Fee-Charging Employment Agencies Convention (Revised), 1949 (No. 96) - Pakistan (Ratification: 1952)

Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 1987, Publication: 73rd ILC session (1987)

A Government representative stated that no fee-charging employment agencies in violation of this Convention were operating in Pakistan. Overseas employment promoters only assisted persons going abroad by providing them with information about available jobs, conditions of employment in foreign countries, travel and visa requirements, etc. They did not recruit workers, who were interviewed by the foreign employer; these employers had the last say in the workers' selection or recruitment. There were about 300 overseas employment promoters in the country, but this number could vary. The duties of such promoters were closely supervised by the Bureau of Emigration and Overseas Employment which had offices throughout the country. A promoter's licence was issued for a one-year period, renewable the following year only if there had been no complaints or abuse of that licence. If the promoter was reported to have engaged in misconduct, the Bureau investigated him and brought charges before the courts which could punish him. A further safeguard against abuses by such promoters was the Bureau's power to cancel or refuse to renew the licence. Overseas employment promoters were providing a useful service in helping unemployed workers to find lucrative jobs outside the country. The system was thus working under very close supervision by a well-staffed government department.

The Workers' member noted that these explanations pointed to employment agencies conducted with a view to profit, contrary to Part II of the Convention. While in 1976 it had been noted with satisfaction that the Fee-Charging Employment Agencies (Regulation) Act had been adopted, the Act had not been brought into force in the various regions. A radical change was needed to bring the legislation and practice into conformity with this Convention.

The Employers' members recalled that there had been discussions in this Committee in the past on the same subject involving statements that this type of fee-charging agency did not exist at all. On the other hand, it had been said that they were gradually being dismantled; these were contradictions which could not be reconciled. Concrete measures were necessary to bring the legislation and the practice into conformity with the Convention.

The Government representative did not understand what was being objected to, because overseas employment promoters merely assisted people in getting jobs abroad. Abolition of such promoters would not help the workers. Today, these employment promoters had been instrumental in finding work for more than 1 million workers who were sending their foreign remittances back home to benefit the country and, more importantly, their families and dependants. The possibility of abuse was always present, but was checked and controlled by the Bureau involved in supervising the promotors' activities. Abuses could be punished even by imprisonment.

The Committee decided to include its conclusions on this case in a special paragraph of its report (see under Convention No. 111).

The Government representative queried the usefulness of giving long explanations when pre-formulated conclusions were handed down on the case. He requested an explanation of what was wrong with a system which was useful in providing employment to the unemployed as well as work for administrative employees. He regretted that the conclusions were adopted without any consideration of the explanation given.

The Chairman thought that this was a matter to be addressed to the Committee of Experts.

The representative of the Secretary-General indicated that Pakistan had ratified Part II of Convention No. 96 but had not implemented its provisions. The Committee's report would be sent immediately after the Conference to the all the members of the Committee of Experts and their attention would be drawn to the observations just made by the Government representative on this Convention. A precise reply to his question would appear in the next report of the Committee of Experts and could not be given here by the secretariat.

The Government member of the USSR noted the Chairman's statement that a question addressed to him and to the Committee by the Government representative of Pakistan could only be put to the Committee of Experts. Given what had just been said, he asked whether the present Committee could address questions to the Committee of Experts.

The Government representative agreed with the question just put and stressed that there would be no change prejudicial to the interest of the workers. He was pleased that this matter could be referred to the Committee of Experts because the members could come to Pakistan to evaluate the situation themselves. Until that time a definite conclusion might be suspended.

The Worker member of Pakistan noted that over the years the Workers' members had always tried to make a dispassionate study of the whole issue and to promote ways of improving the workers' welfare. When a government ratified a Convention, it undertook at the international level to bring its legislation into conformity with the ratified Convention. It would have been more appropriate for the Government to have sent a complete report on all the issues raised by the Experts over the last few years. He agreed that, particularly for Third World countries, employment promotion was a very important subject, but it should not be in the form of exploitation of workers.

The representative of the Secretary-General noted that a straightforward answer to the question posed by the Government member of the USSR was not easy. Referring to that speaker's intervention during the general discussion on the Committee of Experts' terms of reference and methods of work, he pointed out that the hierarchical description of the various supervisory bodies put forward by the Government member of the USSR had not been accepted by others. The representative of the Secretary- General repeated his assurance that this Committee's report and all the statements contain therein would be communicated to the members of the Committee of Experts for their careful study.

