Labour Inspection Convention, 1947 (No. 81) - Serbia (RATIFICATION: 2000)

CMNT_TITLE_CAS



Labour Inspection Convention, 1947 (No. 81) - Labour Inspection (Agriculture) Convention, 1969 (No. 129)

Discussion by the Committee

Government representative – The Republic of Serbia wishes to inform the Committee that, under the national legal order and the Constitution of the Republic of Serbia, ratified international treaties and Conventions take precedence and prevail over other applicable national laws. The Law on Inspection Oversight of April 2015 is subject to this rule. Article 4, paragraph 4, of this Law prescribes that ratified international treaties and Conventions have precedence over the Law on Inspection Oversight. This includes Conventions Nos 81 and 129. Under article 194, paragraphs 4 and 5 of the Constitution of the Republic of Serbia, it is prescribed that ratified international treaties and other generally accepted rules of international law shall be part of the legal system of the Republic of Serbia.

In this particular case, this means that, if the ratified international treaty or Convention prescribes that an inspection shall be launched without prior notice, it shall be so, in compliance with article 4, paragraph 4, of the Law on Inspection Oversight, and in compliance with the position that ratified international Conventions hold within the constitutional and legal system of the Republic of Serbia. To support the aforesaid, I will provide the Committee with the statistical data clearly demonstrating the number and types of the inspections undertaken by the labour inspectorate in the previous year.

In 2018, there were in total 70,122 inspections of the registered and unregistered employers conducted by the labour inspectorate, of which 4,607 (7 per cent) were conducted upon the prior notification and 65,515 (93 per cent) were conducted without prior notification or any written inspection warrant.

In 2018, 939 extraordinary inspections of unregistered entities were conducted without prior notification to the employer on the upcoming inspection. The above-mentioned figures show that the labour inspectorate, in its inspections conducted in 2018, applied directly the standards of the ratified ILO Conventions, in accordance with the Constitution of the Republic of Serbia. The same situation was observed in 2017 and 2016. I would like to add that no inspector paid a fine for the actions undertaken in the course of their duties.

Finally, taking into consideration the findings of the Committee of Experts, we would like to inform the Committee that the Government of the Republic of Serbia will send a request for technical assistance of the ILO, in order to overcome this situation and to adjust the provisions that have been brought into question by the Committee of Experts regarding Conventions Nos 81 and No. 129.

I am sure that after discussion with the ILO, and with our social partners and relevant stakeholders within the Government – because I just want to mention that this Law is under the responsibility of the Ministry of Public Administration in the local governments – if the ILO offers this technical assistance, we will manage to remedy this situation with regard to our legal framework in the near future.

Employer members – The objective of the present case is to analyse the conformity of the Law on Inspection Oversight of Serbia, No. 36/15 of April 2015, with the principles set out in the Labour Inspection Convention, 1947 (No. 81), and the Labour Inspection (Agriculture) Convention, 1969 (No. 129).

Both instruments form part of the series of international labour standards intended to guarantee a minimum floor and universal protection for workers in the sectors concerned. Their objective is not to promote a uniform system of labour inspection, but to establish principles to guide its operation as a basis for labour inspection:

- in terms of its function of ensuring compliance with the legislation on conditions of work and the protection of workers; and

- also to contribute to the development of this legislation in conformity with national and international labour markets.

In addition to the function of supervision, which includes a series of competences and prerogatives directed toward the repression of violations, the instruments confer on labour inspectors an information and advisory function, as well as bringing to the notice of the competent authority defects or abuses not specifically covered by existing legal provisions.

Finally, the instruments provide for the publication and communication to the International Labour Office of an annual inspection report which has to include principally information on the legal basis of labour inspection, the composition and distribution of inspection personnel, their areas of competence and their activities, as well as industrial accidents and cases of occupational diseases.

With regard to the case of Serbia, the ratification by this Balkan country of Conventions Nos 81 and 129 of the International Labour Organization forms part of an ambitious effort to bring its institutions and standards into conformity with international standards. This process has taken on greater dynamism since the entry into force of the Stabilization and Association Agreement between the European Union (EU) and Serbia in 2013 and the initiation of negotiations for the adhesion of the country to the EU, which will involve an adaptation of the social and labour standards in the country to the 20 principles of the European Pillar of Social Rights, for which the ILO and its Conventions are the highest source of inspiration in social and labour matters.

Serbia has been one of the principal objectives of programmes such as the Employment and Social Affairs Platform (ESAP), promoted jointly by the EU, the ILO and the Regional Cooperation Council in the Western Balkans, the main objectives of which consist of:

- improving economic and social councils;

- establishing employment mediation mechanisms;

- promoting the articulation of employment policies and strategies; and

- modernizing labour inspection in accordance with ILO principles, and through the establishment of a labour inspection network in the region for the exchange of experience.

It is within this context that we have to place the adoption by the Government of Serbia of the Law on Inspection Oversight No. 36/15, the principal objective of which is to establish the new model of labour inspection in the country through greater coordination between the various institutions involved in inspection activities and a uniform application of the principles for the operation of labour inspection in the country.

However, the Committee of Experts notes that sections 16 and 17 of the new Law on Inspection Oversight No. 36/15 restrict the freedom of initiative of labour inspectors by requiring three days prior notice for most inspections and a prior inspection warrant, except in emergency situations, specifying, among other matters, the purpose of the inspection and its duration. The Committee of Experts also noted that if, during the course of the inspection, an inspector uncovers an instance of non-compliance that exceeds the inspection warrant, an application must be made for an addendum to the warrant.

It also noted that the Law provides that inspectors shall be held personally accountable for the actions undertaken in the course of their duties, under the terms of section 49, and that they may receive a fine of between Serbian dinar (RSD) 50,000 and 150,000 (approximately between US$500 and 1,500), for example if they undertake inspections without prior notice, as set out in section 60.

In light of the above, the Committee of Experts requested the adoption of the necessary measures to remove the restrictions and limitations placed on labour inspectors by the Law on Inspection Oversight No. 36/15 so as to ensure that labour inspectors are fully authorized to enter freely and without previous notice any workplaces liable to inspection, in accordance with Conventions Nos 81 and 129.

In the view of the Employers, in a State in which the rule of law prevails, a modern labour inspectorate and a judicious legal framework are key to establishing an environment conducive to enterprise, increasing legal and economic security, and reducing the social risks to which investors are exposed.

We therefore consider it fundamental to have a good labour inspection service which, in particular, takes preventive and advisory action, to guarantee fair competition and promote investment, economic growth and employment creation. The independent and unrestricted operation of labour inspection guarantees good governance, transparency and responsibility in the system for the protection of rights. In this respect, the Law on Inspection Oversight No. 36/15 has to be understood as part of the firm will of the Government of Serbia to contribute through the modernization of its inspection system to the reinforcement of the rule of law in the country.

However, we also note certain inadequacies in the content of the Law and the procedure followed for its adoption:

- With regard to section 17 of the Law, which requires three days notice for labour inspection, we agree with the Committee of Experts that this provision should be adapted to the spirit of Conventions Nos 81 and 129, which recognize the principle of unannounced inspections.

Accordingly, under the terms of Article 12(1) of Convention No. 81 and Article 16(1) of Convention No. 129, labour inspectors provided with proper credentials shall be empowered:

– to enter freely and without previous notice at any hour of the day or night any workplace liable to inspection; or

– to enter by day any premises which they may have reasonable cause to believe to be liable to inspection.

Convention No. 129, in Article 16(2), adds that labour inspectors shall not enter the private home of the operator of an agricultural undertaking except with the consent of the operator or with a special authorization issued by the competent authority.

But while agreeing in this respect with the Committee of Experts, we must:

– recall that the complaints made in the observations must be limited to the specific rights and obligations provided for in the Conventions concerned; and

– specify that, although unannounced inspections have been shown to be very effective, it is no less important to be governed by a series of specific rules which respect fundamental freedoms and maintain the principle of proportionality.

- With regard to the procedural issues, the fact that the Government submitted the draft Law on Inspection Oversight to the national Economic and Social Council highlights the lack of effective consultation of the highest tripartite advisory body in the country and takes us back to the debate last year on the deficiencies of social dialogue in Serbia, in light of the Tripartite Consultation (International Labour Standards) Convention, 1976 (No. 144).

Taking into consideration the points raised, we recommend the Committee to request the Government of Serbia to:

- bring the national legislation into conformity with Conventions Nos 81 and 129 so that labour inspectors can undertake inspections in workplaces liable to inspection without previous notice with a view to ensuring appropriate and effective supervision;

- guarantee that inspections are adapted to their purpose and that it is possible to carry them out as often as is necessary; and

- finally, to continue its efforts to give effect to the conclusions adopted last year by the Committee in relation to Convention No. 144 to guarantee effective consultation with the social partners

Worker members – From its very beginning, the International Labour Organization identified labour inspection as one of its priority concerns. I recall in this respect that labour inspection is already included in the general principles set out in the Treaty of Versailles, which created the ILO.

If this major concern was present from the very first moments of our Organization, that is because it is clear that, without an efficient system of inspection, the effectiveness of social standards would be left to chance. Indeed, what is the purpose of adopting standards, formulating texts and voting for laws if there is not an inspection service responsible for the effective supervision of their application and for explaining their content to the various actors? The relevance of these considerations can easily be seen in relation to the case of Serbia.

The Committee of Experts has made worrying observations concerning the application of the Labour Inspection Convention, 1947 (No. 81), and the Labour Inspection (Agriculture) Convention, 1969 (No. 129), in the country. The report indicates that a new law adopted in April 2015 has the consequence of placing significant restrictions on the powers of labour inspectors. Sections 16 and 17 of the Law provide that most inspections must be announced three days in advance and that a written inspection warrant (except in emergency situations) must specify the purpose and duration of the inspection. Section 16 also provides that if, during the course of the inspection, an inspector uncovers an instance of non-compliance that exceeds the inspection warrant, the inspector must apply for an addendum to the warrant. The Committee of Experts also notes that the Law provides that inspectors shall be held personally accountable for the actions undertaken in the course of their duties and that they are liable to very dissuasive fines if they undertake inspections without prior notice.

These provisions raise serious problems in light of Conventions Nos 81 and 129 and, more specifically, Article 12(1)(a) of Convention No. 81 and Article 16(1)(a) of Convention No. 129. The two texts provide that labour inspectors provided with proper credentials shall be empowered to enter freely and without previous notice at any hour of the day or night any workplace liable to inspection. In comparison with these provisions, it is clear that the new Law adopted by Serbia is intended to ensure that the labour inspection services cannot organize any unannounced inspections, or at least endeavours to intimidate inspectors who might wish to do so. As a result, this legislation is not only contrary to the Conventions, but also pursues an objective that is totally opposed to them. There is no need to provide a long justification of the importance of carrying out unannounced inspections, so evident is it.

We can nevertheless recall that the Committee of Experts had the occasion in its General Survey on labour inspection to specify that: “Unannounced visits enable the inspector to enter the inspected premises without warning the employer or his or her representative in advance, especially in cases where the employer may be expected to attempt to conceal a violation, by changing the usual conditions of work, preventing a witness from being present or making it impossible to carry out an inspection. Conducting unannounced visits on a regular basis is especially useful as it enables inspectors to observe the confidentiality required by Article 15, subparagraph (c), of Convention No. 81 and Article 20, subparagraph (c), of Convention No. 129 as regards the purpose of the inspection if it was carried out in response to a complaint.” Restricting the powers of inspectors, as this legislation does, is tantamount to telling employers that their impunity is assured. They are given a blank cheque to exploit the workforce shamelessly.

Attention should also be drawn to the fact that, as indicated in a direct request made by the Committee of Experts, Serbia has also taken measures to significantly reduce the number of inspectors. According to the information provided by the Government, the number of inspectors fell from 324 to 242. To give an idea of the extent of the work to be carried out, in 2016 there were 337,927 registered commercial establishments, without counting those that are not registered. Despite all the rotation systems possible and imaginable, and the best possible organization, it is not possible under these conditions to provide an effective inspection service capable of fulfilling its missions. That is truly impossible.

We should also point out that this reform was adopted without any consultation either with employers or trade unions. This is yet another illustration of the countless harmful effects of austerity. Our Committee has already had the opportunity to deal with similar cases in countries in the region that have taken the same path. The starting point for the reasoning underlying these policies is that social inspections, and more generally all public services, are a cost that must absolutely be reduced. From this perspective, social inspections are mere administrative cost items which must be reduced in the name of this dogma. And yet, austerity policies have continually shown all their limitations and the dead ends to which they lead. Making public services a factor of budgetary adjustment inevitably leads to a rise in inequality and more precarious conditions for workers. When austerity measures are targeted at the resources of inspection services, they lead to a deterioration in working conditions and serious problems for the health of workers, their families and communities as a whole. Worker delegates will provide greater detail in their interventions to illustrate this wave of austerity and its harmful effects.

At this stage, in conclusion, I am bound to insist on the fact that conditions of work and the health of workers cannot be used as levers for the achievement of budgetary savings. This is the whole reason for the existence of the ILO, which emphasizes that work cannot be assimilated to a vulgar commodity. Labour standards are not a weight on public finances, but on the contrary a necessary precondition for the prosperity of everyone.

Employer member, Serbia – I will be very brief. I am here to note that this Law was not a regular procedure. It results of public discussion. This Law was not on the Social Economic Council of the Republic of Serbia, so I think that trade union representatives and representatives of employers did not have a chance to make some influence in changing the articles. It was adopted by the Parliament of Serbia according to the urgent procedure, so some mistakes happen. We know these problems and for the first level you think that employers have some benefits of this Law, but I do not think so because I think somehow that this Law can be some kind of possible corruption because inspectors and employers can make a deal, so we know everything about this. In practice, as the representative of my country said, Ms Dragna Savic, it was just 7 per cent of this kind of labour inspection in the previous years, and I am sure that this Law will be changed very soon. They start with the procedure of changing the Law, and one more thing: it is the same kind of Law as the one that existed in former Yugoslavia, a former socialist country. So the same articles exist in the Special Laws in Slovenia, in Croatia, in Montenegro, in Bosnia and Herzegovina, in North Macedonia – so it is not just in Serbia, it is the same for others in the region. So, I am sure that whatever the Committee decides about this Law, it will make influence on the whole region. So, employers’ organizations of Serbia have full confidence in the decision of the Committee.

Worker member, Serbia – We welcome the findings of the Committee of Experts regarding the violation of Conventions Nos 81 and 129. We are fully convinced that the Law on Inspection Oversight of 2015 provides for a number of restrictions on the powers of labour inspectors, especially with regard to free initiatives of labour inspectors to undertake inspections without prior notice which is in direct violation of the Conventions. In addition, this law is also in contradiction with the Labour Law and it is an example of the trends that we are facing for quite some time when the Labour Law is derogated by the different laws of lower levels of hierarchy. Trade unions are struggling against this and will continue to do it because it is crucial for the future of labour relations in the Republic of Serbia.

The Law on Inspection Oversight was written by the Ministry of State Administration and Local Self-Governance and it was not the result of consultation with the representative social partners. In addition, the Ministry did not submit the draft law for the opinion of the Social and Economic Council even though it is a legal obligation to submit all draft laws that deal with issues that are relevant to workers and employers for the opinion too of this tripartite institution of social dialogue. This is a concrete example of how a lack of social dialogue can have a negative impact on workers’ position and violations of international labour standards.

