Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1993, published 80th ILC session (1993)

Unemployment Provision Convention, 1934 (No. 44) - Peru (Ratification: 1962)

With reference to its previous comments, the Committee notes the information supplied by the Government in its report in which it refers to the consultations held with the representative organizations of employers and workers to establish an unemployment insurance scheme in accordance with the fundamental provisions of the Convention. The Government states that it has received partial replies and is awaiting further information in order to be able to give a more comprehensive opinion.

The Government refers to the provisions of Act No. 24514 of 1986 regulating the right to employment stability, as well as the supplementary provisions in this respect (Presidential Decree No. 003-88-TR, of 1988) and the Employment Promotion Act of 1991. The Committee notes that the above texts contain provisions which enable workers to benefit from compensatory benefits in the event of the termination of the employment relationship, but that they do not provide for an unemployment insurance system in accordance with the provisions contained in the Convention.

The Government refers to the difficult economic situation through which the country is passing and the heavy economic burden of social security contributions. In the Government's opinion, an unemployment insurance system which accords with the provisions of the Convention would be unacceptable, since it would have to be financed by contributions paid by the State, employers and workers, who would not be in a position to undertake such obligations.

The Committee also notes the comments of the Trade Union of Employees of Hierro Perú, which were transmitted to the Government in October 1992, in which the consequences are described of a programme to rationalize the labour force, which affected 850 workers in January 1992. A subsequent reduction in staff is alleged to affect another 700 workers, but no programme has been established to deal with their uncertain economic future. The Front for the Defence of the Rights of the People of Marcona also contacted the Office to support the comments made by the Trade Union of Employees of Hierro Perú.

In its reply, the Government states that it inherited an economy which was in a totally chaotic state, and that the situation of public enterprises was critical. Among the measures which have been envisaged, Hierro Perú has been included in the process of the promotion of private investment, and has been privatized and now operates under another name. It states that the privatization programme was based on the concept of reorienting the economy towards the market in order to improve the living standards of the population.

The Committee is bound to emphasize the importance of giving effect to the obligations deriving from the Convention, which was ratified in 1962, and which contains standards relating to unemployment insurance and various forms of relief for the unemployed. It requests the Government to supply information in its next report.