Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1994, published 81st ILC session (1994)

Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29) - Austria (Ratification: 1960)
Protocol of 2014 to the Forced Labour Convention, 1930 - Austria (Ratification: 2019)

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its report. The Committee also notes the observations made by the Austrian Congress of Chambers of Labour on the application of the Convention.

Article 2, paragraph 2(c), of the Convention. In comments made for several years, the Committee has noted that some of the work done by prisoners was performed in workshops managed by private undertakings inside the prisons under arrangements made with the prison authorities, who place prison labour at the disposal of such undertakings and remain responsible for their supervision with regard to security, while the private employees of the undertaking concerned direct the prisoners' work with the approval of the prison authorities.

The Committee pointed out that Article 2, paragraph 2(c), of the Convention requires not merely that prison labour be carried out under the supervision and control of public authorities, but also prohibits a prisoner to be hired or placed at the disposal of private companies, and that these provisions also apply to workshops managed by private undertakings inside the prisons.

In its latest report the Government, referring to its previous statements, reiterates its view that the conditions for employment of prisoners in workshops or undertakings managed privately are not in contradiction with the Convention and that in particular consent of the prisoner concerned is required only for work outside the prison premises, this being provided for in the law concerning the execution of sentences.

The Committee must point out once more that Article 2, paragraph 2(c), of the Convention explicitly prohibits that persons from whom work is exacted as a consequence of a conviction in a court of law be placed at the disposal of private individuals, companies or associations. Only work performed in conditions of a free employment relationship can be held not to be incompatible with this prohibition; this necessarily requires the formal consent of the person concerned and, in the light of the circumstances of that consent, guarantees and safeguards in respect of wages and social security that are such as to justify the labour relationship being regarded as a free one.

In its previous report the Government indicated that a substantial increase in remuneration and the integration of prisoners in the unemployment scheme were among the declared aims of the Government. The Committee notes the Government's information in its latest report that in 1993 a Bill to amend the law concerning the execution of sentences was submitted to Parliament and provides for a substantial increase in the remuneration for prisoners and the integration of prisoners into the unemployment insurance. These changes should enhance prisoners' chances of social rehabilitation and thus reduce the statistically substantial risk of recidivism. The Government adds that the Bill is currently under consideration by a subcommittee of the Parliament's Committee of Justice and once adopted might enter into force in 1994. It is also planned to include prisoners into the statutory social security insurance but only during the next legislative period.

The Committee notes that the Congress of Chambers of Labour states in its observation that it concurs with the views expressed by the Committee. The Congress further observes that the necessary increase in remuneration and the inclusion in social security schemes are declared objectives of the Government, but have not yet been carried out.

The Committee hopes that the Government will soon be in a position to report on the adoption of the above-announced measures as well as on all arrangements made to ensure that the prisoner's formal consent is sought for work in workshops managed by private undertakings, including those inside prisons.