Representing working people, we as a trade union have an absolute interest in advocating for a strong, independent, educated, adequate in numbers and equipped labour inspectorate – but the precondition and the most relevant thing is that labour inspectors are free to undertake their duties without any restrictions and in a concrete case, not to be sanctioned if they undertake inspections without prior notice. This is not the way we will protect working people, diminish the grey economy and improve workplace health and safety.

In 2018, 53 workers lost their lives at the workplace in the Republic of Serbia. We need empowered labour inspectors who are credible to have zero tolerance for the employers who are not implementing health and safety measures defined by the relevant legislation. We need labour inspectors free from influences of employers and politics. The obligation of prior notice under the current law can only have negative effects such as corruption and double standards for the employers. We are also sure that some exemptions to this rule cannot be relevant argumentation for the Government because Article 12(1)(a) of Convention No. 81 clearly states that labour inspectors provided with proper credentials shall be empowered to enter freely and without previous notice at any hour of the day or night any workplace liable to inspection.

To conclude, we strongly support the request of the Committee of Experts for the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that the restrictions and limitations for labour inspectors in the Law on Inspection Oversight are removed so as to ensure that labour inspectors are empowered to enter freely and without previous notice workplaces liable to inspection in conformity with relevant Articles in Conventions Nos 81 and 129. Trade unions would also welcome ILO technical assistance on this matter.

Government member, Romania – I am speaking on behalf of the European Union (EU) and its Member States. The EFTA country Norway, member of the European Economic Area, aligns itself with this statement.

We would like to reiterate the importance we attribute to the promotion, protection and respect of human rights, as safeguarded by ILO Conventions and other human rights instruments. The EU and its Member States also believe that safe and healthy conditions of work should be ensured for all, everywhere, and we support the recognition of the right to safe and healthy working conditions as a fundamental right at work. In the same spirit, we believe that labour inspection is fundamental in promotion of decent work. Compliance with ILO Conventions Nos 81 and 129 is essential in this respect.

As a candidate country, Serbia and the EU have a very close and constructive relationship. The EU and its Member States are determined to strengthen and intensify its engagement at all levels to support Serbia’s political, economic and social transformation, including through increased assistance, based on tangible progress on the rule of law, as well as on socio-economic reforms. We nevertheless note with concern the Committee of Experts’ observations on Serbia’s non-compliance with ILO Conventions Nos 81 and 129 with regard to free entry of labour inspectors to workplaces without prior notice. We note with regret that the Law on Inspection Oversight No. 36/15 of April 2015 applies to labour inspection and provides for a number of restrictions on the powers of inspectors, including the requirement of three days prior notice for most inspections and a written inspection warrant (except in emergency situations) specifying, among other things, the purpose of the inspection and its duration. In addition, in case of recognition of non-compliance that exceeds the inspection warrant, the inspector must apply for an addendum to the warrant. Finally, we deeply regret that the Law also introduces personal liability of the inspectors for the actions undertaken in the course of their duties for example the possible imposition of a fine for an inspection undertaken without notification.

The share of undeclared work remains at around 20 per cent and addressing this problem requires a comprehensive approach across the relevant ministries. Labour inspections have focused on tackling undeclared work, but the results do not have an impact yet on the level of this type of work.

We therefore call on the Government to ensure that the restrictions and limitations for labour inspectors in the Law on Inspection Oversight No. 36 of April 2015 are removed so as to ensure that labour inspectors are empowered to enter freely and without previous notice workplaces liable to inspection in conformity with ILO Conventions. The EU and its Member States remain committed to their close cooperation and partnership with Serbia.

Worker member, Greece – As we celebrate the International Labour Organization (ILO) Centenary, we recall that labour inspection has been a standard setting priority since the ILO was founded, with references in the Versailles Treaty and the ILO Constitution.

Addressing labour inspection as a pillar of labour administration, Conventions Nos 81 and 129, and the accompanying Recommendations, have provided the universal reference framework, with a high ratification level. As emphasised in Report V of the 2011 Conference, labour inspection systems play a vital, fundamental role in labour law enforcement and compliance, particularly regarding workers’ rights. They also provide information, advice, and training, playing a vital role for occupational health and safety.

Still, in a shifting political, social and economic background, compounded by the economic crisis, the labour law inspection systems have been faced with complex challenges, including high and persistent unemployment, precarious jobs, undeclared or illegal work, labour migration and technological change. Linked to new business and production models, these challenges negatively affect labour standards and labour market institutions.

In this context, regulatory inspection in many EU Member States has been weakened by a well-established trend of cuts in public expenditure, aiming to remove alleged “regulatory burdens on business” and enhance competitiveness.

Recent research highlights cuts in operational costs affecting staff, salaries and conditions of work, a preference for voluntary/private regulation, prioritizing an advisory/informative role for inspection – all these to the detriment of coverage, enforcement and sound labour administration governance at a time when effective labour inspection services are most needed.

Such trends, in particular, weakened labour inspections, tend to be endemic in South-East Europe, a region populated with medium, small and micro-enterprises, some of them even clandestine workplaces, and burdened with undeclared or illegal employment. These trends are aggravated by legislation or practices, such as the Law on Inspection enforced in Serbia, which curtails rights and powers established by Conventions Nos 81 and 129, including the right of labour inspectors to freely conduct unannounced inspections in any workplace; to conduct examinations they deem necessary; interrogate alone or in the presence of witnesses, the employer or the staff. But these rights are essential for an effective, credible labour inspection that respects confidentiality.

Yet, they are abolished by this Law, which imposes prior notice obligation, requires detailed warrants, and compels inspectors to get an additional warrant if they find non-compliances not specified in the first warrant. Moreover, a disgraceful clause incriminates underpaid and overworked Serbian inspectors, imposing huge fines for actions undertaken during the course of their duties. As we heard, the Law has been adopted without any prior consultation or dialogue with the trade unions and the other social partners.

Efficient, transparent and credible labour inspection systems, invested with all the means and resources needed for their unhindered operation are crucial for upholding labour standards, for ensuring a fair workplace, for fighting corrupt practices and for economic development. All these, in turn, are vital for Serbia, the biggest Western Balkan country, an EU candidate aiming to align its legislation with the EU – Serbia deserves better.

We also note with concern that other countries in our region, including Montenegro, Croatia, North Macedonia, Slovenia and even Greece, deploy comparable provisions and practices that fundamentally annul the very idea of inspection. In this light, we urge the ILO to renew its focus on the whole region and monitor labour inspection systems.

To conclude, we follow the Committee of Experts and we request the Government to take the necessary measures for ensuring full compliance with two Conventions and engaging also in dialogue with the social partners so as to consolidate a working, credible and efficient labour inspection system.

Worker member, Belgium – The Committee on the Application of Standards is an essential component of the ILO supervisory system. Essential, because it examines the manner in which States comply with their obligations deriving from the Conventions and Recommendations adopted by the ILO that they have ratified.

As has been mentioned during the discussion on another case, adopting standards without a robust mechanism to supervise the respect of these standards, would be pointless.

Supervising standards on the national level, supervising the respect of the legislation on the national level, is the very essence and purpose of labour inspectorates. Having a well-established corpus of labour law, does not mean a thing in practice if the respect of these labour laws cannot be controlled.

Without labour inspection, workers would be left to the whims of their employers. Without a well-functioning, well-trained and sufficiently equipped force of labour inspectors, decent work, decent working conditions, occupational safety and health, are but distant aspirations that cannot be fulfilled.

It is not a surprise, that one of the conclusions already adopted by this Committee in another case, calls on that government to strengthen the capacity of the labour inspectorate. And this as well on the human as on the material level. To provide the inspectorate with sufficient technical resources and training.

We need to stress however that even a fully equipped, well-trained labour inspectorate is rendered useless if it does not have the ability to conduct surprise inspections. Forcing labour inspectors to give prior notice three days in advance deprives them of the possibility to truly see to it that labour law is being respected.

It is for a reason that the Conventions, the respect of which we are discussing now, stipulate clearly that labour inspectors should be empowered to enter freely and without previous notice any workplace liable to inspection and to enter by day any premises which they may have reasonable cause to believe to be liable to inspection.

Depriving labour inspectors of this possibility, obliging labour inspectors to give a three-days prior notice, is giving a free pass to malicious employers to obfuscate problematic working conditions, to befog non respect of labour law, to simply send away or even lock up workers that are being exploited, to pack up their things and disappear to another location where they can continue their nefarious actions.

The respect of labour law, the respect of occupational safety and health, the respect of decent working conditions is frankly a matter of life and death. Already this year, at least 14 workers have lost their lives in the Republic of Serbia. The Government has confirmed that the number of accidents at work has risen, due to lower compliance.

Without even touching on the ban on hiring new staff in the whole public sector, a ban that is already in place for five years, a ban of which the effect on the number of labour inspectors, given the impossibility to replace labour inspectors, is simply disastrous, we strongly urge the Government to swiftly revise the Law on Inspection Oversight so as to drop the obligation for labour inspectors to give prior notice. And this for all possible situations. We stress once again that labour inspectors should be empowered to enter freely and without previous notice workplaces liable to inspection.

Worker member, France – The Labour Inspection Convention, 1947 (No. 81), is an essential Convention because all rights at work depend on its sound implementation, and particularly the right to occupational safety and health, which would merit inclusion in the body of fundamental standards, as no one should die at work. And yet, the situation of labour inspection in Serbia is such that 53 people lost their lives at the workplace in 2018, and there have already been 14 deaths since January 2019.

Globalization and liberalization are exerting greater pressure on labour resources, and this situation requires greater vigilance by labour inspection services to prevent the exploitation of workers and the deterioration of conditions of work. Labour inspection activities are fundamental for balanced socio-economic development and, consequently, for social justice.

And yet the issue is not new in Serbia, a candidate country for membership of the European Union in 2025. In 2010, the ILO designed a tool kit for labour inspectors in Serbia, entitled: “A model enforcement policy: A training and operations manual: A code of ethical behaviour”. The publication was prepared to help Serbia modernize its labour inspection system and make it more suited for its subsequent membership of the European Union, and to bring its policies and practices into conformity with those of similar neighbouring States in Europe. The objective was to improve significantly the level of compliance with its laws and regulations on occupational safety and health.

Wages paid late, unpaid social contributions, unpaid overtime hours, disastrous working conditions, even to the point sometimes of a prohibition to go to the toilet, have all been reported by the press in large enterprises in recent years. But prevention is a bonus, not an additional cost. Respect for labour law and labour standards is not simply an obligation imposed on employers, but a contribution to quality, efficiency, productivity and the success of enterprises, and to the health, safety and well-being of all workers in the country.

In the Declaration of the EU-Western Balkans Summit held in Sofia on 17 May 2018, the leaders of the European Union stated in point 3 that the EU is determined to strengthen and intensify its engagement at all levels to support the region’s political, economic and social transformation, including through increased assistance based on tangible progress in the rule of law, as well as in socio-economic reforms, by the Western Balkans partners.

For Serbia, that must include compliance with Convention No. 81 so that the State imposes compliance with labour standards in the country and does not sacrifice to the dogma of all-out competition, which can only lead to social dumping, far from the objectives of the European Pillar of Social Rights.

Government representative – I would like to express our gratitude to all groups and all individual speakers who took part in the discussion. I hope that the Government managed to explain the situation in the Republic of Serbia with the clear statistical data about the labour inspection practice. As I said in my introductory intervention, the Government will work with the ILO together with our social partners and other governmental institutions, and we will ask for technical assistance in order to remedy the situation. We will inform the ILO in our next reports on the implementation of the Conventions about the improvements in this regard.

Worker members – We have heard the explanations of the representative of the Government of Serbia and we wish to emphasize once again that the issue under examination here is of primary importance. Labour inspection is a crucial means of ensuring adequate supervision of the application of labour standards.

We invite the Government of Serbia to bring its legislation into conformity with Conventions Nos 81 and 129. More precisely, it is necessary to repeal sections 16 and 17 of the Law that we referred to in our introductory intervention. That implies lifting all restrictions that prevent labour inspectors from carrying out inspections as envisaged in the Conventions. It is not acceptable for an inspector to be under the threat of a penalty or a fine for undertaking an inspection without previous notice.

We also emphasize that the problems faced by the inspection services in the country are not limited to these aspects. We note in this regard that the Committee of Experts has sent the Government a series of direct requests. For example, we note that the legislation is not clear on the time when inspections are authorized and does not appear to guarantee that they can take place at any hour of the day or night.

The same applies to the absence in the legislation of adequate guarantees of the confidentiality of complaints. We therefore invite the Government of Serbia to make the legislative amendments proposed in consultation with trade unions, as I indicated, to provide a precise and detailed response to the issues raised by the Committee of Experts in its direct requests and to guarantee a sufficient number of inspectors so that they can discharge their duties in full.

To follow up on these elements, we request the Government of Serbia to provide a report to the Committee of Experts containing the amendments that will be made to the Law and its response to the issues raised so that the Committee of Experts can examine it at its next session in November 2019. Finally, we propose that the Government avails itself as much as necessary of ILO technical assistance.

Employer members – On behalf of the Employers, we wish to thank the Government of Serbia for the constructive spirit and the dialogue demonstrated from the outset to resolve this anomaly, and we are also very grateful for the information that has already been provided and which will be provided in the near future.

We are also grateful for the description provided of inspection in the country, fundamentally indicating that in most cases notice is not given of the inspections carried out. For this reason, we consider that it is basically necessary to bring the legislation into conformity with both Conventions, even though the primacy of the Conventions is established in accordance with the Constitution of Serbia. It is equally important for this harmonization to be undertaken with the fundamental objective of avoiding undesirable situations, and particularly to ensure legal certainty, not only for workers, but also for enterprises.

And we also see it as being very positive that the Government of Serbia has requested technical assistance and we hope that this will also be carried out in strict coordination with employers and workers who, in this case, and particularly for this type of legislative proposals, have much to offer, especially to guarantee the effective defence of rights and to ensure a system of inspection that also guarantees legal security and an environment in which enterprises can operate on a level playing field.

For all these reasons, we hope that the Government will take on board all the contributions and recommendations made with the essential purpose of definitively bringing the legislation into conformity with Conventions Nos 81 and 129.

Conclusions of the Committee

The Committee took note of the oral statements made by the Government representative and the discussion that followed.

The Committee noted with concern that the national legislation placed a number of restrictions on the powers of labour inspectors.

Taking into account the Government’s submissions and the discussion that followed, the Committee urges the Government to:

- amend sections 16, 17, 49 and 60 of the Law on Inspection Oversight No. 36/15 without delay so as to ensure that labour inspectors are empowered to enter freely and without previous notice workplaces in order to guarantee adequate and effective supervision in conformity with Convention No. 81 and Convention No. 129; and also

- undertake the legislative reforms in consultation with the social partners as well as to ensure effective collaboration between the labour inspectorate and the social partners.

The Committee calls on the Government to avail itself of ILO technical assistance in relation to these recommendations.

The Committee requests that the Government report in detail on the measures taken to implement these recommendations by 1 September 2019.

