ILO-en-strap
NORMLEX
Information System on International Labour Standards
NORMLEX Home > Country profiles >  > Comments

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2002, published 91st ILC session (2003)

Labour Inspection Convention, 1947 (No. 81) - Lithuania (Ratification: 1994)

Other comments on C081

Observation
  1. 2022

Display in: French - SpanishView all

The Committee notes the Government’s reports for the period ending 1 June 2001, which contain the Government’s reply with reference to its previous comments. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the following points.

Labour inspection staff and inspection visits (Articles 10 and 16). With respect to its previous comments, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that the present number of inspectors is not sufficient to ensure the effective discharge of the duties of the inspectorate and that the number of inspection visits is not sufficient as well. It also notes that according to the report, the number of enterprises actually inspected (14,934) amounts to merely 9.1 per cent of the total number of enterprises liable to inspection (163,856) as of January 2001, while that of workers inspected (816,515) accounts for 71.8 per cent of the total number of workers liable to inspection (1,137,428). The Committee accordingly requests the Government to provide information on measures taken or envisaged to increase the labour inspection staff as well as to ensure adequate frequency of inspection visits, in particular to small- and medium-sized enterprises.

Means of transport (Article 11, paragraph 2). With reference to its previous comments, the Committee notes the information provided by the Government that the Labour Inspectorate is financed from the State budget in accordance with article 2 of the State Labour Inspection Law. It notes, however, that the competent authority does not compensate transport expenses incurred by the inspectors as a result of exploitation of private cars for fulfilment of official duties. The Committee asks the Government to provide further information as to the extent the transport expenses for official duties of inspectors are covered by the Government’s budget in practice and to take the necessary measures as to fully comply with the requirements of the abovementioned provision of the Convention.

Enforcement of the posting of notices (Article 12, paragraph 1(c)(iii)). With regard to its previous comments, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that national law has no corresponding regulation as laid down in this provision of the Convention. The Committee asks the Government to describe whether the inspectors do in practice enforce such posting of notices despite the lack of related legal provisions.

Publication of an annual report (Article 20). With respect to its previous comments, and referring to the information supplied by the Government in its 1999 report, that under article 6, paragraph 20, of the State Labour Inspection Law, the Inspectorates are obliged to report their activities annually to the Minister of Social Security and Labour, the Committee takes note of a summarized document, entitled "Report on the activities of the State Labour Inspectorate in 2000" annexed to the Government’s detailed report. The Committee notes, however, that in its subsequent reports, the Government did not specify as to whether the annual inspection report is published; it also notes that no report has been transmitted to the ILO in a published form. The Committee therefore requests the Government to confirm whether the annual report is published in an appropriate manner and to transmit it to the ILO in due course as provided for in this Article.

© Copyright and permissions 1996-2024 International Labour Organization (ILO) | Privacy policy | Disclaimer