The Government member of the USSR noted that this explanation did not clarify the matter for him. The question which had arisen bore out the thesis of the ambiguity in the relationship between the two Committees.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2015, published 105th ILC session (2016)

Part II of the Convention. Progressive abolition of fee-charging employment agencies with a view to profit. The Government indicates in its report that efforts are being made to revive or where required to establish employment exchanges to comply with the provisions of the Convention. Employment exchanges are functional in Sindh and have also been established in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. The Committee notes in this regard that there are 17 employment exchanges in the Sindh Province. The Government further indicates that, after establishing employment exchanges in other provinces and in the Islamabad Capital Territory, steps will be taken to progressively abolish fee charging employment agencies. The Committee notes form the report that no specific period is specified by the Government for the abolition of fee-charging employment agencies because a comprehensive set-up of public employment service is not established in the country, which is a prerequisite for the initiation of the process of abolition of fee-charging agencies. It also notes the lack of harmonization of labour laws at the provincial level and the fact that efforts are needed to develop an institutional set-up in line with the Fee-Charging Employment Agencies (Regulation) Act, 1976. In reply to concerns raised by the Pakistan Workers’ Federation (PWF) concerning a lack of detailed data on existing employment services provided, the Government indicates that efforts are being made to put in place a mechanism for the collection of statistical information by the provincial governments for publication and reporting. It adds that requisite data will be made available in the next report. The Committee requests the Government to provide detailed information on the measures taken to establish a public employment service at the provincial level and on the number of public employment offices and the geographical areas they serve (Article 3(1) and (2)). It also requests the Government to provide information on the supervision of fee-charging agencies by the competent authority (Article 4(1)(a), (2) and (3)).

Revision of Convention No. 96. Prospects of ratification of Convention No. 181. The Committee previously highlighted the role that the Private Employment Agencies Convention, 1997 (No. 181), and the Private Employment Agencies Recommendation, 1997 (No. 188), play in the licensing and supervision of placement services for migrant workers and the role that Convention No. 181 attributes to private employment agencies for the functioning of the labour market (see General Survey concerning employment instruments, 2010, paragraph 730). The Committee also invited the Government to continue to report on the steps taken to ratify Convention No. 181. In reply to the observations made by the Committee, the Government indicates that the federal and provincial governments have notified the Tripartite Consultation Committees with a mandate to give recommendations concerning the ratification of ILO Conventions not yet ratified by Pakistan. The Committee notes that the matter is being examined and deliberated by the Tripartite Consultation Committees. The Committee therefore requests the Government to continue to report on the consultations held with the social partners concerning the ratification of the Private Employment Agencies Convention, 1997 (No. 181), the ratification of which would involve the immediate denunciation of Convention No. 96.

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

Progressive abolition of fee-charging employment agencies conducted with a view to profit. The Committee has noted for many years in relation to the abolition of fee-charging employment agencies, as required by Part II of the Convention, the Government’s indication that draft rules have been framed to regulate the operation of fee-charging employment agencies. The Committee notes that the Fee-Charging Employment Agencies (Regulation) Act, 1976, came into force on 1 January 2003, as stated in the Government’s report received in October 2012. The Government also indicates that licences for overseas employment promoters are renewed on a yearly basis and that their conduct is strictly supervised (Article 5(2)(b) and (d) of the Convention). The Committee recalls the observations made by the Pakistan Workers’ Federation (PWF) indicating that recruiting agencies have been exploiting prospective migrant workers. The Government states that the situation with respect to fee-charging agencies is not as grave as portrayed by the PWF. It also refers to Emigration Rule 15 and 15(A) which allows overseas employment operators to charge certain fees, including actual expenses incurred on air travel, medical expenses, work permit levies, visa fees and other documentation (Article 5(2)(c)). The Government further reports that the competent authorities are being requested to conduct a survey and report on the number of fee-charging agencies that have been abolished, penalized or found working in their respective areas of jurisdiction. The Committee invites the Government to provide in its next report detailed information on the following issues already raised in its previous comments:

• -the measures taken to progressively abolish fee-charging employment agencies (Part II of the Convention);
• -the numbers of public employment offices and the geographical areas they serve (Article 3(1) and (2)); and
• -the consultations of employers’ and workers’ organizations on the supervision of all fee-charging employment agencies (Article 4(1)(a), (2) and (3)).

Revision of Convention No. 96. Possibility of ratifying Convention No. 181. The Government indicates in its report received in October 2012 that consultation with the employers’ and workers’ organizations will be held on the basis of the results of the abovementioned survey on fee-charging employment agencies and that the social partners will consider whether there is a need to ratify the Private Employment Agencies Convention, 1997 (No. 181). In its previous comments on the application of the Convention, the Committee highlighted the role that Convention No. 181, and the Private Employment Agencies Recommendation, 1997 (No. 188), play in the licensing and supervision of placement services for migrant workers and the role that Convention No. 181 attributes to private employment agencies for the functioning of the labour market (see General Survey concerning employment instruments, 2010, paragraph 730). The Committee recalls the importance for member States to build or strive to build institutions necessary to ensure the realization of full employment (see General Survey, 2010, paragraph 786). The Committee hopes that the Government and the social partners will contemplate adhering to the obligations of Convention No. 181, the ratification of which involves the immediate denunciation of the Convention. It invites the Government to continue to report on steps taken, in consultation with the social partners, to ratify Convention No. 181.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2011, published 101st ILC session (2012)