Government representative – The Government of the Republic of Serbia wishes to give thanks to the Committee and to all groups and individuals that took part in the discussion yesterday. We read the conclusions and we are of the opinion that conclusions should also refer to labour practices in Serbia and not only to the national legislation, but anyway, the Government said yesterday that we will ask for technical assistance of the ILO in order to remedy this situation and in this, we will work together with other ministries in the Government and with our social partners and we will send to the ILO the information by 1 September this year.

CMNT_TITLE

In order to provide a comprehensive view of the issues relating to the application of the ratified Conventions on labour inspection, the Committee considers it appropriate to examine Conventions Nos 81 (labour inspection) and 129 (labour inspection in agriculture) together.

Article 3(1)(a) and (b) and (2) of Convention No. 81 and Article 6(1)(a) and (b) and (3) of Convention No. 129. Action against undeclared employment and enforcement of the legislation relating to the protection of workers. The Committee previously noted the 945 joint inspections by the labour inspectorate and other authorities involved in the Working Group for Combating Informal Employment in 2018, during which labour inspectors identified 364 persons in irregular work situations. Concerning the Committee’s request for statistics in this regard, the Committee notes the Government’s statement in its report that, following measures taken by the labour inspectors, a formal employment relationship was established for 233 workers out of those 364 persons. The Committee also notes the Government’s indication that, in 2019, employers entered into employment relationships with 10,167 persons out of 12,938 persons found to be working informally (79 per cent), following measures undertaken by labour inspectors. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the employers applied for compulsory social insurance for all of those 10,167 persons, and that these employees were paid wages and social insurance contributions starting from the date of their contracts. The Committee notes that, according to the information in the Annual Labour Inspection Report 2019, labour inspectors continue to undertake joint inspections in the context of this working group. Noting this information, the Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the number of instances where, following a joint inspection, a formal employment relationship was established for workers found to be in an irregular situation.

Articles 4, 7, 11 and 16 of Convention No. 81 and Articles 7, 9, 15 and 21 of Convention No. 129. Organization and effective functioning of the labour inspection services under the supervision and control of a central labour inspection authority. The Committee previously noted the establishment of a single information system for inspection, e Inspector, which aims to ensure better coordination between different inspectorates, improve planning and access to data, and allow a better monitoring of cases, including by the Coordinating Commission (a body established under the Law on Inspection Oversight to, among other things, avoid overlap and unnecessary duplication of inspections). In this respect, the Committee requested information on the influence of the Coordinating Commission on the organization of the activities of the labour inspectorate, and the impact of the e-Inspector system. The Committee notes the Government’s indication in this regard, that the e-Inspector system covers 42 inspectorates, in addition to labour inspection. The Committee also notes the information provided in the Annual Labour Inspection Report 2019 regarding the objectives and the improvements that the e-Inspector system can bring in terms of efficiency, effective planning, and data management by labour inspectors. Taking into account that the e-Inspector system covers 43 inspectorates, the Committee requests the Government to provide further information on any impact that the Coordinating Commission and the e-Inspector system have on the organization of the labour inspectorate’s activities in practice, such as its inspection priorities, the workplaces it chooses to inspect, and the number of inspection visits undertaken. Observing once again an absence of information in this respect, the Committee requests the Government to indicate any labour inspection functions that have been assigned to bodies of autonomous provinces and local self-government bodies.

Article 5(b) of Convention No. 81 and Article 13 of Convention No. 129. Collaboration between the labour inspection services and employers and workers (at the enterprise level and in the agricultural sector). The Committee previously noted the observations of the Confederation of Autonomous Trade Unions of Serbia (CATUS) regarding the lack of cooperation with social partners during inspections, and indicating that cases where labour inspectors invite trade union representatives to be present during inspections are rare. In response to the Committee’s request for information on measures taken to promote collaboration, the Committee notes the Government’s reference to multiple inspections and joint inspections with other inspection services, such as the Tax Administration, undertaken in the period 2016–19 in coordination with trade unions, including CATUS. The Committee also notes the Government’s statement that the labour inspectorate is always open for cooperation with trade union representatives, for exchange of information and data, as well as for the presence of trade union representatives during inspections. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on measures taken to promote collaboration between the labour inspectorate and employers and workers or their organizations.

Article 12(1)(a) of Convention No. 81 and Article 16(1)(a) of Convention No. 129. Freedom of labour inspectors to enter at any hour of the day or night any workplace liable to inspection. The Committee previously requested information on circumstances in which, pursuant to section 19 of the Law on Inspection Oversight, labour inspectors provided with proper credentials are empowered to conduct inspections outside of working hours. In this respect, the Committee notes the Government’s reference to section 64(1) of the Law on Safety and Health at Work, as amended, which stipulates that, for the purpose of inspection, the employer shall provide access to buildings and rooms to the labour inspector, at any time when there are employees working. The Committee also notes the Government’s indication that labour inspectors can conduct inspections outside working hours without previous notice and without an inspection warrant in the case of certain work injuries. In addition, the Committee notes that section 19(2) of the Law on Inspection Oversight, as amended, allows for inspections outside of working hours to verify an entity’s compliance with prescribed working hours. The Committee notes in this regard that the Annual Labour Inspection Report 2019 contains information regarding inspections conducted at night on compliance with both labour law and occupational safety and health law, including at construction sites. The Committee takes note of this information.

Article 14 of Convention No. 81 and Article 19 of Convention No. 129. Notification of occupational accidents and diseases to the labour inspectorate. The Committee previously noted the Government’s indications regarding various difficulties regarding the notification of occupational accidents and diseases to the labour inspectorate. In response to its request on measures to address those difficulties, the Committee notes the Government’s statement that the labour inspectorate established cooperation with the Ministry of Interior, Police Administration and Centre for Notifications and Whistleblowing, as concerns the notification of injuries at work to the labour inspectorate. The Government indicates that those bodies provide such notifications regularly. The Committee also observes that the Annual Labour Inspectorate Report 2019 continues to note difficulties in relation to the reporting of occupational accidents and diseases, including in relation to: (i) the non-compliance of employers with legal requirements to report occupational accidents and diseases; and (ii) different methodological approaches to the registration, processing and evaluation of the data on occupational injuries. In this respect, the Committee notes that, according to the Annual Labour Inspection Report 2019, no cases of occupational diseases were notified to the labour inspectorate in 2019. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on any measures taken to mitigate the difficulties identified by the Government with a view to strengthening the system for notifying occupational accidents and diseases to the labour inspectorate. The Committee also requests the Government to provide further information on the impact of measures taken to mitigate those difficulties.

Article 15(c) of Convention No. 81 and Article 20(c) of Convention No. 129. Confidentiality of complaints. The Committee previously noted that, according to CATUS, inspectors frequently invite complainants to be present during inspections with the employer, which reveals the complainant’s identity. In response to its request for information on measures to ensure the confidentiality of the source of complaints in practice, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that labour inspectors do not invite the person who lodged the complaint to be present during inspections, precisely so that their identity is not revealed. The Committee notes the Government’s statement that the person who lodged the complaint can be present during the inspection only at their own explicit request. The Committee takes note of this information.

Articles 17 and 18 of Convention No. 81 and Articles 22, 23 and 24 of Convention No. 129. Effective enforcement and adequate penalties. The Committee previously noted limitations to the powers of inspectors to initiate enforcement measures pursuant to sections 27(1) and (5) and 42(3) of the Law on Inspection Oversight. The Committee notes the Government’s statement, in response to the Committee’s previous request, that, where employers do not act upon preventive measures prescribed by labour inspectors within the set deadlines, labour inspectors issue a decision ordering such employer to remove the detected irregularities, and file a misdemeanour charge. The Committee notes that, according to the Government, labour inspectors filed 978 motions for misdemeanour proceedings in 2019, following preventive measures not respected before the set deadline. The Committee also notes that, according to the Annual Labour Inspection Report 2019, there were 6,807 motions for the institution of misdemeanour proceedings in 2019 (an increase from 6,538 motions for misdemeanour proceedings noted in 2018), including 5,306 in the area of employment and 1,444 in the field of occupational safety and health (OSH). The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the proportion of misdemeanour motions that were filed following preventive measures prescribed by inspectors and the possibility to remediate, including information on the average time set for deadlines to undertake preventive measures, and the average time that, following deadlines not being met, misdemeanour motions are filed.

Articles 20 and 21 of Convention No. 81 and Articles 26 and 27 of Convention No. 129. Annual reports on the work of the labour inspection services. The Committee welcomes the Annual Labour Inspection Report 2019, transmitted to the ILO by the Government, and containing information on the subjects listed under Article 21 of Convention No. 81 and Article 27 of Convention No. 129. The Committee requests the Government to continue to publish and communicate the annual reports of the labour inspectorate to the ILO, in accordance with Article 20 of Convention No. 81 and Article 26 of Convention No. 129.

Issues specifically concerning labour inspection in agriculture

Articles 4 and 9(3) of Convention No. 129. Scope of labour inspection in agriculture and training. In response to its previous request for information on training specific to the agricultural sector, the Committee notes the information provided by the Government on training provided to labour inspectors in the context of the EU Twinning project “Support and improvement of occupational safety and health and labour inspection in the Republic of Serbia” (2019–21). In this regard, the Committee welcomes the Government’s indication that 17 labour inspectors participated in a four-day training of trainers, in January 2019, which included a topic on “Occupational health and safety measures and inspection oversight in agriculture”. The Committee also notes the Government’s indication that the organization of trainings for all labour inspectors is planned for the upcoming period. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on any trainings provided to labour inspectors specific to the agricultural sector, including their frequency, content, and the number of participants. The Committee reminds the Government of the possibility to avail itself of ILO technical assistance in this regard.

CMNT_TITLE

In order to provide a comprehensive view of the issues relating to the application of the ratified Conventions on labour inspection, the Committee considers it appropriate to examine Conventions Nos 81 (labour inspection) and 129 (labour inspection in agriculture) together.

Article 12(1)(a) of Convention No. 81 and Article 16(1)(a) of Convention No. 129. Free entry of labour inspectors to workplaces without prior notice. The Committee previously noted restrictions on the powers of inspectors in the Law on Inspection Oversight, with regard to: (i) the ability of labour inspectors to undertake inspection visits without previous notice (sections 16, 17, 49 and 60); and (ii) the scope of inspections (section 16). The Committee noted the 2019 conclusions of the Committee on the Application of Standards (CAS) on the application of Conventions Nos 81 and 129 by Serbia, which called on the Government to amend sections 16, 17, 49 and 60 of the Law on Inspection Oversight without delay; and undertake the legislative reforms in consultation with the social partners as well as to ensure effective collaboration between the labour inspectorate and the social partners. In this respect, the Committee noted the Government’s reference to consultations held by the Ministry of Labour, Employment, Veteran and Social Affairs with the Ministry of Public Administration and Local Self-Government, which issued the Law on Inspection Oversight, and a tripartite workshop planned for 2020.

The Committee welcomes the Government’s indication in its report that a tripartite workshop took place in February 2020 in Belgrade to follow-up on the conclusions of the CAS, attended by the representatives of the Office of the Prime Minister of Serbia, the Ministry of Labour, Employment, Veteran and Social Policy, the Ministry of Public Administration and Local Self-Government, the labour inspectorate, the Occupational Safety and Health Directorate, the Serbian Association of Employers (SAE), the Trade Union Confederation “Nezavisnost”, and the Confederation of Autonomous Trade Unions of Serbia (CATUS), and including the participation of the ILO. The Committee notes the Government’s reference to the conclusions of the workshop, and notes with interest that among the areas of consensus emerging from the workshop to address the conclusions of the CAS was agreement to establish a tripartite working group to determine the specific form the amendments should take, including whether to amend the Law on Inspection Oversight only, or to develop a specific labour inspection law. The Committee also notes that, according to the Government’s supplementary information under the Tripartite Consultation (International Labour Standards) Convention, 1976 (No. 144), the Ministry of Labour, Employment, Veteran and Social Affairs informed the Social and Economic Council on 4 March 2020 of the results of the tripartite workshop on Conventions Nos 81 and 129. The Committee further notes that section 60(1) of the Law on Inspection Oversight, which provided the possibility of fines on labour inspectors in case of failure to notify the entity subject to oversight of an upcoming instance of inspection oversight in writing, has been amended and deleted. Taking due note of this information, the Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the measures taken to amend the Law on Inspection Oversight, including the establishment of the tripartite working group and the outcomes of its meetings, and on any other steps taken to ensure the appropriate follow-up to the conclusions of the CAS, in consultation with the social partners. The Committee also requests the Government to continue to provide information on the application in practice of Article 12(1)(a) of Convention No. 81 and Article 16(1)(a) of Convention No. 129, including statistics on the number and nature of inspections undertaken without previous notice (such as in response to occupational accidents, complaints or serious violations).

Articles 3(1)(a) and (b), 7, 10 and 16 of Convention No. 81 and Articles 6(1)(a) and (b), 9, 14 and 21 of Convention No. 129. Adequate number of qualified labour inspectors and inspection visits to ensure the effective application of the legal provisions. The Committee previously noted the decreasing number of labour inspectors since 2016, as well as trade unions’ concerns regarding the insufficient numbers of inspectors and their lack of appropriate conditions and means of work. In this respect, the Committee requested information on measures taken by the Government concerning the implementation of its proposed three-year action plan to hire civil servants carrying out inspections, and of the recommendations of a 2019 analysis of inspection services.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the labour inspectorate has 229 labour inspectors for 409,868 registered business entities as of May 2020 (a decrease from 240 labour inspectors for 416,815 registered business entities in 2019), and that the Government states that the labour inspectorate is competent to control those entities’ compliance with labour legislation. The Committee also notes the Government’s reference to the adoption, by Decision of the Government, of the Three-year Action Plan for the employment of civil servants carrying out inspections under the jurisdiction of national inspections, according to which it is necessary to employ 13 additional labour inspectors in 2020, and 27 more additional labour inspectors in 2021. The Government also indicates that there are currently 38 vacancies for labour inspector posts. The Committee further notes the Government’s indication that all labour inspectors are equipped with laptops and modems for mobile internet, but that the labour inspectorate is poorly equipped with scanners and printers, and needs IT equipment, including new desktop computers. The Committee requests the Government to provide further information on the implementation of the Three-year Action Plan for the employment of civil servants carrying out inspections under the jurisdiction of national inspections, indicating the specific number of additional labour inspectors hired. The Committee also requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that the labour inspectorate offices are suitably equipped. In this respect, it requests the Government to indicate any measures taken or envisaged to improve the material means placed at the disposal of labour inspectors and to address the deficiencies in IT equipment identified.

The Committee is raising other matters in a request addressed directly to the Government.

CMNT_TITLE

In order to provide a comprehensive view of the issues relating to the application of the ratified Conventions on labour inspection, the Committee considers it appropriate to examine Conventions Nos 81 (labour inspection) and 129 (labour inspection in agriculture) together.

The Committee notes the observations of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) on the application of these Conventions, received on 1 September 2019, and of the Confederation of Autonomous Trade Unions of Serbia (CATUS), communicated with the Government’s report on the application of these Conventions.

