Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2012, published 102nd ILC session (2013)

Labour Inspection Convention, 1947 (No. 81) - Sri Lanka (Ratification: 1956)

The Committee notes the observations made by the Lanka Jathika Estate Workers’ Union (LJEWU) dated 8 November 2011, and received by the Office on 2 December 2011, in which the trade union recalls the points it previously raised, and invites the Government to reply to the relevant comments made by the Committee in its last observation.

Article 12(1)(a) of the Convention. Right of inspectors to freely enter any workplace liable to inspection. According to the observations made by the LJEWU, labour inspections in export processing zones (EPZs) are restricted and require prior approval due to unwritten and undeclared concessions granted to investors by the Government. The Committee recalls that it noted, in its previous observation, the Government’s indications that labour inspectors have the right to freely enter workplaces in EPZs, without prior approval or notice to the Board of Investment. The Committee asks the Government to make any observations it deems appropriate in relation to the comments made by the LJEWU and to furnish relevant data, including on the number of announced and unannounced visits in EPZs and their results.

The Committee recalls that it requested the Government to report in 2013 on the issues raised in its previous observation which read as follows:

Articles 3, 8, 10, 11, 16, 20 and 21 of the Convention. Functioning of the labour inspection system. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the impact of the restructuring of the labour inspection system on the effective discharge of the labour inspection functions has not been evaluated yet. Nevertheless, the Government provides information on the number of workplaces liable to inspection (a total of 86,619), including information on their distribution by economic sector, and the number of workers employed therein (a total of 345,730).

The Committee notes the Government’s statement at the 100th Session of the International Labour Conference according to which further assistance is needed, particularly to help inspectors deal with the challenges of outsourcing, occupational safety and health (OSH), and working conditions in the informal economy. According to the Government, an intensive training programme for the numerous newly recruited labour inspectors is urgently needed. The Government also emphasized the need to use new technologies to assist labour inspection activities, especially in export processing zones (EPZs) (source: ILC 2011 Provisional Record No. 19, page 14). The Committee notes that ILO technical assistance is given in this framework for the training of labour inspectors.

The Committee also notes that according to the Government’s report and the annual inspection report, the number of inspections in factories has slightly decreased (from 4,197 in 2008/2009 to 4,074 in 2010/2011) even though the number of the staff of the labour inspectorate has continued to increase (from 544 officers in 2009 to 608 officers in 2011). It also observes that the Government has not yet provided any information on inspection visits in EPZs or the number of inspection visits in the different economic sectors even though it indicates that initial steps have been taken for the collection of data on this question.

The Committee once again asks the Government to provide detailed information on the impact of the restructuring of the labour inspection system on the effective discharge of labour inspection functions, including in EPZs, as soon as it is available.

The Committee requests the Government to keep the ILO informed of progress made in the collection of data and once again reiterates its requests under Articles 20 and 21 of the Convention for the publication of an annual inspection report containing information and data on the number of inspection visits in different sectors, including in EPZs, the violations detected and the penalties imposed with reference to the legal provisions concerned, cases brought to the courts and outcomes of the proceedings, number and subject of complaints investigated and results obtained.

Noting the information provided by the Government on the training of labour inspectors, the Committee requests the Government to continue to provide details in this regard and to indicate the impact of the technical assistance provided by the ILO in this area.

Recalling also from its previous comments that the Government had referred to the need for ILO technical assistance in relation to data collection, the Committee requests the Government to indicate any formal steps taken for the provision of such assistance and to indicate whether further assistance is needed in other areas.

Noting also that the number of female inspectors has further increased to 227 out of 608 labour inspectors (from 154 out of 544), the Committee once again requests the Government to indicate the impact of the recruitment of female labour inspectors in terms of the effective discharge of labour inspection functions in sectors with a predominantly female workforce, such as the textile sector, and to keep the ILO informed of progress made in terms of the further recruitment of female staff.

Finally, recalling that the number of labour inspectors increased, among other things, through the absorption of 178 field officers entrusted with the enforcement of the Employees’ Provident Fund Act (i.e. the social security law covering the private sector), the Committee notes with interest the figures provided on the number of cases filed and considerable amounts to be recovered for violations of the Act, and once again requests the Government to indicate the progress made in recovering social security contributions.

Article 11(1)(b). Travelling expenses. The Committee notes that the travelling allowance for labour inspectors, previously criticized as being inadequate by the LJEWU and the National Trade Union Federation (NTUF), has been increased from 10 Sri Lankan rupees (LKR) per mile (approximately US$0.09) to LKR12 per mile (approximately $0.108) by Public Administration Circular (PAC) No. 9 of 2010. However, PAC No. 9 of 2010, attached to the Government’s report, still provides for limitations on the mileage that is reimbursed, while it allows for exceptions in special cases to be decided upon by the Commissioner General of Labour. For example, the monthly reimbursement limit for a Labour Officer (District) is set at LKR5,750 (approximately $52.17), which the Committee understands to mean that labour inspectors at that grade are reimbursed for travel for up to 483 miles per month. The Committee asks the Government to provide information on the circumstances in which travel costs exceeding those set out in PAC No. 9 of 2010 are reimbursed. If available, please provide a copy of a reimbursement form and information on the average length of procedures for reimbursement.

