Demande directe (CEACR) - adoptée 2013, publiée 103ème session CIT (2014)

Repetition

Article 1 of the Convention. Scope of application. Further to its previous comment, the Committee notes the adoption of the regulations on janitors (Official Gazette No. 25391 of 3 March 2004), which provide in section 9 that janitors’ weekly rest is regulated according to the relevant provisions of Labour Act No. 4857 of 2003.

Article 5. Compensatory rest. The Committee notes the Government’s reference to section 41(4) and (5) of the Labour Law No. 4857 of 2003 which provides for compensatory rest in lieu of extra pay, if the worker so wishes, in case of overtime at the rate of one-and-a-half hours of rest for each hour of overtime work. In this connection, the Committee observes that this provision refers to overtime in general and therefore does not necessarily relate to work performed on the day of weekly rest. It also observes that the Labour Law of 2003 does not contain a provision similar to section 43 of the previous Labour Law which expressly required enterprises exempt from the weekly rest day provisions to grant to their employees another rest day each week in compensation. The Committee understands that a provision along those terms is to be found in sections 4(e) and 6 of the Weekly Rest Act (No. 394) of 1925. It therefore requests the Government to clarify whether this latter instrument is still in force and, more generally, to explain how it is ensured that, whenever workers are required to perform work on the regular day of weekly rest, by reason of either a permanent or temporary exception, they are granted, as far as possible, compensatory rest of a minimum duration equivalent to 24 hours, as prescribed by this Article of the Convention.

The Committee wishes to recall, in this connection, that the Convention calls for compensatory rest irrespective of any extra pay which may be offered in addition. It considers that leaving it to the discretion of the worker concerned to choose between compensatory rest and cash compensation is perhaps not the best manner to ensure that workers enjoy every week the minimum of rest and leisure they need in order to preserve their health and well-being. Moreover, providing that compensatory rest is to be taken within six months risks to unduly postpone the period of weekly rest and therefore render difficult the worker’s recovery from the accumulated fatigue due to work performed on the rest day. The Committee therefore requests the Government to review the manner in which compensatory rest is regulated in law and practice and to provide in its next report more detailed particulars as to how it is given effect to the requirements of the Convention, particularly as regards the regularity and continuity of compensatory rest.