Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2001, published 90th ILC session (2002)

Labour Inspection (Agriculture) Convention, 1969 (No. 129) - Colombia (Ratification: 1976)

With reference to its observation, the Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its report for the period ending 31 July 2000. It hopes that the Government shall not fail to provide additional information on the following points.

1. Surveys on labour inspection in the rural sector and conditions of life of agricultural workers and their families. The Committee notes the information on the delay caused by the restructuring of the Ministry of Labour and Social Security, to undertaking surveys on labour inspection in the agricultural sector, as well as to the various studies dealing with the working situation in the agricultural sector (recession, seasonal migrations) mentioned in the Government’s report of 1996, and whose aim is to increase the efficiency of labour inspection. It hopes that the Government would be in a position to provide in its next report information on the conclusions reached by the surveys and studies and on the measures which are envisaged to attain the set objective, and in particular, to give detailed information on whether labour inspectors in agriculture, according to Article 6, paragraph 2, shall be entrusted with advisory, and enforcement functions relating to conditions of workers and their families.

2. Training of labour inspectors in agriculture. Noting the information relating to the measures designed to increase the training provided to labour inspectors, the Committee notes with interest the publication in 1998 of a third updated edition of the "Guide of the Labour Inspector", which refers to ILO Conventions Nos. 81 and 129, on labour inspection. It would be grateful if the Government would provide detailed information on the other measures referred to on the specific training of labour inspectors in rural areas, and agricultural undertakings (numbers of inspectors, substance of the training provided) as well as information on the impact of such measures in practice and on the results registered in terms of efficiency with respect to the set aims, as reflected in the formulation of periodic reports, and their communication to the central inspection authority.

3. Lack of labour inspectors. Referring to the information provided in a recent report on the application of Convention No. 81, the Committee notes that women constitute the majority in the labour inspectorate, and that numerous inspector posts remain vacant. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would indicate the measures that have been taken or are envisaged to improve conditions of service, especially remuneration, in such a way as to attract would-be candidates to fill the vacant posts.

4. Principle of absolute confidentiality on the source of complaints. Noting with concern the Government’s indication that labour inspectors are not bound to observe the principle of confidentiality as to the source of complaints when the concerned workers request them to do so, the Committee would like to stress the importance of the principle of confidentiality with respect to the source of complaints as specified in Article 20(c). Labour inspectors are in fact bound to observe this principle in general subject to such exceptions as may be made by national regulations, and pursuant to the same provision, they are also bound not to reveal to the employer or his representative, that a visit of inspection was made in consequence of the receipt of a complaint. The principle of confidentiality with respect to the source of complaints is essential in the relationship between workers and labour inspectors. The Committee therefore invites the Government to refer to the development which was highlighted in its General Survey of 1985 on labour inspection (paragraphs 201 and 202), of the motives behind this affirmation, and which in turn requires it to formulate a legal provision, or failing that, a regulatory or administrative text in this respect. It also notes that the obligation of discretion on the part of labour inspectors may, as specified in the Convention, be subject to a few exceptions, especially with respect to revealing the name of the plaintiff, with the worker’s prior consent, as well as for the sake of legal proceedings (paragraph 203). The Government is requested to take the necessary measures to bring its legislation into conformity with the aforementioned provision of the Convention, in such a manner as to ensure the efficient protection of workers against possible retaliation by employers, and to overcome the fear of revealing workers’ identity, which constitutes an obstacle to workers’ collaboration with labour inspectors.