraph 7); and (v) ships’ cooks are at least 18 years old (Standard A3.2, paragraph 8),

Regulation 4.1 and the Code. Medical care on board ship and ashore. Noting the Government’s reference to the draft Maritime Labour Act, the Committee requested the Government to provide detailed information on the measures currently in force regarding medical care on board ship and ashore. Noting the absence of information in this respect in the Government’s report, the Committee requests again the Government to provide detailed information on the measures in force that give effect to Regulation 4.1 and Standard A4.1, including on the medicine chest and the medical equipment that has to be carried on board Mauritius ships, in accordance with Standard A4.1, paragraph 4(a). The Committee also requests again the Government to indicate the provisions that give effect to Regulation 4.1, paragraph 3.

Regulation 4.2 and the Code. Shipowners’ liability. In its previous comment, the Committee requested further information on the implementation of these requirements of the Convention. Noting the absence of reply on this point, the Committee requests the Government to provide detailed information on how in practice the Workmen’s Compensation Act applies to seafarers and to indicate any other measures adopted to give full effect to Regulation 4.2 and the Code.

The Committee observed that section 80(2) of the Merchant Shipping Act, which provides that, where a seafarer dies while employed in a Mauritius ship and is buried or cremated outside Mauritius, the expenses of his burial or cremation shall be borne by the person employing him, is not in compliance with Standard A4.2.1, paragraph 1(d). The Committee also noted that clause 4.5.1 of the Collective Agreement limits the liability of the shipowners to sickness on board, which is not in conformity with the minimum requirements set out in the Convention. Recalling the requirement to adopt laws and regulations on the shipowner’s liability, the Committee requests again the Government to provide detailed information on the national measures adopted or envisaged to give effect to Standard A4.2.1, paragraphs 2–4.

The Committee further noted that sections 92, 93 and 94 of the draft Maritime Labour Act appear to introduce certain limits to the shipowner’s liability that are not set out in the currently existing legislation. The Committee requests again the Government to ensure that in no case shall the ratification of the Convention be used as a basis for reducing existing levels of protection (article 19(8) of the ILO Constitution).

Regulation 4.2 and Standards A4.2.1 and A4.2.2. Shipowners’ liability. Financial security in the event of death or long-term disability. In its previous comment, the Committee requested the Government to indicate the national provisions implementing the 2014 amendments to the Code. The Committee takes note of the Government’s indication in this regard that Part XIII of the draft Maritime Labour Act, concerning shipowners’ liability in the event of the death or long-term disability of seafarers is being amended. The Committee requests the Government to adopt legislation giving effect to the 2014 amendments to Regulation 4.2 and Standards A4.2.1 and A4.2.2 and to reply to the relevant questions identified in its previous request. The Committee also requests the Government to provide a copy of a model certificate or other documentary evidence of financial security containing the information required in Appendix A4-I of the Convention (Standard A4.2.1, paragraph 14).

Regulation 4.3 and the Code. Health and safety protection and accident prevention. The Committee previously noted that while the draft Maritime Labour Act contains relevant provisions giving effect to the Convention, the Merchant Shipping Act and the other national measures in force provided by the Government do not give effect to the detailed requirements of Regulation 4.3 and Standard A4.3. The Committee therefore requests again the Government to adopt the necessary measures without delay to ensure the conformity of the national legislation with these provisions of the Convention.

Regulation 4.4 and Standard A4.4, paragraph 3. Access to shore-based welfare facilities. Welfare boards. The Committee notes that there is one shore-based welfare facility in Mauritius. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any developments regarding the establishment of a welfare board for regularly reviewing welfare facilities and services.

Regulation 4.5 and the Code. Social security. Noting the absence of information in reply to its previous request, the Committee requests again the Government to provide detailed explanations on the measures adopted or envisaged to give effect to Regulation 4.5 and the Code.

Regulation 5.1 and the Code. Flag State responsibilities. Noting that, although the draft Maritime Labour Act contains relevant provisions implementing the Convention, the Merchant Shipping Act and the other national measures in force do not give effect to the detailed requirements of Regulation 5.1, the Committee requests the Government to adopt the necessary measures without delay to ensure compliance with all the aspects of this provision of the Convention.

Regulation 5.1.2 and the Code. Flag State responsibilities. Authorization of recognized organizations. The Committee previously requested the Government to provide detailed information on the national measures adopted to give effect to Regulation 5.1.2. The Committee notes that section 7(3) of the Merchant Shipping Act allows generally for surveys and inspections of ships to be carried out by a Classification Society, that the Merchant Shipping (Classification Society) Regulations 2017 include a list of recognized organizations and that Circular Note 1 of 2020, which makes available guidelines to Recognized Organizations conducting surveys on behalf of the Republic of Mauritius, indicates that ROs are to provide the types of statutory certification and services as per their respective Agreements with the Government. The Committee notes however that the legislative and regulatory texts currently in force do not specify if inspection or certification of compliance with the Convention have been delegated to recognized organizations, and the Government does not indicate which functions they have been authorized to carry out on its behalf within the scope of the Convention. The Committee therefore requests again the Government to indicate the measures taken to give effect to Regulation 5.1.2 and to provide an example of an agreement with a classification society (Regulation 5.1.2, paragraph 2).

Regulation 5.1.3 and the Code. Flag State responsibilities. Maritime Labour Certificate and Declaration of Maritime Labour Compliance. Recalling the significance of establishing a system for ensuring compliance with the requirements of Regulation 5.1.3, the Committee requests the Government to adopt without delay the necessary measures to give effect to this provision of the Convention and to supply a copy of the DMLC, Part I, and an example of DMLC, Part II, which has been drawn up by a shipowner and certified by the competent authority.

Regulation 5.1.4 and the Code. Flag State responsibilities. Inspection and enforcement. In its previous comment, the Committee noted that section 128 of the draft Maritime Labour Act does not give full effect to Regulation 5.1.4, paragraph 1, and Standard A5.1.4, paragraphs 1 and 4, which require ships to be regularly inspected regarding the requirements of the entire Convention, and not only the specific working and living conditions set out in the DMLC. The Committee also requested the Government to indicate the applicable provisions concerning the qualifications and training required for flag State inspectors carrying out inspections under the Convention, as well as their status and conditions of service. Noting that the Government does not provide information on this point, the Committee requests again the Government to indicate the measures taken to give full effect to Regulation 5.1.4.

Regulation 5.1.5 and the Code. Flag State responsibilities. On-board complaints procedures. The Committee notes that, while the Merchant Shipping Act and the legislative texts currently in force provided by the Government do not give effect to Regulation 5.1.5, the draft Maritime Labour Act contains provisions which would implement certain requirements of the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to adopt without delay the necessary laws and regulations to give effect to Regulation 5.1.5, including namely: (i) the requirement of fair, effective and expeditious handling of seafarer complaints related to any matter that is alleged to constitute a breach of the requirements of the Convention (Regulation 5.1.5, paragraph 1); (ii) the prohibition and penalization of any kind of victimization of a seafarer for filing a complaint (Regulation 5.1.5, paragraph 2); (iii) the right of the seafarer to be accompanied during complaint procedure (Standard A5.1.5, paragraph 3); and (iv) the provision to seafarers of a copy of the on-board complaint procedures applicable on the ship (in addition to a copy of their seafarers’ employment agreement) including the relevant contact information of the competent authority (Standard A5.1.5, paragraph 4).

