Demande directe (CEACR) - adoptée 2012, publiée 102ème session CIT (2013)

Convention (n° 81) sur l'inspection du travail, 1947 - Cameroun (Ratification: 1962)

Autre commentaire sur C081

Observation

Demande directe

Afficher en : Francais - EspagnolTout voir

The Committee refers the Government to its observation and wishes in addition to raise the following points.

Article 3(2) of the Convention. Further duties entrusted to labour inspectors. The Committee notes that, in response to the Committee’s question in its observation of 2010 on measures taken to ensure that the conciliation and mediation duties undertaken by labour inspectors in the event of labour disputes do not interfere with the effective discharge of their primary duties, the Government states that inspection visits are planned on a quarterly basis at regional level but provides no further details. However, the Committee notes from information in the technical memorandum on the diagnosis of Cameroon’s labour administration and labour inspection systems, carried out following the Government’s request for technical assistance in May 2011 (2011 diagnosis), that labour inspectors’ work is still focused on labour dispute settlement and that there are very few visits to workplaces. According to information in the 2011 diagnosis, virtually all workers’ claims against employers are treated as individual disputes giving rise to conciliation proceedings, the parties being notified and summoned to attend. Workers’ complaints are not followed by inspections at the workplace; inspectors do everything from the office. Referring to the comments in its 2010 observation on this matter and to paragraphs 72–74 of its 2006 General Survey on labour inspection, the Committee again points out that the time and energy expended by inspectors in attempting to settle collective labour disputes should not be to the detriment of their primary duties. The Committee notes in this connection the recommendation in the 2011 diagnosis that workers’ grievances, where the employer fails to meet obligations laid down in the law or agreements in the enterprise as a whole, could be treated as a complaint giving rise to an inspection visit, the identity of the complaining worker being kept confidential. Furthermore, a conciliation unit could be set up to hear other claims. The Committee requests the Government to provide up-to-date information on the proportion of inspection work taken up by conciliation duties (number of cases, time spent, etc.) compared in relation to the primary functions of labour inspectors. It requests the Government to take both legislative and practical measures (such as reassigning these duties to a conciliation body created for the purpose) in order to relieve labour inspectors of conciliation duties so that they can resume their primary duties within the meaning of Article 3(1) of the Convention and thus carry out as many inspections as possible of industrial and commercial undertakings that are liable to inspection, thereby helping to avert situations that give rise to labour disputes.

Articles 3(1)(b) and 13. Preventive measures taken by labour inspectors. The Committee notes the information in the 2011 diagnosis that workers and employers have little knowledge of the legislation on labour, occupational safety and health (OSH) and of social security. It further notes that OSH prevention policy is inadequate, not to say inexistent, and that field visits take place only in the context of African Prevention Day. The Committee notes in this connection the recommendation made in the diagnosis that programmes to promote knowledge of the content of the law should be organized. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would indicate the preventive measures taken by the labour inspectorate (inspection visits focusing on prevention through information and education, preparation of information and awareness-raising campaigns and programmes to promote knowledge of the content of the law, preparation of promotional material to inform the public, etc.), in accordance with Article 3(1)(b) of the Convention.

In particular, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on all the preventive measures taken by the labour inspection services in the area of OSH, and on the adoption of measures with immediate executory force in the event of imminent danger to the health or safety of the workers (Article 13(2)(b)) of the Convention.

Article 4. Labour inspection system: supervision and control. The Committee notes the information in the 2011 diagnosis that there is no clearly defined central authority for the labour inspection system and that supervisory duties are entrusted to various officials. Although in the Ministry of Labour and Social Security (MINTSS) the Directorate of Industrial Relations (DRP) has a labour relations sub-directorate which is responsible for monitoring application of labour laws and regulations, there is no department or body either in the DRP or in the MINTSS that has responsibility for coordinating and centralizing labour inspection activities. Nor is there any coordination between the Directorate of Occupational Safety and Health (DSST) and the labour inspectorate. Furthermore, the 2011 diagnosis indicates an overlap in social security functions, since both labour inspectors and the collection officers of the National Social Welfare Fund (CNSP) have competence in this area. The Committee notes in this connection the recommendation in the diagnosis that all units that have labour inspection functions and powers should be integrated or else coordinated and placed under the supervision and control of a central authority. In order to ensure proper coordination of the tasks and responsibilities of the labour administration system, the MINTSS should have the means to share the statistical information, documents, databases and projects of the bodies that report to it. It would also be advisable to define clearly the duties of labour inspectors and the CNPS collection officers so as to avoid problems of overlapping functions. The Committee requests the Government to make all necessary arrangements to ensure that the labour inspection system operates under the supervision and control of a central authority, and to provide information on the measures taken or envisaged to ensure that action is taken on the abovementioned recommendations, and to provide copies of any relevant texts or documents.

Article 5(b). Cooperation between the inspection services and the social partners. In reply to the Committee’s question in its 2010 observation under this Article, the Committee notes that the Government merely indicates that cooperation between the labour inspectorate and the social partners is frank and constructive, and refers to social dialogue forums already communicated to the ILO, but provides no details of cooperation in bodies such as the National Labour Advisory Commission (CNCT), the National Commission for Health and Safety at Work (CNSST), the Synergy Committee and OSH committees. The Committee notes the information in the 2011 diagnosis that forums for social dialogue, for example in the CNCT and CNSST, seldom operate and cooperation with the social partners is in much greater evidence in the decentralized departments of the MINTSS. The Committee accordingly repeats its request to the Government to provide details, along with any available documents, of the content of the cooperation that takes place at national level in or with the abovementioned bodies and at regional level in the decentralized departments of the MINTSS. It refers in this connection to the guidance provided in Part II of Recommendation No. 81 on the types of collaboration possible between the labour inspectorate and organizations of employers and workers.

