Questions and answers

The ILO Helpdesk for Business provides information on the principles contained in International Labour Standards. It does not address disputes.

The ILO does have an interpretation procedure. The procedure is used to interpret the provisions of the ILO Tripartite Declaration of Principles concerning Multinational Enterprises and Social Policy (MNE Declaration) when needed to resolve a disagreement on their meaning, arising from an actual situation, between parties to whom the Declaration is commended.

Please note the following:

« Requests for interpretation may be addressed to the Office: a. as a rule by the government of a member State acting either on its own initiative or at the request of a national organization of employers or workers;
b. by a national organization of employers or workers, which is representative at the national and/or sectoral level, subject to the conditions set out in paragraph 6. Such requests should normally be channelled through the central organizations in the country concerned;
c. by an international organization of employers or workers on behalf of a representative national affiliate.”
Individual complainants cannot bring a request.

Of 21 requests received, five cases have been the subjects of decisions by the Governing Body. Two were submitted by a government, and three by international organizations of workers on behalf of representative national affiliates. Four of the cases were found receivable, two unanimously [2] and the other two by majority decisions.[3] The fifth case was declared non-receivable and did not reach the interpretation stage.[4] In four cases, substantive interpretations have been issued.

One case concerned paid leave for a union official to attend training on safety and health and three concerned collective dismissal.

There is also the option of the Company-Union Dialogue but both the union and the management must agree, and the company must be a multinational operating across borders. The Company-Union Dialogue is not for purely internal disputes within a country.

If the issue concerns failure of the state to adequately protect the workers’ rights, there are a few mechanisms for bringing a complaint under the supervisory machinery . Please note, however that any complaint must be brought by a trade union at the national, sectoral or international level.

Trade and Investment Agreements increasingly reference core labour standards in Ratifying the 8 core labour standards, wherein governments which are parties to such agreements make a commitment to ratify and apply these conventions, if they have not already done so.

See ILO’s recent report The Social Dimensions of Free Trade Agreements for a discussion of trends and implications .

A growing number of trade agreements also reference CSR, encouraging each signatory country to promote socially responsible business within their territory and among their MNEs operating in the other countries which are party to the treaty. See, Corporate social responsibility in international trade and investment agreements: Implications for states, business and workers .

Concerning how companies decide to source their products and services, companies are increasingly taking into account respect for workers’ rights when selecting suppliers. They may even be required by law to demonstrate that they have undertaken due diligence to assess whether their business partners are respecting their workers’ rights. (see, e.g., “Examples of government regulations on human rights reporting & due diligence for companies ”).

A first step in any corporate human rights due diligence process is to assess the national legal framework of the country where the business partner operates. This includes checking whether the country has ratified the core labour standards and progress in implementing the provisions.

Companies do not necessarily refuse to source from countries which have not ratified all of the core conventions, but in such cases, the companies are likely to increase their sectoral and enterprise-level scrutiny as additional assurance that there are no problems with the potential supplier. It is also the case that ratification does not necessarily guarantee that more buyers will source from the country. Buyers also look for quality, timeliness of delivery, price advantage, etc. Respect for workers’ rights is only one factor, albeit an important one. ILO has developed programmes such as SCORE, which helps smaller producers to become both more responsible and more competitive. See https: www.ilo.org/empent/Projects/score/lang--en/index.htm for more information on this project.

You may find the following tool useful in thinking about how to promote ratification and implementation of the core labour standards to position your country to attract more and better foreign direct investment: HANDBOOK ON ASSESSMENT OF LABOUR PROVISIONS IN TRADE AND INVESTMENT ARRANGEMENTS .

The ILO adopted an international instrument aiming at encouraging the positive contribution of enterprises to economic and social progress and at minimizing and resolving the difficulties to which their various operations may give rise. The ILO Tripartite Declaration of Principles concerning Multinational Enterprises and Social Policy (MNE Declaration) sets out the principles in the field of employment, training, conditions of work and life and industrial relations which governments, employers’, workers’ organizations and enterprises are recommended to observe on a voluntary basis. The ILO MNE Declaration is the only instrument of its kind adopted in a tripartite manner. Its principles as well as those underlying the ILO’s Conventions and Recommendations provide guidance for the development and implementation of enterprises’ social policies and programmes and are often referred to in codes of conducts and similar initiatives.

The MNE Declaration mentions the ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work and its Follow-up, which highlights a set of core labour principles endorsed by the international community. Eight Conventions based on those principles have been identified as fundamental to the rights of human beings at work, irrespective of the level of development of individual ILO Member States. They cover four main areas:

• freedom of association and the effective recognition of the right to collective bargaining;
• the elimination of all forms of forced or compulsory labour;
• the effective abolition of child labour;
• the elimination of discrimination in respect to employment and occupation.

A number of international initiatives involving enterprises refer to either or both the Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work and its Follow-up and the Tripartite Declaration of Principles concerning Multinational Enterprises and Social Policy, including the United Nations Global Compact, the Business and Human Rights Framework and Guiding Principles and the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises.

An E-learning module provides an interactive opportunity to become knowledgeable about the ILO MNE Declaration and to learn how its recommendations can be put into practice to address a range of labour and employment issues. The self-guided module can be accessed at: https://www.ilo.org/mnelearning

Since the international labour standards (ILS) are directed at Governments, companies cannot “comply” with or conform to them; but companies can contribute to their aims.

The best benchmark they could use is compliance with national law, which is generally the basis of codes of conduct. There will be cases where national law does not reflect the provisions of the ILS, in which case the supplier should be encouraged to attain the higher aims set out in the ILS.