Regulation 5.1.6, paragraph 1. Flag State responsibilities. Marine casualties. Official inquiry. The Committee previously requested the Government to indicate the measures taken to give full effect to Regulation 5.1.6. The Committee notes that sections 10, 11 and 105 of the Merchant Shipping Act 2007, the provisions of the Merchant Shipping (Preliminary Inquiries and Formal Investigations of Shipping Casualties) Regulations 2017 as well as section 147 of the draft maritime Labour Act concern inquiries into marine casualties. The Committee notes however that these provisions do not ensure that an official inquiry shall be held in all cases of serious marine casualty leading to injury or loss of life and that the final report of the inquiry is normally made public, as required by Regulation 5.1.6. The Committee therefore requests the Government to take the necessary measures to amend its legislation to give effect to this provision of the Convention.

Regulation 5.2.1 and the Code. Inspections in port. The Committee previously noted that, while the Merchant Shipping Act and the other national measures in force in Mauritius do not give effect to the detailed requirements of Regulation 5.2.1, the draft Maritime Labour Act contains relevant provisions implementing the Convention. The Committee therefore requests again the Government to adopt the necessary measures without delay to ensure the conformity of the national legislation with these requirements of the Convention. The Committee also notes that Mauritius participates in the Indian Ocean MoU, and that the MLC, 2006 is one of the instruments on which the regional port state control under the Indian Ocean MoU is based. The Committee requests the Government to provide the requested documents and statistics (or alternatively a copy of the report to the PMoU) concerning port State inspection activities carried out according to Standard A5.2.1, including the number of authorized officers appointed by the competent authority.

Regulation 5.2.2 and the Code. Port State responsibilities. Onshore seafarer complaint-handling procedures. The Committee noted that, while the Merchant Shipping Act and the other national measures in force do not give effect to the detailed requirements of Regulation 5.2.2 and Standard A5.2.2, the draft Maritime Labour Act contains relevant provisions in this respect. The Committee therefore requests again the Government to adopt the necessary measures without delay to ensure the conformity of the national legislation with these requirements of the Convention.

Additional documents requested. The Committee again requests the Government to provide the following documents and information: an example of the approved document for seafarers’ record of employment and a standard form example of a seafarers’ employment agreement (Standard A2.1, paragraphs 1–3); an example of the kind of documentation that is accepted or issued with respect to the financial security that must be provided by shipowners (Regulation 2.5, paragraph 2); an example of the standard medical report form for seafarers and a copy of the requirements for the medicine chest and medical equipment and for the medical guide (Standard A4.1, paragraphs 2 and 4(a)); an example of the kind of documentation that is accepted or issued with respect to the financial security that must be provided by shipowners (Standard A4.2.1, paragraph 1(b)); an example of a document (e.g. Part II of the DMLC) outlining a shipowner’s practices or on-board programmes (including risk evaluation) for preventing occupational accidents, injuries and diseases (Standard A4.3, paragraphs 1(c), 2(b) and 8); a copy of the relevant national guidelines (Regulation 4.3, paragraph 2); a copy of the document(s) used for reporting unsafe conditions or occupational accidents on board ship (Standard A4.3, paragraph 1(d)); a report or other document containing information on the objectives and standards established for your country’s inspection and certification system, including the procedures for its assessment (Regulation 5.1.1); a copy of the annual reports on inspection activities; a standard document issued to or signed by inspectors setting out their functions and powers; and a copy of any national guidelines issued to flag State inspectors; a copy of any documentation that is available informing seafarers and interested others about the procedures for making a complaint (in confidence) regarding a breach of the requirements of the Convention (Standard A5.1.4, paragraphs 5, 7 and 13); a copy of the form used for an inspector’s report (Standard A5.1.4, paragraph 12); a copy of the model for on-board complaint procedures, if developed, or of typical procedures that are followed on ships that fly the national flag (Regulation 5.1.5); a copy of any national guidelines issued to inspectors in implementation of Standard A5.2.1, paragraph 7; and a copy of a document, if any, that describes the onshore complaint-handling procedures (Regulation 5.2.2).

[The Government is asked to reply in full to the present comments in 2024.]

In order to provide a comprehensive view of the issues relating to the application of ratified Conventions on occupational safety and health (OSH), the Committee considers it appropriate to examine Conventions Nos 155 (occupational safety and health) and 187 (promotional framework for OSH) together.

I. Action at the national level

A. National policy

Article 2(3) of Convention No. 187. Measures that could be taken, in consultation with the social partners, to ratify relevant OSH Conventions. Following its previous comment, the Committee notes that the following conventions were examined by the tripartite Advisory Council for OSH: the Asbestos Convention, 1986 (No. 162), the Occupational Safety and Health (Dock Work) Convention, 1979 (No.152), the Hygiene (Commerce and Offices) Convention, 1964 (No. 120), the Occupational Health Services Convention, 1985 (No. 161), the Safety and Health in Construction Convention, 1988 (No.167), and the Safety and Health in Agriculture Convention, 2001 (No. 184). The Committee notes that the Council has reviewed several ILO Conventions and Recommendations with a view to using them to update the national OSH legislation and improve working conditions. It takes note of the legislation and guidelines examined by the ACOSH. The Committee takes note of this information, which addresses its previous request.

Article 5(b) of Convention No. 155. Relationships between the material elements of work and the persons who carry out or supervise the work. In its previous comment, the Committee noted that a number of elements of Article 5(b) of the Convention do not seem to be covered by the OSH policy or legislation, including the adaptation of working time, the organization of work and work processes to the physical and mental capacities of the workers. The Committee requested the Government to provide further information on the extent to which the national OSH policy takes into account all the elements listed in Article 5(b) of the Convention. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that section 5(1) of the OSH Act 2005, which requires employers to ensure the safety and health of their employees, is being amended to include “mental health” in the definition of health. The Government also refers to the Risk Assessment Guidelines 2011, which are intended to provide guidance to employers on the hazards to be considered when carrying out the risk assessment. The types of hazards to be considered are: chemical, mechanical, physical, biological, psychosocial, environmental, fire and ergonomic. The Risk Assessment Guidelines also require employers to take into consideration workers with incapacities, young/old workers and pregnant workers. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the amendment of section 5(1) of the OSH Act and to provide a copy once adopted.

Article 5(e) of Convention No. 155. Spheres of action in the national OSH policy. Protection of workers and their representatives from disciplinary measures. In its previous comment, the Committee requested the Government to provide information on the measures taken to ensure that workers and their representatives are protected from disciplinary measures as a result of actions properly taken by them. The Committee notes that the Government refers to section 15(2) of the OSH Act, which provides that no civil or criminal action, or any form of disciplinary proceedings, shall lie against any employee as a result of a complaint made in good faith against his employer under the Act. The Committee further notes that section 23(7) of the OSH Act provides that no civil, criminal or disciplinary action shall lie against a member of the Safety and Health Committee in respect of anything done in good faith under the Act. The Committee takes note of this information, which addresses its previous request.

