Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2008, published 98th ILC session (2009)

Protection of Wages Convention, 1949 (No. 95) - Paraguay (Ratification: 1966)

The Committee notes the Government’s report and the voluminous documentation attached. However, it notes that the Government has not replied in full to its previous comment. It is therefore bound to raise once again the following points.

Article 2 of the Convention. Scope of application – Rural workers. With reference to its previous comment, the Committee notes that certain documents attached to the Government’s report relate to the conditions of employment of agricultural workers. It notes in particular resolution No. 311 of the Ministry of Justice and Labour, of 3 May 2006, fixing the minimum wage for workers employed in agricultural establishments. It also notes resolution No. 111 of the Ministry of Justice and Labour, of 24 February 1999, granting workers in a poultry enterprise coverage by section 247 of the Labour Code respecting the protection of wage claims by a privilege in the event of the bankruptcy of the employer. The Committee notes, however, that the provisions of the Labour Code determining its scope of application have not been amended. Accordingly, the conditions of employment of rural workers are still subject to specific provisions, namely sections 157 to 191 of the Labour Code, which do not give effect to the Convention. Furthermore, under the terms of section 162, the general provisions of the Labour Code, including those respecting the protection of wages, do not apply to rural workers, except to those engaged in work of an industrial character (production of cheese, wine, etc.).

The Committee recalls that the Convention applies to all persons to whom wages are paid or payable, including agricultural workers. It notes the Government’s indications that rural workers benefit from the same protection in relation to wages as industrial workers. However, it recalls that such protection has to be explicitly set out in the national legislation and cannot take the form of a mere practice. The Committee therefore hopes that the Government will take the necessary measures without further ado to amend the Labour Code and extend the scope of application of its provisions respecting the protection of wages to all agricultural workers. Such an amendment could, for example, take the form of a provision with wording similar to that of section 147 of the Labour Code respecting domestic workers.

Article 4, paragraph 1. Partial payment of wages in kind. The Committee notes that the Government refers to section 231 of the Labour Code, which allows the partial payment of wages in kind on an exceptional basis and within the limit of 30 per cent of the wage. It notes in this respect that section 231 follows the wording of Article 4, paragraph 2, of the Convention in requiring that allowances in kind be appropriate for the personal use and benefit of the worker and his family and that the value attributed to such allowances be fair and reasonable. The Committee however notes that the Labour Code fails to specify, as required by Article 4, paragraph 1, of the Convention, that the payment of wages in the form of liquor of high alcoholic content or of noxious drugs is prohibited under any circumstances. In this respect, it notes the Government’s reference to section 392 of the Labour Code, which establishes the penalties applicable to an employer who sets up taverns or outlets for drugs or gaming at the workplace. While this provision is undoubtedly positive for the protection of wages, it is not sufficient to give effect to Article 4, paragraph 2, of the Convention, which specifically covers arrangements for the partial payment of wages in kind. In the light of these explanations, the Committee hopes that the Government will adopt a provision in the very near future explicitly prohibiting the payment of wages in the form of noxious drugs or liquor of high alcoholic content, as required by the Convention.