Knowledge of the law and practice of the country in question is an important first step in a due diligence process; however, even if national law or labour administration has problems, a company may hold itself to a higher standard. Therefore, an accurate assessment requires information about the specific company’s operations, which may require more extensive dialogue with the company. The employers’ and workers’ organizations familiar with the national and sectoral context also may be an important source of information; and collaboration with the relevant global union federations could also be useful.
ILO is not linked to any certification bodies and does not advocate certification for labour issues. Recent tragedies and numerous studies (see, e.g., the research of Richard Locke) have exposed the limits of such systems and high costs to suppliers, and have highlighted the importance of strong national institutions, sound industrial relations and effective social dialogue systems for effectively protecting the rights of workers.

There are a few direct references in international labour standards to the principle that workers should be able to understand their contract of employment. The Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention, 1989 (No. 169) states in Article 20, paragraph 3 (a) of Convention No. 169 that "workers belonging to the peoples concerned" (shall) "enjoy the protection afforded by national law and practice to other such workers in the same sectors, and that they are fully informed of their rights under labour legislation and of the means of redress available to them".

The ILO Multilateral Framework on Labour Migration states in paragraph 13.3. that steps should be taken to ensure “that migrant workers receive understandable and enforceable employment contracts.”

The Domestic Workers Convention, 2011 (No. 189) provides in Article 7 that workers should be “informed of their terms and conditions of employment in an appropriate, verifiable and easily understandable manner and preferably, where possible, through written contracts in accordance with national laws, regulations or collective agreements.”

Providing the worker with a written contract in a language she or he can understand is also recognized as an important means of preventing forced labour. Combating forced labour: A handbook for employers and business recommends on page 4 that business “ensure that all workers have written contracts, in language that they can easily understand, specifying their rights with regard to payment of wages, overtime, retention of identity documents, and other issues related to preventing forced labour.”

The ILO supervisory bodies consist of the Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations and the Conference Committee on the Application of Standards. These bodies currently review government reports on the application of ratified conventions every 2 years for priority conventions (concerning the fundamental principles and rights at work and employment) and every 5 years for all other conventions; however, for a variety of reasons, a government may be requested to report more frequently, particularly on the fundamental conventions.

Representation and complaint procedures can also be initiated against states that fail to comply with conventions they have ratified.

A special procedure—the Committee on Freedom of Association (CFA)—reviews complaints concerning violations of freedom of association, whether or not a Member State has ratified the relevant conventions.

Regarding question 1, ILO does not monitor compliance of organizations operating in a country. Member States which have ratified a particular convention report on whether they have established the requisite mechanisms for giving effect to the provisions of the convention, through national legislation or collective bargaining agreements and national labour administration, in particular labour inspection and the courts.

For instance, a member State which has ratified the minimum Wage Fixing Machinery Convention, 1928 (No. 26) would report whether it has established a tripartite consultation body, what factors it takes into account in establishing the minimum wage, how often the minimum wage is adjusted and whether it keeps pace with inflation, what legislation mandates that enterprises pay at least the minimum wage, what percentage of the workforce receives at least the minimum wage, etc. Member States do not report on specific organizations' compliance with the established minimum wage.

A complaint received by the CFA may contain allegations concerning specific company practices concerning freedom of association. Please note, however, that this is a complaints-based mechanism and thus wholly dependent upon the filing of a complaint which is in any event brought against governments, and not employers. This is because under the ILO supervisory machinery the Government is the party responsible for ensuring that the standards and principles are applied in practice.

The ILO maintains a database of ratifications , organized by convention and by country; and a database of decisions concerning freedom of association . You can also find out more about what the Committee of Experts has said about a particular Member State's compliance with a ratified convention, using the "universal query form ".

The relevant national labour administration may be able to provide you with information on violations of national labour law; however, this would not necessarily indicate compliance with international labour standards if the country has not ratified or does not comply with the relevant international labour standards.

As an employer, an enterprise in any country can be encouraged to take part in national processes through local organizations of employers, and through these organizations it may be able to raise concerns about breaches of labour standards at the national level. Through international employer organisations these concerns may be pursued at the international level.

You may also find useful the Tripartite Declaration of Principles concerning Multinational Enterprises and Social Policy (MNE Declaration). The MNE Declaration is a non-binding instrument which contains recommendations on how enterprises should apply principles deriving from ILO Conventions and Recommendations. The objective of the MNE Declaration is to encourage the positive contribution that multinationals can make to economic and social progress and to minimize and resolve the difficulties to which their various operations may give rise. The MNE Declaration provides guidelines on how enterprises should apply principles deriving from international labour standards concerning employment, training, conditions of work and life, and industrial relations. The principles of the MNE Declaration are intended to guide multinational enterprises (whether they are of public, mixed or private ownership), governments, and the organizations of employers and workers in home countries as well as in host countries.

The ILO maintains a database of national legislation called NATLEX . It is searchable by country and by subject.

“Multinational enterprises include enterprises, whether they are of public, mixed or private ownership, which own or control production, distribution, services or other facilities outside the country in which they are based. The degree of autonomy of entities within multinational enterprises in relation to each other varies widely from one such enterprise to another, depending on the nature of the links between such entities and their fields of activity and having regard to the great diversity in the form of ownership, in the size, in the nature and location of the operations of the enterprises concerned”. See, Para. 6 of the ILO Tripartite Declaration of Principles concerning Multinational Enterprises and Social Policy .

Only States can be members of the International Labour Organization (ILO) and ratify its conventions. However, enterprises such as cooperatives can refer to ILO instruments in their social policies, including their codes of conduct and similar social responsibility initiatives. The ILO adopted an international instrument aiming at encouraging the positive contribution of enterprises to economic and social progress and at minimizing and resolving the difficulties to which their various operations may give rise. The ILO Tripartite Declaration of Principles concerning Multinational Enterprises and Social Policy (MNE Declaration) sets out the principles in the field of employment, training, conditions of work and life and industrial relations which governments, employers’, workers’ organizations and enterprises are recommended to observe on a voluntary basis.