Article 14 of Convention No. 155. Measures for the inclusion of questions of occupational safety and health at all levels of education and training. In its previous comment, the Committee noted that educational institutions at the primary, secondary, tertiary and vocational levels have included occupational safety and health questions in their courses. The Committee notes that the National OSH Programme provides for the introduction of OSH curricula at all levels of education and supporting research work in collaboration with universities and professional institutions. The Committee requests the Government to provide detailed information on the measures taken with a view to promoting, in a manner appropriate to national conditions and practice, the inclusion of questions of occupational safety and health and the working environment at all levels of education and training, including higher technical, medical and professional education, in a manner meeting the training needs of all workers.

B. National system

Article 11(b) of Convention No. 155. Functions to be carried out progressively including the determination of work processes and of substances and agents the exposure to which is to be controlled by the competent authority or authorities; health hazards due to the simultaneous exposure to several substances or agents. Following its previous comment, the Committee notes the Government’s reference to the Dangerous Chemical Control Act 2004 (DCCA). The Committee notes that, under section 7 of the DCCA, the Dangerous Chemicals Control Board is responsible for, among other things, classifying dangerous chemicals after consultation with the Advisory Council on Dangerous Products, considering applications for the grant of licences, permits and authorizations, issuing prohibition notices and registering dangerous chemicals. Furthermore, the Committee notes that the DCCA lists the dangerous and extremely dangerous chemicals, the prohibited chemicals, the enforcing agencies, the measures to be taken regarding scheduled operation, and that it regulates the transport, storage and handling of dangerous chemicals. In addition, the Committee notes the Government’s reference to the OSH (Noise at Work) Regulation 2012, which requires employers to ensure that workers receive appropriate medical surveillance; the OSH (Control of Asbestos at Work) Regulation 2014, which relates to the prohibition of asbestos; and section 8 of the OSH Act 2005, which prohibits the employment of young workers in certain activities. Finally, the Government indicates that employers should consider simultaneous exposure during risk assessment. The Committee takes note of this information, which addresses its previous request.

Article 11(c) of Convention No. 155 and Article 4(3)(f) and (g) of Convention No. 187. Establishment and application of procedures for the notification of occupational accidents and diseases by insurance institutions. Collaboration with insurance and social security schemes. Further to its previous comment, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that the OSH Act 2005 is being amended to include the reporting of occupational accidents by insurance companies. In addition, the Committee notes that occupational accidents are reported to the OSH Division, under the Ministry of Labour, Human Resource Development and Training, and that occupational diseases are reported to the Occupational Health Unit of the Ministry of Health and Wellness. Occupational industrial injuries are reported to the Ministry of Social Security and National Solidarity to obtain industrial injury benefits, as the self-employed and employees are entitled to industrial injury benefit and disablement benefit under the Social Contribution and Social Benefits Act 2021. The Workmen’s Compensation Act 1931 applies where, in any employment, a worker suffers personal injury by accident arising out of and in the course of employment. Finally, the Committee notes that an analysis of accidents reported to the OSH Division is carried out on a yearly basis. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any developments regarding the revision of the OSH Act to give full effect to Article 11(c) of the Convention.

Article 11(e) of Convention No. 155. Annual publication of information on the measures taken in pursuance of the national policy. Further to its previous comment, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that data on the number of notifiable fatal accidents, notifiable non-fatal accidents and non-notifiable accidents, as well as the number of cases brought to the courts are published on the website of the Ministry. The Committee notes that the Government does not provide information on the effect given to Article 11(e) regarding the annual publication of information on the measures taken in pursuance of the national OSH policy and on occupational diseases and injuries arising in the course of or in connection with work. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the measures progressively taken to give full effect to Article 11(e).

Article 4(3)(h) of Convention No. 187. Micro-enterprises, small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and the informal economy. Following its previous comment, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that OSH training and advice is provided free of charge to all stakeholders, including micro-enterprises, SMEs and the informal economy. The Committee further notes that, in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, and to address the economic hardship of the self-employed, micro-enterprises, SMEs and the informal economy, the Government has established the Self-employed Assistance Scheme and the Government Wage Assistance Scheme. In this regard, the Government indicates that, to benefit from these schemes, the self-employed and employees in the informal economy had to be registered with the Mauritius Revenue Authority, which resulted in a significant decrease in the number of persons working in the informal sector. The Committee requests the Government to continue providing information on the support mechanisms adopted for a progressive improvement of occupational safety and health conditions in micro-enterprises, small and medium-sized enterprises and the informal economy.

C. National programme

Article 5(1) and (2)(c) and (e) of Convention No. 187. Formulation, implementation, monitoring, evaluation and periodic review of the national OSH programme. Requirements of the national programme. Further to its previous comment, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that the 2009 National Occupational Safety and Health Profile is being reviewed with the assistance of the ILO to identify challenges in existing and emerging sectors in Mauritius and to propose measures to mitigate the risks and overcome obstacles. The Committee notes that an updated National Occupational Safety and Health Programme will be developed accordingly. Finally, it notes the activities carried out in the area of OSH in the context of the implementation of the Decent Work Country Programme 2012–14. The Committee requests the Government to continue providing information on the evaluation and periodical review of the national OSH programme. Moreover, it requests the Government to provide information on the outcome of the consultations held in this regard. Finally, the Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures adopted to ensure that the national OSH programme is formulated and reviewed on the basis of the analysis of the national OSH situation, and includes objectives, targets and progress indicators.

II. Action at the level of the enterprise

Article 19(b) and (c) of Convention No. 155. Rights of representatives of workers in the field of occupational safety and health. In its previous comment, the Committee noted the Government’s indication that the necessary amendments were being made to the OSH Act in order to implement these provisions of the Convention. The Committee notes that the Government has not provided information in this regard. The Committee once again requests the Government to provide information on any progress made in the adoption of the amendments to the OSH Act on this subject, and particularly on the manner in which they give effect to Article 19(b) and (c) of the Convention.

Article 19(e) of Convention No. 155. Inquiries by workers and their representatives, and their consultation on all aspects of OSH. Further to its previous comment, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that section 20 of the OSH Act 2005 is being amended. It indicates that once this section has been amended, following a request made by an employee, the employer shall within 28 days of a written request made by an employee, communicate to him the findings of the relevant part of the risk assessment in relation to the risks to which he is exposed whilst at work. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any progress in the adoption of this amendment to the OSH Act, and to communicate a copy of the amended Act once it becomes available.

Article 20 of Convention No. 155 and Article 4(2)(d) of Convention No. 187. Cooperation between management, workers and their representatives. Further to its previous request on the arrangements made to ensure cooperation between management and workers and/or their representatives within undertakings employing fewer than 50 workers, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that, under the Risk Assessment Guidelines, it is recommended that the team that carries out the assessment shall, in so far as is reasonably practicable, consist of both employees’ and employer’s representatives. It should normally include safety and health personnel, safety and health representatives, a representative of the maintenance team and where necessary specialists in specific fields. The Committee takes note of this information, which addresses its previous request.

The Committee takes note of the supplementary information provided by the Government in light of the decision adopted by the Governing Body at its 338th Session (June 2020). The Committee proceeded with the examination of the application of the Convention on the basis of the supplementary information received from the Government this year (see articles 1(2) and 10 below), as well as on the basis of the information at its disposal in 2019.