The Committee notes the short statement submitted by the Government in June 2011 indicating that it is complying with the provisions of the Convention through the application of the Fee-Charging Employment Agencies (Regulation) Act, 1976. The Government further reports that the Act regulates employment agencies and licensing, and provides sanctions which may lead to imprisonment of up to one year. In its previous observations, the Committee recalled that in 1977 it noted the enactment of the Fee-Charging Employment Agencies (Regulation) Act, 1976, which provided for the licensing of fee-charging employment agencies and empowered public authorities to prohibit the establishment of fee-charging employment agencies in any area where the public employment service was operating. According to section 1(3), the Act would enter into force when the federal Government made an official notification in the Official Gazette. The Committee recalls the comments made by the All Pakistan Federation of Trade Unions (APFTU) in June 2005. The APFTU stated that agencies are allowed to charge fees for recruitment abroad and that some of them were involved in human trafficking. The Committee also noted the Pakistan Workers Federation’s (PWF) observations, forwarded to the Government in August 2010, indicating that recruiting agencies have been exploiting prospective migrant workers. The PWF urged the Government to ensure that the Fee-Charging Employment Agencies (Regulation) Act, 1976, enters into force in order to protect prospective migrant workers against exploitation and to set up free public employment exchange facilities for jobseekers. The Committee requests a copy of the Official Gazette indicating the enactment of the Fee-Charging Employment Agencies (Regulation) Act, 1976. The Committee also requests the Government to reply in detail to the following points raised in the previous observations.

Progressive abolition of fee-charging employment agencies conducted with a view to profit. Part II of the Convention. In its 2006 observation, the Committee noted that in relation to the abolition of fee-charging employment agencies, as required by Part II of the Convention, the Government reiterated that draft rules have been framed to regulate the operation of fee-charging employment agencies. The Government also confirmed that the licences for overseas employment promoters were granted for a period of one, two or three years. In relation to Article 9 of the Convention, the Government indicated that, due to the economic conditions of Pakistan, levies have been established for migrant workers. Therefore, the Government was not in a position to adopt a policy for abolishing fee-charging employment services for migrant workers. It also added that punitive action was taken against those overseas employment promoters that were involved in violations of the Emigration Ordinance, 1979, and the Emigration Rules, 1979. The Committee refers to its previous comments, noting again the lack of progress in achieving the abolition of fee-charging employment agencies. The Committee asks the Government to report on the following issues:

• -the measures taken to abolish fee-charging employment agencies;
• -the numbers of public employment offices and the geographical areas they serve (Article 3(1) and (2));
• -the consultations of employers’ and workers’ organizations on the supervision of all fee-charging employment agencies (Article 4(1)(a), (2) and (3));
• -with regard to overseas employment promoters, the measures taken to ensure that these agents may only benefit from a yearly licence renewable at the discretion of the competent authority (Article 5(2)(b)) and charge fees and expenses on a scale submitted to, and approved by, the competent authority (Article 5(2)(c));
• -with regard to placing and recruiting workers abroad, the conditions established by the laws and regulations in force for the operation of fee charging employment agencies (Article 5(2)(d)).

Revision of Convention No. 96. The Committee refers to its 2010 General Survey concerning employment instruments in which it recalled that public employment services and private agencies are both actors in the labour market. They should therefore mutually benefit from cooperation as their common aim is to ensure a well-functioning labour market and the achievement of full employment (paragraph 728). In Chapter III of the General Survey, the Committee noted that if private employment agencies operate in a particular labour market, this operation has to be regulated. Therefore, governmental action is required, either directly through a system of legislation, licensing or certification or, indirectly, by authorizing an existing national practice or one that is to be established (paragraph 237 et seq.). In its previous observations on Convention No. 96, the Committee has already highlighted the role that the Private Employment Agencies Convention, 1997 (No. 181), and the Private Employment Agencies Recommendation, 1997 (No. 188), play in the licensing and supervision of placement services for migrant workers and the role that Convention No. 181 attributes to private employment agencies for the functioning of the labour market (see paragraph 730 of the 2010 General Survey). Taking into account that the present situation is not in conformity with the provisions of Part II of Convention No. 96, the Committee hopes that the Government and the social partners will contemplate adhering to the obligations of the Private Employment Agencies Convention, 1997 (No. 181), the ratification of which involves the immediate denunciation of Convention No. 96. It invites the Government to report on steps taken, in consultation with the social partners, to ratify Convention No. 181.

[The Government is asked to reply in detail to the present comments in 2012.]