Articles 3, 7, 9, 13, 14, 17, 21(f) and (g). Role of the labour inspectorate in the field of occupational safety and health. Statistics of industrial accidents and cases of occupational disease. Recalling from its previous comments, the observations made by the World Confederation of Labour (WCL) (WCL now merged into the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC)) and the NTUF on the persistent shortage of factory inspecting engineers, medical officers and occupational hygienists to carry out routine inspections in industrial enterprises. With regard to the commitment made by the Government in previous reports to develop the prevention side of labour inspection in the framework of the restructuring of the labour inspection system, the Committee notes that according to the Government, section 100 of the Factories Ordinance No. 45 of 1942 (FO) has been consolidated in order to make provision for the maintenance of health, safety and welfare of workers in factories and that the OSH staff has increased from 27 to 42, now encompassing 38 factory inspecting engineers, two medical officers and two research officers in order to carry out routine inspections in the various industrial sectors.

The Committee notes that the annual report of the labour inspection service for 2010 and 2011 provides no information on the activities of the labour inspectorate in the field of occupational safety and health, and indicates that no industrial accidents have been notified under the Factory Ordinance No. 45 of 1942, despite the fact that the same report also provides data on the total number of fatal accidents. The Committee notes from this data that fatal accidents have risen from 49 in 2008 to 62 in 2010 and non-fatal accidents have decreased from 1,525 in 2008 to 1,456 in 2010. It notes the Government’s statement that both fatal and non-fatal accidents are likely to be much higher due to deficiencies in reporting as well as the lack of coverage of the informal sector. Finally, the Committee notes that no information has been provided on the number of cases of occupational disease.

The Committee would like to recall that the activities of the labour inspectorate in the area of occupational safety and health should focus both on securing the enforcement of the relevant legislation (Article 3(1)(a)) and preventing industrial accidents and occupational diseases including through the provision of technical information and advice (Article 3(1)(b)), as well as measures with immediate executory force in the event of imminent danger to the health or safety of workers (Article 13(2)(b)). The Committee would like to draw the Government’s attention to the fact that the establishment of a system that ensures access of the labour inspectorate to information on industrial accidents and cases of occupational disease (Article 14) is essential to the development of the prevention policy to which the Government has committed itself in the framework of the restructuring of the labour inspection system. The Committee notes that even though sections 61 and 63 of the FO clearly indicate the cases and circumstances in which such incidents are to be notified to the District Factory Inspecting Engineer, it is essential in order for such a system to function effectively in practice, that comprehensive regulations exist on the procedure for notification and the penalties that apply in the event of negligence. In this regard, the Committee wishes to draw the Government’s attention to the ILO code of practice on the recording and notification of occupational accidents and diseases which offers guidance on the collection, recording and notification of reliable data and the effective use of such data for preventive action (available at www.ilo.org/safework/normative/codes/lang--en/docName--WCMS_107800/index.htm. The Committee also wishes to emphasize that labour inspectors can inform and sensitize employers and workers about the importance of notifying industrial accidents and cases of occupational disease so as to encourage compliance with the relevant legal provisions in pursuance of Article 3(1)(b) and of Paragraphs 6 and 7 of the Labour Inspection Recommendation, 1947 (No. 81).

The Committee once again requests the Government to provide detailed information on the labour inspection activities carried out in the area of OSH, including the adoption of measures with immediate executory force in the event of imminent danger to the health or safety of the workers. It also asks the Government, once again, to provide information on the difficulties encountered in enforcing OSH legislation vis-à-vis employers pursuant to the comments previously made by the NTUF.

Furthermore, the Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to ensure that the labour inspectorate is duly informed of industrial accidents and cases of occupational disease and that relevant statistics are included in the annual labour inspection report, in accordance with Article 21(f) and (g), if possible in the manner indicated in Paragraph 9(f) and (g) of Recommendation No. 81.

The Committee finally requests the Government, once again, to provide information on any arrangement to associate technical experts and specialists from the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health with the work of the labour inspectorate for the purpose of securing the enforcement of the legal provisions relating to the protection of the health and safety of workers and investigating the effects of processes, materials and methods of work on the health and safety of workers.

Articles 17 and 18. Amendments to legislative acts concerning enforcement procedures and dissuasive sanctions. The Committee previously noted that steps had been taken to update the fines and penal provisions in all legislative acts relating to conditions of work and had asked the Government to keep the ILO informed of the progress made in the adoption of the relevant bills. In this regard, it notes that amendments to the Industrial Disputes Act (IDA) have been approved by the Cabinet of Ministers and that the Bill has been submitted to Parliament. Further, it notes the Government’s indication that initial steps have been taken for the envisaged amendments to be introduced in the Wages Boards Ordinance so as to facilitate enforcement in cases of subcontracted work. The Committee asks the Government to continue to keep the ILO informed of any progress made in the adoption of the relevant bills, including with regard to the Shop and Office Employees’ Act, the Maternity Benefits Ordinance, and the Termination of Employment of Workmen (Special Provisions) Act.

The Committee is raising other points in a request addressed directly to the Government.

[The Government is asked to reply in detail to the present comments in 2013.]