Demande directe (CEACR) - adoptée 2018, publiée 108ème session CIT (2019)

Convention (n° 97) sur les travailleurs migrants (révisée), 1949 - Jersey

Autre commentaire sur C097

Demande directe

2018
2012
2008
2002

Afficher en : Francais - EspagnolTout voir

Scope of protection. Private household employees. The Committee previously noted that section 1(5)(a) and (b) of the Employment (Jersey) Law excluded from its application the employment of a person under which the person’s work relates to the employer’s family household, where certain specific conditions are met. It also noted the Government’s clarification that workers employed in private households who were likely to meet the additional conditions set out in section 1(5) would be au pairs. The Committee notes that the Government indicates in its report that there is no specific employment legislation for au pairs but that the Employment (Jersey) Law would apply if the conditions in section 1(5)(a) and (b) are not met. The Committee recalls that foreign workers who are au pairs are covered by the Convention and asks the Government to indicate the applicable legislation to foreign au pairs who do meet the conditions set out in section 1(5)(a) and (b) of the Employment (Jersey) Law 2003, and any measures taken to ensure that foreign au pairs who are working and residing in the family home enjoy no less favourable treatment with nationals in the same conditions with respect to the matters set out in Article 6(1)(a)–(d) of the Convention. The Committee further encourages the Government to consider collecting statistical information, disaggregated by sex and nationality, on the number of national and foreign workers employed as live-in domestic workers in private households, including au pairs, in order to have an overview of the number of those foreign live-in domestic workers and nationals who are covered by the Employment (Jersey) Law 2003, and of those who are not, and to provide such information when available.

Article 3 of the Convention. Private recruitment agencies and misleading propaganda. The Committee notes the Government’s reply in response to its previous request concerning any complaints received by the Department of Social Security regarding unsatisfactory agency service pursuant to the Employment Agencies (Registration) Code of Conduct (Jersey) Order 1970. The Government also indicates that it is not aware of any misleading propaganda on the migration process, and that no measures have been considered necessary to prevent or suppress such misleading propaganda. The Committee requests the Government to continue to assess the need for any measures to prevent and suppress misleading propaganda on the migration process (including for example: (i) measures aimed at tackling exaggerated claims on the living and working conditions or on chances in finding and maintaining work in Jersey; or (ii) measures aimed at tackling false information propagating stereotypes on migrant workers or at combating xenophobia), and to provide information on any steps taken in this regard.

Article 4. Measures to facilitate departure and equality of treatment. The Committee recalls its previous comments regarding section 11 of the Employment Agencies (Registration) Code of Conduct (Jersey) Order 1970, imposing disproportionate restrictions on women wishing to migrate for employment using private agencies, restrictions that are not imposed with respect to male migrants. The Committee notes with interest that section 5 of the Employment Agencies (Registration and Code of Conduct) (Amendment) (Jersey) Order 2013 amends section 6 of the Employment Agencies (Registration) Code of Conduct (Jersey) Order 1970 to repeal the reference to “any female person” and to remove the restrictions on women wishing to migrate for employment using private agencies.

Article 6. Equality of treatment. Enforcement. The Committee welcomes the information provided by the Government regarding compliance with the provisions of the Employment (Jersey) Law 2003, including the minimum wage, and the Social Security (Jersey) Law 1974 and the Social Security (Residence and Persons Abroad) (Jersey) Order 1974, covering the matters enumerated in Article 6(1)(a)–(d) of the Convention. It notes in particular the data from the surveys undertaken on employers in the domestic work sector between June 2012 and May 2017, indicating that no minimum wage issues were found but that a number of employers had “issues with contracts”. The Government further indicates that both migrants and national workers, as well as employers, can submit complaints to the Jersey Advisory and Conciliation Service (JACS) which can settle employment disputes and give free advice. Since January 2014, the JACS received 15 queries in relation to work in private households (six from male workers, seven from female workers and two unspecified), 12 of which were from British/Jersey nationals. No complaints were submitted to the judicial or administrative authorities dealing with questions of principle relating to the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on compliance with the relevant legal provisions covering the matters set out in Article 6(1)(a)–(d) of the Convention, including complaints submitted to the courts or the JACS, or violations detected by the compliance inspectors of the Social Security Department. It also asks the Government to clarify the type of contractual issues that were found in the context of the surveys of the employers of domestic workers.