Articles 1(2) and 6 of the Convention. Contribution of the national public employment service to employment. Encouraging full use of employment service facilities. The Committee takes note of the Government’s indication that the Employment Service, operating under the Ministry of Labour, Human Resource Development and Training (MLHRDT) is in the process of drafting a National Employment Policy with the participation of the social partners. It further notes that the Government Programme 2015-2019 provides for the creation of a National Employment Agency, to be referred to as the National Employment Department (NED). The Committee notes that section 4 of the 2017 National Employment Act (NEA) provides for the creation of the NED; however, the Government indicates that the NEA has not yet been promulgated. The Government adds that actions have nevertheless already been initiated in the areas of training, restructuring of employment information centres and provision of equipment. In this regard, the Committee notes with interest the range of measures taken by the Government to promote employment. The Committee notes that the Youth Employment Programme (YEP), launched by the Ministry of Finance and Economic Development in 2013, was transferred to the MLHRDT in February 2015. The YEP aims to assist young persons between the ages of 16 and 35 to obtain training and placement in employment. In its supplementary report, the Government reports that, as of 31 August 2020, the YEP had registered 37,599 young people and placed 23,628 in employment, out of which 10,699 (45 per cent) were men, compared to 12,929 (55 per cent) women. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that female unemployment in Mauritius is approximately twice that of male unemployment. Accordingly, in 2015, the MLHRDT introduced the Back to Work Programme (BTW) for women over the age of 35 to help them enter or re-enter the labour force. The BTW provides eligible participants with a paid one-year placement and training opportunities. As of 31 August 2020, the BTW programme had 4,723 women registered in its database and had placed 1,265 in employment. A Dual Training Programme (DTP) was also introduced in 2015, which consists of a mix of practical on-the-job training and classroom studies. The Government indicates that DTP courses are selected and designed according to the specific needs of employers, with industry associations and training institutions collaborating in designing and developing diploma/degree courses to be offered on a dual basis. The Human Resources Development Council (HRDC) subsidizes 50 per cent of the training costs up to Rs 50,000 per year for each trainee, as well as refunding a monthly stipend of Rs 6,000 per trainee for up to three years. As of 31 August 2020, 46 companies were participating in the DTP and 264 trainees had been placed. Moreover, the Government launched a Trainee Engineer Scheme (TES) in September 2016. The supplementary information provided by the Government indicates that the BTW has registered 4,723 women and placed 1,265 in employment. The Committee recalls that the public employment service is one of the necessary institutions to ensure the realization of full employment. In conjunction with the Private Employment Agencies Convention, 1997 (No. 181), Convention No. 88 forms a necessary building block for employment growth (2010 General Survey concerning employment instruments, paras. 785–790). The Committee requests the Government to communicate information on the current status of the National Employment Policy and to transmit a copy as soon as it is adopted. It further requests the Government to provide updated information with regard to the establishment of the National Employment Department upon promulgation of the National Employment Act, 2017, as well as with respect to other measures taken to build institutions for the realization of full employment. The Committee also invites the Government, in consultation with the social partners, to consider the possibility of ratifying the Employment Policy Convention, 1964 (No. 122), a priority governance instrument which, taken together with the constellation of employment instruments provides a framework for the realization of the right to work and education for all (2010 General Survey, paragraph 789).

Articles 4 and 5. Participation of the social partners. The Committee notes that section 12 of the NEA provides for the creation of a National Employment Advisory Committee, which will include representatives from workers’ and employers’ organizations, to advise the Minister on employment-related matters such as: employment policies and strategies; training and placement schemes; labour market trends; linkages between education and training systems and the workplace; and measures to reduce mismatches between demand and supply of labour. Nevertheless, the Government reports that the NEA, adopted in October 2017, has not yet been promulgated and that, as a result, the Committee has not yet been established. The Committee also notes that the National Empowerment Foundation (NEF) has revamped its Training and Placement Programme and is focusing on education, health, training and employment, and family empowerment as its main areas of intervention. The Committee trusts that the Government will take the necessary measures to ensure the adoption of the NEA and the establishment of the National Employment Advisory Committee without delay, and requests the Government to provide information on any progress made in this regard. In addition, the Committee invites the Government to continue to provide updated detailed information regarding the activities of the NEF and consultations with the social partners relevant to the operation of the public employment service.

Article 8. Special arrangements for young persons. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that it has entrusted its Human Resource Development Council with the responsibility of implementing a National Skills Development Programme as well as a Graduate Training for Employment Scheme, both of which aim to reduce unemployment among young persons. The Committee requests the Government to provide detailed information, including statistical data disaggregated by age and sex, on the nature, activities and outcomes of these programmes and their impact on opportunities for young persons to secure decent and lasting employment. It further requests the Government to provide information in relation to other measures taken or envisaged to give effect to this Article of the Convention.

Article 10. Encouraging full use of employment service facilities. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government on measures taken to disseminate information on vacancies available at the level of the employment service through the Citizen Advice Bureaux (CAB), Youth Centres, Centres for Women and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) throughout the island. It also notes the television programme “Magazine de l’Emploi et des Métiers » launched in October 2014, which disseminates information on vacancies in different economic sectors. The Committee invites the Government to continue to communicate information concerning the manner in which effect is given to this Article of the Convention.

Article 11. Cooperation with private employment agencies. The Committee notes the information communicated by the Government indicating that, as of 18 July 2019, 62 private recruitment agencies were licensed to carry out recruitment functions. The Government adds that these agencies are inspected monthly by officers of the Public Employment Service. The Committee requests the Government to provide updated detailed information on the nature and impact of specific measures taken to ensure effective cooperation between the public employment service and private employment agencies.

The Committee takes note of the supplementary information provided by the Government in light of the decision adopted by the Governing Body at its 338th Session (June 2020). The Committee examines the application of the Convention on the basis of the supplementary information received from the Government this year, as well as on the basis of the information at its disposal in 2019.

Article 1(3) of the Convention. Scope of application. Subcontractors. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that the provisions of section 46(5) of the Public Procurement Act, 2006, on the insertion of labour clauses, do not apply to subcontractors or assignees. Instead, it was left to the main contractor to ensure compliance and to submit evidence of this to the public procurement authority. Section 46(8) of the 2006 Act does not, however, place any legal responsibility on the main contractor to ensure compliance on the part of a subcontractor or to produce evidence of such compliance. Therefore, in its 2017 direct request, the Committee once again drew the Government’s attention to the 2008 General Survey on labour clauses in public contracts, paragraphs 75–81, particularly paragraph 75, which points out that Article 1(3) of the Convention requires the competent authorities to take appropriate measures to ensure that labour clauses of the type required by the Convention are applied to work carried out by subcontractors or assignees of contracts. The Committee therefore once again requested that the Government take, without further delay, all necessary measures to ensure that labour clauses in public contracts apply fully to work carried out by subcontractors and assignees. The Committee notes that the Government refers in its supplementary report to the adoption of the Workers’ Rights Act, Act No. 20 of 2019 (WRA), which repealed and replaced the Employment Rights Act 2008 (ERiA) as of 24 October 2019. The Committee notes with interest that section 29(1) of the WRA establishes the joint liability of the job contractor and the employer (principal) with regard to payment of the remuneration of the worker and the conditions of employment of the worker, including his or her safety, health and welfare. Furthermore, section 29(3) of the WRA provides that “no person who is jointly liable with a job contractor under subsection (1) may set up as a defence to a claim from a worker seeking to recover remuneration the fact that he has already paid to the job contractor any sum due under the arrangement with the job contractor.” In addition, section 29(4) of the WRA provides that “every worker employed by a job contractor shall, for securing payment of his remuneration, have the same privileges, in respect of the property of the principal, as he would have had if he had been directly employed by the principal without the intervention of the job contractor.”

