National Legislation on Labour and Social Rights
Global database on occupational safety and health legislation
Employment protection legislation database
DISPLAYINEnglish - French - Spanish
Amendment and implementation in practice of the legislation giving effect to the provisions of the Convention. Powers of labour inspectors. The Committee notes the lists of laws and regulations relevant to the work of the inspection services. In this connection, it observes that the operation of the Factories and Machinery Act 1967 (Act 139) is suspended in Sabah and Sarawak as from 1 July 1980, by virtue of a decision made by the Minister of Human Resources under the provisions of section 1(3) of the Act. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would indicate the specific instruments which regulate inspections of factories in Sabah and Sarawak.
Articles 3(1) and 17 of the Convention. Enforcement and advisory activities of the labour inspectorate. Referring to its previous direct request, the Committee takes note of the partial information supplied by the Government on the provisions relating to working conditions and the protection of workers in respect of vulnerable categories of workers. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would also describe the action undertaken by the labour inspectorate with a view to securing the enforcement of the legal provisions relating, in particular, to conditions of work and the protection of young persons, women and immigrant workers, and provide available statistical data on the number and nature of violations identified, sanctions imposed, remedies provided, etc.
Article 5. Effective cooperation with other government services and public institutions, and collaboration with employers, workers or their organizations. Further to its previous comments on this point, the Committee notes the information provided by the Government that the labour departments are in collaboration with the immigration and police departments and other relevant departments in relation to the establishment of a task force to combat irregular workers and the employers who hire them. In this connection, the Committee recalls paragraph 78 of its General Survey of 2006 on labour inspection in which, noting that inspections of clandestine work of illegal employment, which are increasingly closely linked to irregular migration, are carried out through a partnership between the labour inspectorate and other public administration bodies, it recalled that the primary duty of labour inspectors was to protect workers and not to enforce immigration law. The Committee therefore requests the Government to explain how this primary duty of labour inspectors is fulfilled in the context of actions with respect to irregular workers.
The Committee also notes that such collaboration aims at contributing to the preparation of legislation or standards by soliciting public comments or by disseminating information through dialogue, seminars and talk at the National Council for Safety and Health (NCOSH). The Committee requests the Government to provide information on its assessment of the practical impact of these collaborative activities. It would also appreciate if the Government would continue to provide up to date and documented information concerning any new collaboration of the labour inspectorate with other public institutions and the social partners, and of its practical results.
Article 12. Powers of labour inspectors. The Committee notes the copy provided by the Government of the Labour Ordinance Sabah (Cap. 67) and the Labour Ordinance Sarawak (Cap. 76), as amended. It observes that not all provisions are in line with relevant parts of the Employment Act 1955 (Act 265), contrary to the Government’s indication. In particular, section 66 of the Employment Act provides, in line with Article 12(2) of the Convention, that labour inspectors must notify the employer of their presence unless they have reasonable grounds to believe that such notification might be prejudicial to the performance of their duties. The Sabah and Sarawak Ordinances, however, do not contain such provisions. The Committee requests the Government to explain how Article 12(2) of the Convention is given effect under the Labour Ordinance Sabah (Cap. 67) and the Labour Ordinance Sarawak (Cap. 76).
Articles 17(2), 18 and 21. Violations and penalties imposed. Cooperation with the justice system. Further to its previous comments on this point, the Committee notes the information provided by the Government on the reason for the one single case of prosecution, as a result of the 3,288 inspections carried out in Sarawak in 2006, and how the case was established by the Magistrates’ Court. It also notes the number of cases referred to the courts by the labour inspectorate. The Committee would appreciate if the Government would continue to provide the relevant up-to-date information.
