 |
Disclaimer webinfo@ilo.org |
2006, Labour Inspection: Chapter X - Ratification prospectsDescription:(General Survey) Convention:C081 Convention:P081 Convention:C129 Recommendation:R081 Recommendation:R082 Recommendation:R133 Subject classification: Labour Inspection Subject: Labour Administration and Inspection Document:(Report III Part 1B) Session of the Conference:95 Display the document in: French Spanish Document No. (ilolex): 252006G12 Chapter X Ratification prospects 346. Convention No. 81 remains one of the best ratified Conventions of the ILO. The pace of ratification of this instrument continues, as indicated by the seven ratifications it received in the past three years, bringing the total number of ratifications to 135. 347. Among the countries that have not ratified any of the labour inspection instruments, Fiji plans to ratify Convention No. 81 in 2006, but does not envisage ratification of Convention No. 129 because national legislation is not in conformity with Articles 17 and 18 of the instrument. 348. In some countries, recent legislative developments appear to favour a re- examination of prospects for ratifying the Conventions. This is the case in China, where the possibility of ratifying Conventions Nos. 81 and 129 is being considered; it should be made easier by the entry into force of regulations governing labour inspection. In Trinidad and Tobago, where several provisions of both Conventions have been incorporated in the new occupational safety and health legislation, the "ILO 144 Tripartite Committee" recommended in June 2004 ratification of Convention No. 81, which is now under consideration. The report of the Czech Republic indicates that the provisions of Convention No. 81 and other ILO Conventions were taken into account in the process of drafting recent labour inspection legislation. (Endnote_1) 349. Several reports point out that certain aspects of national legislation or policy are perceived as obstacles preventing ratification and application of Conventions Nos. 81 and 129. According to the Government of Canada, ratification of Convention No. 81 cannot be envisaged in view of certain provisions relating to the powers of inspectors (Article 12, paragraph 1) and the publication of the annual report (Articles 20 and 21). Provincial requirements also prevent ratification of Convention No. 129. The Government of Mexico does not plan to ratify any of the instruments, given the areas of divergence between the instruments and national legislation. The Government of Chile does not envisage ratification at the moment; it would be in favour of ratifying a single Convention applicable to all branches of activity, if this were possible. Accordingly, it suggests the preparation of a single Convention and an end to Conventions with partial coverage by sectors. 350. Botswana, Nicaragua, Nigeria, and South Africa do not plan to ratify any of the instruments. In this regard, the Government of Nicaragua points out that if ratification were envisaged, ILO assistance and technical cooperation would be necessary. 351. Information on other ratification prospects has also been provided by countries that have only ratified Convention No. 81. The Government of Tunisia intends to consider the possibility of ratifying Convention No. 129 and the Protocol to Convention No. 81. In Cyprus, given that the EU directives on occupational safety and health have been transposed into national legislation, the Government states that it is in a position to consider ratifying Convention No. 129. According to the Government of Sri Lanka, there is no obstacle to ratification of the Protocol, which is currently expected. As to Convention No. 129, ratification will be considered at a later date, once the inspection system fully meets the requirements laid down in the Convention. 352. For some countries, however, certain provisions of Convention No. 129 and the Protocol appear to pose difficulties in regard to application. In Japan, although most of its provisions are implemented by national legislation, Convention No. 129 cannot be ratified because of the divergence between national law and the instrument with regard to the powers conferred on labour inspectors. As to ratification of the Protocol, it would require an in-depth review of the current inspection system as regards the application of several provisions of Convention No. 81 to the non-commercial services sector. The Government of Switzerland indicates that the obstacles referred to during the preparatory work for Convention No. 129 (Endnote_2) and the Protocol still persist. The Government of New Zealand considers that the requirements laid down in the instrument with regard to submission of the activity report of the labour inspection service pose difficulties in application since statistics on agricultural enterprises are not necessarily differentiated from general statistics on all the other sectors covered such as industry, commerce, mines, transport and non-commercial activities. However, ratification of the Protocol is envisaged. The Government of Lebanon states that ratification of Convention No. 129 cannot be envisaged, given that the labour inspectorate is only competent to cover activities covered by the Labour Code, which excludes agricultural activities. As for prospects of ratification of the Protocol, these will be examined in the light of the ILO's reply to the requests for clarification submitted to it concerning the categories subject to its provisions. The Government of Jordan also states that Convention No. 129 has not been ratified owing to the fact that agricultural workers are not covered by the provisions in legislation. 