Observation (CEACR) - adoptée 2003, publiée 92ème session CIT (2004)

The Committee notes with regret that the Government’s report has not been received. It is therefore bound to repeat its previous comments, which read as follows:

Requirement for the central inspection authority to publish and transmit to the ILO an annual inspection report. Several decades after ratification of this instrument no annual inspection report has yet been transmitted to the ILO. The Committee therefore draws the Government’s attention once again to the essential nature of the reporting obligation incumbent on the central inspection authority under Articles 20 and 21 of the Convention. It accordingly urges the Government to take the necessary steps as soon as possible to ensure that the central authority is in a position to fulfil the obligation. The purpose of publishing an annual report of the kind provided for in these Articles of the Convention is, in particular, to inform at the national level the social partners of the labour inspectorate’s activities and how effective they are, so that they may express any relevant views. The transmission of such reports to the ILO constitutes, at the international level, an indispensable basis for the supervisory bodies to monitor application of the Convention as part of a constructive dialogue with the Government.

Furthermore, the Committee notes the comments made by the Association of Labour Inspectors of the Ministry of Labour and Employment Promotion (SIT) concerning the application of the Convention and the information supplied in reply by the Government.

According to the SIT, labour inspection is not a priority for the Government and does not therefore benefit from the necessary support from the public authorities. It adds that the establishment of a trade union by labour inspectors with a view to defending the interests of the occupation has been punished by a series of intimidation measures against its leaders and members.

Functions, status, conditions of service and safety of labour inspectors

According to the SIT, over half of labour inspectors, including the leaders and members of the trade union, have been affected by transfers to other duties and unannounced evaluations which may be assimilated to direct or tacit threats of dismissal. The personal safety of labour inspectors is not guaranteed, as they are not even covered in the event of employment accidents and no measures are taken to collaborate with the forces of order in the event of obstructions to the discharge of inspection duties.

The SIT adds that the direction of the labour inspectorate has endeavoured to dissuade labour inspectors from joining the trade union by indicating tacitly, during a meeting concerning the allocation of training grants, that they would be provided to inspectors favourable to the administration, which did occur in practice.

According to the Government, transfers of labour inspectors are not a new development related to the establishment of the trade union. It indicates that they are dictated by the requirements of the service and, more recently, to respond to the training needs of the labour inspectorate, in accordance with the new policy of the Ministry. Certain inspectors, for example, have been made responsible for examining collective redundancies in state enterprises, public sector bodies and local governments. The Government states that the transfers of inspectors to which the SIT refers were prior to the establishment of the trade union and are not therefore related to it. It adds that the new duties are related to the functions for which the inspectors were recruited and do not therefore jeopardize the principle of the employment stability of inspectors. This employment stability is guaranteed by the nature of their employment relationship, which is covered by permanent contracts in the context of the General Act respecting labour inspection and the protection of workers. In the view of the Government, the dismissal of inspectors is subject to the conditions set out by the Act and is undertaken on the grounds of a grave professional fault.

The Government emphasizes the particular interest of the national directorate of labour inspection for the training of inspectors, particularly in the fields of safety and health in industrial activities, and it refers to a training project in the framework of an annual plan involving the selection of candidates on the basis of their professional qualifications and experience, to the exclusion of any other discriminatory criteria.

With regard to the personal safety of labour inspectors, the Government states that labour inspectors are protected and that the relevant criminal procedures are initiated whenever the situation so requires. In response to the allegation of the SIT that no measures have been taken to ensure the support of the police forces for inspectors in the event of difficulties in the discharge of their duties, the Government states that such support is envisaged in section 7(b) of the General Act respecting labour inspection and the protection of workers and that, in addition, the directorate of the labour inspection recently addressed the relevant communications to police stations.

Human resources, material resources, transport facilities and the reimbursement of travel expenses. The SIT indicates that the lack of support from the central government for the inspection services is reflected in the first place in the derisory nature of the budget allocated to the labour inspection services. It indicates that inspectors are obliged to cover personally their professional travel expenses, the reimbursement of which is subject to a complex and burdensome procedures, including for inspections of distant workplaces. In the view of the Government, these allegations are without foundation, as the labour inspectorate benefits from a legal status and conditions of employment that are such as to guarantee the objectivity and professionalism of its personnel, as well as measures to strengthen the human and material resources of the services, despite the budgetary restrictions and other austerity measures affecting the whole of the public sector. The Government nevertheless acknowledges that Act No. 28034 of 2003 respecting new austerity measures has imposed restrictions on the use of service vehicles, with the labour inspectorate having at its disposal a single vehicle. Nevertheless, according to the Government, it has recently decided to allocate labour inspectors a budget to cover their professional travel expenses, including their accommodation and incidental travel expenses for inspections of distant workplaces. With regard to office equipment, it indicates that it will be a case of the inspection services being allocated a monthly budget. Furthermore, in the context of a project for the modernization of the labour inspectorate, with the support of the ILO Regional Office, the purchase is envisaged of new computer equipment, vehicles and furniture, as well as training at the national and international levels for labour inspectors.

The Committee notes that the numerous documents which the Government indicated as being attached, in support of the information provided in reply to the matters raised by the Organization, have not been received by the Office. It hopes that they will be provided in the near future and that they will permit a complete examination of the situation at the Committee’s next session.

The Committee renews it direct request of 2001 to the Government.