Article 21. Analysis of the results of labour inspection activities. Further to its last comments on this point, the Committee notes the Government’s clarification provided with respect to the terms “employer reprimanded” and “workers involved”. It also notes the indication by the Government that the seemingly contradictory relationships between the reduction in the number of inspections and the increase in the number of violations reported as regards Peninsula Malaysia in 2005 and 2006 was due to the improved quality of inspections. The Committee would appreciate if the Government would provide specific information concerning the measures taken to improve the quality of inspections. It also notes the explanation by the Government that the amendment of the Labour Ordinance Sarawak (Cap. 76) in October 2005 resulted in a wider use of the employers’ register book, which has been replaced since 2006 by the labour market database system. In this connection, the Committee notes that the statistics available from the Labour Department of Sabah concerning the evolution of the number of inspections indicate that the number rather decreased substantially in 2007 and then increased back to the 2005 level in 2008. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any similar measures to those implemented in Sarawak, which may have been taken since the amendment of the Labour Ordinance Sabah (Cap. 67).
Collection and contents of statistical information on the work of the labour inspection services. The Committee notes the various information concerning: (i) the statistical data and information for 2008 provided by the labour departments; laws and regulations relevant to the work of the inspection services; number of inspecting officers; number of workplaces liable to inspection; number of inspection visits; information on the size of workplaces inspected; number and percentage of employers not complying with the labour legislation; and statistics of industrial accidents; and (ii) the statistical data and information for the period 2006–08 provided by the Department of Occupational Safety and Health (DOSH): laws and regulations relevant to the work of the inspection services; number of inspecting officers; number of workplaces liable to inspection; number of inspection visits by types of workplace; legislation on occupational safety and health (OSH) and industrial sectors; statistics of violations and penalties imposed; and number of industrial accidents and occupational diseases.
With respect to the abovementioned set of information in (i), the Committee observes that the total number of workplaces inspected in Peninsular Malaysia in 2008 (data No. 3) and the total number of workplaces inspected in Peninsular Malaysia in 2008, disaggregated by the size of establishments (data No. 4) differ nearly by 10,000, and that the difference between data No. 3 and the number of workplaces inspected (data No. 2) differ by nearly 1,200. The total number of industrial accidents reported to the labour departments and the social security organizations in 2008 is different from the number provided by the labour departments and the number provided by the DOSH. The Committee requests the Government to clarify the correct total number of workplaces inspected. While appreciating the breakdown by sex provided by the Government concerning the number of workers inspected, the Committee would appreciate if the Government would provide the same disaggregation on the number of inspectors (data No. 1), in view of the provisions under Article 8 of the Convention. As regards the information on the number of workplaces inspected and violations of the labour legislation (data No. 5), please provide the disaggregation by region and the law concerned, indicating the number and nature of violations identified.
Concerning the information in (ii), the Committee observes that, as regards the numbers of inspection officers (data (a)), while the number of technical staff increased considerably between 2006 and 2007, it decreased in 2008 below the 2006 level. On the other hand, the number of administrative and diplomatic officers more than tripled between 2007 and 2008. The number of agricultural staff nearly doubled between 2007 and 2008. In view of these changes, the Committee would appreciate if the Government would explain the evolution of the general policy of the OSH inspection, which may explain the reasons for the abovementioned changes in the number of specific categories of inspection officers. The Government is also requested to provide the data on the number of OSH inspecting officers, disaggregated by sex, in view of the provisions under Article 8 of the Convention.
Labour inspection and child labour. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the labour departments have been engaged in consultations with the police and the Immigration Department in respect of the employment of child workers, including awareness raising among employers on child labour and the related legislation. Periodic meetings and cooperation are carried out with the agencies under the Ministry of Human Resources in relation to issues on the protection of children dealt with under the Child Act 2001 (Act 611). The Committee also notes the references made by the Government to the provisions of the legislation of Peninsular Malaysia, Sabah and Sarawak concerning the employment of children and young persons. It further recalls the information provided by the Government on the role played by the labour inspectorate in ascertaining cases of child labour, as mentioned in its observation of 2009 under Convention No. 182. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would continue to provide information on any up to date and documented legislative, administrative or practical measures taken or envisaged with a view to realizing active participation of labour inspectors in combating child labour in establishments covered by the Convention.