We welcome the efforts of your municipality to help promote respect for workers’ rights in your procurement practices. At the same time, we appreciate the challenges this may pose when most of the employment takes place outside of your municipality and country and therefore you are dependent on other sources of information on how the fundamental principles and rights at work (FPRW, often referred to as core labour standards) are being implemented in the operations of the MNEs submitting tenders.

There are several actions we can suggest. First, your municipality could take steps to ensure a shared understanding of the FPRW. You also could include provisions for reporting on measures taken to ensure respect for the FPRW. In developing these provisions, you may wish to engage in social dialogue with the relevant employers’ and workers’ organizations at the local and national level, as well as the relevant trade unions operating at the global sectoral level, to seek their views on what could be done to strengthen the oversight of company claims of compliance with the FPRW.

You may wish to get in touch with other municipalities which have also committed to applying the FPRW in their procurement processes, to learn from their experiences. You may wish also to check the following sites, which are very active on responsible public procurement at the local government level:

• http://www.procuraplus.org/
• http://www.respiro-project.eu/

Companies should “obey national laws and regulations, give due consideration to local practices and respect relevant international standards.” ILO MNE Declaration , para. 8. In many situations, national law may not be in line with international labour standards, but does not actually block a company from respecting the principles contained in international labour standards and the MNE Declaration. For instance, a law may allow employing persons as young as 12 years of age but not impede a company from setting its own internal policy to not hire anyone below 15 years of age.

In other cases, national law may act as a genuine barrier to respecting the principles contained in international labour standards. In situations where the law or its implementation is genuinely in conflict with international norms of behaviour, companies may consider seeking to influence relevant organizations and authorities to remedy the conflict. National employers’ organizations may be able to help. A list of national federations can be found here: http://www.ioe-emp.org/en/member-federations/index.html.

Where it is not possible for a company to influence change, and where not following these norms would have significant consequences, it may wish to consider, as feasible and appropriate, reviewing the nature of operations within that jurisdiction.

ILO does not deal with certification schemes, and therefore cannot answer your specific question. However, we can provide some general guidance which we hope will be helpful.

1. Address a broad range of labour standards. The ILO MNE Declaration identifies principles underlying international labour standards that can be used by companies. A one-page overview is attached for your convenience, and the link to the full text is here:

2. Respect national legislation and adhere to collective bargaining agreements

3. Promote and use social dialogue. Social dialogue can lead to a better understanding of problem and solutions. Social dialogue can be an important means to advance and protect workers’ interests and promote sustainable enterprise development. Dialogue improves transparency and helps to build a shared understanding of the meaning and importance of workers’ rights. Social dialogue requires independent parties. This means that worker representative must be freely chosen in accordance with law or by trade unions that represent the workers concerned.

Discussions are also important between buyers and suppliers, to better understand suppliers’ needs and constraints. Suppliers are under pressure due to short lead times, frequent or last-minute changes in an order; buyer expectations to improve quality and shorten delivery times while simultaneously cutting costs, etc.

4. Providing support for correcting problems uncovered. Multinationals should consider ways to provide suppliers, both management and workers, guidance and support to take needed corrective action to protect workers’ rights.

5. Harmonizing with, and supporting the development of, the public labour inspection system. Although CSR can be a useful compliment, ILO is concerned to ensure that private initiatives do not replace public labour inspection systems. Private initiatives should operate in harmony with the public labour administration and do nothing to undermine it, and should cooperate with the public authorities and national employers’ and workers’ organizations. Any private inspection systems should be under the supervision of the public labour inspection system.

6. Considering impact for workers and costs to suppliers. There is a growing body of literature which casts doubt on the effectiveness and efficiency of private initiatives to protect workers’ rights, at least as they are currently conducted. Often it is difficult to identify any significant and sustained benefit to the workers.

There is also a growing concern about the costs to suppliers, in terms of both expense and disruption to operations. These resources might be better spent improving working conditions or strengthening public labour inspection.

You may also wish to consult with the relevant national employers' and workers' organisations, both in your home country and in the countries where your products are made, about which approaches and initiatives in their view are most effective.

Lastly, we have a set of guidelines concerning labour inspection which were negotiated at the international level. Although specific to the forestry sector, it may give you a good indication of the areas ILO thinks are important for protecting workers' rights, and some suggestions on good practice on checking compliance, including both public inspection and private approaches.

The application of international labour standards is regularly reviewed by the oversight bodies of the ILO, the Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations and the Committee on the Application of Standards of the International Labour Conference.

Member States which have ratified a convention are required to report periodically on the measures put in place to implement the provisions of the conventions through national legislation, collective agreement or national labour administration labour, especially labour inspection. The list of ratifications by Convention and country is available.

To learn more about what the expert panel said about the compliance of national law with the provisions of a specific agreement has been ratified, use the universal search form .

You can also consult the Tripartite Declaration of Principles concerning Multinational Enterprises and Social Policy . The statement is non-binding instrument which contains recommendations on how companies should apply principles deriving from conventions and ILO recommendations. The aim of the declaration is to encourage the positive contribution multinational enterprises to economic and social progress and to minimize and resolve difficulties which their various operations may give rise. The statement provides guidance on how companies should apply principles deriving from international labour standards concerning employment, training, conditions of work and life, and industrial relations. The Declaration principles guiding multinational companies (whether public, private or mixed ownership), the countries of origin as well as the governments of the host countries and the organizations of employers and workers.