Article 6. Status and conditions of service of labour inspectors. The Committee notes the information from the Government that the number of labour inspectors rose from 106 in 2008 to 329 in 2012, and that all labour inspectors are labour administration staff members. However, the Government provides no clarification as to the status and conditions of service of the various categories of inspectors, controllers, assistant controllers, clerks, contract staff, decision-makers and other staff referred to in the 2008 annual inspection report. The Committee asks the Government to provide information on the status and conditions of work of the 329 labour inspectors mentioned above. Please indicate in particular whether they have the status of public servants with indefinite appointments and provide information on their wages, including allowances, as compared to those of other officials in the administration or officials performing similar duties, such as tax inspectors. The Government is asked to provide copies of any legal texts applying to these matters.

It also asks the Government to specify the grades or categories and specializations of these inspectors, and their geographical distribution, indicating whether they assume all the functions defined in Article 3(1) of the Convention, namely: (a) securing enforcement of the legal provisions relating to conditions of work and the protection of workers; (b) supplying information and advice to workers and employers; and (c) engaging in activities that improve the labour legislation.

Article 7. Initial training and further training of labour inspectors. The Committee notes the information in the 2011 diagnosis that in the various units visited by the mission, labour inspectors do not have the full capacity or knowledge needed to perform the duties assigned to them, as they receive only initial training and are seldom given further training. They have not attended specialized courses on the prevention of risks at work. The Committee notes in this connection the recommendations made in the diagnosis to the effect that an appropriate body should determine the means for checking the particular qualifications required and that there should be permanent mechanisms for ensuring that inspectors have access to such training throughout their career. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the initial training and further training provided for labour inspectors in the course of their employment (subjects covered, number of participants, duration, etc.) and on the measures taken or envisaged to ensure that action is taken on the abovementioned recommendations.

Articles 9, 10, 11 and 16. Human and material resources available to the labour inspection services. The Committee notes the information in the 2011 diagnosis that material resources, such as buildings, furniture, office equipment, computer equipment, means of communication and vehicles, are limited or inadequate, or even obsolete. Workplace inspections are rare and, according to the reports on inspection work, OSH-related inspections at workplaces are virtually non-existent. The Committee notes the recommendations in the diagnosis to the effect that appropriate measures should be taken to endow the MINTSS with the necessary financial resources and a sufficiently large staff to cover the national territory, and that the number of inspectors with appropriate knowledge in safety and health matters in the regional offices should be increased. The Committee notes with interest the Government’s reference to the reinforcement of the material resources available to inspectors (electronic office equipment, transport facilities, office supplies, etc.). It notes, however, that the Government provides no details in this regard. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would indicate the measures taken or envisaged to implement the abovementioned recommendations, in particular to step up human and material resources to enable labour inspectors to perform their duties in the area of OSH.

It also asks the Government to provide up-to-date information on the number of labour inspectors and the material resources (premises, computers, printers, telephones, etc.) in the various regional directorates, including the number and type of transport facilities made available to labour inspectors and controllers carrying out their functions in the regions.

Articles 12, 13 and 17. Review of the legislation on the powers of labour inspectors. The Committee notes the information in the 2011 diagnosis that the MINTSS users’ guide to establishing procedures for the Ministry’s various departments, indicates as a requirement to be met prior to inspecting a workplace “a letter addressed to the head of the enterprise specifying the day, date and time of the visit”. The Committee notes in answer to the comments it has been making for years about the lack of any legislative provisions on the powers to be conferred on labour inspectors for the performance of their duties, the Government’s statement that the National Advisory Commission has just revised the 1992 Labour Code and that the nature and scope of labour inspectors’ powers pursuant to Articles 12, 13 and 17 of the Convention, have been considerably strengthened. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the status of the draft revision of the Labour Code. It would be grateful if the Government would provide a copy of the draft or of any relevant final text.

Articles 20 and 21. Annual report on labour inspection. The Committee notes that no report on the work of the labour inspectorate has been received at the ILO. It notes that the Government again expresses the need for technical assistance in producing annual inspection reports but does not indicate, as the Committee had requested in its observation of 2010, the steps taken to this end. In its previous comments, the Committee pointed out that technical assistance is useful for updating the register of workplaces for the creation of which, according to the Government’s last report, studies have been launched. It notes in this connection the information in the 2011 diagnosis that databases and enterprise registers are virtually non-existent in the regional offices. The figures produced by the CNPS are not shared directly with the MINTSS and are incomplete because many enterprises and workers are still not declared. The Committee notes the recommendations in the 2011 diagnosis that registering of enterprises should be set up in every regional office, and organized with the help of the existing databases at the CNPS, and that the registration of enterprises and their employees with the CNPS should be more effectively monitored. The Committee invites the Government to address a formal request for technical assistance to the Office for the purpose of setting up a register of workplaces and preparing and publishing an annual inspection report as required by the Convention.

It asks the Government to provide information on the steps taken to this end and on all other measures taken or envisaged, including the establishment of ongoing cooperation between the labour inspectorate and other Government agencies and public or private institutions that have relevant data.

Articles 2(1), 3(1), 16, 17 and 23. Labour inspection and child labour. The Committee requests the Government to provide detailed information on the labour inspectorate’s work in the area of child labour (number of offences detected, investigations, prosecutions, convictions and criminal sanctions applied, available means of redress, etc.).