Article 3(1)(a) and (b) and (2) of Convention No. 81 and Article 6(1)(a) and (b) and (3) of Convention No. 129. Action against undeclared employment and enforcement of the legislation relating to the protection of workers. The Committee notes the information in the report of the Government regarding the activities undertaken in 2018 by labour inspectors in respect of undeclared work and unregistered business entities. In particular, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that 13,869 out of 17,026 persons identified to be working in irregular situations (82 per cent) had a formal employment relationship established following the measures taken by inspectors, and that 620 business entities out of 939 unregistered business entities registered with the Serbian Business Registers Agency after the inspections. The Committee also notes that, following the administrative reforms of the labour inspectorate, the Government refers to the participation of labour inspection in the Working Group for Combating Informal Employment, which includes representatives from diverse Ministries and organizes coordinated and joint inspections, involving mutual cooperation and exchange of information. The Government indicates that, between January and December 2018, the labour inspectorate and other authorities involved in the working group engaged in 945 joint inspections, on the occasion of which labour inspectors identified 364 persons in irregular work situations as well as ten unregistered business entities. Recalling that the primary function of labour inspectors is to secure the legal provisions relating to conditions of work and the protection of workers while engaged in their work, the Committee requests the Government to provide further information on the manner in which joint inspections of the Working Group for Combating Informal Employment contribute to the fulfilment of labour inspectors’ primary functions, under Article 3(1) of Convention No. 81 and Article 6(1) of Convention No. 129. The Committee further requests the Government to provide statistics on the number of instances where, following a joint inspection, a formal employment relationship was established for workers found to be working in irregular situations. In addition, the Committee requests that with respect to the 13,869 workers for whom a formal relationship was established, the Government provide information on the number of cases in which these workers have been granted their due rights, such as the payment of outstanding wages or social security benefits.

Articles 4, 7, 11 and 16 of Convention No. 81 and Articles 7, 9, 15 and 21 of Convention No. 129. Organization and effective functioning of the labour inspection services under the supervision and control of a central labour inspection authority. The Committee notes the information and organigrams provided by the Government on the structure of the labour inspectorate, in response to its previous request on the structure of labour inspection services following the administrative reform. The Committee also notes the Government’s indication that the Coordinating Commission, which, pursuant to section 12(1) of the Law on Inspection Oversight, shall ensure greater effectiveness of inspections and avoid overlaps and unnecessary reduplication of inspections, has formed 11 working groups, including the Working Group for Combating Informal Employment. The Government indicates that the labour inspectorate is the body in charge of this Working Group, and has to report monthly on its work to the Coordinating Commission. In addition, the Government and the 2018 annual report of the labour inspectorate refer to the establishment of a single information system for inspection, e-Inspector, which aims to ensure better coordination between different inspections, to improve planning and access to data, and to allow the better monitoring of cases, including by the Coordinating Commission. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the manner in which the Coordinating Commission influences the organization of the activities of the labour inspectorate in practice, including the role and impact of the e-Inspector system in this respect. In addition, the Committee once again requests the Government to indicate any labour inspection functions that have been assigned to bodies of autonomous provinces and local self-government bodies.

Article 5(b) of Convention No. 81 and Article 13 of Convention No. 129. Collaboration between the labour inspection services and employers and workers (at the enterprise level and in the agricultural sector). The Committee notes that, in response to its previous request for information on collaboration with social partners in the inspection process, the Government refers to the organization and participation of the labour inspectorate in meetings with the social partners, in workshops on OSH organised by CATUS and the Trade Union Confederation ‘Nezavisnost’, and in joint inspections at the initiative of the social partners. In its observations, however, CATUS states that cases where labour inspectors invite trade union representatives to be present during inspections are rare, and that cooperation with social partners during inspections does not exist at present. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments in respect of the observations by CATUS and to provide further information on the measures it is taking to promote collaboration between officials of the labour inspectorate and employers and workers or their organizations.

Article 12(1)(a) of Convention No. 81 and Article 16(1)(a) of Convention No. 129. Freedom of labour inspectors to enter at any hour of the day or night any workplace liable to inspection. The Committee previously noted that, pursuant to section 19(1) and (2) of the Law on Inspection Oversight, inspection of a legal entity shall be performed during working hours, except where there are reasons to act without delay, where the level of risk appraised is high or critical, or where urgent action is required to prevent or remove direct hazard to human life or health, the environment or plant or animal life. In this respect, the Committee had requested information on the meaning of the term “reasons to act without delay”. The Committee observes that the information provided by the Government, in response to that request, relates to the requirement to give previous notice to employers, but not to the timing of inspections outside of working hours. The Committee recalls that, in accordance with Article 12(1)(a) of Convention No. 81 and Article 16(1)(a) of Convention No. 129, labour inspectors provided with proper credentials shall be empowered to enter freely and without previous notice at any hour of the day or night any workplace liable to inspection. The Committee requests the Government to specify the circumstances in which, pursuant to section 19 of the Law on Inspection Oversight, labour inspectors provided with proper credentials are empowered to conduct inspections outside of working hours, and at any hour of the day or night, in accordance with Article 12(1)(a) of Convention No. 81 and Article 16(1)(a) of Convention No. 129.

Article 14 of Convention No. 81 and Article 19 of Convention No. 129. Notification of occupational accidents and diseases to the labour inspectorate. In response to its previous comments on the system for notifying occupational accidents and diseases, the Committee notes that the Government reiterates information on difficulties of application in practice, including: failure of employers to report occupational accidents; non-systematic and inadequate reporting by employers of occupational diseases, due in part to the failure to recognize a connection between diseases and working conditions; different methodological approaches for recording, processing and evaluating the source data on workplace injuries; and lack of communication and exchange of information among institutions dealing with safety and health at work. The Committee therefore requests the Government to provide further detailed information on the measures taken or envisaged in order to address the difficulties identified with a view to strengthening the system for notifying occupational accidents and diseases.

Article 15(c) of Convention No. 81 and Article 20(c) of Convention No. 129. Confidentiality of complaints. In response to the Committee’s previous comments, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that inspection oversight warrants pursuant to section 16 of the Law on Inspection Oversight do not indicate that inspections were initiated pursuant to a received complaint, and that labour inspectors do not reveal such fact, or the identity of the complainant, during inspection visits. CATUS nevertheless alleges that inspectors frequently invite the complainant to be present during inspections with the employer, and that their identity is revealed in this way. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments in respect of these observations by CATUS. The Committee also requests the Government to provide further information on measures taken to ensure that, in practice, labour inspectors give no intimation to the employer or his representative that a visit of inspection was made in consequence of the receipt of a complaint.

Articles 17 and 18 of Convention No. 81 and Articles 22, 23 and 24 of Convention No. 129. Adequate penalties imposed and effectively enforced. The Committee previously noted that sections 27(1) and (5) and 42(3) of the Law on Inspection Oversight require inspectors first to provide advice and the possibility to remediate non-compliance before they may initiate enforcement measures, with the exception only in urgent cases related to OSH. The Committee requested the Government to ensure that any exceptions to labour inspectors’ discretionary powers to initiate prompt legal proceedings without previous warning do not undermine the effectiveness of labour inspection. In this respect, the Committee notes the statistics provided by the Government regarding the misdemeanour proceedings initiated and warnings given by labour inspectors in 2018. The Committee notes that, according to the Government, labour inspectors filed a total of 6,538 motions for misdemeanour proceedings in 2018, which is 80 per cent higher than in the same period in 2017. In comparison, the 2018 annual report of the labour inspectorate indicates that labour inspectors issued 10,644 decisions ordering the remedy of non-compliance with labour law or with the law on OSH. While noting these statistics, the Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures taken to ensure that any exceptions to labour inspectors’ discretionary powers to initiate prompt legal proceedings without previous warning do not undermine the effectiveness of labour inspections, and in that respect to provide information on the proportion of the 6,538 misdemeanour motions that were filed following provision of prior advice and the possibility to remediate, as well as the average length of time between such provisions of advice and the filing of misdemeanour motions.

Articles 20 and 21 of Convention No. 81 and Articles 26 and 27 of Convention No. 129. Annual reports on the work of the labour inspection services. The Committee notes the 2018 annual report of the labour inspectorate communicated to the ILO. The Committee takes due note that the report contains detailed information on most of the subjects listed under Article 21 of Convention No. 81 and Article 27 of Convention No. 129, but observes that it is again missing statistics on occupational diseases (Article 21(g) of Convention No. 81 and Article 27(g) of Convention No. 129). In addition, the Committee observes that, while the Government’s report on the application of these Conventions contains the relevant statistics on workplaces liable to inspection (Article 21(c) of Convention No. 81 and Article 27(c) of Convention No. 129), this information is not reflected in the annual report of the labour inspectorate. The Committee therefore requests the Government to continue to publish and communicate the annual reports of the labour inspectorate to the ILO, in accordance with Article 20 of Convention No. 81 and Article 26 of Convention No. 129. The Committee also requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that it contains information on all the subjects listed under Article 21 of Convention No. 81 and Article 27 of Convention No. 129, including statistics of workplaces liable to inspection and the number of workers employed therein (Article 21(c) of Convention No. 81 and Article 27(c) of Convention No. 129) and statistics of occupational diseases (Article 21(g) of Convention No. 81 and Article 27(g) of Convention No. 129).

Issues specifically concerning labour inspection in agriculture

Articles 4 and 9(3) of Convention No. 129. Scope of labour inspection in agriculture and training. In response to its previous request for information on trainings for labour inspectors that are particularly relevant to the agricultural sector, the Committee notes the information provided by the Government on a training in April 2019 relating to seasonal jobs. The Committee requests the Government to provide further information on trainings provided to labour inspectors that are specific to the agricultural sector, including the frequency, the content, and the number of participants in such trainings.

[The Government is asked to reply in full to the present comments in 2020.]

CMNT_TITLE

In order to provide a comprehensive view of the issues relating to the application of the ratified Conventions on labour inspection, the Committee considers it appropriate to examine Conventions Nos 81 (labour inspection) and 129 (labour inspection in agriculture) together.

The Committee notes the observations of the International Organisation of Employers (IOE) and the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) on the application of these Conventions, received on 29 August and 1 September 2019, respectively, and the observations of the Confederation of Autonomous Trade Unions of Serbia (CATUS), the Trade Union Confederation “Nezavisnost”, and the Serbian Association of Employers (SAE), communicated with the Government’s report on the application of these Conventions.

Follow-up to the conclusions of the Committee on the Application of Standards (International Labour Conference, 108th Session, June 2019)

Article 12(1)(a) of Convention No. 81 and Article 16(1)(a) of Convention No. 129. Free entry of labour inspectors to workplaces without prior notice. The Committee previously noted restrictions on the powers of inspectors in the Law on Inspection Oversight No. 36/15: sections 16 and 17 of the Law require three days prior notice for most inspections and a written inspection warrant (except in emergency situations) specifying, among other things, the purpose of the inspection and its duration. Section 16 further provides that if, during the course of the inspection, an inspector uncovers an instance of non-compliance that exceeds the inspection warrant, the inspector must apply for an addendum to the warrant. Pursuant to sections 49 and 60, inspectors shall be held personally accountable for the actions undertaken in the course of their duties and may receive a fine if they undertake inspections without prior notice.

The Committee notes the 2019 conclusions of the Committee on the Application of Standards (CAS) on the application of Conventions Nos 81 and 129 by Serbia, which called on the Government to: (i) amend sections 16, 17, 49 and 60 of the Law on Inspection Oversight without delay so as to ensure that labour inspectors are empowered to enter freely and without previous notice workplaces in order to guarantee adequate and effective supervision in conformity with Convention No. 81 and Convention No. 129; and (ii) undertake the legislative reforms in consultation with the social partners as well as to ensure effective collaboration between the labour inspectorate and the social partners. The Committee notes the observations of the IOE, the ITUC and the Trade Union Confederation “Nezavisnost” which recall these conclusions adopted by the CAS. The Committee also notes the SAE’s indication in its observations that it is ready to review, with ILO technical assistance and through social dialogue, the Law on Inspection Oversight, in light of these conclusions. The Committee further notes the observations of CATUS, which state that section 17 of the Law on Inspection Oversight contradicts Article 12(1)(a) of Convention No. 81 and Article 16(1)(a) of Convention No. 129. According to CATUS, while ratified Conventions take precedence under the Constitution, inspections in practice are made with reference to national legislation and it is only in judicial proceedings that the court applies the Convention, in response to its reference by the workers’ attorney. The Committee welcomes the Government’s indication in its report that the Ministry of Labour, Employment, Veteran and Social Affairs held consultations with the Ministry of Public Administration and Local Self-Government, and that a tripartite workshop attended by all relevant stakeholders will take place with the technical assistance of the ILO in January 2020. The Committee also notes the information provided by the Government concerning the application in practice of Article 12(1)(a) of Convention No. 81 and Article 16(1)(a) of Convention No. 129, including its indication that, in 2018, 93 per cent of inspections took place without previous notification to the employer, and that all 939 inspections of unregistered entities were undertaken without previous notice. Taking note of all these considerations, the Committee expects that the Government will continue to take the necessary and prompt measures to ensure the appropriate follow-up to the conclusions of the CAS, in consultation with the social partners. In this respect, it requests the Government to continue to provide information on the measures taken to ensure full compliance with Article 12 of Convention No. 81 and Article 16 of Convention No. 129, and to provide information on the outcome of the tripartite workshop.

Articles 3(1)(a) and (b), 7, 10 and 16 of Convention No. 81 and Articles 6(1)(a) and (b), 9, 14 and 21 of Convention No. 129. Adequate number of qualified labour inspectors and inspection visits to ensure the effective application of the legal provisions. The Committee previously noted that, in 2016, the number of labour inspectors decreased from 324 to 242 following the implementation of administrative reforms. It noted the Government’s indication that the labour inspectorate has managed to significantly increase the efficiency of its work with the existing resources, as a result of intensified inspections.

The Committee notes the observations of CATUS that the number of inspectors is insufficient and that they do not have appropriate conditions and means of work, all of which contribute to the large number of workers’ rights violations; and notes the observations of the ITUC that the Government has taken measures to significantly decrease the number of labour inspectors, and that the ratio of inspectors to registered business entities does not enable an effective inspection service. The Committee also notes the indication of the Government, in response to the Committee’s previous comments, that there are 240 labour inspectors and 416,815 registered business entities liable to inspection as at July 2019. The Committee also notes that the Government refers to a number of measures recommended by a 2019 analysis of inspection services, undertaken by the Balkan Centre for Regulatory Reform and the National Alliance for Local Economic Development, including the hiring of additional labour inspectors and support staff, the procurement of new IT equipment and new vehicles, and the amendment of an existing Rulebook to foresee the hiring and training of junior inspectors, in view of the aging demographic of the existing workforce of labour inspectors. In this respect, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that it is in the process of adopting conclusions for a three-year action plan to hire civil servants carrying out inspections. The Committee requests the Government to ensure that the number of labour inspectors is sufficient to secure the effective discharge of the duties of the inspectorate. In this respect, it requests the Government to indicate the measures taken to implement the recommendations to improve the labour inspectorate, including the implementation of the three-year action plan on the hiring of additional inspectors.

The Committee is raising other matters in a request addressed directly to the Government.

[The Government is asked to reply in full to the present comments in 2020.]

CMNT_TITLE

In order to provide a comprehensive view of the issues relating to the application of ratified Conventions on labour inspection and the labour administration, the Committee considers it appropriate to examine Conventions Nos 81 (labour inspection), 129 (labour inspection in agriculture) and 150 (labour administration) together.