The subjects covered by international labour standards are the following:

• Freedom of association
• Collective bargaining
• Forced labour
• Child labour
• Equal opportunity and treatment
• Tripartite consultation
• Labour administration
• Labour inspection
• Employment policy
• Employment promotion
• Orientation and professional training
• Job security
• Social policy
• Wages
• Working time
• Security and health at work
• Social security
• Maternity protection
• Migrant workers
• Seafarers
• Fishermen
• Dockworkers
• Indigenous and tribal peoples
• Other specific categories of workers

For a brief description of international labour standards on each of these issues, we recommend reading the following guidance: "Rules of the Game: a brief introduction to International Labour Standards (Revised edition 2014) ”. See Chapter 3; on the role of organizations of employers and workers in the system of regular monitoring of these standards, see page 100.

There is no international labour norm that regulates exhaustively the value of documents and electronic signatures in the field of work.

Nevertheless, certain international labour norms that regulate specific subjects address, at least indirectly, this subject. The Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations of the ILO has maintained in the General Survey on Protection of Wages of 2003 that payment of wages by direct electronic transfer to a bank account or by money order is compatible with the Protection of Wages Convention of 1949 (No. 95) as long as its 5th article is complied with.

Furthermore, the Private Employment Agencies Recommendation of 1997 (No. 188) includes the following recommendations:

11. Private employment agencies should be prohibited from recording, in files or registers, personal data which are not required for judging the aptitude of applicants for jobs for which they are being or could be considered.

12 (1) Private employment agencies should store the personal data of a worker only for so long as it is justified by the specific purposes for which they have been collected, or so long as the worker wishes to remain on a list of potential job candidates.

(2) Measures should be taken to ensure that workers have access to all their personal data as processed by automated or electronic systems, or kept in a manual file. These measures should include the right of workers to obtain and examine a copy of any such data and the right to demand that incorrect or incomplete data be deleted or corrected.

(3) Unless directly relevant to the requirements of a particular occupation and with the express permission of the worker concerned, private employment agencies should not require, maintain or use information on the medical status of a worker, or use such information to determine the suitability of a worker for employment.

The Seafarers' Identity Documents Convention (Revised) of 2003 (No. 185) also requires Member States to keep in electronic format certain information. As an example of this, paragraph 1 of article 4 therein provides that “Each Member shall ensure that a record of each seafarers' identity document issued, suspended or withdrawn by it is stored in an electronic database. The necessary measures shall be taken to secure the database from interference or unauthorized access”.

As a voluntary tool, the MNE Declaration Dispute Procedure is promotional in nature. The procedure is used to interpret the provisions of the Declaration when needed to resolve a disagreement on their meaning, arising from an actual situation, between parties to whom the Declaration is commended.

Of 21 requests received, five cases have been the subjects of decisions by the Governing Body. Two were submitted by a government, and three by international organizations of workers on behalf of representative national affiliates. Four of the cases were found receivable, two unanimously (GB. 229/13/13 and GB.239/14/24/appendix) and the other two by majority decisions (GB.272/6 and preceding documents on which the discussion is based and GB.264/MNE/2). The fifth case was declared non-receivable, GB.254/MNE/4/6, and did not reach the interpretation stage. In four cases, substantive interpretations have been issued.

One case concerned paid leave for a union official to attend training on safety and health and three concerned collective dismissal.

There are two problems with child labour:

1. It deprives a child of an education which could expand his or her employment opportunities when she or he is old enough to enter the workforce. Society also benefits from having a better educated population which has a broader perspective and skills to be informed and responsible adults.
2. It puts the child at risk. In agriculture, risks include long hours of work which are too much for a child, and exposure to chemicals which a young body may not be able to metabolize safely (safety standards are set for adults). It also may expose the child to dangerous equipment such as machetes or combines. All of these elements are considered hazardous and therefore young people under 18 should have higher levels of protection. (See, Recommendation 190, paragraph 3).

It is important to note, each government determines which sectors are considered hazardous, and a particular country may have determined (hopefully in tripartite dialogue with the workers and employers organizations) that agriculture is not a hazardous sector and young people under 18 years of age but above the minimum set in national law (15 or exceptionally, 14) can work in that sector. So it is essential to check what the law says in India, which may also vary by state.

Of course, young people can be exposed to agricultural work as part of their vocational education and training once they have finished their compulsory general education. In such cases, this should be done in a structured way in a programme subject to government oversight, with a combination of class work and hands-on exposure in carefully supervised conditions to protect the health and safety of the young people.

Concerning the abolition of child labour, the ILO MNE Declaration (2017) states at its paragragh 27 that: “Multinational enterprises, as well as national enterprises, should respect the minimum age for admission to employment or work in order to secure the effective abolition of child labour in their operations and should take immediate and effective measures within their own competence to secure the and elimination of the worst forms of child labour as a matter of urgency.”

Paragraph 9 of the MNE Declaration further states that: “All parties should contribute to the realization of the ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work and its Follow-up, adopted in 1998. All Members, even if they have not ratified the fundamental Conventions in question, have an obligation, arising from the very fact of membership in the Organization, to respect, to promote and to realize, in good faith and in accordance with the Constitution, the principles concerning the fundamental rights which are the subject of those Conventions, namely: (a) freedom of association and the effective recognition of the right to collective bargaining; (b) the elimination of all forms of forced or compulsory labour; (c) the effective abolition of child labour; and (d) the elimination of discrimination in respect of employment and occupation. Governments of States which have not yet ratified the Conventions concerning fundamental principles and rights at work recognized in the 1998 Declaration are urged to do so. Multinational enterprises, through their operations, can contribute significantly to the attainment of its objectives.”

Paragraph 10 clarifies the responsibilities of the different actors in such a situation of abuse of labour-related human right: “The principles set out in the MNE Declaration are commended to governments, employers’ and workers’ organizations of home and host countries and to multinational enterprises themselves. The principles thereby reflect the fact that different actors have a specific role to play. In this regard for the purpose of this Declaration:

(a) The Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations “Protect, Respect and Remedy” Framework (2011) outline the respective duties and responsibilities of States and enterprises on human rights. These principles are grounded in recognition of:

(i) States’ existing obligations to respect, protect and fulfil human rights and fundamental freedoms (“the State duty to protect human rights”); (ii) the role of enterprises as specialized organs of society performing specialized functions, required to comply with all applicable laws and to respect human rights (“the corporate responsibility to respect human rights”); and (iii) the need for rights and obligations to be matched to appropriate and effective remedies when breached (“Access to remedy”).