353. The Government of Mauritius indicates that the labour inspectorate already has jurisdiction over parastatal bodies, local authorities and non-commercial activities in the private sector, but the fact that it has no jurisdiction over government administration, the armed forces, police and prison services does not favour ratification of the Protocol. In this respect, the Committee draws attention to the possibility afforded by Article 2 of the Protocol to exclude from its scope certain categories of con-commercial sector. As regards Convention No. 129, the Government indicates that national law and practice are in conformity with most of its requirements. 354. Several countries have said that ratification of Convention No. 129 has been prevented by the impossibility of establishing an inspection system specifically for agriculture, or the fact that they had a single national inspection system covering all areas of activity. Austria, for example, plans to consider the possibility of ratifying Convention No. 129, but is concerned that the absence of a central authority for agriculture and forestry may hinder ratification. In addition, the fact that labour inspection in respect of local and provincial government employees is carried out separately by the nine provinces and not by the federal labour inspectorate could be an obstacle to ratification of the Protocol. The Government of the Republic of Korea does not intend to ratify Convention No. 129, since although it has a system of labour inspection covering all commercial establishments and workplaces, there is no separate system for agriculture, in which most workers are self-employed. Neither does it envisage ratification of the Protocol. In Belarus, the department of labour inspection and specialized bodies supervise compliance with obligations under labour legislation and protection of workers, including in agriculture. Therefore the establishment of a specialized labour inspectorate for agriculture and ratification of Convention No. 129 are not on the agenda. 355. The Government of Cuba states that the system of labour inspection covers all the sectors of activity in the country and therefore ratification of other instruments besides Convention No. 81 is not necessary. 356. In this regard, the Committee refers to Chapter IV of this General Survey, where it points out that under Article 7, paragraph 3(a), of Convention No. 129 labour inspection in agriculture might be carried out by a single labour inspection department responsible for all sectors of economic activity. 357. Other countries perceive Convention No. 129 as being unsuited to the national characteristics of agricultural activity. The Government of Gabon, for example, considers that ratification of Convention No. 129 would not be appropriate, as agriculture is in its embryonic stages; Convention No. 81, however, is applied in the agriculture sector as in the rest of the economy. The Government envisages submitting the Protocol to Parliament. According to the Government of Indonesia, ratification of Convention No. 129 would not be appropriate, as agricultural activity mainly takes place in the informal economy. Cameroon does not envisage ratification of Convention No. 129 or the Protocol, although some aspects of the instruments are already implemented in national legislation. 358. For some countries, economic obstacles are perceived as preventing ratification of Convention No. 129 and the Protocol. This is the case in Mali, which considers that agricultural enterprises are not sufficiently structured to be liable to inspection, which would require specialized labour inspection structures that the country is unable to set up at present, owing to lack of resources. (Endnote_3) The Government of Panama states that it does not have the necessary human and material resources to apply Convention No. 129. While ratification of the Protocol is not envisaged either, this would be possible if some of the authorized exclusions from its scope were made. The Government of Rwanda does not envisage ratification of Convention No. 129 as it is not in a position to apply it given its limited material, financial and human resources which led it to opt for a system of labour inspection covering all branches of activity. Neither is ratification of the Protocol envisaged in the near future given the constraints surrounding the possibilities of exclusion from its scope. The Government of Viet Nam states that the main obstacle to ratification of Convention No. 129 in the near future is the number of labour inspectors, which is not sufficient to carry out labour inspection in agriculture. 