The Committee notes the Government’s indication in its 2019 report that the standard bidding document for “security services, cleaning services and those for street cleaning, refuse collection and disposal services” includes provisions that govern subcontracting. The Government adds that any subcontracting component proposed by the main contractor is subject to the employer’s (the public authority’s) approval. Therefore, the conditions governing the subcontractor with respect to labour clauses will be the same as those governing the main contractor. Notwithstanding the Government’s indication, the Committee observes that the standard bidding document (SCS/RFQ-GCC18/10-13) (as revised on 18 October 2013) does not contain any clauses providing for the contractor’s responsibility to ensure observance of the terms of the labour clauses by a subcontractor. The Committee requests the Government to provide detailed information on the manner in which section 29 of the Workers’ Rights Act, Act No. 20 of 2019 (WRA) is applied in practice to public employment contracts, as well as to provide the Office with copies of standard bidding documents currently in use.

Article 2. Insertion of labour clauses. In its previous comments, the Committee noted the Government’s indication that the standard bidding documents for the procurement of goods were based on World Bank guidelines which did not contain the type of labour clauses required by the Convention. In this regard, the Committee urged the Government to take measures to ensure full implementation with the requirements of the Convention. The Government indicates that the standard bidding documents for procurement of goods do not contain labour clauses of the type required by the Convention, as the goods in question are imported and are not manufactured locally. Hence, the workers involved in the manufacturing process of these goods are outside of Mauritius and its jurisdiction. The Government adds that these workers are instead covered by legislation applicable in their home country. While the Committee notes the Government’s explanation, it wishes to stress that the Convention applies to all public contracts, whether for works (for example construction of a new highway, extension of an airport terminal), goods (for example the purchase of new uniforms for customs officers or procurement of computer hardware for a ministry) or services (for example cleaning or IT services). In this respect, the Committee draws the Government’s attention to the ILO’s 2008 Practical Guide on Convention No. 94 and Recommendation No. 84, which provides guidance in relation to the requirements of the Convention, with the aim of ultimately improving their application in law and practice (page 7). For instance, with regard to the application of the Convention to cross-border public procurement contracts, the Practical Guide points out that, while work done outside the contracting State is not covered by the provisions of the Convention, this does not mean that all contracts with a transnational dimension are excluded from its scope. Therefore, in the case of public contracts involving the use of foreign workers brought into the country for purposes of the contract, the requirements of the Convention in relation to labour clauses would fully apply and the workers would enjoy the protection of the required clauses (pages 18 and 19). The Committee once again requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that the scope of application of the Public Procurement Act, 2006, are amended to cover all types of public contracts envisaged by the Convention.

Article 5(1). Adequate sanctions. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to indicate the measures taken or contemplated to ensure the application of adequate penalties for failure to respect the provisions of labour clauses contained in public contracts. The Government refers to section 45(6) of the Public Procurement Act 2006, which establishes that “no contractor shall be entitled to any payment in respect of work performed in the execution of the procurement contract unless he has, together with his claim for payment, filed a certificate stating: (a) the rates of remuneration and hours of work of the various categories of workers employed in the execution of the contracts; (b) whether any remuneration payable in respect of work done is due; and (c) any other information that the public body administering the procurement contract may require to satisfy himself that this Act has been complied with.” In addition, section 46(7) provides that, in the event that remuneration is still owed to a worker employed on a public contract, the public body administering the contract “may, unless the remuneration is paid sooner by the contractor, arrange for the payment of the remuneration out of the money payable under the procurement contract.” The Committee requests the Government to provide detailed updated information on the manner in which section 46(7) of the Public Procurement Act of 2006 is given effect in practice, as well as the manner in which effect is given to Article 5(1) of the Convention more generally.

Application of the Convention in practice. While noting that the Government does not provide information on the application of the Convention in practice, the Committee once again expresses the hope that the Government will make every effort to compile and communicate detailed updated information, including statistical data disaggregated by age and sex, regarding the application of the provisions of the Convention in practice.

The Committee takes note of the Government’s report and the supplementary information provided in light of the decision adopted by the Governing Body at its 338th Session (June 2020).

Legislative developments. The Committee takes note of the information provided by the Government regarding: (1) the adoption of the Workers’ Rights Act, No. 20 of 2019 (WRA) that repealed the Employment Rights Act, 2008 (ERiA) and includes new provisions on the application of the principle of the Convention (section 26); (2) the establishment of a National Wage Consultative Council (NWCC) following the adoption of the National Wage Consultative Council Act, No 6 of 2016 (NWCCA); and (3) the adoption of the Additional Remuneration and Other Allowances Act, (AROAA) No. 24 of 2018.

Article 2 of the Convention. Public service schemes. In its last comment, the Committee encouraged the Government to collect data on the occupational gender segregation in the public sector and requested information on the measures taken to ensure that appropriate methods, free from gender bias, were being used for the evaluation of the different occupations and the determination of corresponding salary grading. The Committee notes that in this regard, the Government indicates that the Pay Research Bureau (PRB), responsible for the review of pay and grading structures in the public sector, produced a report in 2016 incorporating the principle of the Convention and that this report will be valid for a period of five years. The Committee notes however, from the statistics provided by the Government, that occupational segregation remains prevalent in the public sector (for instance in 2018, there were 3033 women and 1511 men clerks; and 1071 women and 1646 men legislators, senior officials and managers). Therefore, the Committee requests the Government to : (i) indicate whether in its next evaluation, the Pay Research Bureau examined the different occupations and corresponding gradings, on the basis of objective factors free from gender bias (such as skills, efforts, responsibilities and working conditions); (ii) provide a copy of any recommendations and guidelines of the Pay Research Bureau; and (iii) provide information on any additional measures envisaged or adopted to ensure the application of the principle of the Convention in the public sector.

Article 3. Objective job evaluation in the private sector. The Committee previously noted that the limited capacities of the National Remuneration Board (NRB), responsible for making recommendations on remuneration in the private sector, had prevented the application of the methods of evaluation used by the PRB for the public sector. The Committee notes that in this regard, the Government indicates that an extension of the Decent Work Country Programme is under discussion and would include activities to enhance capacity building on objective job evaluations in the private sector. The Committee also observes that section 26 of the newly adopted WRA requires employers to ensure that the remuneration of a worker is not less favourable than the remuneration of another worker performing work of equal value and enumerates criteria to be taken into account to determine whether there exists an element of discrimination in this respect. Among these criteria, the Committee notes with interest that section 26 (2)(a) of the WRA requires that the rates and types of remuneration be based on an objective job evaluation, and that section 26 (2)(d) and (e) refers to the use of objective factors to performs these evaluations such as skills, efforts, responsibilities and working conditions. The Committee requests the Government to: (i) provide information on whether the National Remuneration Board has conducted an evaluation of the jobs and corresponding remuneration levels applied in the private sector, using objective factors free of gender bias (such as skills, efforts, responsibilities and working conditions); (ii) indicate whether objective job evaluations are being conducted in practice by employers in application of section 26 of the Workers’ Rights Act; and (iii) indicate whether it has received ILO technical assistance in the context of the Decent Work County Programme or in other context in relation with the conduct of objective job evaluations in the private sector, and if applicable, information on the results of these activities.