(b) The Guiding Principles apply to all States and to all enterprises, both multinational and others, regardless of their size, sector, operational context, ownership and structure.

(c) The corporate responsibility to respect human rights requires that enterprises, including multinational enterprises wherever they operate:

(i) avoid causing or contributing to adverse impacts through their own activities, and address such impacts when they occur; and (ii) seek to prevent or mitigate adverse human rights impacts that are directly linked to their operations, products or services by their business relationships, even if they have not contributed to those impacts.

(d) Enterprises, including multinational enterprises, should carry out due diligence to identify, prevent, mitigate and account for how they address their actual and potential adverse impacts that relate to internationally recognized human rights, understood, at a minimum, as those expressed in the International Bill of Human Rights and the principles concerning fundamental rights set out in the ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work.

(e) In order to gauge human rights risks, enterprises – including multinational enterprises – should identify and assess any actual or potential adverse human rights impacts with which they may be involved either through their own activities or as a result of their business relationships. This process should involve meaningful consultation with potentially affected groups and other relevant stakeholders including workers’ organizations, as appropriate to the size of the enterprise and the nature and context of the operation. For the purpose of achieving the aim of the MNE Declaration, this process should take account of the central role of freedom of association and collective bargaining as well as industrial relations and social dialogue as an ongoing process.

The responsibility of the state
The state has the duty both under international human rights law and international labour law to protect the children from working at too young an age. This requires taking appropriate steps to prevent, investigate, punish and redress such abuse through effective policies, legislation, regulations and adjudication.
Additionally, as part of their duty to protect against business-related human rights abuse, States must take appropriate steps to ensure, through judicial, administrative, legislative or other appropriate means, that when such abuses occur within their territory and/or jurisdiction those affected have access to effective remedy.

The responsibilities of business
An enterprises needs to comply with national laws, and has the responsibility to respect human rights; and they should be held legally accountable for any violations of the laws concerning minimum age to work. All enterprises are required to comply with national law, whether those laws are adequately implemented and enforced or not. Hiring under age workers is a breach of the responsibility to respect human rights which requires immediate cessation of employing underage children and remediation of any adverse human rights impacts they have caused or to which they have contributed.

In cases where the due diligence of the supplier is weak or non-existent, or where the rights at risk are very serious the buyer should undertake its own due diligence. For any size or type of enterprise, the complexity of its due diligence process will vary with the risk of severe impacts, and the nature and context of its operations. All company due diligence processes should involve meaningful consultation with potentially affected groups and other relevant stakeholders including workers’ organizations, as appropriate to the size of the enterprise and the nature and context of the operation. This process should also take account of the central role of freedom of association and collective bargaining as well as industrial relations and social dialogue as an ongoing process.

If a business is causing or contributing to child labour through its business practices, it should cease to contribute and support remediation. Using leverage is critical to prevent and address child labour in business relationships throughout the value chain.

The ILO MNE Declaration encourages enterprises to make a positive contribution to economic and social development, in particular by contributing to the realization of the fundamental principles and rights at work, which include elimination of all forms of child labour and the worst form of child labour. Therefore, even in the absence of an obligation arising from a direct business link to a supplier using child labour, the enterprise should also consider other ways to address child labour in the sector.

The practice of child labour is often driven by poverty and the actions of a few enterprises alone is unlikely to solve the problem; a more holistic, community-based intervention would be needed. Nonetheless, such efforts might prod local government concerned to take appropriate systematic action and could also motivate collaboration with other enterprises to address instances of child human rights violations.

The company should respect the minimum age set by law, normally 15 but in some countries it is set at 14 and others at 16. If the minimum age set by the national law is below either 15 in developed countries or 14 in developing countries, the company should apply the minimum of 15, or exceptionally 14 for developing countries. (See, Minimum Age Convention, 1973 (No. 138) , Article 2) The age of 18 should be applied if and where the work or tasks in question are considered as hazardous—defined as work which, by its nature or the circumstances in which it is carried out, is likely to harm the health, safety or morals of children. (See, ILO Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention, 1999 (No. 182) , Article 3d [2]) Furthermore, the age of 18 could also be imposed for a specific post if it can be considered as an inherent requirement of the job.

In any other circumstances, a minimum age of 16 would be discriminatory. Discrimination at work includes any “distinction, exclusion or preference … which has the effect of nullifying or impairing equality of opportunity or treatment in employment or occupation.” See, Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1958 (No. 111) , Article 1(1) Discrimination occurs when a person is treated less favourably than others because of characteristics that are not closely related to the inherent requirements of the job or when the same condition, treatment or criterion results in a disproportionately harsh impact on some persons.

The provision of work opportunities for adolescents under adequate conditions, rather than excluding them entirely from employment opportunities, is one of the effective measures to eliminate child labour, including its worst forms. Companies can play an important role in promoting youth employment by providing non-hazardous decent work opportunities to young people between the minimum age and 18. Companies are encouraged to increase employment opportunities and standards, taking into account the employment policies and objectives of the government; in many countries, increasing youth employment is a central policy goal. See, ILO Tripartite Declaration of Principles Concerning Multinational Enterprises and Social Policy , paragraph 16.

The ILO does not provide documents for enterprises to sign. The ILO approach to eliminating child labour is a more systemic approach which promotes collaboration between buyers, suppliers, employers and workers organization and the community.

In general terms, child labour is work performed at too early an age which deprives a child of the chance to obtain an education or damages a child’s development.

