Demande directe (CEACR) - adoptée 2015, publiée 105ème session CIT (2016)

Convention (n° 81) sur l'inspection du travail, 1947 - Madagascar (Ratification: 1971)

Autre commentaire sur C081

Observation

Demande directe

Afficher en : Francais - EspagnolTout voir

The Committee notes the observations of the Trade Union Confederation of Malagasy Revolutionary Workers (FISEMARE), received on 31 August 2014, and the Government’s reply to those; and the observations of the Autonomous Trade Union of Labour Inspectors (SAIT), received on 29 January 2015, and the Christian Confederation of Malagasy Trade Unions (SEKRIMA), received on 2 June 2015.

Articles 2, 5(a), 21(c) and 23 of the Convention. Labour inspection activities in export processing zones and inter-institutional cooperation for the exchange of information aimed at the establishment of a register of workplaces. The Committee recalls that, following the expansion of the Labour Code’s scope to cover export processing zones (EPZs), it asked the Government to provide statistics on labour inspection activities in these zones and their outcome. It also asked the Government to indicate the measures taken to collect information on the number of employers and workers, as well as the enterprises and EPZs, covered by the Labour Code. The Committee notes that SEKRIMA notes the need for statistics on employers and workers, and on the enterprises and EPZs, at a time when the country is reinstating its market into the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) and is expecting to implement the Millennium Challenge Account (MCA) programme. The SAIT expresses its concern at the effectiveness of labour inspection in relation with the reinstatement of the market into the AGOA, which will involve the reopening of several previously closed enterprises and the creation of thousands of jobs.

In this regard, the Government indicates in its report that 34,475 employers and 567,917 workers are affiliated to the National Social Security Fund (NSSF). The Committee underlines in this respect, as it did in its general observation of 2009, the importance of the availability of a register of workplaces liable to labour inspection, as well as the activities performed and the categories of workers employed therein, for the assessment of the coverage of the labour inspection system to meet its needs, and the need, to this end, to promote effective cooperation with other governmental services and public and private institutions that hold relevant data (for example, tax administration, the chambers of commerce and industry, and the ministries responsible for the sectors covered). The Committee hopes that the Government will take the necessary measures promptly with a view to promoting inter-institutional cooperation with the abovementioned bodies and that such cooperation will serve to establish and update a register of workplaces.

Article 3(2). Other functions of labour inspectors. In its previous comments, the Committee asked the Government to take all the necessary measures, including revising the relevant provisions of the Labour Code, with a view to gradually dissociating the roles of arbitration and conciliation from those of labour inspection, to enable labour inspectors to devote their time more fully to monitoring the enforcement of legal provisions relating to conditions of work and the protection of workers. The Committee notes that SEKRIMA maintains that the number of inspectors will remain insufficient as long as they assume two different roles, that is, enforcing the legislation and conciliating individual and collective labour disputes, and that the employers’ influence over certain inspectors during labour disputes may affect the decision taken. With reference, in this respect, to paragraphs 72–74 of its 2006 General Survey on labour inspection, the Committee considers that the time spent on the function of conciliation or arbitration is often at the expense of the primary duty, as set out in Article 3(1), especially in a setting with limited resources. It also draws the Government’s attention to the guidance in paragraph 8 of the Labour Inspection Recommendation, 1947 (No. 81) according to which, “the functions of labour inspectors should not include that of acting as conciliator or arbitrator in proceedings concerning labour disputes”. The Committee encourages the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that labour inspectors are released, in law and practice, from the duties to which they are assigned in the area of conciliation and arbitration in order that they may devote themselves fully to their primary duties as set out in Article 3(1) of the Convention.

Article 5(b). Collaboration between officials of the labour inspectorate and employers and workers or their organizations. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that the National Labour Council had resumed its work in 2010, and asked the Government to provide information on the activities of the Council with respect to strengthening the labour inspection system. According to FISEMARE, the Council has not convened since 2012 and, therefore, the Ministry of Public Service, Labour and Social Laws (MFPTLS) acts without any consultation with the employers’ and workers’ organizations. In this regard, the Government indicates that there is currently no collaboration between the inspection services and the National Labour Council. It also indicates that this body has been partially functional despite the crisis, focusing its activities on issues relating to salaries. The Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to promote collaboration between officials of the labour inspectorate and employers and workers or their organizations, including through the revitalization of the National Labour Council.