Solicitud directa (CEACR) - Adopción: 2013, Publicación: 103ª reunión CIT (2014)

Convenio sobre la discriminación (empleo y ocupación), 1958 (núm. 111) - India (Ratificación : 1960)

Otros comentarios sobre C111

Observación

Solicitud directa

Visualizar en: Francés - EspañolVisualizar todo

Article 1(1)(a) of the Convention. Sexual harassment. The Committee notes with interest the adoption of Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act No. 14 of 2013 covering women workers in the organized sector and workplaces in the unorganized sector where fewer than ten people are employed, including domestic workers. The Act defines and prohibits quid pro quo and hostile environment sexual harassment against women at any workplace, provides for a complaints procedure before internal or local complaints committees, imposes specific duties on the employer and imposes penalties on the employer for non-compliance. The Act further requires the relevant government authority to take measures to publicize the Act, monitor its implementation and collect data on the number of cases filed with and disposed of by the complaints committees. The Committee considers that the Act is a major step towards the protection and prevention of sexual harassment in employment and occupation, but notes however that the scope of the Act was not extended to cover also sexual harassment against male workers, as previously recommended by the Committee. It is also unclear whether agricultural workers are protected under the Act and how workers in workplaces in the unorganized sector with more than ten employees are protected against sexual harassment. The Committee further notes that the Act authorizes the internal or complaints committee to recommend action against a woman or any other person for lodging a malicious or false complaint, or any witness for producing false evidence or forged documents (section 14(1) and (2)). Due to the specific circumstances in which sexual harassment occurs and the fact that many victims are hesitant to file a complaint for fear of reprisals, the Committee considers that giving the same complaints committee to whom an aggrieved women can lodge a complaint the power to recommend to the employer or District Officer to take action against her may not create a conducive environment for filing complaints on sexual harassment and prevent women from making such complaints. The Committee requests the Government to clarify whether agricultural workers are covered by the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act No. 14 of 2013 and to provide information on the practical application of the Act, including information on the measures taken to widely publicize and monitor its implementation, the number of sexual harassment cases filed with the internal and local complaints committees, and the outcomes thereof, including remedies provided and any penalties imposed on employers for non-compliance. It also requests the Government to review the impact of section 14 of the Act on the ability of women and other persons to file complaints of sexual harassment without fear of reprisals. Further, the Committee requests the Government, when the opportunity of the revision of the Act arises, to amend the Act to ensure that men, as well as workers in workplaces in the unorganized sector with more than ten employees, also are protected against sexual harassment at the workplace, and to provide information on any developments in this regard.

Equality between men and women with respect to vocational training. The Committee notes the statistics provided by the Government on the percentage of women and scheduled castes and scheduled tribes participating in the Mahatma Ghandi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, 2005 (MGNREGA), indicating that women’s participation continued to increase up to 52 per cent in 2012–13. The overall participation rates in 2012–13 of scheduled castes and scheduled tribes amounted to 22 per cent and 16 per cent, respectively. However, the information provided by the Government does not show to what extent the MGNREGA, or other employment programmes, have actually led to increased employment of women in rural areas of the different states and union territories. The Committee previously noted that many of the trades and skills offered to women by the network of National and Regional Vocational Training Institutes (NVTI and RVTIs), as well as institutes exclusively targeting vocational training requirements of women in the country, have a tendency to lead to jobs and occupations traditionally considered “suitable” for women. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the annual training capacity of the NVTI and RVTIs for women and industrial training institutes (ITIs) exclusively targeting women and women wings in ITIs is 85,036 per cent (6,956 seats for women in NVTI/RVTI and 78,080 seats in ITIs exclusively targeting women and women wings), and that there is a requirement to reserve 30 per cent of the seats for women in all of the courses offered by the network of 10,344 government and private ITIs under the Craftsmen Training Scheme. The Committee must point out that a reservation of places for women, while welcomed, does not per se guarantee that the vocational training courses provided to women are free from considerations based on stereotypes or prejudices or will encourage women to enter a wider range of occupations. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the specific measures taken to ensure that the vocational training courses offered to women are free from considerations based on stereotypes or prejudices, and broaden the range of occupations from which women are able to choose, and to provide information, disaggregated by sex, on participation rates in the various vocational training courses offered by the NVTI, RVTIs and ITIs. The Committee also asks for information supported by statistics as to what extent the MGNREGA and other employment programmes have led to employment of women, including those belonging to scheduled castes and scheduled tribes, in rural areas of the states and union territories.

Discrimination on the basis of social origin (untouchability) – Enforcement. The Committee notes the statistics provided by the Government on the enforcement of protective legislation, namely the Protection and Civil Rights Act, 1955 (PCR Act), and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (POA Act), which provide for the punishment of the practice of untouchability. From the information provided, the Committee notes that, in spite of some measures taken (special police stations for registration of complaints of offences against scheduled castes and scheduled tribes and the designation of special courts and exclusive special courts), the statistics from 2009 to 2011 continue to suggest that a considerable number of cases under both Acts remain pending with the courts and that only a few cases resulted in a conviction. According to the information provided, only 17.3 per cent of the cases on the PCR Act disposed of by the courts in 2011 ended in a conviction. With respect to the POA Act, 32 per cent of the cases disposed of by the courts ended in conviction. The Committee therefore requests the Government to take more vigorous steps to ensure the strict enforcement of the PCR Act and the POA Act by the special police and special courts, including capacity building and awareness raising of the judiciary, public prosecutors and police to reduce the backlog and delays in the administration of cases in courts and to speed up the issuing of judgments, and to provide information in this regard. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide up-to-date statistics on the number and outcome of the cases handled by the competent authorities since 2011, and to seek and provide detailed information on the results achieved by the activities of State and District Level Vigilance and Monitoring Committees to review the implementation of the abovementioned Acts, as requested by the Committee.

Article 1(1)(b). Discrimination on the basis of HIV and AIDS. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on any developments regarding the adoption of the HIV/AIDS (Prevention and Control) Bill 2013, which aims to address stigma and discrimination related to HIV and AIDS.