Labour inspection: Conventions Nos 81 and 129

Article 3(1)(a) and (b) of Convention No. 81 and Article 6(1)(a) and (b) of Convention No. 129. Action against undeclared employment and enforcement of the legislation relating to the protection of workers. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its report, in response to the Committee’s previous request, concerning the results of the activities of the labour inspectorate in the area of undeclared employment with regard to the protection of workers’ rights, particularly the establishment of formal employment contracts with 12,250 workers in 2015.

Articles 3(1)(a) and (b), and 5(a) and (b) of Convention No. 81 and Articles 6(1)(a) and (b), 12 and 13 of Convention No. 129. Preventive role of the labour inspectorate in the field of occupational safety and health (OSH). Risk assessments carried out by private companies for employers. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government, in response to the Committee’s previous request, concerning the various preventive activities undertaken by the labour inspectorate in the area of OSH and in small and medium-sized enterprises, in cooperation with other government services and the social partners. The Committee also notes the information provided by the Government, in response to its previous request, concerning the modalities of supervision of private companies that perform risk assessments for employers.

Articles 3(1)(a) and (b), 10 and 16 of Convention No. 81 and Articles 6(1)(a) and (b), 14 and 21 of Convention No. 129. Adequate number of labour inspection visits to ensure the effective application of the legal provisions. The Committee previously noted the observations made by the Trade Union Confederation “Nezavisnost” concerning an insufficient number of labour inspections in the area of labour conditions to address frequent labour law violations. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that in 2016, there was a total of 337,927 registered business entities, and that the number of labour inspectors decreased from 324 to 242 labour inspectors following the implementation of administrative reforms. It notes from the information in the 2017 annual labour inspection report that the number of labour inspectors in 2017 was 247, and that the number of inspections was 53,424 covering 510,725 workers. The Government also indicates that a higher number of labour inspectors is needed in the more remote territorial structures of the labour inspectorate, among other things, in view of the increasing number of business entities, and the enlarged scope of labour inspection (which includes the control of unregistered entities since the entry into force of the Law on Inspection Oversight No. 36/15 of April 2015). The Government adds that the labour inspectorate has managed to significantly increase the efficiency of its work with the existing resources, as a result of intensified inspections, which also involve the temporary assignment of labour inspectors to territorial structures on a rotating basis. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the number of labour inspectors working at the central and local levels of the labour inspectorate as well as the workplaces subject to labour inspection, and to continue to report specifically on measures taken to ensure that the number of inspectors are appropriate for the effective performance of their duties.

Articles 4, 7, 11 and 16 of Convention No. 81 and Articles 7, 9, 15 and 21 of Convention No. 129. Organization and effective functioning of the labour inspection services under the supervision and control of a central labour inspection authority. The Committee notes from the Government’s report that there are currently 36 inspection services within 12 ministries, and that technical inspections are also performed by the bodies of autonomous provinces and local self-government bodies. It further notes the Government’s reference to administrative reforms, and its indication that the activities of the labour inspection services are now covered by the Law on Inspection Oversight No. 36/15 of April 2015. Pursuant to section 12(1) of the Law on Inspection Oversight, a Coordinating Commission shall ensure greater effectiveness of inspection, and avoid overlaps and unnecessary reduplication of inspections. In accordance with section 12(2) of that Law, the Coordinating Commission shall, among other things: provide guidelines to improve the coordination of the various inspection bodies, which also includes the harmonization of the respective workplans of the inspection bodies; review opinions, directives, methodological materials and manuals relevant to inspection oversight; and participate in analysing the needs for funding, technical equipment and professional development of inspectors and make relevant recommendations. The Committee requests the Government to provide clarifications on the structure of the labour inspection services following the abovementioned administrative reform, including information on the organization and exercise of any labour inspection functions that have been entrusted to the bodies of autonomous provinces and local self-government bodies. The Committee also requests the Government to provide information on the composition of the Coordinating Commission, and the impact of its decisions and activities on the labour inspection system.

Article 5(b) of Convention No. 81 and Article 13 of Convention No. 129. Collaboration between the labour inspection services and employers and workers (at the enterprise level and in the agricultural sector). The Committee notes the Government’s reference, in reply to the Committee’s request for information on collaboration with the social partners at the enterprise level, to numerous inspections following relevant requests made by trade union representatives. The Committee also notes that the Government indicates, with regard to the previous observations made by the Confederation of Autonomous Trade Unions of Serbia (CATUS) concerning restrictions on the presence of trade union representatives during labour inspections, that there are no such restrictions. The Government provides information on inspections with trade union representatives in attendance. Moreover, in response to the Committee’s request for information on collaboration, particularly in the agricultural sector, the Government refers to periodic meetings with the social partners on issues concerning the implementation of labour legislation, and to a meeting in 2016 specifically concerning the agricultural sector. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on collaboration with social partners in the inspection process.

Article 7 of Convention No. 81 and Article 9 of Convention No. 129. Adequate initial and further training of labour inspectors. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government, in reply to its previous request, concerning the training provided to labour inspectors, including the preparation of inspection instructions, which also concern labour inspections in agriculture.

Article 12(1)(a) of Convention No. 81 and Article 16(1)(a) of Convention No. 129. Freedom of labour inspectors to enter at any hour of the day or night any workplace liable to inspection. The Committee notes that pursuant to section 19(1) and (2) of the Law on Inspection Oversight No. 36/15, inspection of a legal entity shall be performed during working hours, except where there are reasons to act without delay, where the level of risk appraised is high or critical, or where urgent action is required to prevent or remove direct hazard to human life or health, the environment or plant or animal life.

The Committee would like to recall its observations made in its 2006 General Survey, Labour inspection, paragraph 270, according to which the conditions for the exercise of the right of free entry to workplaces laid down by Conventions Nos 81 and 129 are intended to allow inspectors to carry out inspections, where necessary and possible, to enforce the application of legal provisions relating to conditions of work, and that the protection of workers and the technical requirements of inspection should be the primordial criteria for determining the appropriate timing of visits. The Committee also recalls its indications in the same paragraph that it should be for the inspector to decide whether a visit is reasonable and that, obviously, inspections should only be carried out at night or outside working hours where this is warranted. The Committee requests the Government to specify the meaning of the term “reasons to act without delay” in section 19 of the Law on Inspection Oversight No. 36/15, and to ensure that the protection of workers is the primary objective for any decision on the timing of inspection visits, in conformity with Article 12(1)(a) of Convention No. 81 and Article 16(1)(a) of Convention No. 129.

Article 14 of Convention No. 81 and Article 19 of Convention No. 129. Notification of occupational accidents and diseases to the labour inspectorate. In its previous comments, the Committee noted the Government’s indication that data on occupational diseases was extremely fragmented due to: its underreporting by employers who fail to recognize the link between occupational diseases and working conditions, as well as the absence of appropriate exchange of information between the various national institutions holding such data. In this respect, the Committee noted the Government’s reference to a number of proposed measures for improved identification, reporting and registration of occupational accidents and diseases. In response to the Committee’s request for progress made in this regard, the Government refers to a European Union (EU) project, which includes the introduction of a new information system for the registration of statistics on occupational accidents and diseases. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the measures taken or envisaged in order to strengthen the efficiency of the system for notifying occupational accidents and diseases.

Article 15(c) of Convention No. 81 and Article 20(c) of Convention No. 129. Confidentiality of complaints. The Committee notes that section 16 of the Law on Inspection Oversight No. 36/15 requires a written inspection warrant, which determines the content and purpose of the inspection. Section 17(4) provides that the reasons for not providing notification shall be listed in the inspection warrant, and section 20(1) provides that entities subject to inspection shall be acquainted with the purpose of the inspection. The Committee recalls that Article 15(c) of Convention No. 81 and Article 20(c) of Convention No. 129 provide that labour inspectors shall treat as absolutely confidential the source of any complaint bringing to their notice a defect or breach of legal provisions and shall give no intimation to employers or their representatives that a visit of inspection was made as a consequence of the receipt of such a complaint. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the manner in which it ensures that confidentiality is maintained with respect to the fact that an inspection was undertaken pursuant to a complaint, and to indicate if the fact that a complaint was received is indicated on the inspection oversight warrant.

Articles 17 and 18 of Convention No. 81 and Articles 22, 23 and 24 of Convention No. 129. Adequate penalties imposed and effectively enforced. In its previous comments, the Committee noted the observations made by CATUS and the Trade Union Confederation “Nezavisnost” concerning the inefficiency of the system of penalties for labour law violations (including the reference of workers by labour inspectors to the courts, rather than applying the administrative means available to them). In this context, the Committee also noted the Government’s indication that there was a need to accelerate judicial procedures so as to overcome problems with regard to the statute of limitations. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in reply to its request, namely on cooperation with the judicial authorities, as well as the statistical information on the number of proceedings that have lapsed due to the statute of limitations. According to the statistics provided, this number has decreased between 2012 and 2015 from 558 to 335 cases concerning alleged offences under the Labour Code, and from 200 to 171 cases concerning alleged offences under the Occupational Safety and Health (OSH) Law.

Concerning the discretionary powers of labour inspectors, the Committee notes that sections 27(1) and (5) and 42(3) of the Law on Inspection Oversight No. 36/15 require inspectors first to provide advice and the possibility to remediate non-compliance before they may initiate enforcement measures, with the exception only in urgent cases related to OSH. In this respect, the Committee recalls that under Article 17(1) and (2) of Convention No. 81 and Article 22(1) and (2) of Convention No. 129, persons who violate or neglect to observe legal provisions enforceable by labour inspectors shall be liable to prompt legal or administrative proceedings without previous warning, but that exceptions may be made by national laws or regulations in respect of cases in which previous notice to carry out remedial or preventive measures is to be given. The Committee requests the Government to ensure that labour inspectors are provided with the discretionary powers to initiate prompt legal proceedings without previous warning as provided for in Article 17 of Convention No. 81 and Article 22 of Convention No. 129, to provide specific examples in which such prompt proceedings were initiated and with what results, and to limit any exceptions as to the possibility of initiating prompt legal proceedings to a level that does not undermine the effectiveness of labour inspection actions to achieve the effective application of the legal provisions relating to conditions of work and the protection of workers.

Articles 20 and 21 of Convention No. 81 and Articles 26 and 27 of Convention No. 129. Communication of the annual reports on the work of the labour inspection services. The Committee notes once again that no annual report on the labour inspection activities has been received by the Office (including electronically) since 2011. However, the Committee also notes that such reports are published on the website of the Ministry of Labour, Employment, Veterans and Social Affairs, and that the latest report published on that website relates to 2017. While noting the detailed information in the 2017 annual labour inspection report, the Committee notes that the report does not appear to contain information on the number of workplaces liable to inspection and the number of workers employed therein (Article 21(c) of Convention No. 81 and Article 27(c) of Convention No. 129), although that information was transmitted in the Government’s report to the Committee, nor on the statistics of occupational diseases (Article 21(g) of Convention No. 81 and Article 27(g) of Convention No. 129). The Committee also hopes that in light of the abovementioned EU project under Article 14, the Government will soon be in a position to include statistics on occupational diseases in its annual labour inspection reports. The Committee once again requests the Government to ensure that the annual report on the labour inspection activities is transmitted to the ILO on an ongoing basis in accordance with Article 20 of Convention No. 81 and Article 26 of Convention No. 129 and that it contains information on all the items listed in Article 21 of Convention No. 81 and Article 27 of Convention No. 129.

Issues specifically concerning labour inspection in agriculture

Articles 4 and 9(3) of Convention No. 129. Scope of labour inspection in agriculture. The Committee notes the Government’s indication, in reply to its previous request, concerning the scope of application of labour inspection in agriculture, which now includes, following legislative amendments, employers in agriculture which are not registered with the National Business Registries Agency. Noting the extension of the scope of labour inspection in agriculture, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the frequency, content, and number of participants in trainings particularly relevant to that sector.

Labour administration: Convention No. 150

The Committee notes the Government’s first report.

Articles 5, 6 and 8 of the Convention. Consultation, cooperation and negotiation within the system of labour administration, between the public authorities and the most representative organizations of employers and workers. The Committee notes the structural arrangements for the involvement of the social partners within the system of labour administration at the national, regional and local levels, including through the Social and Economic Council, the Board of the National Employment Service and regional and local employment councils. The Government indicates that the employers’ and workers’ representatives on the Social and Economic Council discuss and give their opinions on draft laws and regulations. In this respect, the Committee indicated in its 1997 General Survey, Labour administration, paragraph 56, that the preparation of draft laws and regulations constitutes the major part of the preparation of national labour policy, and that for this purpose consultations with the social partners take place in tripartite bodies. Despite the existing arrangements as described above, the Committee also notes the 2018 conclusions of the Committee on the Application of Standards (CAS) concerning the application of the Tripartite Consultation (International Labour Standards) Convention, 1976 (No. 144), which recommended that the Government take the necessary steps to ensure that meaningful, effective and timely consultations on matters concerning international labour standards take place, including within the framework of the Social and Economic Council. The Committee notes that the discussions in the CAS concerned social dialogue, particularly in relation to labour and social legislation. The Committee requests the Government to provide detailed information on the consultation and cooperation within the system of labour administration with the social partners in the different tripartite instances.

Article 7. Coverage of workers by the labour administration system who are not, in law, employed persons. In its 2017 comment under the Employment Policy Convention, 1964 (No. 122), the Committee noted the Government’s indication that the rate of informal employment was 19.4 per cent in the first quarter of 2015, and its reference to measures taken, in line with the national employment policy, to facilitate the transition to the formal economy. In this regard, the Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its report under this Convention that the Law on Inspection Oversight No. 36/15 of 2015 expanded the powers of labour inspectors to undeclared workplaces, and that in cases where labour inspectors find persons to be working illegally, they shall issue a decision ordering the employer to establish their employment relationship for an indefinite time, subject to the relevant conditions in the law being applied. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the extension of the functions of the system of labour administration to workers who are not, in law, employed persons.

CMNT_TITLE

In order to provide a comprehensive view of the issues relating to the application of ratified Conventions on labour inspection, the Committee considers it appropriate to examine Conventions Nos 81 (labour inspection) and 129 (labour inspection in agriculture) together.

Article 12(1)(a) of Convention No. 81 and Article 16(1)(a) of Convention No. 129. Free entry of labour inspectors to workplaces without prior notice. The Committee notes with concern that the new Law on Inspection Oversight No. 36/15 of April 2015 applies to labour inspection and provides for a number of restrictions on the powers of inspectors. This includes with regard to the free initiative of labour inspectors to undertake inspections without prior notice provided for in Article 12(1)(a) of Convention No. 81 and Article 16(1)(a) of Convention No. 129: sections 16 and 17 of the Law, which require three days prior notice for most inspections and a written inspection warrant (except in emergency situations) specifying, among other things, the purpose of the inspection and its duration. Section 16 further provides that if, during the course of the inspection, an inspector uncovers an instance of non-compliance that exceeds the inspection warrant, the inspector must apply for an addendum to the warrant. The Committee also notes that the Law provides that inspectors shall be held personally accountable for the actions undertaken in the course of their duties (section 49) and that they may receive a fine in the amount of Serbian dinar (RSD) 50,000 to RSD150,000 (approximately US$500 to US$1,500), for example, if they undertake inspections without prior notice (section 60). The Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that the restrictions and limitations for labour inspectors in the Law on Inspection Oversight No. 36/15 are expeditiously removed so as to ensure that labour inspectors are empowered to enter freely and without previous notice workplaces liable to inspection in conformity with Article 12(1)(a) of Convention No. 81 and Article 16(1)(a) of Convention No. 129, and to inform the Committee of steps taken in this regard.