Minimum Wage and additional remuneration. The Committee notes with interest the indication by the Government that following adoption of the NWCA, a national minimum wage was introduced in 2017. The Committee also notes the Government’s indication that workers have benefited from additional remuneration and other allowances to compensate increases in the cost of living, in application of the AROAA. The Committee welcomes these initiatives and recalls that as women predominate in low-wage employment and as a uniform national minimum wage system helps to raise earnings of the lowest paid, it has an influence on the relationship between men and women’s wages and on reducing the gender pay gap. With regard to the additional remuneration and other allowances that are provided for under the AROAA, the Committee stresses that the Convention sets out a very broad definition of “remuneration” covered by the principle of the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the impact of the introduction of the national minimum wage on the gender pay gap, and on whether the additional remuneration and other allowances recently introduced have benefited equally to both men and women and have contributed to reducing the gender pay gap.

Article 4. Cooperation with social partners. Following its previous request in this regard, the Committee takes note of the Government’s indication that it collaborates with the social partners on the application of the Convention in the context of various tripartite bodies, including the National Minimum Wage Consultative Council (NWCC) established in September 2016, the National Tripartite Council (NTC) that replaced the National Tripartite Forum (NTF) and the Labour Advisory Council, following the entry into force of the WRA. The Committee requests the Government to indicate how the National Minimum Wage Consultative Council and the National Tripartite Council are taking into account the principle of equal remuneration for men and women for work of equal value in formulating their recommendations. In addition, the Committee requests again the Government to provide copies of any collective agreements containing provisions implementing the principle of the Convention.

Enforcement. Following its previous request for information on the enforcement of the Convention, the Committee takes note of the information provided by the Government on the activities of the labour inspectorate. Specifically, it notes that between June 2019 and June 2020, awareness-raising activities on the Convention have included 129 talks (to 631 men and 1,220 women worker participants), 26 training sessions, and 2,721 information activities for the public at large. The Committee also noted the information provided on the measures adopted following the confinement due to the COVID-19 pandemic, such as the enlistment of 115 labour officers to provide advice on-line or over the phone, the conduct of on-site enquiries in exceptional circumstances, and the publication of officers’ phone numbers to allow for complaints to be made over the phone. With regard to the enforcement of the Convention by the Equal Opportunity Commission (EOC) and Tribunal (EOT), the Committee notes that the Government does not provide information on the complaints dealt with by the EOC and the EOT that specifically relate to the application of the principle of equal remuneration for work of equal value. The Committee requests the Government to provide specific information on the number of complaints filed in relation to the application of the principle of the Convention, the number of such cases detected by the labour inspectorate, and the outcome of these cases (sanctions imposed, number of cases referred to court, etc…). The Committee also requests information on the number of such cases dealt with by the Equal Opportunity Commission and the Equal Opportunity Tribunal and other dispute settlement bodies.

Statistics. Following its previous request for detailed statistical information to assess the application of the Convention in practice, the Committee notes that once again, the statistics provided for the public sector refer to the distribution of men and women in selected occupations without providing information on the corresponding earnings, while those provided for the private sector refer to the average earnings in selected occupations by industry groups, without providing information on the distribution of men and women in the different occupations. The Committee requests the Government to collect statistical data disaggregated by sex on the remuneration of workers, classified by branch of economic activity and occupations. The Committee also refers to its general observation adopted in 1998 on the application of the Convention for more details on the statistics to be collected to fully assess the application of the principle of the Convention.

The Committee takes note of the Government’s report and the supplementary information provided in light of the decision adopted by the Governing Body at its 338th Session (June 2020).

Article 2 of the Convention. Determination of minimum wages. Remuneration Regulations. In its previous comments, the Committee had requested the Government to amend the Remuneration Regulations concerning the salt manufacturing, sugar and tea industries in order to remove all remaining gender-specific job appellations and different wages rates for men and women. The Committee notes that these three Remuneration Regulations were replaced with new ones in 2019. The Committee notes that the Salt Manufacturing Industry (Remuneration) Regulations 2019 do not use gender-specific job appellations. However, they explicitly provide in their second schedule for two different categories of wages, one for male employees and another one for female employees (even though the same wage rate applies to both categories). The Committee also notes that both the Sugar Industry (Agricultural Workers) (Remuneration) Regulations 2019 and the Tea Industry Workers (Remuneration) Regulations 2019 still include gender-specific appellations and set different wage levels for men and women in the same job occupations. The Committee urges the Government to amend without delay the Salt Manufacturing Industry (Remuneration) Regulations 2019, the Sugar Industry (Agricultural Workers) (Remuneration) Regulations 2019, and the Tea Industry Workers (Remuneration) Regulations 2019 in order to remove all remaining gender-specific job appellations, and gender specific wage categories and rates in the same job occupations. The Committee also requests the Government to provide information on the measures taken to ensure that, when determining minimum wage rates by occupations in the sectors covered by remuneration regulations, skills considered to be “female” are not undervalued in comparison with traditionally “male” skills and that female-dominated occupations are not undervalued in comparison with male-dominated occupations. The Committee also refers to its comments on the application of the Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1958 (No. 111).

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

The Committee takes note of the Government’s report and the supplementary information provided in light of the decision adopted by the Governing Body at its 338th Session (June 2020).

Articles 1(a) and 2 of the Convention. Discrimination on the basis of race, colour, national extraction and social origin. In its previous comments, the Committee expressed concern at the situation of workers from the Malaise Creole community and urged the Government to take proactive measures to address without delay discrimination based on race, colour and ethnic and social origin. In its report, the Government indicates that Mauritius is a multicultural country and that no persons identified themselves as members of the Malaise Creole community during the last population census. The Committee notes that in its activity report 2016–19, the Equal Opportunity Commission (EOC) indicates that complaints of discrimination based on ethnic origin, race, caste and place of origin amount to 9 per cent of the total number of complaints. It also notes that, in its 2018 concluding observations, the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD) expressed concerned that the Creoles face de facto discrimination in all walks of life, are disproportionately vulnerable to poverty and have limited access to employment, housing, health care and education. The Committee notes with regret the fact that, as indicated by the CERD, the measures taken by the Government and the EOC have had a limited impact on improving the socioeconomic situation of the Creoles, and the lack of measures specifically targeted at improving their situation (CERD/C/MUS/CO/20-23, 19 September 2018, paragraph 26). The Committee once again urges the Government to take proactive measures to address discrimination in employment and occupation based on race, colour and ethnic and social origin, including against workers in Creole communities. The Committee also encourages the Government to undertake studies or research to analyse the situation of the different groups in the labour market with a view to eliminating discrimination in employment and occupation.

