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

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2007, published 97th ILC session (2008)

Labour Inspection Convention, 1947 (No. 81) - New Zealand (Ratification: 1959)

Other comments on C081

Display in: French - SpanishView all

The Committee notes the Government’s detailed report, the comments of Business New Zealand and of the New Zealand Council of Trade Unions (NZCTU), according to which the reorganization of the Department of Labour has had positive effects, notably by facilitating access to information and advice on labour legislation, but nevertheless raise a number of points, in particular with regard to high-risk industries.

Articles 3, 13, 16, 17 and 18 of the Convention.Prevention and monitoring activities of labour inspectors, in particular with regard to occupational safety and health. According to the NZCTU, some of its affiliates in high-risk industries have condemned the lack of responsiveness of the inspection services in charge of occupational health and safety and, in particular, their failure to respond to accident complaints in some regions and to requests for inspections. In this sector, less monitoring activities have been performed by inspectors since the recent restructuring of the inspection services and staffing changes therein. In fact, it appears that the most experienced health and safety inspectors were not kept in their posts. While stating that it is aware of the apparently transitory nature of these difficulties, the organization is nevertheless concerned about this loss of expertise and the reduction in monitoring activities, notably during the period in which new inspectors are being trained. It also fears that by putting more and more emphasis on the responsibility of the enterprise, the inspection services are abandoning, to a certain extent, their powers to monitor the compliance with labour legislation. According to the NZCTU, while a good relationship should be maintained with employers in order to ensure improvements in the work environment, the strong enforcement of occupational safety and health standards is also essential.

In its comments attached to the Government’s report, Business New Zealand refers to a certain degree of inconsistency in the decisions taken by labour inspectors upon observing a compliance failure, with some inspectors providing advice on remedying the matter, while others immediately impose a penalty. According to this organization, more emphasis should be placed on information than on punishment. In its report, the Government states that when visiting workplaces, inspectors are free to decide whether to impose a penalty or not, and that they take into account various factors such as the nature and the magnitude of the violation and whether there was any intent involved in causing it. However, to help avoid inconsistencies in labour inspector decision-making, it states that a strategic approach to health and safety prosecutions is currently being developed.

The Committee also notes with interest that, in response to the concerns of the NZCTU and to the increased demand for occupational safety and health services, additional funding has been allocated to the Department of Labour, notably to reinforce field inspection capacity and to provide information services. The Department of Labour has also undertaken to identify vulnerable workers and focus its efforts on targeted visits.

The Committee believes that the technical information and advice provided to employers and workers can only favour compliance with the legal provisions relating to conditions of work. The credibility of any inspection service depends, to a large extent, on its ability to advise employers and workers on the best way in which to apply the relevant legal provisions, but it also depends on its ability to apply effectively a sufficiently dissuasive system of penalties. Violations of relevant legal provisions or blatant disregard for the recommendations or compliance orders issued by labour inspectors can thus be dealt with by inspectors with the appropriate level of severity. It is important, however, to ensure that this power of labour inspectors to avoid the application of penalties is not used in a manner in which it was not initially intended. The Committee asks the Government to ensure that the prevention and advising activities performed by labour inspectors and directed at workers and employers, particularly in the field of occupational health and safety, are supplemented, in all cases where this is necessary in order to obtain compliance with the applicable legal provisions and the measures ordered by the labour inspector, by the imposition of penalties or the institution of legal proceedings.

Noting that the Government has also set up a panel to examine inspection decisions relating to enforcement action, the Committee requests the Government to provide in its next report information on the strategy adopted and the measures established for its implementation and their impact.

Article 10.Number of labour inspectors. The Committee notes with interest that six new posts have been created for labour inspectors within the framework of the Recognized Seasonal Employer Policy (RSE). It notes that these inspectors will be responsible for monitoring not only general conditions of work, but also health and safety conditions. According to the Government, this new approach reflects a longer term objective to have the labour and the health and safety inspectorates operate more collaboratively. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would communicate information on any progress made in this respect.

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