The Committee is raising other matters in a request addressed directly to the Government.

CMNT_TITLE

With reference to its observation, the Committee would like to raise the following additional points.

Labour inspection legislation. The Committee notes the observations made by the Union of Employers of Serbia, in which it indicates the need for a separate law on the organization and operation of the labour inspection services, providing for closer cooperation with the social partners, particularly in preventive activities with the employers’ representatives. The Committee understands from the information in the Government’s report that, a labour inspection draft law has been prepared within the framework of the project “Modernization and integration of the labour inspection system in the Republic of Serbia in accordance with the ILO and EU standards and practice”, funded by the Government of Norway. The Committee asks the Government to keep the Office informed of any further progress made in the process of adopting the law on labour inspection and to supply a copy of this text once it has been adopted, if possible, in one of the working languages of the ILO.

Articles 3(1)(a) and (b), 5(a) and (b). Preventive role of the labour inspectorate in the field of occupational safety and health (OSH). Risk assessments carried out by employers and private enterprises. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government on the various preventive activities conducted by the labour inspectorate in cooperation with international and national services and institutions dealing with OSH and in collaboration with the social partners, including the organization of conferences, round tables, workshops and seminars. In this regard, the Committee notes in particular the various activities in the framework of the project “Improving occupational safety and health in Serbia” funded by the Government of Norway, including the training provided by labour inspectors in the area of OSH (also in the area of risk assessments) to a large number of experts and licensed OSH officers and representatives of the social partners in various sectors. In the framework of the above project, various preventive materials (a risk assessment guide, a feasibility study for establishing an OSH Educational Centre, training courses and manuals for the social partners in the textiles, leather and footwear and other manufacturing industries, etc.) have been developed during OSH seminars organized by the labour inspectorate.

The Committee also notes the information contained in the 2010 annual labour inspection report, to the effect that labour inspections have focused in particular on the compliance of employers with their obligations relating to risk assessments. According to the information in the above report, the preventive activities of labour inspectors in this regard have contributed to an increased awareness by numerous employers of their obligations and the procedures to be followed, and improved compliance with these obligations. The Committee also notes the problems indicated in the above report arising in practice in the area of risk assessments, for example, as regards the risk assessment provided by private agencies for employers. The Committee finally notes that guidelines for inspections concerning risk assessments have been issued in pursuance of sections 44 and 48 of the Act on State Administration (a copy has been provided to the Office). The Committee would be grateful if the Government would continue to provide information on the preventive activities undertaken by the labour inspectorate in cooperation with all the services and institutions dealing with prevention, including the social partners. Please also continue to provide information on the activities of the labour inspectorate concerning prevention, as well as the control of compliance with employers’ obligations relating to risk assessments, and on how private agencies establishing risk assessments for employers are supervised.

Recalling that in its previous comments the Committee welcomed the implementation of a new policy on health and safety in small and medium-sized enterprises, according to which regular inspection visits would focus on prevention through information and education, the Committee also requests the Government to indicate the proportion of regular inspection visits targeted at small and medium-sized enterprises, and to provide information on the education and information campaigns targeted at such enterprises.

Article 5(b). Collaboration with the social partners at the enterprise level. The Committee notes that the Confederation of Autonomous Trade Unions of Serbia (CATUS) in its communication of 28 August 2013, refers to restrictions on the presence of trade union representatives during inspection visits. It notes that the NEZAVISNOST, in its communication of 31 August 2011, also indicated that trade union representatives were not invited to attend inspections and, even in cases where inspections were conducted upon request of a trade union member, they were not present during inspections. The Committee asks the Government to describe the methods of collaboration with the social partners at the enterprise level, where they exist, and draws the Government’s attention to the guidance provided in this regard in Part II of the Labour Inspection Recommendation, 1947 (No. 81).

Article 7(3). Adequate initial and further training of labour inspectors. The Committee notes that the Government reiterates the indications provided in its previous report. Referring to its previous comments, the Committee once again asks the Government to communicate additional information on the number of participants in the training sessions for integrated inspections, their duration, the topics covered and the evaluation of the results. It also once again requests the Government to continue to provide information on further periodical training for labour inspectors.

Articles 5(a), 17 and 18. Effective cooperation of the labour inspection services with government institutions and with the judicial system. Adequate penalties imposed and effectively enforced. In its previous comments, the Committee referred to comments by the CATUS, concerning the inefficiency of the system of penalties against employers. It further notes that, according to the recent observations by the CATUS as well as the observations made by the NEZAVISNOST in a communication dated 31 August 2011, in a large number of cases labour inspectors fail to apply the administrative means available to them when detecting non-compliance with legal obligations of employers, but instead advise workers who have requested inspections to assert their rights before the courts, despite the long duration of court procedures. According to the NEZAVISNOST, this also occurs when trade unions request inspections, thereby undermining the reputation and stability of unions. The trade union further indicates that numerous proceedings for minor offences are conducted sluggishly, leading to the expiry of the statute of limitations.

The Committee previously noted the information provided by the Government concerning penalties that are well below the minimum envisaged by the Labour Act and the Act on Safety and Health at Work and the need to accelerate judicial procedures so as to overcome problems with regard to the statute of limitations. In this regard, the Committee notes the indications made in the annual labour inspection report for 2010 that punitive policy in court proceedings has become more severe recently and that the complaints of labour inspectors on penalties below the minimum prescribed by the law has contributed to these changes. In this regard, the Committee also notes the statistical information provided by the Government on the total amount of fines imposed in all misdemeanour proceedings, relating to both employment and OSH issues, as well as the number of proceedings that have lapsed due to the statute of limitations (558 in the field of employment and 200 in the field of OSH).

It further notes that the Government reiterates its previous indications on the consultations held between the labour inspectorate and bodies responsible for criminal prosecution in Serbia, in which the need to further intensify cooperation between these bodies and the need to establish a common database was emphasized, with a view to overcoming the problems indicated above. The Committee once again asks the Government to provide statistical data on the average duration of proceedings and to provide information on the average amount of penalties imposed for violations of the Labour Act and the OSH Act in recent years, as well as information on the impact of the steps taken to overcome problems relating to the duration of proceedings and their effective enforcement. The Committee would also be grateful if the Government would continue to provide information on any further steps taken or envisaged to ensure effective cooperation between the labour inspection services and the judicial authorities and to indicate any measures taken or envisaged in relation to the needs identified.

Articles 5(a), 14 and 21(f) and (g). Notification of industrial accidents and cases of occupational disease. In its previous comments, the Committee noted the difficulties in the current system of notification and registration of occupational accidents and diseases, despite the existence of a legal obligation for employers in this regard. The Committee notes that the Government again describes the difficulties encountered, including the failure of employers to comply with their obligations, which in the case of individual reporting and registration of cases of occupational disease is partly due to the failure to recognize the relation between occupational diseases and working conditions. It notes the Government’s indications that data and reports on cases of occupational disease are extremely fragmented, due to the absence or inadequacy of reporting. In this regard, the Committee notes the Government’s indications that only three cases of occupational disease were notified to the labour inspectorate in 2012. It also notes that, according to the Government, there is no appropriate exchange of information between the health-care institutions, the National Fund and the labour inspectorate on the number of diseases diagnosed, verified and reported.

The Committee notes that the Government once again refers to a project for the development of a register for occupational accidents and the identification, reporting and registration of industrial accidents and cases of occupational diseases (based on cooperation between the Ministry of Health and the Ministry of Labour Employment and Social Policy). The Committee previously noted in this regard that working groups, in which representatives of the labour inspectorate have taken an active part, were established in order to consider proposals for a new list of occupational diseases and an efficient registration system for occupational accidents. It notes from the Government’s present report that efforts are currently being made for the implementation of a relevant pilot project in the Kolubara District. According to the Government, medical doctors have a major role to play in the new system of registration of industrial accidents and cases of occupational diseases which provides for the revision of the report form and registration through a web-based application. The Committee once again draws the Government’s attention to the 1996 ILO code of practice on the recording and notification of occupational accidents and diseases, which offers guidance in this context. The Committee requests the Government to continue providing information on the measures taken or envisaged in order to strengthen the efficiency of the system for recording and notifying occupational accidents and diseases, including through the adoption of a new list of occupational diseases and better collaboration between all institutions concerned for that purpose.

CMNT_TITLE

The Committee notes the Government’s report received on 18 September 2013, and the observations made by the Confederation of the Autonomous Trade Unions of Serbia (CATUS), dated 28 August 2013, as well as the observations made by the Union of Employers of Serbia, dated 26 August 2013, annexed to the Government’s report. It further notes the observations made by the Trade Union Confederation “Nezavisnost” received by the Office on 29 October 2013 and forwarded to the Government on 11 November 2013. The Committee also notes that the Government has not yet provided any comments in relation to the observations made by the Nezavisnost, dated 31 August 2011.

Article 3(1)(a) and (b) and (2) of the Convention. Action against undeclared employment, and monitoring of legislation relating to conditions of work and the protection of workers. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that the labour inspectorate’s priority for a number of years has been to combat undeclared work and emphasized that the exercise of such a function by the labour inspectorate should have as its corollary the reinstatement of the statutory rights of all the workers in order to be compatible with the objective of labour inspection. Recalling the Government’s statement in its previous report that the fight against illegal employment aims among other things at the “formalization” of employment relations so as to prevent a deterioration of conditions of work, the Committee notes that the Government reiterates in its report that the activity of the labour inspectorate has led to an increase of the number of signed employment contracts and workers reported for compulsory social security coverage. In this regard, the Committee notes the Government’s indications that between July 2011 and July 2013, labour inspectors conducted 43,528 inspection visits regarding employment issues concerning 459,352 workers, of which 4,389 were found to be engaged in informal or “shadow” employment, and it notes with interest that, as a result of the orders issued by labour inspectors, employers entered into formal employment contracts with 3,951 of these workers. The Committee asks the Government to continue to provide statistical data illustrating the improvements made in the enforcement of the legal provisions relating to conditions of work and the protection of workers through the activities of the labour inspectorate in the framework of the action against undeclared employment. Please provide data that is as detailed as possible (number of cases in which formal employment contracts have been concluded, registration of workers with the social security authorities, number of cases in which workers have been paid outstanding salaries resulting from their past employment relationship, etc.).

Articles 3(1)(a) and (b), 5(a), 20 and 21. Efficiency of the work of the labour inspection services and communication and content of the annual report. The Committee notes the observations made by the Nezavisnost in its communication dated 31 August 2011, in which the trade union expresses concern with regard to the absence of labour inspections in the area of general employment conditions, in comparison with the number of inspections in the field of occupational safety and health. In this regard, the trade union refers to problems in various sectors (catering, construction, industry, tourism, banking, etc.) where a large number of employees work without formal employment contracts. According to the trade union, labour inspections in the area of employment conditions are necessary to address the great number of collective lay-offs, wage arrears, abuse of fixed-term employment contracts, and the avoidance of overtime pay in recent years.

The Committee notes that the annual labour inspection reports for 2011 and 2012 have not been received by the Office, but that the Government has provided statistical information in a number of tables annexed to its report on the Labour Inspection (Agriculture) Convention, 1969 (No. 129). While it notes that the annual reports on the labour inspection activities for 2008, 2009 and 2010 (received by the ILO in 2011) contain useful information, the Committee observes that they still do not include information on the total number of industrial and commercial establishments under the supervision of the labour inspectorate and the number of workers employed therein, as previously requested. However, it notes that these tables contain information on the total number of workers (including information on the number of workers in the informal economy). The Committee also notes that the Nezavisnost deplores the fact that the annual labour inspection reports do not contain full information on all the subjects listed in Article 21 of the Convention. While noting the observations made by the CATUS and the Nezavisnost in a communication dated 31 August 2011, in which the trade unions emphasized the need for annual labour inspection reports to be communicated to the social partners with the aim to enable cooperation for the improvement of the effectiveness of labour inspection, the Committee notes the Government’s indications that annual labour inspection reports are regularly communicated to the representative organizations of employers and trade unions, including the CATUS and the Nezavisnost.

Drawing the Government’s attention once again to its 2009 general observation on the importance of statistics on workplaces liable to inspection and the number of workers covered as a basis for assessing the effectiveness of the labour inspection system and its needs, the Committee hopes that, as previously indicated by the Government, in future annual reports, the labour inspectorate will provide statistical data on the number of registered companies engaged in industrial and commercial activities, and on the number of workers employed therein. The Committee once again requests the Government to ensure that the annual report on the labour inspection activities is forwarded to the ILO on an ongoing basis in accordance with Article 20 and that it contains information on the items listed in Article 21. In particular, the Committee would be grateful if the Government would also indicate in its next report, in addition to the information usually provided in the annual report, the total number of industrial and commercial establishments under the supervision of the labour inspectorate and the number of workers employed therein (clause (c)), and statistics on cases of occupational diseases (clause (g)).

The Committee is raising other points in a request addressed directly to the Government.

CMNT_TITLE

The Committee notes the observations made by the Trade Union Confederation “NEZAVISNOST”, which were annexed to the Government’s report as well as by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) in a communication dated 31 August 2011. It requests the Government to communicate any comment it deems relevant in this regard.

The Committee notes that the Government’s report contains no reply to its previous comments and that the annual reports of the labour inspectorate for the years 2008, 2009 and 2010, communicated by the Government, contain general information on some of the questions raised but do not allow for a full assessment of the effect given to the provisions of the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to provide a detailed reply to the Committee’s previous comments which read as follows:

Article 3(1)(a) and (c) and (2) of the Convention. Action against illegal employment, and monitoring of legislation relating to conditions of work and the protection of workers. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that the labour inspectorate’s priority for a number of years had been the fight against illegal employment and emphasized that the exercise of such a function by the labour inspectorate should have as its corollary the reinstatement of the statutory rights of all the workers in order to be compatible with the objective of labour inspection. The Committee notes the Government’s statement in its latest report to the effect that the fight against illegal labour is part of the European Union Accession Strategy and the Strategy on Poverty Reduction and focuses on industries where unregistered workers – mostly young and unqualified workers or older workers over 40 years – are most dominant (hotel/restaurant/cafe and tourism, trade, civil engineering and artisan and personal services). The Government adds that illegal employment is primarily due to a transition from public companies towards a huge number of small and medium-sized private enterprises, which has led to an aggravation of working conditions, often with regard to high risk jobs (e.g. engineering). This is why the Government is of the view that it is important to carry out regular and intensified inspection. The Government specifies that, where illegal employment has been detected, the employer is ordered to sign employment contracts and charges are pressed against employers in cases where more than one irregular worker is hired; as a result, the number of signed employment contracts and workers reported for compulsory social security coverage usually increases after the inspection is carried out. In order to address key legislative obstacles in this regard, the labour inspectorate has, among other things, proposed amendments to applicable regulations that would require the registration of signed employment contracts and improve the procedure for registration of workers in compulsory social security schemes under section 144 of the Pension and Disability Insurance Act.