Articles 20 and 21 of the Convention. Annual report on the work of the inspection services. The Committee notes the Government’s report which contains detailed statistical information on labour inspections and inspections on occupational safety and health, with respect to Peninsular Malaysia, Sabah and Sarawak. It notes with interest that the information provided corresponds to the requirements under Article 21 of the Convention. The Committee also notes the Government’s indication that each one of the 11 agencies under the auspices of the Ministry of Human Resources (MOHR) produces its own annual report, and that the statistics reflecting common data are available on the MOHR’s web site. The Committee wishes to indicate that these data must be published as an integral part of an annual report on the work of the inspection services (Article 20(1)) within a reasonable time after the end of the year and in any case within 12 months (Article 20(2)). In this connection, the Committee recalls its General Observation of 2009, in which the Committee referred to the use of statistical data both at the international and national levels, indicating that at the national level, such data would allow assessment of the rate of coverage by labour inspection services in relation to their scope, as defined in national legislation. Such assessment could then be used for the determination of the appropriate number of labour inspectors and the necessary material resources for the discharge of their functions (Articles 10, 11 and 16), or for the provision of training (Article 7). With these factors identified, an appropriate budget to meet the justified and quantified needs of labour inspection could then be allocated, according to the national financial possibilities. At the international level, these data would allow for an assessment of the implementation of the Convention in practice (Article 20(3)). Accordingly, the Committee requests the Government to take all necessary measures with a view to compiling and publishing an annual report of the labour inspection services, containing such data as contained in the Government’s report, and to send a copy to the Office, as required under Articles 20 and 21 of the Convention.
The Committee is raising other points in a request addressed directly to the Government.
With reference to its observation, the Committee requests the Government to provide additional information on the following points.
Amendment and implementation in practice of the legislation giving effect to the provisions of the Convention. The Committee notes that, according to the Government, the provisions of the Labour Ordinance Sarawak (Cap. 76) and the Labour Ordinance Sabah (Cap. 67) were amended in 2004 to bring them into line with the provisions of the Employment Act, 1955. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide copies of these two Ordinances, as amended, the original texts and information on their application in practice since their entry into force in 2005.
Analysis of the results of labour inspection activities. According to the data provided by the Government concerning Peninsula Malaysia between 2005 and 2006, the number of inspections carried out fell significantly (from 57,420 to 44,522), while the numbers of “employers reprimanded” almost doubled (from 6,385 to 12,380). In Sarawak, the number of workplaces liable to inspection rose from 27,272 to 40,469 over the same period, the number of fatal industrial accidents reported more than doubled (from 33 to 69), while the number of other types of industrial accidents rose by around 30 per cent. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would indicate the meaning of the expressions “employer reprimanded” and “worker involved” used in the statistics for Peninsula Malaysia. It also requests the Government to indicate the reasons for: (i) the seemingly contradictory relationships between the reduction in the number of inspections and the increase in the number of violations reported in the region; and (ii) the significant increase in the number or workplaces liable to inspection in Sarawak.
The Committee would be grateful if the Government would also provide the available data on the distribution by branch of activity of occupational accidents in Sarawak for the years 2005 and 2006, take measures to reduce that number and, in so far as possible, the risk factors identified, and provide a description of these measures and of any action taken against the employers concerned (administrative or judicial action).
Article 3, paragraph 1. Enforcement and advisory activities of the labour inspectorate. The Committee requests the Government to indicate precisely the source and content of the legal provisions liable to supervision by labour inspectors and to describe the action undertaken by the labour inspectorate with a view to securing the enforcement of the legal provisions relating principally to conditions of work and the protection of workers in respect of vulnerable categories of workers, such as young persons, women and immigrant workers.
Article 5(a) and (b). Effective cooperation with other government services and public institutions, and collaboration with employers, workers or their organizations. The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether measures have been taken to promote effective cooperation between the inspection services and other public institutions and services, such as the judicial and fiscal authorities, social insurance institutions and bodies responsible for the protection of children established under the Malaysia Child Act, 2001. If so, it requests the Government to provide examples of cooperation and an assessment of its impact.