General observation of 2018. Regarding the above issues, and in more general terms, the Committee would like to draw the Government’s attention to its general observation on discrimination based on race, colour and national extraction adopted in 2018. In the general observation, the Committee notes with concern that discriminatory attitudes and stereotypes based on the race, colour or national extraction of men and women workers continue to hinder their participation in education, vocational training programmes and access to a wider range of employment opportunities, resulting in persisting occupational segregation and differences in remuneration for work of equal value. Furthermore, the Committee considers that it is necessary to adopt a comprehensive and coordinated approach to tackling the obstacles and barriers faced by persons in employment and occupation because of their race, colour or national extraction, and to promote equality of opportunity and treatment for all. Such an approach should include the adoption of interlocking measures aimed at addressing gaps in education, training and skills, providing unbiased vocational guidance, recognizing and validating the qualifications obtained abroad, and valuing and recognizing traditional knowledge and skills that may be relevant both to accessing and advancing in employment and to engaging in an occupation. The Committee also recalls that, in order to be effective, these measures must include concrete steps, such as laws, policies, programmes, mechanisms and participatory processes, and remedies designed to address prejudices and stereotypes and to promote mutual understanding and tolerance among all sections of the population.

The Committee draws the Government’s attention to its general observation of 2018 and requests the Government to provide information in response to the questions raised in that observation.

Article 1(2). Inherent requirements of the job. The Committee previously noted that section 13 of the Equal Opportunities Act, 2008 (EOA), provides for a wide range of cases in which an employer or a prospective employer may discriminate against a person on the basis of sex and that section 6(3) of the EOA and section 4(3) and (4) of the Employment Rights Act, 2008 (ERiA), provides that conditions, requirements or practices that have or are likely to have a “disadvantaging effect” are not deemed discrimination where they are “justifiable” or “reasonable in the circumstances”. It urged the Government to ensure that the exceptions permitted correspond in a concrete and objective way to the inherent requirements of a particular job. The Committee notes that the Workers’ Rights Act, No. 20 of 2019 (WRA), replaced the ERiA, but again provides in section 5(3) that “(a) person does not discriminate against another person by imposing or proposing to impose on that other person a condition, requirement or practice that has or is likely to have a disadvantaging effect, where the condition, requirement or practice is reasonable in the circumstances.” Furthermore, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that the Guidelines for Employers enumerate the provisions of section 13 of the EOA, without providing further guidance on their scope or implementation. In this regard, the Committee recalls that workers of both sexes should have the right to pursue freely any job or profession and that exclusions or preferences in respect of a particular job should be determined in a concrete and objective manner, taking into account the inherent requirements of a particular job and without reliance on stereotypes or negative prejudices about men’s and women’s roles. The Committee therefore asks the Government to review the application in practice of section 13 of the Equal Opportunity Act, 2008, and section 5(3) of the Workers’ Rights Act, No. 20 of 2019, to ensure that the exceptions permitted are in fact based on the inherent requirements of a particular job and do not restrict the right of workers of both sexes to pursue freely any job or profession. It also requests the Government to provide specific examples of the particular jobs concerned, as well as information on any judicial decisions interpreting these provisions or any advice, decisions or recommendations by the Equal Opportunity Commission dealing with this issue.

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

The Committee takes note of the Government’s report and the supplementary information provided in light of the decision adopted by the Governing Body at its 338th Session (June 2020).

Legislative developments. The Committee takes note of the adoption of the Workers’ Rights Act, No. 20 of 2019 (WRA) that repealed the Employment Rights Act, 2008 (ERiA).

Article 1(1) of the Convention. Prohibited grounds of discrimination. Legislation. In its last comment, the Committee noted that the Equal Opportunity Act, 2008 (EOA) did not explicitly prohibit discrimination on the basis of “national extraction” and “social origin” while these grounds were prohibited under the ERiA, and requested that the Government harmonize the prohibited grounds of discrimination in the legislation. The Committee notes that the Government does not provide information in this regard in its report and observes that section 5(a) of the newly adopted WRA prohibits discrimination on the basis of national extraction and social origin. The Committee requests the Government to consider amending the Equal Opportunity Act, 2008 in order to ensure coherence on the prohibited grounds of discrimination in the legislation on non-discrimination and equality.

Scope of protection against discrimination. The Committee previously noted that pursuant to section 13(5)(c) and (e) of the EOA, two categories of workers were excluded from the protection of discrimination in respect to access to employment, namely domestic workers and workers in enterprises with less than ten employees on a full-time basis. In its report, the Government indicates that all workers, including from these two categories, may file complaints with the Inspection and Enforcement Section (IES) of the Ministry of Labour, Industrial Relations, Employment and Training (MLIRET). The Committee notes however, that domestic workers and workers in enterprises with less than ten employees on a full-time basis do not enjoy the benefit of the provisions of the EOA in relation with access to employment and therefore are prevented from the possibility to file complaints in this regard with the Equal Opportunity Commission (EOC). The Committee requests the Government to consider extending the protection of the Equal Opportunity Act on access to employment to domestic workers and workers in enterprises with less than ten employees on a full-time basis.

Discrimination based on sex. Sexual harassment. In its previous comments, the Committee had requested the Government to provide information on the application of the legislation against sexual harassment in practice. Attached to its report, the Government provides statistical information showing that: (1) in 2017, out of the 186 complaints filed with the EOC only one concerned sexual harassment; and (2) in 2018, only seven complaints of sexual harassment were filed with the IES of the MLIRET out of a total of 19,476 complaints. The Committee also notes that the Government indicates that regular inspection visits are carried out as preventive measures and that the EOC and the MLIRET conduct awareness-raising campaigns, and that an important case of sexual harassment is scheduled for trial in November 2020. While taking note of this information, the Committee recalls that the low level of complaints regarding sexual harassment is likely to reflect the lack of awareness, understanding and recognition of this form of sex discrimination, as well as the lack of access to, or the inadequacy of, complaints mechanisms and means of redress, or fear of reprisals (see General Survey on the fundamental Conventions, 2012, paragraph 790). The Committee asks the Government to provide information on the measures taken to raise awareness on this specific form of sex discrimination and ensure that workers are provided with effective protection when seeking redress for both quid pro quo and hostile environment sexual harassment. In particular, the Committee asks for information on the awareness-raising activities of the EOC and the labour inspectorate that specifically address sexual harassment, and on the number of cases of sexual harassment detected by the labour inspectorate or brought to its attention, or referred to the EOC or the courts, and the outcome given to these cases.

Discrimination on the basis of political opinion. The Committee previously noted that discrimination on the basis of political opinion was the most frequent ground of discrimination alleged before the EOC and requested the Government to adopt measures to prevent and eliminate discriminatory practices based on political opinion. The Committee notes that the Government does not provide information on the activities conducted to address specifically this ground of discrimination. It observes that in its report of activities for the period 2016–2019, the EOC indicates that complaints on the basis of political opinion represented 9 per cent of the complaints received. The Committee once again asks the Government to provide detailed information on the measures adopted to prevent and eliminate discrimination on the basis of political opinion, including specific information on awareness raising activities and information on the number of such cases detected by the labour inspectorate or brought to its attention, or referred to the EOC or the courts, as well as on the outcome of these cases.