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2010, published 100th ILC session (2011)

The Committee notes with concern that the Government has not provided information on the application of the Convention since its last report received in February 2006. The Committee recalls that in 1977 it noted the enactment of the Fee Charging Employment Agencies (Regulation) Act, 1976, which provided for the licensing of fee-charging employment agencies and empowered public authorities to prohibit the establishment of fee-charging employment agencies in any area where the public employment service was operating. According to section 1(3), the Act would enter into force when the federal Government made an official notification in the Official Gazette. The Committee has requested several times that the Government take the necessary steps to bring the Act into force in order to achieve the aim of Part II of the Convention, which is the progressive abolition of fee-charging employment agencies conducted with a view to profit.

The Committee recalls the comments made by the All Pakistan Federation of Trade Unions (APFTU) on the application of the Convention, which were forwarded to the Government in June 2005. The APFTU stated that agencies are allowed to charge fees for recruitment abroad and that some of them were involved in human trafficking. The Committee notes the Pakistan Workers Federation’s (PWF) new observations, forwarded to the Government in August 2010, indicating that recruiting agencies have been exploiting prospective migrant workers. The PWF also urges the Government to ensure that the Fee-Charging Employment Agencies (Regulation) Act 1976, enters into force in order to protect  prospective migrant workers against exploitation and to set up free public employment exchange facilities for jobseekers.

Part II of the Convention. Progressive abolition of fee-charging employment agencies conducted with a view to profit. In its 2006 observation, the Committee noted that in relation to the abolition of fee-charging employment agencies, as required by Part II of the Convention, the Government reiterated that draft rules have been framed to regulate the operation of fee-charging employment agencies. The Government also confirmed that the licences for overseas employment promoters were granted for a period of one, two or three years. In relation to Article 9 of the Convention, the Government indicated that, due to the economic conditions of Pakistan, levies have been established for migrant workers. Therefore, the Government was not in a position to adopt a policy for abolishing fee-charging employment services for migrant workers. It also added that punitive action was taken against those overseas employment promoters that were involved in violations of the Emigration Ordinance, 1979, and the Emigration Rules, 1979. The Committee refers to its previous comments, noting again the lack of progress in achieving the abolition of fee-charging employment agencies. The Committee asks the Government to report on the following issues:

–      the measures taken to abolish fee-charging employment agencies;

–      the numbers of public employment offices and the geographical areas they serve (Article 3(1) and (2));

–      the consultations of employers’ and workers’ organizations  on the supervision of all fee-charging employment agencies (Article 4(1)(a), (2) and (3));

–      with regard to overseas employment promoters, the measures taken to ensure that these agents may only benefit from a yearly licence renewable at the discretion of the competent authority (Article 5(2)(b)) and charge fees and expenses on a scale submitted to, and approved by, the competent authority (Article 5(2)(c));

–      with regard to placing and recruiting workers abroad, the conditions established by the laws and regulations in force for the operation of fee-charging employment agencies (Article 5(2)(d)).

Revision of Convention No. 96. The Committee refers to its General Survey 2010 concerning employment instruments in which it recalled that public employment services and private agencies are both actors in the labour market. They should therefore mutually benefit from cooperation as their common aim is to ensure a well-functioning labour market and the achievement of full employment. In Chapter III of the General Survey, the Committee noted that if private employment agencies operate in a particular labour market, this operation has to be regulated. Therefore, governmental action is required, either directly through a system of legislation, licensing or certification or, indirectly, by authorizing an existing national practice or one that is to be established (paragraph 237 and subsequent of the 2010 General Survey). In its previous observations on Convention No. 96, the Committee has already highlighted the role that the Private Employment Agencies Convention, 1997 (No. 181), and Private Employment Agencies Recommendation, 1997 (No. 188), play in the licensing and supervision of placement services for migrant workers and the role that Convention No. 181 attributes to private employment agencies for the functioning of the labour market (see paragraph 730 of the 2010 General Survey). Taking into account that the present situation is not in conformity with the provisions of Part II of Convention No. 96, the Committee hopes that the Government and the social partners will contemplate adhering to the obligations of the Private Employment Agencies Convention, 1997 (No. 181), the ratification of which involves the immediate denunciation of Convention No. 96. It invites the Government to report on steps taken, in consultation with the social partners, to ratify Convention No. 181.

[The Government is asked to reply in detail to the present comments in 2011.]

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2009, published 99th ILC session (2010)

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It must therefore repeat its 2006 observation, which read as follows:

Part II of the Convention. Progressive abolition of fee-charging employment agencies conducted with a view to profit. The Government refers in a report received in February 2006 to the operation of the Overseas Employment Corporation (OEC), which operates in the public sector and has been able, to date, to dispatch 125,000 Pakistanis in various professions for employment abroad. The OEC is utilizing modern techniques by striving to obtain maximum job opportunities for Pakistanis abroad. Foreign employers are required to ensure completion of the necessary documentation and to seek permission from the concerned Protector of Emigrants. Foreign employers initiate the process of recruitment by inviting applications from the general public, including interviews and tests. Neither regional nor provincial quotas are followed in the selection of workers. The Government also states that the Overseas Employment Promoters (OEPs) operate in the private sector and have established an association, that is, the Pakistan Overseas Employment Promoters’ Association (POEPA), along with provincial and regional heads. The POEPA deals with the issues and grievances confronted by the OEPs while processing the recruitment of Pakistanis for placement abroad. There exists a close liaison between POEPA and the Ministry of Labour, Manpower and Overseas Pakistanis to resolve issues and problems that are faced from time to time. The Ministry – under section 12 of the Emigration Ordinance, 1979 – has issued 2,265 licences – out of which 1,180 are actively functioning in the recruitment business.