With reference to the guidance contained in Part II of the Labour Inspection Recommendation, 1947 (No. 81), on the various possible forms of collaboration between officials of the labour inspectorate and employers and workers or their organizations (establishment of safety and health committees, organization of lectures, dissemination of documentation, etc.), the Committee requests the Government to describe, where appropriate, the nature and results of such collaboration.
Articles 17, paragraph 2, 18 and 21. Violations reported, prosecutions and penalties imposed. According to the data provided by the Government, one single case of violation gave rise to prosecution as a result of the 3,288 inspections carried out in Sarawak in 2006. No relevant data were provided concerning Peninsula Malaysia. The Committee requests the Government to indicate in its next report the reason for the single case of prosecution. With reference to its general observation of 2007, in which it emphasizes the value of effective cooperation between the inspection services and the justice system for an effective contribution to the progressive improvement of conditions of work, the Committee would be grateful if the Government would indicate whether appropriate measures have been taken, in accordance with Article 5(a), to promote such cooperation. If not, it hopes that the Government will not fail to take such measures and to keep the Office informed rapidly.
The Committee requests the Government to provide information in its next report on the number of cases referred to the courts by the labour inspectorate throughout the country, with an indication of the fields concerned.
Collection and content of statistical information on the work of the labour inspection services. Further to its observation, in which it emphasizes the need to ensure the publication and communication to the Office of an annual report on the work of the labour inspection services, the Committee wishes to draw the Government’s attention to Paragraph 9 of the Labour Inspection Recommendation, 1947 (No. 81), in relation to the desirable level of detail of the information that should be contained in the annual report. While awaiting an annual report as envisaged in Articles 20 and 21 of the Convention, the Committee hopes that the Government will be in a position to provide the available data in its next report on the composition and geographical distribution of the staff of the labour inspection services, the total number of workplaces liable to inspection, the number of workers employed therein, in so far as possible disaggregated by sex, category (young workers, migrant workers, etc.), the number and types of inspection visits carried out (first inspection, inspection to verify the implementation of an order), the type and size of the workplaces inspected, the violations reported and penalties imposed, as well as the available data on employment accidents (the economic sectors concerned) and cases of occupational disease (the economic sectors concerned).
Labour inspection and child labour. With reference to its general observation of 1999, the Committee would be grateful if the Government would keep the ILO informed of any legislative or practical measures adopted for the active participation of labour inspectors in combating child labour in the industrial and commercial workplaces covered by the Convention. It requests the Government to provide a detailed description, with details of their impact.
Articles 20 and 21 of the Convention. Functioning of the inspection system. Annual report on the work of the inspection services. Noting the statistics provided by the Government in its report for the years 2004, 2005 and 2006, the Committee observes that the data relating to Peninsula Malaysia only indicate the number of inspections carried out, the number of employers reprimanded and the number of employees involved, and that the figures for 2005 and 2006 relating to Sarawak indicate the number of men and women inspectors, the number of workplaces liable to inspection, the number of inspection visits, the number of persons employed in the workplaces visited, the number of prosecutions and the number of industrial accidents reported. No data are provided for Sabah. Such fragmentary data, covering different elements for each of the regions covered, do not offer a global view of the functioning of the inspection system nor, as a consequence, a basis for determining the measures for its improvement.
In reply to the comments that the Committee has been making for many years concerning the failure to publish and communicate to the ILO an annual report on the work of the inspection service, the Government indicates once again that each year a report is prepared by each department of the ministry and that the report of the Department of Occupational Safety and Health has already been published on the Internet. The Committee observes that this report briefly indicates the total number of inspections carried out in factories, installations involving machinery and construction sites for the years 1999–2003, with the exclusion of any data allowing the identification of the categories of workplaces inspected, the legislative fields addressed or the results of inspections, such as the number of violations reported, the action taken on these violations in terms of issuing warnings, the imposition of administrative penalties or prosecutions. The Committee is therefore bound to regret once again that no annual report on the work of the labour inspection services, as required by the Convention, has been communicated to the ILO, despite its reiterated requests. It invites the Government to refer to paragraphs 331 to 333 of its General Survey of 2006 on labour inspection, which emphasize the importance of the availability of such a report so as to be able to assess the operation of the labour inspection system, identify priorities for its improvement and determine the resources that need to be allocated in the context of the national budget. The Government is requested to ensure that the central inspection authority is very soon in a position to collect, based on uniform instructions to the services placed under its authority, information that is as detailed as possible on each of the items covered by clauses (a) to (g) of Article 21 of the Convention, and to include this information in the annual report to be published and communicated to the ILO within the time limits set out in Article 20.