Taking due note of the Government’s statement that the fight against illegal employment aims among other things at the “formalization” of employment relations so as to prevent a deterioration of conditions of work and that this has led to an increase of the number of signed employment contracts and workers reported for compulsory social security coverage, the Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide statistical data illustrating the improvements made in the enforcement of the legal provisions relating to conditions of work and the protection of workers through the activities of the labour inspectorate in the framework of the fight against illegal employment.

Article 3(1)(b). Preventive role of the labour inspectorate in the field of occupational safety and health. The Committee takes due note of the information provided by the Government on various activities relative to cooperation with services and institutions dealing with prevention during the period under review, including the organization of 15 round tables on risk assessment throughout the country from 20 to 24 October 2008, with an active participation of representatives from trade unions, employers’ organizations, chambers of commerce, and experts in the area of occupational safety and health (OSH). The Committee would be grateful if the Government would continue to provide information on any action relative to cooperation with all the services and institutions dealing with prevention, including the social partners, the intensification of media campaigns, particularly in high-risk sectors, and the development of promotional material for public information.

Recalling that in its previous comments the Committee had welcomed the implementation of a new policy regarding health and safety in small and medium-sized enterprises, according to which regular inspection visits would focus on prevention through information and education, the Committee also requests the Government to indicate the part of regular inspection visits targeted at small and medium-sized enterprises, and to provide information on information and education campaigns addressed at such enterprises.

Articles 5(a) and 18. Effective cooperation of labour inspection services with government institutions and with the judicial system. Adequate penalties imposed and effectively enforced. In its previous comments, the Committee referred to comments by the Confederation of Autonomous Trade Unions of Serbia, according to which the system of penalties against employers is not efficient. The Committee notes that the Government refers in its latest report to the pronouncement of sentences far below the minimum foreseen by the law which constitutes an obstacle to the proper and full application of the penal provisions envisaged under the Labour Law and the Law on Safety and Health at Work (OSH Law). The Government’s report also refers to the need to accelerate judicial procedures so as to overcome related problems with regard to the statute of limitations.

According to the Government, the labour inspectorate organized expert meetings and consultations between the labour inspectorate and bodies responsible for criminal prosecution in Serbia, both at the first instance and at the level of the Council for Criminal Offences. The need to further intensify the cooperation between these bodies was underlined in these meetings with a view to overcoming problems in the duration of the criminal procedures and the amount of the penalties imposed. The importance of exchange of data between municipal bodies and prosecution councils on the collection of fines was also stressed so as to ensure the harmonization and alignment of databases and monitor the economic effects of inspections as well as the efficiency of penal policy. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide statistical data on the average duration of proceedings and the average amount of penalties imposed for violations of the Labour Law and the OSH Law as well as information on the impact of the steps taken in order to overcome problems in the duration of proceedings, the amount of fines and their effective enforcement. The Committee would also like to request the Government to continue to provide information on any further steps taken or envisaged in order to ensure effective cooperation between the labour inspection services and the judicial authorities.

According to the Government, in 2008, 60 requests for the institution of criminal proceedings were filed by the labour inspectorate in relation to offences which apparently concerned only the area of OSH. Recalling that the functions of the labour inspectorate are not limited to the enforcement of the OSH legislation (the OSH Law) but also include the enforcement of legal provisions and advice relating to the conditions of work under the Labour Law, the Committee requests the Government to specify in its next report the manner in which the labour inspectorate addresses violations of legal provisions on hours of work, wages, the employment of children and young persons and other connected matters and the number of proceedings instituted for such violations.

Article 7(3). Adequate initial and further training of labour inspectors. In its previous comments, the Committee had noted the comments of the Union of Employers of Serbia, according to which, following the restructuring of the labour inspectorate as a single body, labour inspectors were not provided with adequate training to perform both legal and technical supervision. According to the Government’s report, the labour inspectorate launched in 2008 a modernization process to be delivered through internal training in three phases so as to enable labour inspectors to undertake integrated inspections. In this framework, an inspection methodology was designed and all inspectors gained adequate knowledge in areas in which they had not yet performed inspections (e.g. engineers in the field of labour relations, lawyers in the field of safety and health at work, etc.). The Committee would be grateful if the Government would communicate additional information as to the number of participants in the training sessions, their duration, the topics covered and the evaluation of the results. It also requests the Government to continue to furnish information on further periodical training for labour inspectors.

Articles 12(1) and 18. Penalties for obstructing labour inspectors in the performance of their duties, particularly with regard to their right of free entry in establishments. In its previous comments, the Committee took note of comments by the Confederation of Autonomous Trade Unions of Serbia, according to which labour inspectors were occasionally denied the right to enter a workplace for inspection purposes, particularly in new private enterprises. The Committee notes that, according to the Government, the 2005 Labour Law and the 2005 OSH Law contain an obligation for the employer to allow the labour inspector to access facilities and premises at any time when occupied by workers, and, should it occur that the labour inspector is prevented from undertaking inspections, the labour inspectorate should address the Ministry of the Interior, which will enable unobstructed inspection with the assistance of the police. Keeping in mind that section 273(10) of the Labour Law and section 69, paragraph 1(32), of the OSH Law set fines in cases where a labour inspector is prevented from conducting an inspection, the Committee once again requests the Government to indicate if any acts of obstruction were reported by labour inspectors to the central inspection authority and, if so, to describe the penalties imposed and the proceedings followed to ensure their effective enforcement in conformity with Article 18 of the Convention.

Article 5(a), 14 and 21(f) and (g). Notification of industrial accidents and cases of occupational disease. In its previous comments the Committee took note of difficulties in the actual system of notification and registration of occupational accidents and diseases, despite the existence of a legal obligation for the employer to notify these under section 50 of the OSH Law. The Government’s report contains a list of steps that are necessary to ensure effective prevention of occupational accidents and diseases, including coordination of all services, institutions and individuals who work on the prevention of occupational accidents; intensified media campaigns, brochures aimed at promoting a national prevention culture in the field of safety and health at work, the introduction of a continuous data processing practice in all departments and institutions working in the area of OSH; as well as an efficient national system for recording and collecting data on occupational accidents and diseases. With regard to the latter, the Government indicates that the Serbian Institution for Occupational Medicine and Radiology “Dr Dragomir Krajovic” (under the Ministry of Health) is implementing a project on the development of a register for occupational accidents and on the identification, reporting and registration of occupational diseases. Working groups, in which representatives of the labour inspectorate have taken active part, were established in order to consider proposals for a new list of occupational diseases and an efficient registration system for occupational accidents.

The Committee once again draws the Government’s attention to the 1996 ILO code of practice on the recording and notification of occupational accidents and diseases which could offer guidance in this framework. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the measures taken or envisaged in order to strengthen the efficiency of the system for recording and notifying occupational accidents and diseases, including through the adoption of a new list of occupational diseases and a better collaboration of all institutions concerned for that purpose.

Articles 20 and 21. Communication and content of the annual report. In its previous comments, the Committee welcomed the detailed information contained in the annual report on the labour inspection activities for 2007 and requested additional information including on the total number of industrial and commercial establishments under the supervision of the labour inspectorate and the number of workers employed therein. The Committee takes due note of the information provided by the Government as to the number of establishments subject to labour inspection (318,540 businesses of which 10,056 are legal entities and 33,592 are individual entrepreneurs engaged in industrial activities as well as 35,738 legal entities and 72,703 entrepreneurs engaged in the trade sector). Drawing the Government’s attention to its 2009 general observation on the importance of statistics on workplaces liable to inspection and the number of workers covered as a basis for assessing the effectiveness of the labour inspection system and its needs, the Committee takes due note of the Government’s indication that, in its future annual reports, the labour inspectorate will provide statistical data on the number of registered companies engaged in industrial and commercial activities as well as on the number of workers employed therein.

The Committee also notes however, that no further annual report on the labour inspection activities was received. It recalls that, according to Article 20, the annual report should be published by the central authority and duly forwarded to the ILO within a reasonable time after its publication. The Committee therefore requests the Government to ensure that the annual report on the labour inspection activities is forwarded to the ILO on an ongoing basis in accordance with Article 20 and that it contains information on the items listed in Article 21. In particular, in order to assess the coverage of labour inspection, the Committee would be grateful if the Government would also indicate in its next report, in addition to the information usually provided in the annual report, the total number of industrial and commercial establishments under the supervision of the labour inspectorate and the number of workers employed therein (clause (c)), the statistics of inspections carried out (clause (d)), and statistics on the outcome of judicial procedures and penalties imposed (clause (e)).

The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the very near future.

CMNT_TITLE

The Committee notes the Government’s report received on 22 September 2009, in response to its previous comments.

Article 3(1)(a) and (c) and (2) of the Convention. Action against illegal employment, and monitoring of legislation relating to conditions of work and the protection of workers. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that the labour inspectorate’s priority for a number of years had been the fight against illegal employment and emphasized that the exercise of such a function by the labour inspectorate should have as its corollary the reinstatement of the statutory rights of all the workers in order to be compatible with the objective of labour inspection. The Committee notes the Government’s statement in its latest report to the effect that the fight against illegal labour is part of the European Union Accession Strategy and the Strategy on Poverty Reduction and focuses on industries where unregistered workers – mostly young and unqualified workers or older workers over 40 years – are most dominant (hotel/restaurant/cafe and tourism, trade, civil engineering and artisan and personal services). The Government adds that illegal employment is primarily due to a transition from public companies towards a huge number of small and medium-sized private enterprises, which has led to an aggravation of working conditions, often with regard to high‑risk jobs (e.g. engineering). This is why the Government is of the view that it is important to carry out regular and intensified inspection. The Government specifies that, where illegal employment has been detected, the employer is ordered to sign employment contracts and charges are pressed against employers in cases where more than one irregular worker is hired; as a result, the number of signed employment contracts and workers reported for compulsory social security coverage usually increases after the inspection is carried out. In order to address key legislative obstacles in this regard, the labour inspectorate has, among other things, proposed amendments to applicable regulations that would require the registration of signed employment contracts and improve the procedure for registration of workers in compulsory social security schemes under section 144 of the Pension and Disability Insurance Act.

Taking due note of the Government’s statement that the fight against illegal employment aims among other things at the “formalization” of employment relations so as to prevent a deterioration of conditions of work and that this has led to an increase of the number of signed employment contracts and workers reported for compulsory social security coverage, the Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide statistical data illustrating the improvements made in the enforcement of the legal provisions relating to conditions of work and the protection of workers through the activities of the labour inspectorate in the framework of the fight against illegal employment.

Article 3(1)(b). Preventive role of the labour inspectorate in the field of occupational safety and health. The Committee takes due note of the information provided by the Government on various activities relative to cooperation with services and institutions dealing with prevention during the period under review, including the organization of 15 round tables on risk assessment throughout the country from 20 to 24 October 2008, with an active participation of representatives from trade unions, employers’ organizations, chambers of commerce, and experts in the area of occupational safety and health (OSH). The Committee would be grateful if the Government would continue to provide information on any action relative to cooperation with all the services and institutions dealing with prevention, including the social partners, the intensification of media campaigns, particularly in high-risk sectors, and the development of promotional material for public information.

Recalling that in its previous comments the Committee had welcomed the implementation of a new policy regarding health and safety in small and medium‑sized enterprises, according to which regular inspection visits would focus on prevention through information and education, the Committee also requests the Government to indicate the part of regular inspection visits targeted at small and medium-sized enterprises, and to provide information on information and education campaigns addressed at such enterprises.

Articles 5(a) and 18.  Effective cooperation of labour inspection services with government institutions and with the judicial system. Adequate penalties imposed and effectively enforced. In its previous comments, the Committee referred to comments by the Confederation of Autonomous Trade Unions of Serbia, according to which the system of penalties against employers is not efficient. The Committee notes that the Government refers in its latest report to the pronouncement of sentences far below the minimum foreseen by the law which constitutes an obstacle to the proper and full application of the penal provisions envisaged under the Labour Law and the Law on Safety and Health at Work (OSH Law). The Government’s report also refers to the need to accelerate judicial procedures so as to overcome related problems with regard to the statute of limitations.

According to the Government, the labour inspectorate organized expert meetings and consultations between the labour inspectorate and bodies responsible for criminal prosecution in Serbia, both at the first instance and at the level of the Council for Criminal Offences. The need to further intensify the cooperation between these bodies was underlined in these meetings with a view to overcoming problems in the duration of the criminal procedures and the amount of the penalties imposed. The importance of exchange of data between municipal bodies and prosecution councils on the collection of fines was also stressed so as to ensure the harmonization and alignment of databases and monitor the economic effects of inspections as well as the efficiency of penal policy. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide statistical data on the average duration of proceedings and the average amount of penalties imposed for violations of the Labour Law and the OSH Law as well as information on the impact of the steps taken in order to overcome problems in the duration of proceedings, the amount of fines and their effective enforcement. The Committee would also like to request the Government to continue to provide information on any further steps taken or envisaged in order to ensure effective cooperation between the labour inspection services and the judicial authorities.

According to the Government, in 2008, 60 requests for the institution of criminal proceedings were filed by the labour inspectorate in relation to offences which apparently concerned only the area of OSH. Recalling that the functions of the labour inspectorate are not limited to the enforcement of the OSH legislation (the OSH Law) but also include the enforcement of legal provisions and advice relating to the conditions of work under the Labour Law, the Committee requests the Government to specify in its next report the manner in which the labour inspectorate addresses violations of legal provisions on hours of work, wages, the employment of children and young persons and other connected matters and the number of proceedings instituted for such violations.

Article 7(3). Adequate initial and further training of labour inspectors. In its previous comments, the Committee had noted the comments of the Union of Employers of Serbia, according to which, following the restructuring of the labour inspectorate as a single body, labour inspectors were not provided with adequate training to perform both legal and technical supervision. According to the Government’s report, the labour inspectorate launched in 2008 a modernization process to be delivered through internal training in three phases so as to enable labour inspectors to undertake integrated inspections. In this framework, an inspection methodology was designed and all inspectors gained adequate knowledge in areas in which they had not yet performed inspections (e.g. engineers in the field of labour relations, lawyers in the field of safety and health at work, etc.). The Committee would be grateful if the Government would communicate additional information as to the number of participants in the training sessions, their duration, the topics covered and the evaluation of the results. It also requests the Government to continue to furnish information on further periodical training for labour inspectors.

Articles 12(1) and 18. Penalties for obstructing labour inspectors in the performance of their duties, particularly with regard to their right of free entry in establishments. In its previous comments, the Committee took note of comments by the Confederation of Autonomous Trade Unions of Serbia, according to which labour inspectors were occasionally denied the right to enter a workplace for inspection purposes, particularly in new private enterprises. The Committee notes that, according to the Government, the 2005 Labour Law and the 2005 OSH Law contain an obligation for the employer to allow the labour inspector to access facilities and premises at any time when occupied by workers, and, should it occur that the labour inspector is prevented from undertaking inspections, the labour inspectorate should address the Ministry of the Interior, which will enable unobstructed inspection with the assistance of the police. Keeping in mind that section 273(10) of the Labour Law and section 69, paragraph 1(32), of the OSH Law set fines in cases where a labour inspector is prevented from conducting an inspection, the Committee once again requests the Government to indicate if any acts of obstruction were reported by labour inspectors to the central inspection authority and, if so, to describe the penalties imposed and the proceedings followed to ensure their effective enforcement in conformity with Article 18 of the Convention.