In relation to the abolition of fee-charging employment agencies, as required by Part II of the Convention, the Government reiterates that draft rules have been framed to regulate the operation of fee-charging employment agencies. The Government also confirms that the policy of renewal of licences for OEPs is made for a period of one, two or three years. In relation to Article 9 of the Convention, the Government indicates that due to the economic conditions of Pakistan, levies have been established for migrant workers. Therefore, the Government is not in a position to adopt a policy of abolishing fee-charging employment services for migrant workers. It also adds that punitive action is taken against those OEPs that are involved in violations of the Emigration Ordinance, 1979, and Emigration Rules, 1979.

The Committee recalls the comments made by the All Pakistan Federation of Trade Unions (APFTU) on the application of the Convention, which were forwarded to the Government in June 2005. The APFTU stated that agencies are allowed to charge fees for recruitment abroad and that some of them are involved in human trafficking.

The Committee also recalls that in 1977 it noted the enactment of the Fee‑Charging Employment Agencies (Regulation) Act, 1976, which provided for the licensing of fee-charging employment agencies and empowered the public authorities to prohibit all or any fee-charging employment agencies in any area where a public employment service has been set up. According to section 1(3) of the Act, the Act would come into full force when the federal Government notified the same in the Official Gazette. The Committee has from time to time requested the Government to take the necessary steps to bring the Act into operation in order to achieve the aim of Part II of the Convention, that is the progressive abolition of fee‑charging employment agencies conducted with a view to profit. Taking into account the lack of progress in achieving the abolition of fee-charging employment agencies, the Committee asks the Government to provide information in its next report on the following issues:

–      the measures taken to abolish fee-charging employment agencies, the numbers of public employment offices and the areas served by them (Article 3(1) and (2));

–      the measures taken to consult employers’ and workers’ organizations as regards the supervision of all fee-charging employment agencies (Article 4(3));

–      with regard to overseas employment promoters, the measures taken to ensure that these agents may only benefit from a yearly licence renewable at the discretion of the competent authority (Article 5(2)(b)) and charge fees and expenses on a scale submitted to and approved by the competent authority (Article 5(2)(c)).

Revision of Convention No. 96 and protection of migrant workers. The Committee recalls that, in March 2006, a Multilateral Framework on Labour Migration has been published by the ILO which includes non-binding principles and guidelines for a rights-based approach to labour migration. It provides particularly for the licensing and supervision of placement services for migrant workers in accordance with the Private Employment Agencies Convention, 1997 (No. 181), and its Recommendation (No. 188). Convention No. 181 recognizes the role played by private employment agencies in the functioning of the labour market. The ILO Governing Body invited the States parties to Convention No. 96 to contemplate ratifying, as appropriate, Convention No. 181, the ratification of which would involve the immediate denunciation of Convention No. 96 (document GB.273/LILS/4(Rev.1), 273rd Session, Geneva, November 1998). The Committee invites the Government to provide information on any developments which, in consultation with the social partners, might occur to ensure full application of the relevant international labour standards for the placing and recruitment of workers abroad (Article 5(2)(d) of the Convention).

The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the very near future.

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

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It must therefore repeat its 2006 observation, which read as follows:

1. Part II of the Convention. Progressive abolition of fee-charging employment agencies conducted with a view to profit. The Government refers in a report received in February 2006 to the operation of the Overseas Employment Corporation (OEC), which operates in the public sector and has been able, to date, to dispatch 125,000 Pakistanis in various professions for employment abroad. The OEC is utilizing modern techniques by striving to obtain maximum job opportunities for Pakistanis abroad. Foreign employers are required to ensure completion of the necessary documentation and to seek permission from the concerned Protector of Emigrants. Foreign employers initiate the process of recruitment by inviting applications from the general public, including interviews and tests. Neither regional nor provincial quotas are followed in the selection of workers. The Government also states that the Overseas Employment Promoters (OEPs) operate in the private sector and have established an association, that is, the Pakistan Overseas Employment Promoters’ Association (POEPA), along with provincial and regional heads. The POEPA deals with the issues and grievances confronted by the OEPs while processing the recruitment of Pakistanis for placement abroad. There exists a close liaison between POEPA and the Ministry of Labour, Manpower and Overseas Pakistanis to resolve issues and problems that are faced from time to time. The Ministry – under section 12 of the Emigration Ordinance, 1979 – has issued 2,265 licences – out of which 1,180 are actively functioning in the recruitment business.

