Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2017, published 107th ILC session (2018)

Portugal

Labour Inspection Convention, 1947 (No. 81) (Ratification: 1962)
Labour Inspection (Agriculture) Convention, 1969 (No. 129) (Ratification: 1983)

In order to provide a comprehensive view of the issues relating to the application of the ratified Conventions on labour inspection, the Committee considers it appropriate to examine Conventions Nos 81 and 129 together.

The Committee notes the observations made by the Trade Union Association of Civil Servants of the Authority for Food and Economic Security (ASF–ASAE) received on 5 January 2016 and on 19 April 2017, concerning the status, conditions of service and work of market surveillance and food inspectors, who do not assume labour inspection functions within the meaning of the Convention.

Articles 3(1)(a) and (b) and (2) of Convention No. 81 and Articles 6(1)(a) and (b) and (3) of Convention No. 129. Labour inspection activities in the area of undeclared work. The Committee notes that pursuant to section 566 of the Labour Code, employers may only be “eligible” for the minimum fine under the Code where they settle any outstanding obligations towards workers. Noting the statistical information provided by the Government on cases concerning the payment of outstanding wages and social security benefits, the Committee requests the Government to provide relevant information on the enforcement of outstanding labour rights of undocumented foreign workers.

Articles 3(1)(a) and (b), 13, 17 and 18 of Convention No. 81 and Articles 6(1)(a) and (b), 22(1) and 24 of Convention No. 129. Distribution of inspection activities between advice and enforcement. The Committee notes the observations made by the General Confederation of Portuguese Workers – National Trade Unions (CGTP–IN) alleging that preference is given to preventive activities over control activities. In this respect, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that there has been no decrease in the number of labour inspections devoted solely to controlling compliance, and that monitoring and control have not been made secondary to information and awareness raising. The Government adds that the decrease in the number of labour inspections resulting in enforcement measures from 2014 to 2015 was due to a commitment of the Working Condition Authority (ACT) to the greater use of “non-coercive” measures (that is, information and advice, warnings, and notifications to take action). Noting the Government’s indication that the decrease in non-coercive measures was only temporary, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on how it is ensured that an appropriate balance is struck between the advisory functions of labour inspection, and its enforcement functions as part of a comprehensive compliance strategy.

Article 7 of Convention No. 81 and Article 9 of Convention No. 129. Training of labour inspectors. The Committee notes that the report of the tripartite committee set up to examine the representation alleging non-observance by Portugal of Convention No. 81, Convention No. 129, and the Occupational Safety and Health Convention, 1981 (No. 155), made under article 24 of the ILO Constitution by the Union of Labour Inspectors (SIT) adopted by the Governing Body at its 324th Session (June 2015) observed that the strategy paper of the ACT had identified the continuous adaptation of competencies in the context of change as one of the weaknesses of the ACT. In this respect, the Committee notes that the Government provides statistical information on the training provided to labour inspectors in 2013, 2014 and 2015 (including information on the subject matters, length and number of participants of training), and indicates that the training of labour inspectors includes innovative subjects, without providing further information, as requested by the tripartite committee, on any difficulties in this respect. The Committee requests the Government to indicate how the training provided has contributed to the continuous adaptation of competencies of labour inspectors and to provide information on the discussions undertaken with the social partners on the specific training needs of labour inspectors in light of current realities and labour market developments.

Article 11(1)(b) and (2) of Convention No. 81 and Article 15(1)(b) and (2) of Convention No. 129. Mechanisms to ensure the mobility and physical safety of labour inspectors. The Committee notes that the tripartite committee considered that the arrangements in the central and decentralized offices in principle ensured sufficient mobility for labour inspectors to carry out their duties. However, the tripartite committee also noted the allegations made by the SIT concerning the unsafe conditions of transport vehicles. The Committee requests the Government, in line with the tripartite committee, to take measures to ensure the physical safety of labour inspectors (such as the purchase of new vehicles or the regular maintenance of existing vehicles).

Article 11(2) of Convention No. 81 and Article 15(2) of Convention No. 129. Reimbursement of incidental expenses. The Committee notes that the tripartite committee observed the allegations made by the SIT that, in certain remote units of the ACT, expenses for inspection-related travel, such as parking costs, are not reimbursed. In this respect, the Committee notes the indications of the Government that all expenses incurred by labour inspectors in the discharge of their functions are reimbursed upon submission of a request and supporting documentation. The Government adds that the administrative procedure for reimbursement is standardized (inspectors must fill out a form and attach the corresponding bills or receipts) and governed by specific legislation. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the legislation referred to by the Government, which governs the reimbursement of expenses incurred in the duties of labour inspectors.

Articles 20 and 21 of Convention No. 81 and Articles 26 and 27 of Convention No. 129. Labour inspection statistics on the work of the labour inspection services in the Autonomous Regions of Madeira and the Azores. The Committee notes that the Government has communicated some statistical data in its 2013 and 2016 reports on labour inspection activities in the Autonomous Regions of Madeira and the Azores. Concerning agriculture, the Committee notes that while some statistics have been provided in relation to such activities in the Azores, no relevant information was provided in relation to Madeira. The Committee requests the Government to continue its efforts to ensure that information on the work of the inspection services in the autonomous regions of the Azores and Madeira is published and communicated to the ILO, preferably reflected in a separate part of the general labour inspection annual report, containing information on all the items listed in Article 21 of Convention No. 81 and Article 27 of Convention No. 129.

Issues specifically concerning agriculture

Articles 6(1)(a) and (b), 22, 23 and 24 of Convention No. 129. Labour inspection activities in the agricultural sector. Following its previous comment, the Committee notes that the agricultural sector continues to have a high rate of fatal occupational accidents and that a safety and health campaign in agriculture, animal production and forestry was therefore launched in 2012. The Committee requests the Government to refer in this regard to its comments under the Safety and Health in Agriculture Convention, 2001 (No. 184), in this regard.