Article 2. Equality of opportunity and treatment between men and women. Access to education and employment. In its previous comment, the Committee requested the Government to provide information on the measures adopted to increase the participation of girls and women in a wider range of educational and vocational training courses. The Committee notes that the Government provides detailed information on the activities of the Mauritius Institute of Training and Development (MITD) to improve access to training courses in general. The Committee also takes note of the information provided on a series of women empowerment programmes organized by the Ministry of Gender Equality, Child Development and Family Welfare (MGECDFW), namely the “Goal programme” and the “3E’s project: Empowerment through Education and Entertainment”. The Committee also notes that the MGECDFW will be implementing the “Leadership, Empowerment, Advocacy and Development Project” (LEAD) to bridge gender gaps in boardrooms. The Committee further notes the detailed information provided on the activities of the Employment Division of the MLIRET for the implementation of three training programmes: the “Youth Employment Programme”, the “Back to Work Programme” and the “Dual Training Programme”. The Committee welcomes these different initiatives. It notes, however, that the information provided relates to programmes aiming at increasing access to training in general and at improving leadership skills, without necessarily aiming at increasing women’s access to employment in male dominated sectors and occupations. In view of the above, the Committee asks the Government to provide detailed information on the activities conducted to improve girls and women’s access to trainings related to sectors of activity and occupations which tend to be male dominated, and on the results achieved.

National gender equality policy. In its past comment, the Committee requested information on the strategies and actions taken in the framework of existing gender policies to ensure equality of opportunity and treatment between men and women, and on the equal opportunity policies that have already been adopted and implemented by employers, pursuant to section 9 of the EOA. In its report, the Government indicates that a series of measures have been adopted towards the attainment of the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goal 5 “achieving gender equality and empowering all women and girls”, including the holding of wide consultations on the formulation of a National Gender Policy 2019, the exchange of views on the opportunity of a Gender Equality Bill, and the establishment of four gender technical working groups comprising representatives of the private sector, academia, media and civil society. It also refers to the formulation of a National Costed Action Plan on Gender Mainstreaming and the establishment of the National Women’s Council (NWC), pursuant to the National Women’s Council Act, No. 40 of 2016 (NWCA). In this regard, the Committee observes that the NWC is responsible for implementing Government policies relating to women’s empowerment and gender equality and to advise the Minister on ways of addressing factors responsible for impeding women’s empowerment and gender equality (section 5 of the NWCA). The Committee notes these different initiatives. However, it also notes that, in its 2018 concluding observations, the United Nations Committee the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) expressed concern over the lack of a national action plan on the advancement of women and girls and over the complexity of the national machinery for the advancement of women and of State organs with similar mandates, such as the National Steering Committee, the gender focal points, the National Women’s Council, the National Women Entrepreneur Council and the Equal Opportunities Commission (CEDAW/MUS/CO/8, 14 November 2018 paragraph 13). The Committee asks the Government to indicate whether a national policy or action plan has been adopted on the advancement of women and girls (such as for instance the National Gender Policy and the National Costed Action Plan on Gender Mainstreaming mentioned in the report of the Government). It further asks the Government to specify the mandate of the different state organs responsible for the advancement of women, and to provide detailed information on their activities and the concrete results achieved towards equality and non-discrimination in employment and occupation on the basis of sex. Last, noting that the Government does not provide information in this regard, the Committee reiterates its request for information on the implementation of section 9 of the Equal Opportunity Act in practice.

Article 5. Special measures of protection. Previously, the Committee, noting that the Remuneration Regulations governing the salt manufacturing industry, the sugar industry and the tea industry provided for general limitations on the assignment of work to women workers, urged the Government to ensure that, when revised, these limitations on assignment of work to women are strictly limited to maternity protection. The Committee notes that, on 24 October 2019, these Remuneration Regulations were revoked and replaced with new regulations. It notes with regrets that the Sugar Industry (Agricultural Workers) (Remuneration) Regulations 2019 (section 9(1) of the First Schedule) and the Tea Industry Workers (Remuneration) Regulations 2019 (section 4(2) of the First Schedule) continue to provide for general limitations on the assignment of women. It therefore recalls that while measures aimed at protecting maternity in the strict sense come within the scope of Article 5 of the Convention, protective measures for women generally because of their sex or gender, based on stereotypical perceptions about their capabilities and role in society are contrary to the Convention. It urges the Government to amend the general limitations on the assignment of work to women workers. In this regard, the Committee also refers to its comments on the application of the Equal Remuneration Convention, 1951 (No. 100).

Enforcement. In its last comment, the Committee requested the Government to provide information on the number and nature of complaints dealt with by the EOC and the Equal Opportunities Tribunal (EOT). The Committee notes from the report of activities of the EOC for 2016–2019 that grounds of discrimination invoked in complaints relate for 42.5 per cent to ethnic origin and race, 36.5 per cent to sex, 11 per cent to age and 5.1 per cent to creed. The Committee also notes that, out of the 593 complaints filed with the EOC, 156 cases had been settled, nine had been referred to the EOT, and 108 were under examination. In addition, the Committee notes that, in 2018, there were only ten complaints regarding discrimination (including sexual harassment) filed with the IES of the MLIRET. Taking note of this information, the Committee requests the Government to provide detailed information on the activities conducted by the labour inspectorate to ensure the detection of cases of discrimination and address them (such as training of labour inspectors on discrimination, targeted inspection campaigns or plans, etc.) as well as on the remedies and sanctions imposed in the cases of discrimination dealt with by the EOC, the EOT, or the labour inspectorate.

Practical information. In follow up to its previous request for information in this regard, the Committee notes that the Government indicates that there are no research proposals at the moment in relation with discriminatory practices. Recalling the importance of collecting data and conducting research on the actual situation, including the underlying causes of discrimination, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on any studies conducted or envisaged with regard to matters covered by the Convention.

Comments adopted by the CEACR: Mauritius

Adopted by the CEACR in 2021

C014 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

C019 - Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

C081 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

A. Labour inspection

Labour Inspection Convention, 1947 (No. 81)

B. Labour administration

Labour Administration Convention, 1978 (No. 150)

C081 - Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

C087 - Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

C087 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

C095 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

C098 - Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

C099 - Replies received to the issues raised in a direct request which do not give rise to further comments (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

C144 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

C159 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

C175 - Replies received to the issues raised in a direct request which do not give rise to further comments (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

C183 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

MLC, 2006 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

C187 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

I. Action at the national level

A. National policy

B. National system

C. National programme

II. Action at the level of the enterprise

Adopted by the CEACR in 2020

C088 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2020, published 109th ILC session (2021)

C094 - Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2020, published 109th ILC session (2021)

C100 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2020, published 109th ILC session (2021)

C100 - Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2020, published 109th ILC session (2021)

C111 - Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2020, published 109th ILC session (2021)

C111 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2020, published 109th ILC session (2021)

Comments adopted by the CEACR: Mauritius

Display the list by:

Adopted by the CEACR in 2021

C014 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

C019 - Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

C081 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

A. Labour inspection

Labour Inspection Convention, 1947 (No. 81)

B. Labour administration

Labour Administration Convention, 1978 (No. 150)

C081 - Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

C087 - Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

C087 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

C095 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

C098 - Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

C099 - Replies received to the issues raised in a direct request which do not give rise to further comments (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

C144 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

C159 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

C175 - Replies received to the issues raised in a direct request which do not give rise to further comments (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

C183 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

MLC, 2006 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

C187 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

I. Action at the national level

A. National policy

B. National system

C. National programme

II. Action at the level of the enterprise

Adopted by the CEACR in 2020

C088 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2020, published 109th ILC session (2021)

C094 - Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2020, published 109th ILC session (2021)

C100 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2020, published 109th ILC session (2021)

C100 - Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2020, published 109th ILC session (2021)

C111 - Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2020, published 109th ILC session (2021)

C111 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2020, published 109th ILC session (2021)