2. In relation to the abolition of fee-charging employment agencies, as required by Part II of the Convention, the Government reiterates that draft rules have been framed to regulate the operation of fee-charging employment agencies. The Government also confirms that the policy of renewal of licences for OEPs is made for a period of one, two or three years. In relation to Article 9 of the Convention, the Government indicates that due to the economic conditions of Pakistan, levies have been established for migrant workers. Therefore, the Government is not in a position to adopt a policy of abolishing fee-charging employment services for migrant workers. It also adds that punitive action is taken against those OEPs that are involved in violations of the Emigration Ordinance, 1979, and Emigration Rules, 1979.

3. The Committee recalls the comments made by the All Pakistan Federation of Trade Unions (APFTU) on the application of the Convention, which were forwarded to the Government in June 2005. The APFTU stated that agencies are allowed to charge fees for recruitment abroad and that some of them are involved in human trafficking.

4. The Committee also recalls that in 1977 it noted the enactment of the Fee-Charging Employment Agencies (Regulation) Act, 1976, which provided for the licensing of fee-charging employment agencies and empowered the public authorities to prohibit all or any fee-charging employment agencies in any area where a public employment service has been set up. According to section 1(3) of the Act, the Act would come into full force when the federal Government notified the same in the Official Gazette. The Committee has from time to time requested the Government to take the necessary steps to bring the Act into operation in order to achieve the aim of Part II of the Convention, that is the progressive abolition of fee-charging employment agencies conducted with a view to profit. Taking into account the lack of progress in achieving the abolition of fee-charging employment agencies, the Committee asks the Government to provide information in its next report on the following issues:

–      the measures taken to abolish fee-charging employment agencies, the numbers of public employment offices and the areas served by them (Article 3, paragraphs 1 and 2);

–      the measures taken to consult employers’ and workers’ organizations as regards the supervision of all fee-charging employment agencies (Article 4, paragraph 3);

–      with regard to overseas employment promoters, the measures taken to ensure that these agents may only benefit from a yearly licence renewable at the discretion of the competent authority (Article 5, paragraph 2(b)) and charge fees and expenses on a scale submitted to and approved by the competent authority (Article 5, paragraph 2(c)).

5. Revision of Convention No. 96 and protection of migrant workers. The Committee recalls that, in March 2006, a Multilateral Framework on Labour Migration has been published by the ILO which includes non-binding principles and guidelines for a rights-based approach to labour migration. It provides particularly for the licensing and supervision of placement services for migrant workers in accordance with the Private Employment Agencies Convention, 1997 (No. 181), and its Recommendation (No. 188). Convention No. 181 recognizes the role played by private employment agencies in the functioning of the labour market. The ILO Governing Body invited the States parties to Convention No. 96 to contemplate ratifying, as appropriate, Convention No. 181, the ratification of which would involve the immediate denunciation of Convention No. 96 (document GB.273/LILS/4(Rev.1), 273rd Session, Geneva, November 1998). The Committee invites the Government to keep it informed of any developments which, in consultation with the social partners, might occur to ensure full application of the relevant international labour standards for the placing and recruitment of workers abroad (Article 5, paragraph 2(d), of the Convention).

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2006, published 96th ILC session (2007)

1. Part II of the Convention. Progressive abolition of fee-charging employment agencies conducted with a view to profit. The Government refers in a report received in February 2006 to the operation of the Overseas Employment Corporation (OEC), which operates in the public sector and has been able, to date, to dispatch 125,000 Pakistanis in various professions for employment abroad. The OEC is utilizing modern techniques by striving to obtain maximum job opportunities for Pakistanis abroad. Foreign employers are required to ensure completion of the necessary documentation and to seek permission from the concerned Protector of Emigrants. Foreign employers initiate the process of recruitment by inviting applications from the general public, including interviews and tests. Neither regional nor provincial quotas are followed in the selection of workers. The Government also states that the Overseas Employment Promoters (OEPs) operate in the private sector and have established an association, that is, the Pakistan Overseas Employment Promoters’ Association (POEPA), along with provincial and regional heads. The POEPA deals with the issues and grievances confronted by the OEPs while processing the recruitment of Pakistanis for placement abroad. There exists a close liaison between POEPA and the Ministry of Labour, Manpower and Overseas Pakistanis to resolve issues and problems that are faced from time to time. The Ministry – under section 12 of the Emigration Ordinance, 1979 – has issued 2,265 licences – out of which 1,180 are actively functioning in the recruitment business.

2. In relation to the abolition of fee-charging employment agencies, as required by Part II of the Convention, the Government reiterates that draft rules have been framed to regulate the operation of fee-charging employment agencies. The Government also confirms that the policy of renewal of licences for OEPs is made for a period of one, two or three years. In relation to Article 9 of the Convention, the Government indicates that due to the economic conditions of Pakistan, levies have been established for migrant workers. Therefore, the Government is not in a position to adopt a policy of abolishing fee-charging employment services for migrant workers. It also adds that punitive action is taken against those OEPs that are involved in violations of the Emigration Ordinance, 1979, and Emigration Rules, 1979.