Article 5(a), 14 and 21(f) and (g). Notification of industrial accidents and cases of occupational  disease. In its previous comments the Committee took note of difficulties in the actual system of notification and registration of occupational accidents and diseases, despite the existence of a legal obligation for the employer to notify these under section 50 of the OSH Law. The Government’s report contains a list of steps that are necessary to ensure effective prevention of occupational accidents and diseases, including coordination of all services, institutions and individuals who work on the prevention of occupational accidents; intensified media campaigns, brochures aimed at promoting a national prevention culture in the field of safety and health at work, the introduction of a continuous data processing practice in all departments and institutions working in the area of OSH; as well as an efficient national system for recording and collecting data on occupational accidents and diseases. With regard to the latter, the Government indicates that the Serbian Institution for Occupational Medicine and Radiology “Dr Dragomir Krajovic” (under the Ministry of Health) is implementing a project on the development of a register for occupational accidents and on the identification, reporting and registration of occupational diseases. Working groups, in which representatives of the labour inspectorate have taken active part, were established in order to consider proposals for a new list of occupational diseases and an efficient registration system for occupational accidents.

The Committee once again draws the Government’s attention to the 1996 ILO code of practice on the recording and notification of occupational accidents and diseases which could offer guidance in this framework. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the measures taken or envisaged in order to strengthen the efficiency of the system for recording and notifying occupational accidents and diseases, including through the adoption of a new list of occupational diseases and a better collaboration of all institutions concerned for that purpose.

Articles 20 and 21. Submission and content of the annual report. In its previous comments, the Committee welcomed the detailed information contained in the annual report on the labour inspection activities for 2007 and requested additional information including on the total number of industrial and commercial establishments under the supervision of the labour inspectorate and the number of workers employed therein. The Committee takes due note of the information provided by the Government as to the number of establishments subject to labour inspection (318,540 businesses of which 10,056 are legal entities and 33,592 are individual entrepreneurs engaged in industrial activities as well as 35,738 legal entities and 72,703 entrepreneurs engaged in the trade sector). Drawing the Government’s attention to its 2009 general observation on the importance of statistics on workplaces liable to inspection and the number of workers covered as a basis for assessing the effectiveness of the labour inspection system and its needs, the Committee takes due note of the Government’s indication that, in its future annual reports, the labour inspectorate will provide statistical data on the number of registered companies engaged in industrial and commercial activities as well as on the number of workers employed therein.

The Committee also notes however, that no further annual report on the labour inspection activities was received. It recalls that, according to Article 20, the annual report should be published by the central authority and duly forwarded to the ILO within a reasonable time after its publication. The Committee therefore requests the Government to ensure that the annual report on the labour inspection activities is forwarded to the ILO on an ongoing basis in accordance with Article 20 and that it contains information on the items listed in Article 21. In particular, in order to assess the coverage of labour inspection, the Committee would be grateful if the Government would also indicate in its next report, in addition to the information usually provided in the annual report, the total number of industrial and commercial establishments under the supervision of the labour inspectorate and the number of workers employed therein (clause (c)), the statistics of inspections carried out (clause (d)), and statistics on the outcome of judicial procedures and penalties imposed
(clause (e)).

CMNT_TITLE

The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government in 2007, in response to its previous comments, and the annual reports on labour inspection activities for the years 2005, 2006 and 2007. It notes with interest the creation of the labour inspectorate as a body within the Ministry of Labour and Social Policy, following the entry into force of the Law on Ministries in 2007. The Committee further notes the comments of the Union of Employers of Serbia and the observations of the Confederation of Autonomous Trade Unions of Serbia communicated with the Government’s report on 11 October 2007.

Article 3, paragraphs 1(a) and 2, of the Convention. Action against illegal employment, and monitoring of legislation relating to conditions of work and the protection of workers. With reference to its previous comments, the Committee notes that the labour inspectorate’s priority for 2007 was again the fight against illegal employment through targeted and unannounced inspections. Even if inspection activities targeting illegal employment can also be an opportunity to monitor the application of the legal provisions relating to the conditions of work and the protection of workers, the Committee underlines, in its General Survey of 2006 on labour inspection (paragraphs 75–78), that when labour inspectors are invested with the function of verifying the legality of employment, the exercise of such function should have as its corollary the reinstatement of the statutory rights of all the workers if it is to be compatible with the objective of labour inspection. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would supply information on the follow-up measures taken to this end in such cases of infringement with regard to workers engaged in illegal employment and their employers.

Article 3, paragraph 1(b). Preventive role of the labour inspectorate in the field of occupational safety and health. The Committee notes that, in accordance with the 2005 Law on Safety and Health at Work (hereinafter the OSH Law), labour inspectors shall provide information and advice to employers and workers and to their organizations in the area of occupational safety and health (section 63(6)). It notes with interest the implementation of a new policy regarding health and safety of workers in small and medium-sized enterprises, according to which regular inspection visits focus on prevention through information and education. In order to improve the prevention of occupational accidents and diseases and to enforce the relevant legal provisions, the labour inspectorate recommends a set of measures in its 2007 report, such as the establishment of efficient cooperation with all the services and institutions dealing with prevention, including the social partners, the intensification of media campaigns, particularly in high-risk sectors, and the development of promotional material for public information. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide information on any action taken or envisaged further to these recommendations to reinforce the preventive role of labour inspectors.

The Committee notes with interest that, as provided for by Part I (Paragraphs 1–3) of the Labour Inspection Recommendation, 1947 (No. 81), labour inspectors are responsible for supervising the fulfilment of health and safety requirements in establishments prior to the beginning of their business activities, under the Law on Private Entrepreneurs and the Law on Companies.

Articles 5(a) and 18. Effective cooperation of labour inspection services with government institutions and with the judicial system. Adequate penalties imposed and effectively enforced. The Committee notes the allegations of the Confederation of Autonomous Trade Unions of Serbia, according to which the system of penalties against employers is not efficient. It observes that the annual report for 2007 states the number of requests instituting minor offence proceedings (5,942) and the number of criminal reports (22) established by labour inspectors, without indicating how these requests and reports were processed once they were transmitted by the labour inspectors to the competent authorities. However, according to this report, a closer cooperation was established with the Ministry of Justice and the bodies dealing with minor offences. Furthermore, guidelines for the institution of the minor offence proceedings were issued by the director of the labour inspectorate and sent to all departments and sections with a view to improving the efficiency of labour inspectors in drafting the requests for instituting such proceedings. The Committee requests the Government to supply information regarding the follow-up by the competent authorities to the requests and reports on offences committed, particularly on the penalties imposed, and to indicate how it is ensured that these penalties are effectively enforced. With reference to its general observation of 2007 in which it emphasizes the importance of developing effective cooperation between the labour inspection services and the judicial authorities, the Committee encourages the Government to continue to take measures to strengthen such cooperation.

Article 7, paragraph 3. Adequate initial and further training of labour inspectors. In response to the Committee’s request on the training of labour inspectors, the Government refers to section 62 of the OSH Law which prescribes the qualifications required for being recruited to perform inspection activities in the field of occupational safety and health as a labour inspector. However, it adds that the Ministry of Labour and Social Policy does not have a training centre for labour inspectors or any special programme for basic and advanced training for labour inspectors. New inspectors receive in-house training from more experienced colleagues, and conferences, consultations and seminars are organized on the application of the Law on Labour and the OSH Law, the list of which is in the annual report. The Committee notes, in this regard, the allegation of the Union of Employers of Serbia, according to which, following the restructuring of the labour inspectorate as a single body, labour inspectors are not provided with adequate training to perform both legal and technical supervision. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would supply information on any measures envisaged or taken to ensure that labour inspectors receive more adequate training with regard to the complexity of their missions.

Article 8. Gender balance within the labour inspectorate. The Committee notes with interest that the numbers of men and women in managerial positions (head of department and head of section) in the labour inspectorate are equal (15).

Articles 12, paragraph 1, and 18. Penalties for obstructing labour inspectors in the performance of their duties, particularly with regard to their right of free entry in establishments. The Committee notes that section 273(10) of the 2005 Labour Law and section 69, paragraph 1(32) of the 2005 OSH Law set fines in cases where a labour inspector is prevented from conducting an inspection. In its communication, the Confederation of Autonomous Trade Unions of Serbia alleges that labour inspectors are occasionally denied the right to enter a workplace for inspection purposes, particularly in new private enterprises. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would supply information in response to this allegation. It requests the Government to indicate if any acts of obstruction were reported by labour inspectors to the central inspection authority and, if so, to describe the penalties imposed and the proceedings followed to ensure their effective enforcement. The Government is further requested to supply information on the legal provisions governing the right of labour inspectors to enter workplaces liable to inspection, as prescribed by Article 12, paragraph 1(a) and (b), of the Convention.

Article 14. Notification of industrial accidents and cases of occupational disease. In its report for 2007, the labour inspectorate observes that, despite the existence of a legal obligation for an employer to notify occupational accidents and diseases (section 50 of the OSH Law), the actual system is not efficient. With regard to industrial accidents, the inspectorate reports difficulties due to differences in the methodological approaches used to record, process and evaluate the information on accidents as well as a lack of effective communication and exchange of information among the institutions concerned. It also states that the notification of occupational diseases is sporadic and inadequate and that, as a result, data concerning such diseases are incomplete. Drawing the Government’s attention to the 1996 ILO code of practice on the recording and notification of occupational accidents and diseases which offers guidance in this respect, the Committee requests it to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to strengthen the efficiency of the system for recording and notifying occupational accidents and diseases and to encourage the collaboration of all institutions concerned for that purpose, with a view to reducing their occurrence.

Article 21. Content of the annual report. The Committee notes with interest that the report contains detailed information on the labour inspection activities for 2007 and wishes to underline the quality of this information. However, the Committee observes that it does not contain some of the statistical data necessary for the appraisal of the scope of competence of the labour inspection system. The Committee therefore requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that the total number of industrial and commercial establishments under the supervision of the labour inspectorate and the number of workers employed therein will be included in the next annual report. Moreover, in order to assess the coverage of labour inspection, the Committee would also be grateful if the Government would indicate, in addition to the number of inspections carried out, the number of establishments visited. With reference to the above comments under Article 18 of the Convention, the Committee emphasizes that Article 21(e) requires the inclusion in the annual report of statistics of penalties imposed, and hopes that the next annual report on the work of inspection services will also contain such information.

CMNT_TITLE

The Committee notes a report, received in December 2003, on the application of the Convention in the Republic of Serbia, and a report, received in August 2005, on the application of the Convention in the Republic of Montenegro. It requests the Government to provide additional information in its next report on the following points.

Republic of Serbia

1. Functions of labour inspectors. The Committee notes that labour inspectors exercising their functions in fields other than occupational safety and health focus their efforts in particular on combating illegal employment. It points out that any further duties which may be entrusted to labour inspectors shall not be such as to interfere with the effective discharge of their primary duties or to prejudice in any way the authority and impartiality which are necessary to inspectors in their relations with employers and workers (Article 3, paragraph 2, of the Convention). The Committee requests the Government to indicate in this regard the duties entrusted to labour inspectors pursuant to the Law on Private Entrepreneurs and the Law on Enterprises. Please also provide copies of the State Administration Law and the Law on General Administrative Proceedings.

2. Collaboration with employers and workers. Please provide information on the measures taken to ensure effective collaboration between officials of the labour inspectorate and employers and workers or their organizations (Article 5(b)).

3. Initial and subsequent training of labour inspectors. Please provide detailed information on the measures implemented to ensure that labour inspectors receive adequate training both at the time of appointment to the service and subsequently (Article 7, paragraph 3).

4. Gender balance within the labour inspectorate. Please indicate the proportion of women within the labour inspectorate, stating their distribution by grade and whether special duties are assigned to them, as envisaged by Article 8 of the Convention.

5. Material resources. Please provide information on the resources, premises, equipment and vehicles furnished to labour inspectors for the performance of their duties, as well as the accessibility of local offices for those concerned (Article 11, paragraph 1). Please transmit any text providing for the reimbursement to labour inspectors of any travelling and incidental expenses which may be necessary for the performance of their duties (Article 11, paragraph 2).

6. Prosecution of violations. Please indicate whether exceptions to the principle of immediate prosecution of violations of legal provisions are provided for by the national legislation, in order that prior notice may be given so that the situation may be resolved or that preventive measures be taken, as provided for by Article 17, paragraph 1, and whether labour inspectors are able, in accordance with Article 17, paragraph 2, to give warning or advice instead of instituting or recommending proceedings.

7. Penalties. Please indicate whether the national legislation establishes penalties for obstructing labour inspectors in the performance of their duties (Article 18).

8. Publication of an annual report. The Committee notes that no annual inspection report has been transmitted to the International Labour Office. It requests the Government to ensure that such a report on the subjects covered by Article 21 is published and transmitted to the International Labour Office in the form and within the time limits prescribed by Article 20.

Republic of Montenegro

1. Functions of labour inspectors. Please indicate the manner in which effect is given to Article 3 of the Convention.

2. Structure and organization of the labour inspectorate. Please provide information on the structure and organization of the labour inspectorate and transmit the organization chart of the inspection services (Article 4). Please transmit the Labour Inspection Act (Official Journal of the Republic of Montenegro No. 69/03), the Occupational Safety Act (Official Journal of the Republic of Montenegro No. 79/04) and the Decree on Joint Inspection (Official Journal of the Republic of Montenegro No. 48/2003).

3. Collaboration with employers and workers. Please provide information on any measures taken to promote collaboration between the officials of the labour inspectorate and the employers and workers or their organizations, in accordance with Article 5(b).

4. Initial and further training of labour inspectors. Please provide information on the measures taken to ensure that labour inspectors receive adequate training at the time of appointment to the service and communicate detailed information on the annual seminar organized for labour inspectors, its length, programme and the number of inspectors participating (Article 7, paragraph 3).

5. Gender balance within the labour inspectorate. Please indicate the proportion of women within the labour inspectorate, indicating their distribution by grade and whether special duties are assigned to them, as provided for by the provisions of Article 8.

6. Workplaces liable to inspection and workers employed therein. Please indicate the number of workplaces liable to inspection and the workers employed therein (Articles 10 and 21(c)).

7. Reimbursement of expenses to labour inspectors. Please transmit any text providing for the reimbursement to labour inspectors of any travelling and incidental expenses which may be necessary for the performance of their duties (Article 11, paragraph 2).

8. Powers of inspectors. Please indicate the measures taken to give effect to each of the provisions of Article 12.

9. Obligations of labour inspectors. Please indicate the provisions prohibiting labour inspectors from having any direct or indirect interest in the undertakings under their supervision and ensuring their professional secrecy and discretion, in accordance with Article 15.

10. Prosecution of violations. Please indicate the manner in which effect is given to the provisions of Article 17.

11. Publication of an annual report. The Committee notes the report on the work of the labour inspectorate for the period between 2001 and 2005. It requests the Government to take such measures as are necessary to ensure that the report on the work of the labour inspectorate is prepared on an annual basis and that it contains information on all the subjects covered by Article 21 of the Convention, including statistics on workplaces liable to inspection and the number of workers employed therein (clause (c)). The Committee also requests the Government to ensure that this report is published and transmitted to the International Labour Office within the time limits prescribed by Article 20.