Enterprises should contribute to the “effective abolition of child labour” and to “take immediate and effective measures within their own competence to secure the prohibition and elimination of the worst forms of child labour as a matter of urgency,”[1] including forced labour or slavery-like practices, including child trafficking and child soldiers, the use of children in sexual exploitation or in illicit activities, and designated hazardous work.

The minimum working age is usually set by the national legislation, and must be respected. According to international standards, it is at least 15, which is typically the age when compulsory schooling ends. Exceptions may be permitted for work done in the context of training or for light work from 13 years of age that does not affect schooling.

In developing countries, the prescribed minimum age may be set at 14 years generally and at 12 years for light work. However, some countries (for example, Brazil, China and Kenya) chose to set the minimum age at 16 years on their own initiative.

Nobody under the age of 18 years should be engaged in hazardous work—work that is damaging to a child’s physical, social, mental, psychological and spiritual development— regardless of the level of development of the country. Efforts to eliminate the worst forms of child labour should not be used to justify other forms of child labour.

Action to eliminate the worst forms of child labour should give special attention to the needs of girls and the young child.

Not all work by a person under the age of 18 is child labour. It depends both on the age and on the types and conditions of work. Child labour should not be confused with “youth employment”; as from the minimum working age, young people should be introduced to decent work, but still need protection from hazardous work and other worst forms of child labour. There are also flexibilities for “light work”, which is permissible as from 13 (or 12) years of age by school-going children if authorized and monitored by the relevant authorities.

Companies sourcing in specific industry sectors with geographically distant supply chains need to be particularly vigilant. Part of conducting due diligence should include review of ILO and other research to be aware of sectors prone to child labour problems in areas where a company operates.

Particular actions companies can take to eliminate child labour in the workplace include:

• Adhere to minimum age provisions of national labour laws and regulations and, where national law is insufficient, take account of international standards.
• Use adequate and verifiable mechanisms for age verification upon recruitment.
• Maintain accurate and up-to-date records of all employees.
• When children below the legal working age are found in the workplace, take measures to remove them from work and
• To the extent possible, help the child removed from workplace and his/her family to access adequate services and viable alternatives.
• Exercise influence on subcontractors, suppliers and other business partners to combat child labour.
• Consider ways to build the capacity of business partners to combat child labour, such as the provision of training and incentives.
• Fix the wage level for the adult employees so that they can support their families without depending on children’s earning.

Companies may also wish to contribute, where possible, to broader community efforts to eliminate child labour and help children removed from work to have access to quality education and social protection, including:

• Work in partnership with other companies, sectoral associations and employers’ organisations to develop an industry-wide approach to address the issue, and build bridges with stakeholders such as workers’ organisations, law enforcement authorities, labour inspectorates and others.
• Establish or participate in a task force or committee on child labour in your representative employers’ organisation at local, state or national level. Support development of a National Action Plan against child labour as part of key policy and institutional mechanisms to combat forced labour at national level.
• Within your sphere of influence, participate in prevention and re-integration programmes for former child labourers by providing education, skills development and job training opportunities.
• Where possible, participate in national and international programmes, including media campaigns, and co-ordinate with local and national authorities, workers’ organisations and others.

Information on monitoring concerning child labour can be found in Eliminating Child Labour. Guide Two: How employers can eliminate child labour , pages 47-48.

[1] Tripartite Declaration of Principles concerning Multinational Enterprises and Social Policy , paragraph 36

There are three types of action a company can take: provide financial incentives, raise awareness of the importance of school attendance among staff, and participate in collective action.

1. Help address the root cause of child labour—poverty. The most important incentive is to pay adult workers decent wages that enable them to send their children to school. The company should ensure payment of the legal minimum wage. It should consider paying above the minimum wage where the minimum is not sufficient. However, paying a higher wage may not be feasible for a particular company without the worker's ability to improve his or her skills and productivity. Other types of financial incentives a company may wish to consider include:

• providing school grants for employees' children;
• paying bonuses for employees' children completing certain education levels;
• establishing day care at the work place or near to it to avoid younger children not enrolling in school and instead starting work; and
• providing after-school recreational facilities for children so they have a place to do homework and play which will keep them out of work.

While combating child labour is a universal goal, appropriate incentives for a particular company to use in order to prevent child labour will depend a lot on the national situation. The incentives should be designed to suit the needs of both the companies and their workers. A dialogue with workers and their representatives on how best to structure incentives would insure the most effective approach.

2. Raise awareness. A company can play a very important role in raising awareness of the value of education. Generally, economic incentives should always go hand in hand with sensitization to make sure the incentive has the intended effect of keeping children in school and out of labour.

3. Joining efforts. Although companies can take action individually, child labour is an issue which is most effectively addressed collectively. National employers’ and workers’ organizations may be able to provide suggestions and guidance about what incentives are most appropriate in the local context. And a company may find that by acting through an employers’ organization and in cooperation with workers’ organizations, many of the suggestions listed above which may not be financially feasible for each individual company to provide could be provided jointly.

Furthermore, companies acting in cooperation with others will be more effective in advocating for the government to assume its responsibilities for combating child labour. Some areas for potential collective advocacy for government action include:

• free compulsory schooling in national legislation.
• appropriate training opportunities for teachers.
• the construction of additional classrooms.
• the recruitment of additional qualified teachers especially in the rural areas.
• the provision of funds for non-formal educational opportunities for school drop-outs and other vulnerable children, particularly in the rural areas; bursary schemes for children orphaned by HIV/AIDs, and
• skills training programmes for children withdrawn from the streets.
• effective enforcement of child labour laws and child labour monitoring.

Additionally companies managing supply chains could take steps to put in place a due diligence process and where child labour is found, work with suppliers to eliminate child labour.