3. The Committee recalls the comments made by the All Pakistan Federation of Trade Unions (APFTU) on the application of the Convention, which were forwarded to the Government in June 2005. The APFTU stated that agencies are allowed to charge fees for recruitment abroad and that some of them are involved in human trafficking.

4. The Committee also recalls that in 1977 it noted the enactment of the Fee-Charging Employment Agencies (Regulation) Act, 1976, which provided for the licensing of fee-charging employment agencies and empowered the public authorities to prohibit all or any fee-charging employment agencies in any area where a public employment service has been set up. According to section 1(3) of the Act, the Act would come into full force when the federal Government notified the same in the Official Gazette. The Committee has from time to time requested the Government to take the necessary steps to bring the Act into operation in order to achieve the aim of Part II of the Convention, that is the progressive abolition of fee-charging employment agencies conducted with a view to profit. Taking into account the lack of progress in achieving the abolition of fee-charging employment agencies, the Committee asks the Government to provide information in its next report on the following issues:

–      the measures taken to abolish fee-charging employment agencies, the numbers of public employment offices and the areas served by them (Article 3, paragraphs 1 and 2);

–      the measures taken to consult employers’ and workers’ organizations as regards the supervision of all fee-charging employment agencies (Article 4, paragraph 3);

–      with regard to overseas employment promoters, the measures taken to ensure that these agents may only benefit from a yearly licence renewable at the discretion of the competent authority (Article 5, paragraph 2(b)) and charge fees and expenses on a scale submitted to and approved by the competent authority (Article 5, paragraph 2(c)).

5. Revision of Convention No. 96 and protection of migrant workers. The Committee recalls that, in March 2006, a Multilateral Framework on Labour Migration has been published by the ILO which includes non-binding principles and guidelines for a rights-based approach to labour migration. It provides particularly for the licensing and supervision of placement services for migrant workers in accordance with the Private Employment Agencies Convention, 1997 (No. 181), and its Recommendation (No. 188). Convention No. 181 recognizes the role played by private employment agencies in the functioning of the labour market. The ILO Governing Body invited the States parties to Convention No. 96 to contemplate ratifying, as appropriate, Convention No. 181, the ratification of which would involve the immediate denunciation of Convention No. 96 (document GB.273/LILS/4(Rev.1), 273rd Session, Geneva, November 1998). The Committee invites the Government to keep it informed of any developments which, in consultation with the social partners, might occur to ensure full application of the relevant international labour standards for the placing and recruitment of workers abroad (Article 5, paragraph 2(d), of the Convention).

[The Government is asked to report in detail to the present comments in 2008.]

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2005, published 95th ILC session (2006)

1. The Committee notes the comments made by the All Pakistan Federation of Trade Unions (APFTU) on the application of the Convention which were forwarded to the Government in June 2005. The APFTU states that agencies are allowed to charge fees for recruitment abroad and that some of them are involved in human trafficking. The Committee invites the Government to reply to the said comments (Article 5, paragraph 2(d), of the Convention).

2. In addition, the Committee notes with regret that the Government’s report has not been received. It must therefore repeat its 1999 observation which read as follows:

Part II of the Convention. 1. The Committee recalls that it had in particular requested the Government to give details of the measures taken with a view to adopting the draft Rules under the Fee-Charging Employment Agencies (Regulation) Act, 1976, to which the Government had referred for many years, so as to undertake the abolition of fee-charging employment agencies "within a limited period of time", but not "until a public employment service is established", in accordance with Article 3 of the Convention. The Committee urges the Government to take the necessary measures in the near future and to report on the progress towards achieving adoption of the Rules.

2. The Committee noted the information regarding measures taken to supervise overseas employment promoters under the Emigration Ordinance of 1979 and rules there under. It noted that a license was issued to these agencies for an initial period of three years, then renewed for periods which vary depending on the way in which the agencies operate. The Committee recalls that, under Article 5, paragraph 2(b), of the Convention, these agencies are required to be in possession of a yearly licence renewable at the discretion of the competent authority. It asks the Government to indicate in its next report the measures taken or envisaged to give full effect to this provision of the Convention in respect of overseas employment promoters.

3. The Committee noted the information regarding penalties imposed on overseas employment promoters following contraventions. It asks the Government to continue to supply such information and also to include the information required under Article 9 of the Convention on the number of these agencies, as well as on the nature and volume of their activities. Please supply all available information on the application of the Convention in practice (Part V of the report form).

3. Finally, the Committee recalls that the ILO Governing Body invites the States parties to Convention No. 96 to contemplate ratifying, as appropriate, the Private Employment Agencies Convention, 1997 (No. 181), the ratification of which will, ipso jure, involve the immediate denunciation of Convention No. 96 (document GB.273/LILS/4(Rev.1), 273rd Session, Geneva, November 1998).