The Committee is also addressing a request directly to the Government on certain points.
The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It must therefore repeat its previous observation which read as follows:
Publication of an annual report. The Committee regrets to note that, although the Government indicates in its report that an annual report is compiled by the labour inspectorate, it has nevertheless omitted to transmit this report. With reference to the repeated requests that it has been making for many years in this connection, the Committee trusts that the Government will take the necessary measures in the near future to ensure that the annual report required by Articles 20 and 21 of the Convention is published and transmitted to the ILO.
The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the very near future.
The Committee notes the Government’s report and the replies to its previous comments. It notes in particular, its indication that the new preventive approach to labour inspection has improved the education of both employers and employees. The Government indicates that dialogue between employers and employees has increased and that many consultations have been held in 2000-02. However, despite the Committee’s repeated requests and the Government’s promises, no annual inspection report has been received for many years, precluding any assessment of the practical impact of the new preventive approaches, as no data, such as statistics of violations reported and penalties imposed or statistics of cases of occupational disease, is provided. The Committee once again requests the Government to take all necessary measures to ensure, in accordance with Article 20 of the Convention, that an annual inspection report containing the information requested under Article 21 is published and transmitted to the ILO.
The Committee also requests the Government to indicate to which organizations of employers and workers the report has been sent and to transmit any comments made by such organizations, in accordance with article 23, paragraph 2 of the Constitution of the ILO.
The Committee notes the Government’s brief report. It notes that there is no reply to its previous comments.
Referring to its previous observation, the Committee requests the Government to supply information on the effect of implementation of the new preventive approach to labour inspection through the use of the media and consultations with employers and workers on the application of labour legislation covered by the Convention.
The Government is also requested to supply information on the measures already requested by the Committee as to how effect is given in law and in practice to Article 14 of the Convention laying down that the labour inspection service shall be notified of industrial accidents and cases of occupational disease in such cases and in such manner as may be prescribed by national laws or regulations.
Noting that, despite the Government’s affirmation that an annual inspection report is prepared regularly, to date none of these reports has been received by the ILO, the Committee would be grateful if the Government would take all appropriate measures to ensure in future that an annual inspection report containing information on the subjects listed in Article 21 is published and communicated to the ILO within the time limits laid down in Article 20.
With reference also to its observation, the Committee draws the Government’s attention to the following points.
1. Recording of industrial accidents and occupational diseases. On many occasions, and in its general observation of 1996, the Committee has emphasized the need to take measures enabling the central authority to obtain and transmit to the ILO the information required by Article 21(f) and (g) on industrial accidents and occupational diseases. The Committee notes in this respect that the Labour Department is only responsible for the recording of industrial accidents affecting foreign employees covered by the Workmen’s Compensation Act. Furthermore, the statistical data provided with the report on the number of workplaces inspected and economic sectors only cover a part of the country and do not include inspections in relation to occupational safety and health which, it is indicated, are the responsibility of the Department of Occupational Safety and Health and the Social Security Organization. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide additional information on the manner in which effect is given to Article 14, which provides that the labour inspectorate shall be notified of industrial accidents and cases of occupational disease in such cases and in such manner as may be prescribed by national laws or regulations.