359. Lastly, several governments indicated that they did not intend to ratify either Convention No. 129 or the Protocol. These include the Governments of Lithuania and Qatar; the latter considers, however, that the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Agriculture might draw on the provisions of Convention No. 129 for inspiration. The Government of Suriname states that tripartite discussions should be held on Convention No. 129 and the Protocol before submitting the question of ratification to the competent authorities, but that it does not intend to ratify the Protocol for the time being. The Government of the United Kingdom considers that ratification of Convention No. 129 would require amending the legislation in force. Given that current provisions provide adequate protection for workers, there is no need to amend them. However, the Government is currently reconsidering its position with regard to the Protocol. The Government of Australia plans to give priority to ratifying Convention No. 182 and a number of other occupational safety and health Conventions. Consideration will be given in future to the question of ratifying Convention No. 129 as appropriate. 360. Of the 133 countries bound by Convention No. 81, only ten have ratified the Protocol extending the application of Convention No. 81 to activities in the non- commercial services sector. Some useful information has also been provided by countries that have ratified both Conventions on the prospects for ratifying the Protocol. The Government of Costa Rica states that it hopes for a favourable decision by the Legislative Assembly, to which the instrument has been submitted with a view to ratification. 361. Ratification of the Protocol is envisaged by the Governments of El Salvador and Zimbabwe. The Government of Colombia points out that there are no obstacles in the way of ratification. In Estonia, where Conventions Nos. 81 and 129 were ratified in February 2005, the National ILO Council considered in March 2005 that the country was not yet ready to ratify the Protocol. However, the Ministries of Social Affairs, Defence, Justice and Internal Affairs are currently seeking means of giving effect to certain provisions of the Protocol. 362. The governments of some countries cite technical difficulties in the way of ratification of the Protocol. In Germany, the main obstacle lies in the absence in the Protocol of provisions for the exclusion of religious communities covered by national legislation applicable to church organizations. In Portugal, the principles of the Protocol are largely incorporated in national legislation, with the General Labour Inspectorate (IGT) being competent to promote and supervise legislation relating to conditions of work and the promotion of workers in all sectors of activity. However, the IGT only carries out safety and health functions in the services and institutions of the public administration, while the enforcement of legal provisions relating to other conditions of work falls to the general inspectorate of the public administration. Moreover, since the Protocol does not allow the exclusion of nuclear plants and offshore enterprises, ratification is not envisaged. (Endnote_4)
EndnotesEndnote 1The Czech-Monrovian Confederation of Trade Unions (CMKOS) indicated that, in the preparation and adoption of this new legislation, it repeated its request (made since 1990) to the Government to ratify Convention No. 81. Endnote 2The Government of Switzerland had considered that the objectives of the proposed international instrument had already been attained or were in the process of being attained by legislative provisions and a well-conceived system of agricultural training and extension services. It suggested that international standards should not cover undertakings which employ members of the family, as the standards should provide that the system of labour inspection in agriculture should only cover agricultural undertakings permanently employing wage earners or apprentices who are not members of the operator's family. Endnote 3The General Union of Workers of Mali (UGT) considers that all the labour inspection instruments should be ratified, in particular to protect certain workers such as the police and civil defence services, which are affiliated to their organization, subject however to restrictions warranted by the special nature of these establishments. Endnote 4In this regard, the employers' and workers' organizations take a different view. The Confederation of Commerce and Services of Portugal (CCP) is in favour of ratifying the Protocol, considering that the basic principles of that instrument are already affirmed in national legislation. The General Union of Workers (UGT) also advocates ratification with a view to inclusive, progressive and harmonious coverage by the General Labour Inspectorate of the sectors not covered by Convention No. 81.
Cross references
|
| ILO Home | NORMES home | ILOLEX home | Universal Query | NATLEX |
|
Disclaimer webinfo@ilo.org |