Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1996, published 85th ILC session (1997)

Hours of Work and Rest Periods (Road Transport) Convention, 1979 (No. 153) - Uruguay (Ratification: 1989)

1. The Committee notes the Government's reports which were received in September and November 1995. With reference to its previous observation, it also notes the communication sent by the Inter-Union Assembly of Workers - National Convention of Workers (PIT-CNT) containing the observations made by the National Union of Transport Employees and Manual Workers (UNOTT), and the Government's reply.

2. UNOTT considers that the Government's latest report refers unjustly to the collective agreement of 9 August 1994 between the urban transport undertakings of the department of Montevideo and the organizations of workers' representatives, as well as to the governmental decrees of 17 and 23 August 1994 as implementing the provisions of the Convention. The opinion of UNOTT is that these decrees and collective agreements merely settled the dispute between the Uruguay Public Transport Company (CUTCSA) and the representative organizations mentioned above by granting vehicle crews a 30-minute break. The only two national standards which give effect to the Convention are Act No. 5350 of 17 November 1915 and the Decree of 29 October 1957. UNOTT adds that the definition of hours of work is laid down by the combination of section 4 of Act No. 5350 and sections 6, 10 and 29 of the Decree of 29 October 1957. Taking into account all the time during which workers or employees cannot dispose freely of their time or are present at their workplace or available to an employer or a hierarchical superior during actual hours of work, these provisions are said to be more favourable to workers than Article 4, paragraph 2, of the Convention and should be applied as such. The result according to UNOTT is that there are no reasons for splitting the rest period, as proposed by CUTCSA and confirmed by an opinion of the General Labour Inspectorate.

3. In its reply, the Government emphasizes that there are no regulations applying the Convention as a whole and that the collective agreement of 9 August 1994, along with the Decrees of 17 and 23 August 1994, only deal with part of the matter.

4. The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether the vehicle crew, as defined in the collective agreement of 9 August and the Decrees of 17 and 23 August 1994, includes drivers. The Committee notes that the Government has not excluded urban transport from the Convention's scope pursuant to Article 2. It would recall that under Article 5, paragraphs 3 and 4, the competent authority or body may, after consulting with employers' and workers' organizations in accordance with Article 3, decide how the break may be split or exclude rest periods because drivers have sufficient breaks as a result of stops provided for in the timetable or as a result of the intermittent nature of the work.

5. Furthermore, the Committee notes the information contained in the Government's reports in reply to its previous comments. It notes in particular that section 1 of the Decree of 29 October 1957 has been repealed by Decree 611/80 of 19 November 1980 and that heads of firms and members of their families are not excluded from national legislation on hours of work. The Committee also notes that an adequate system of inspection and appropriate penalties for infringement are provided by Decree 680/977 of 6 December 1977 and Act No. 15.903 of 10 November 1987. The report describes the regular consultations of employers' and workers' organizations on the matters covered by the provisions of the Convention. The Government is requested to supply detailed information on the subject of these consultations and their results (Article 3).

Finally, noting that the problem raised by UNOTT relates to the practical application of the Convention and noting that the Government's report mentions none of the many judgements cited by UNOTT, the Committee would be grateful if the Government would indicate in subsequent reports any change, progress or difficulty arising in application of the provisions of the Convention and would supply full information on any decision of the courts or other tribunals raising matters of principle on this subject (points III and IV of the report form).