In circumstances where there is a lack of good schooling or vocational training options, good practice elsewhere has been to continue to pay the wages until the children are of legal age to work, then rehiring them in appropriate (non-hazardous for below 18 year olds) work. Apprenticeships in accordance with relevant legislation can also be a good option. Can the factories engage the children in clerical or other non-hazardous work as apprentices?

In reacting to the problem it would be important to understand Bangladesh law, including minimum age for entry into work, any provisions for light work and the hazardous work list of occupations prohibited for under-18s.

In other instances, companies have hired parents or adult members of the household, resulting in increased household income and reducing the need for children to work. It sounds like the children in this case are with their families, which is a major advantage in promoting that they have real alternatives to child labour. If the factories can provide work for the parents with adequate wages, the pressure on the children to work would be much less and the leverage with the parents, who are attending daily or weekly meetings with the human resources department, would be much increased (attendance at school or vocational training also could be monitored in these meetings). The buyers should consider sharing any costs associated with this (and with support for remediation for the affected children) as it may increase operating costs of the factories, at least in the short term.

Finally, it would also be important to strengthen preventive measures in the supply chain or else the problem is likely to recur, which is why remediation is so challenging.

Companies are encouraged to work within their spheres of influence. Enterprises are responsible for their own workplaces, but they also can have an influence beyond it. They can encourage or even help business partners to reduce child labour; they can work with other organizations to create awareness; they can support broader programmes to improve education facilities for children and so on.

Therefore, you may wish to point out to your customer the growing realization that child labour is becoming an important issue for all businesses everywhere and companies need to be proactive rather than reactive. Being proactive in finding solutions means that the enterprise will avoid bad publicity in the media, fines by the government and dictates by buyers. In addition, the removal of children from work takes time and planning. Being proactive means an enterprise stands a better chance of planning this process carefully.

A new ILO database NORMLEX provides information on what conventions a country has ratified. You can also find "Country Profiles" as well as the Comments on the country by the ILO supervisory bodies. The website also provides links to national legislation.

Information on the extent, characteristics and determinants of child labour at the global as well as country and sectoral level is provided by the ILO’s Statistical Information and Monitoring Programme on Child Labour (SIMPOC).

In addition, the national employers and workers organizations may be a useful source of information on child labour issues in the country.

A "developing country" is considered to be "a Member whose economy and educational facilities are insufficiently developed"[1] . Countries determine for themselves whether they qualify to make use of this provision to set the minimum age for work at 14 years of age instead of 15. Only in one instance, in the case of Argentina, was the government specifically requested to indicate why.

It is important to note that many developing countries have not made use of this provision, and instead apply the minimum age of 15 years, or set a higher minimum age of 16 years.

Nobody under the age of 18 years should be engaged in hazardous work—work that is damaging to a child’s physical, social, mental, psychological and spiritual development— regardless of the level of development of the country.[2]

[1] Minimum Age Convention, (No. 138), 1973 , Article 2, paragraph 4
[2] Minimum Age Convention, 1973 (No.138) Article 3; and Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention, 1999 (No. 182) , Articles 2, 3(d) and 4.

A summary of the situation in the region and the actions of the International Programme on the Elimination of Child Labour (IPEC) is available.

To verify the age of workers, “employers should keep and make available to the competent authority registers or other documents indicating the names and ages or dates of birth, duly certified wherever possible, not only of children and young persons employed by them but also of those receiving vocational orientation or training in their undertakings.”[1]

When there are no birth certificates to verify age or where falsified documents are easily obtained, the following suggestions may be helpful:[2]

• a medical examination prior to employment may help to indicate the person’s true age and also to verify the physical aptitude for the work. Care should always be taken to respect the person’s right to privacy.
• cross-checking multiple written documents and affidavits can help identify false documentation
• employers can hold interviews with employees and applicants who appear to be below the minimum age required for work to obtain further information
• school enrolment certificates can be a good source of information.

Local indicators may also be helpful in countries where the challenge is that the worker may not know the precise year in which he or she was born. For example, in some Asian countries children do not know their precise year of birth but they know the animal year (Year of the Monkey, etc.). A person might know that their birth is related to some major historical event, such as independence or the start or end of a war, or a significant anniversary. You may wish to check what are some local key events or means of marking time in the country of operation which you could use in interviews with workers where you may have doubts about their age.

[1] See, Article 9(3) of Convention No. 138 (1973) , concerning the employers’ obligation to keep registers of young workers under 18.
[2] See, Eliminating Child Labour: Guides for Employers , ILO, Geneva, 2007.

The Minimum Age Recommendation, 1973 (No. 146), which supplements the Minimum Age Convention, 1973 (No. 138) states in Paragraph 16(a) that "the public authorities should maintain an effective system of birth registration, which should include the issue of birth certificates." This means the authorities should ensure a proper system of birth certificates which provides the correct date of birth.

If a company has reason to believe that the age indicated on a certificate is false, it should not be used as the basis for determining the age of the person for employment. A document issued by the local authority indicating a false date of birth does not justify employment of an under-age child. If the local authorities are not sensitive to the problem, there might be room for private entities to raise awareness with the authorities about the need for reliable birth certificates and to collaborate with local organizations concerned with tackling child labour.

The fact that a girl as young as 12 is married and therefore considered under national law to be an adult does not make child labour any less harmful to her. Convention No. 138 sets the minimum age for entering into work at 15 and exceptionally at 14. Convention No.182 requires the protection of all children under the age of 18 from hazardous work and other worst forms of child labour. Action to eliminate the worst forms of child labour should give special attention to the needs of the young girl child.

The ILO MNE Declaration encourages enterprises to “obey the national laws and regulations, give due consideration to local practices” but also to “respect relevant international standards.” Concerning child labour, the MNE Declaration also calls on enterprises to contribute to the “effective abolition of child labour” and to “take immediate and effective measures within their own competence to secure the prohibition and elimination of the worst forms of child labour as a matter of urgency.”