2. Central inspection authority and annual inspection report. The Committee notes that the ILO has not received any annual inspection report, despite the undertaking made by the Government in this respect in its report for 1995, and it is bound to emphasize once again the need to designate the central authority with responsibility, in accordance with Article 4, for the supervision and control of labour inspection and, in accordance with Article 20, for the publication and transmission to the ILO of an annual general report on the work of the inspection services under its control. It requests the Government to take the appropriate measures to give effect to these provisions of the Convention and to report them in its next report. It also trusts that an annual inspection report containing all the information required under Article 21(a) to (g) will be published in the near future and transmitted to the ILO within the required time limits.
The Committee takes due note of the various activities and measures taken in recent years to strengthen the performance of the labour inspectorate. It also notes with interest the adoption of the Occupational Safety and Health Act, 1994, which supplements the provisions of the Factories and Machinery Act, 1967. In its previous comments, the Committee welcomed the many measures taken with a view to the rationalization of the use of human resources and the distribution of responsibilities in the field of labour inspection. It notes that the start-up of operations by the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health, which was established in 1992, has relieved the Labour Department of a number of functions and has contributed to minimizing the involvement of labour officers in the planning and implementation of training activities for industry. It also notes that, as a result of the restructuring of the inspection services into two sections with different responsibilities, some 80 per cent of field inspectors are assigned to pure inspection duties and that as a result the number of inspections rose from 69,107 in 1993 to 83,667 in 1994. In its report for 1999, the Government refers to the adoption of a new approach to inspection which places greater emphasis on preventive measures. The media are used for educational programmes on various aspects of labour law, and consultations are organized with employers and workers at the workplace and in labour offices. The Committee hopes that the Government will not fail to provide information in future reports on the effects of these measures in the areas of labour legislation covered by the Convention.
The Committee is addressing a request directly to the Government on other points.
Further to its previous comments, the Committee notes the information contained in the Government's report. It would be grateful if the Government would provide more clarifications on the points raised below.
Articles 3, paragraph 2; 9, 10 and 16 of the Convention. The Committee notes that the Government's report does not directly reply to its previous comments regarding the increase in non-inspection work performed by inspectors that was preventing an increase of the number of inspection visits to a desired level. The Government's report indicates that there has been an organizational restructuring of the inspection system with regional offices being divided into two sections, namely the enforcement service carrying out routine statutory inspections of workplaces and machinery and the technical services performing non-routine functions such as accident investigation, prosecution, promotion and approvals. The Committee further notes that the Government is preparing the introduction, in early 1995, of a comprehensive integrated inspection check-list with assessment standards that will allow quantification of the safety and health standards of workplaces and thus facilitating integrated inspection visits that are more objective and of a higher quality. The Government also states in its report that it expects the introduction of the integrated system of inspection to replace the separate but redundant statutory inspections for safety and for hygiene matters, to permit a more flexible, efficient and effective use of limited manpower in this respect. The Government also expects the introduction in 1994 of a new system of inspection by sector regarding statutory inspections, to provide a clearer picture of the various situations within a sector throughout the different states through the comparison of data and better planning. It further states that this should also help ensure that workplaces are inspected as often and as thoroughly as is necessary within the meaning of Article 16 of the Convention. The Committee welcomes the measures taken and those that are in the process of introduction or planning aimed at ensuring a better application of these provisions of the Convention. The Committee hopes the Government will continue to provide full details of developments in this respect.
Article 5(b). Further to its previous comments relating to the observations of the Malaysian Trades Union Congress (MTUC) of 1989, the Committee notes the Government's reply concerning the changes introduced thus far as well as the enactment, at the initiative of the tripartite National Advisory Council for Occupational Safety and Health, of the 1994 Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA), which Act is based on the concept of self-regulation and places the primary responsibility for ensuring safety and health at the workplace on employers and workers. The Government states that the OSHA incorporates provisions promoting proactive consultations and cooperation between the Government, management and workers in efforts to maintain and upgrade safety and health at work as evidenced by its sections that provide for the formation of a tripartite National Council for Occupational Safety and Health to replace the National Advisory Council and the creation of safety and health committees in places of work having at least 40 workers. The Committee hopes these measures will in practice enable the Government to ensure the collaboration between officials of the labour inspectorate and employers and workers or their organizations as required by this Article of the Convention. The Committee would be also grateful if the Government would supply a copy of the OSHA of 1994 with its next report.
