Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2013, published 103rd ILC session (2014)

Labour Inspection (Agriculture) Convention, 1969 (No. 129) - France (Ratification: 1972)

The Committee refers to its comments relating to the Labour Inspection Convention, 1947 (No. 81), in so far as they also concern the application of the present Convention.

Articles 6(3) and 22 of the Convention. Additional duties assigned to labour inspectors in the context of combating the illegal employment of foreign workers. The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government that is common to the reports on the Convention and Convention No. 81. It also notes that, in 2011, according to the annual report, out of a total of 250 reports of infringements recorded in agricultural undertakings, 113 related to illegal work, 73 were concerned with safety and health, 40 with employment contracts and 14 with the work of the labour inspectorate (obstacles, abuse, prerogatives and resources). The Committee requests the Government to refer to its observation under Convention No. 81, and again asks it to take the measures requested with a view to limiting inspectors’ involvement in joint inspection operations with the police to an extent that is compatible with the objectives of the Convention.

Article 7(3). Integration of the system of labour inspection in agriculture into a common labour inspection system. The Committee notes the statement that, although the downward trend in the number of inspections in agricultural undertakings recorded in 2010 and 2011 following the merger of the departments remains a source of concern, the trend has reversed slightly, with a small increase in activity in 2011 following the measures taken. It further notes that the labour inspectorate in the overseas departments (DOM) has not been affected by the merger of departments and that the number of inspections increased over the 2010–11 period. The Committee further notes the Government’s statement that the drop in activity was not primarily attributable to the departments where an agricultural section of the inspectorate was not maintained or set up but rather to an under-evaluation of recorded activity relating to agriculture and the fact that dealing with the new sectors inspected took more time for the officials concerned than had been saved through the reduction in workload.

The Committee also notes that, according to the record of the meeting of the agriculture social partners attached to the Government’s report, the latter wish to have an up-to-date list of agricultural sections, and that the Labour Directorate-General (DGT) undertakes to update the list of contact officials for agriculture. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would continue to provide information on the measures taken to ensure that the labour inspection services remain visible and accessible to employers and workers in the agriculture sector, particularly in departments where an agricultural section of the inspectorate has not been maintained or set up (including Alpes-de-Haute Provence, Hautes-Alpes, Ariège, Corse-du-Sud, Creuse, Haute-Loire, Lozère, Nièvre, Hautes-Pyrénées, Territoire de Belfort and Val-d’Oise). The Government is also requested to provide statistical information on labour inspection in agriculture for the period covered by the next report.

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