Child labour is work which deprives a child of the chance to obtain an education. The worst forms of child labour damage a child’s physical, social, mental, psychological and spiritual development because it is work performed at too early an age.

If the national law or regulations prohibit the engagement of under-18 at night, that rule has to be adhered to. In the absence of applicable national rules, the following may guide the business.

International labour standards generally prohibit engaging workers under 18 years of age to work at night. However, an exception may be made to allow 16 and 17 year olds to undertake night work as part of an apprenticeship programme under the following limited circumstances:

• The apprenticeship programme should be authorized by the competent authority.
• The young person should be granted a rest period of at least thirteen consecutive hours between two working periods.
• The young person should be given an appropriate specific instruction or training regarding the work prior to being engaged at night
• Measures should be taken to safeguard and supervise the conditions of the apprenticeship, including the work at night.

Young people below the age of 16 should never be engaged in night work, even as apprentices.

The provisions are balancing two considerations. On the one hand, young workers whose bodies are still developing are more vulnerable to the potential harm caused by working at night; are at greater risk of accidents; and are more vulnerable to the risks involved in travelling in the dark to the work site. On the other hand, many jobs require night work; therefore, a complete prohibition against apprenticeships and vocational training opportunities involving night work would deny young people an important opportunity.

International labour standards state that measures should be taken to safeguard and supervise the conditions in which children and young persons undergo vocational orientation and training within undertakings, training institutions and schools for vocational or technical education.

Special attention should be given to the provision of fair remuneration and its protection, bearing in mind the principle of “equal pay for equal work” meaning work of a similar nature which meets the same requirements as to quantity and quality of work as that of other workers.

In practice, it is not uncommon that national minimum wage laws or regulations exclude apprentices from coverage, and the Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations has confirmed that this practice may be consistent with the Minimum Wage Fixing Convention . In these cases there are usually clear definitions of what it means to be an "apprentice", including limitations of the apprenticeship period and specific obligations of the employers in terms of ensuring training; and, in so-called "dual systems", time off to attend courses in training centres.

The special protections afforded by the Minimum Age Convention , Article 3(3), include full protection of the young apprentice’s health, safety and morals within an apprenticeship scheme subject to government regulation and oversight. These protections apply to young persons between 16 and 18 years of age undertaking apprenticeships involving hazardous work.

Interns, trainees and student workers who are at or above the age of 18 years are adults who should be afforded the same protections for their safety and well-being as other adults being trained to undertake the same type of hazardous work.

Young people—in particular 14 to 16 year olds but also in many respects 17 to 18 year olds—are still developing both physically and intellectually and emotionally. Therefore, ILS recognize that they may need additional safeguards, such as annual medical examinations, clearer limitations on the hours they work, longer rest periods between shifts, at least one period of rest consisting of a minimum of 24 consecutive hours, etc. (See, e.g., R. 146, C. 90) Such safeguards are important to protect young workers, and national laws should reflect these provisions of ILS; and ILO encourages companies to incorporate these safeguards into their own operations, including in their supply chains. When a company does not, it is a failure to adequately protect the young worker. However, it is not child labour per se, as the young person is lawfully in employment (provided the law is consistent with ILS) and that employment is not interfering with his/her education or harming his/her development.

Discrimination at work includes any “distinction, exclusion or preference … which has the effect of nullifying or impairing equality of opportunity or treatment in employment or occupation.”[1] Discrimination occurs when a person is treated less favorably than others because of characteristics that are not closely related to the inherent requirements of the job or when the same condition, treatment or criterion results in a disproportionately harsh impact on some persons. Discrimination based on age often occurs and hence safeguards against such discrimination are encouraged.[2]

The provision of work opportunities for adolescents under adequate conditions, rather than excluding them entirely from employment opportunities, is one of the effective measures to eliminate child labour, including its worst forms. Companies can play an important role in promoting youth employment by providing non-hazardous decent work opportunities to young people between the minimum age and 18. Companies are encouraged to increase employment opportunities and standards, taking into account the employment policies and objectives of the government[3] ; in many countries, increasing youth employment is a central policy goal.

The company should respect the minimum age set by law, normally 15 but in some countries it is set at 14 and others at 16. If the minimum age set by the national law is below this level (the age of 15 in developed countries or 14 in developing countries), the company should apply the minimum of 15, or exceptionally 14 for developing countries.[4]

The age of 18 should be applied if and where the work or tasks in question are considered as hazardous—defined as work which, by its nature or the circumstances in which it is carried out, is likely to harm the health, safety or morals of children—or as any other worst form of child labour.[5] Furthermore, the age of 18 could also be imposed for a specific post if it can be considered as an inherent requirement of the job. In any other circumstances, this limitation would be discriminatory.

[1] Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1958 (No. 111) , Article 1(1).
[2] See, ILO General Survey on Equality in Employment and Occupation, 1996 , para. 243.
[3] See ILO Tripartite Declaration of Principles Concerning Multinational Enterprises and Social Policy, paragraph 16.
[4] See, ILO Minimum Age Convention, 1973 (No. 138) .
[5] See, ILO Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention, 1999 (No. 182) .

Measures should be taken to ensure that the conditions in which young persons under the age of 18 years are employed are supervised closely. This includes:

• “strict limitation of the hours spent at work in a day and in a week, and the prohibition of overtime, so as to allow enough time for education and training (including the time needed for homework related thereto), for rest during the day and for leisure activities” and
• “the granting, without possibility of exception save in genuine emergency, of a minimum consecutive period of 12 hours' night rest, and of customary weekly rest days.”

In determining whether work is hazardous, consideration should be given to whether it is performed “under particularly difficult conditions such as work for long hours.” The minimum age for hazardous work is 18 years of age.