Articles 17 and 18. The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government in reply to its previous comments which related to the observations of the MTUC of 1989 concerning the inadequacy of the penalties for violation of enforceable provisions and for obstruction of inspectors. The Government indicates the OSHA provides for more severe penalties.
Articles 20 and 21. The Committee recalls its previous comments where it expressed the hope that annual inspection reports will be published and transmitted to the Office within the periods prescribed by Article 20 of the Convention and that they will contain all the required information, particularly statistics of workplaces liable to inspection and numbers of workers employed in them (Article 21(c), as well as statistics of violations and penalties imposed (Article 21(e)).
Further to its previous comments, the Committee has taken note of the Government's reply and the Report of the Labour Department as regards inspection activities in 1989-90. It recalls also the earlier observations made by the Malaysian Trades Union Congress (MTUC).
Article 3(2) of the Convention. The Committee notes from the report that, as the workload on labour officers in other areas of activity than inspection is increasing, visits for the detection of non-compliance with the law cannot be increased to a desired level. It hopes the Government will nevertheless endeavour to ensure that the further duties given to inspectors do not interfere with the effective discharge of their primary inspection duties and that it will provide full information in the next report on the Convention.
Article 5. (a) The Committee notes the recommendations in the Annual Report for 1989/90 of the Factories and Machinery Deparment (FMD). It would be glad to know what cooperation exists between the FMD and the Labour Department in the implementation of the Convention.
(b) The Committee recalls the view of the MTUC that not much had been done to increase collaboration between the labour inspectorate and workers or their organizations. It notes also the statement in the report as to the need for self-auditing by employers to ensure the law is complied with and for employees to know their obligations and rights. Further, the report states that the percentage of organized labour is small, so that the vast majority of employees in the private sector are wholly dependent on the Labour Department for the establishment and enforcement of labour standards and conditions of employment. At the same time, the FMD has pointed to a misconception among employers and workers that responsibility for occupational safety and health lies solely with the Government. The Committee hopes the Government will indicate the measures taken to ensure the necessary collaboration with both employers and workers or their organizations, as required by this Article.
Articles 9, 10 and 16. The Committee notes from the Government's reply and the tables for 1990 and 1991 and the 1989-90 report that numbers of inspectors have not grown to match numbers of places of employment, so that the frequency of inspections has deteriorated to the point where places of employment are visited only once every six years. The MTUC especially drew attention to the lack of specialists and technical experts carrying out inspections, and to the general lack of thoroughness of inspections. The Committee hopes the next report on the Convention will include details of the effect of the new strategy mentioned in the report, involving listing of priorities for inspection so that, as required by the Convention, workplaces may be inspected as often and as thoroughly as necessary to ensure the effective application of legislation.
Articles 17 and 18. The Committee recalls the MTUC view that penalties for violation of enforceable provisions and for obstruction of inspectors are inadequate. It notes too the 1989-90 report's statement that the Labour Department has adopted a "facilitative" approach to enforcement, as manifested by the decline in numbers of prosecutions. The Committee hopes the next report on the Convention will include the Government's present views in this respect, as well as information on any revision of levels of penalties.
Articles 20 and 21. The Committee hopes annual labour inspection reports will be published and transmitted to the Office within the periods prescribed and will contain all the required information, particularly statistics of workplaces liable to inspection and numbers of workers employed in them (Article 21(c)), as well as statistics of violations and penalties imposed (Article 21(e)).
Articles 20 and 21 of the Convention. Further to its previous comments, the Committee notes that the annual inspection reports have not been received. It hopes that they will soon be transmitted and will contain all the necessary information.
Articles 20 and 21 of the Convention. The Committee takes note of the 1985-86 Labour and Manpower Report and of the statistics of the number of staff in the Labour Inspection Service. It hopes that, in future, information on all the subjects listed at Article 21 will be included in the report and that the report will be published and transmitted to the International Labour Office within the time-limits laid down at Article 20.