Demande directe (CEACR) - adoptée 2009, publiée 99ème session CIT (2010)

The Committee takes note of the Government’s report received in October 2008, containing replies to its previous comments and the points raised by the Central Organization of Finnish Trade Unions (SAK) and the Confederation of Unions for Academic Professionals in Finland (AKAVA), as well as the comment of the Commission for Local Authority Employers (KT) and the corresponding annex, supplied by the Government.

Article 14 of the Convention. Number of labour inspectors in agriculture to secure the effective discharge of their duties. The Committee notes with interest that, according to the Government’s information, each occupational safety and health inspectorate shall be assigned one to two inspectors specialized in the agricultural sector, though also performing tasks not directly related to agriculture. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would indicate the total average number of inspectors specialized in agricultural issues, currently working in each occupational safety and health inspectorate. In addition, it would like to refer the Government to its comments under the Labour Inspection Convention, 1947 (No. 81) (Articles 10 and 16), and requests it to provide information on the expected impact as regards the number of labour inspectors specialized in agriculture following the proposal of the Rsurssi II working group.

Article 4. Changes in inspection coverage in the agricultural sector. According to the SAK and AKAVA, the cases in which the employer does not regard the work of foreign berry-pickers as work under an employment contract have become more common. The Government indicates that the harvesting of berries and vegetables is generally deemed work performed within an employment agreement, irrespective of whether the harvest worker is directly employed by the farmer or by an employment agency, through which the farmer recruits the required manpower. The Committee notes that the Occupational Safety and Health Act (738/2002), as indicated by the Government, applies indeed to employees working under the terms of an employment contract (section 2(1)) as well as to employees leased out to an employer by an employment agency (section 3(1)).

As regards responsibilities in occupational safety and health in agricultural undertakings, where work is subcontracted, the Government indicates that responsibility, normally assumed by the farmer alone, is shared by both parties in a manner specified in section 3 of the Occupational Safety and Health Act. The employer (employment agency) of berry-pickers is responsible for ensuring that his/her employees possess the necessary skills and that they are familiar with the specific attributes of the work in question. As the provider of employment, the farmer is responsible for ensuring that his/her employees have been familiarized with the work and working conditions. The farmer is also responsible for ensuring cooperation in occupational safety and health at the workplace. If the land under cultivation is being tended by employees working for several employers, the farmer is vested with primary responsibility, in accordance with the Act on Occupational Safety and Health Enforcement and Cooperation on Occupational Safety and Health at the Workplaces (44/2006).

The Committee further notes that an employment relationship does not exist in cases where wild berries are picked in forests by any person and sold freely. According to the Government, these berry-pickers shall be deemed self-employed and any party purchasing these berries shall not be deemed to be an employer.

Referring to the concern of SAK and AKAVA, the Committee would be grateful if the Government would indicate, how it is ensured, that berry-pickers selling their crops to (monopolized) enterprises, do not find themselves in a subordinate relationship, where the entrepreneur is in a position to dictate the conditions of the business relationship and in consequence virtually all components of an employment relationship are fulfilled.

Articles 25, 26 and 27 of the Convention. Reporting obligations on inspection activities. The Committee notes that once again no annual report has been drawn up. Having raised this request for many years, the Committee requests the Government to ensure that the restructuring of the inspection database, will allow for the compilation of a wide-ranging statistics, and will guarantee that annual reports containing the information requested by Article 27 can be published and communicated to the ILO in the near future.