[The Government is asked to reply in detail to the present comments in 2006.]

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2004, published 93rd ILC session (2005)

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It must therefore repeat its 1999 observation which read as follows:

Part II of the Convention. 1. The Committee takes note of the information supplied by the Government in its report in reply to its previous observation. The Committee recalls that it had in particular requested the Government to give details of the measures taken with a view to adopting the draft Rules under the Fee-Charging Employment Agencies (Regulation) Act, 1976, to which the Government had referred for many years, so as to undertake the abolition of fee-charging employment agencies "within a limited period of time", but not "until a public employment service is established", in accordance with Article 3 of the Convention. The Committee regrets to note that the report contains no signs of progress on this matter. The Committee urges the Government to take the necessary measures in the near future and to report on the progress towards achieving adoption of the Rules.

2. The Committee notes the information regarding measures taken to supervise overseas employment promoters under the Emigration Ordinance of 1979 and rules there under. It notes that a licence is issued to these agencies for an initial period of three years, then renewed for periods which vary depending on the way in which the agencies operate. The Committee recalls that, under Article 5, paragraph 2(b), of the Convention, these agencies are required to be in possession of a yearly licence renewable at the discretion of the competent authority. It asks the Government to indicate in its next report the measures taken or envisaged to give full effect to this provision of the Convention in respect of overseas employment promoters.

3. The Committee notes the information regarding penalties imposed on overseas employment promoters following contraventions. It asks the Government to continue to supply such information and also to include the information required under Article 9 of the Convention on the number of these agencies, as well as on the nature and volume of their activities. Please supply all available information on the application of the Convention in practice (Part V of the report form).

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1999, published 88th ILC session (2000)

Part II of the Convention. 1. The Committee takes note of the information supplied by the Government in its report in reply to its previous observation. The Committee recalls that it had in particular requested the Government to give details of the measures taken with a view to adopting the draft Rules under the Fee-Charging Employment Agencies (Regulation) Act, 1976, to which the Government had referred for many years, so as to undertake the abolition of fee-charging employment agencies "within a limited period of time", but not "until a public employment service is established", in accordance with Article 3 of the Convention. The Committee regrets to note that the report contains no signs of progress on this matter. The Committee urges the Government to take the necessary measures in the near future and to report on the progress towards achieving adoption of the Rules.

2. The Committee notes the information regarding measures taken to supervise overseas employment promoters under the Emigration Ordinance of 1979 and rules thereunder. It notes that a licence is issued to these agencies for an initial period of three years, then renewed for periods which vary depending on the way in which the agencies operate. The Committee recalls that, under Article 5, paragraph 2(b), of the Convention, these agencies are required to be in possession of a yearly licence renewable at the discretion of the competent authority. It asks the Government to indicate in its next report the measures taken or envisaged to give full effect to this provision of the Convention in respect of overseas employment promoters.

3. The Committee notes the information regarding penalties imposed on overseas employment promoters following contraventions. It asks the Government to continue to supply such information and also to include the information required under Article 9 of the Convention on the number of these agencies, as well as on the nature and volume of their activities. Please supply all available information on the application of the Convention in practice (Part V of the report form).

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1997, published 86th ILC session (1998)

The Committee notes with regret that the report provided by the Government contains no reply to its previous comments. It must therefore repeat its previous observation which read as follows:

Part II of the Convention. 1. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in reply to its earlier comments. The Government states, as in its previous reports since 1987, that the provincial governments have been urgently asked for their views and comments on the draft Rules under the Fee-Charging Employment Agencies (Regulation) Act, 1976, and that every effort is being made to accomplish this work. The Committee observes, however, that the Act has not yet been brought into operation. With reference to the comments the Committee has been making over a number of years on the same subject, it trusts that the Government will not fail to take the necessary measures with a view to bring the Act into operation in the nearest future in order to give legislative effect to the requirement of the Convention concerning the abolition of fee-charging employment agencies "within a limited period of time", but not "until a public employment service is established" (Article 3 of the Convention). 2. In its previous comments, the Committee noted the observations made in October 1993, and reiterated in October 1994, by the All-Pakistan Federation of Trade Unions stating that effective measures should be taken regarding supervision of agencies for recruiting workers abroad. It asked the Government to make its comments on the matters raised in these observations. The Government states in its reply that the present socio-economic conditions in the country do not permit it to abolish overseas employment-promoting agencies. The Government describes the arrangements made under the Emigration Ordinance of 1979 and Rules made thereunder for supervision of the Overseas Employment Promoters, the licensing system and the fixing of fees they are allowed to charge. The Committee notes this information. It would be grateful if the Government would continue to supply, in its future reports, any relevant information on the fee-charging employment agencies for which exceptions are allowed under Article 5 of the Convention, as required under Article 9 of the Convention (number of agencies concerned, scope of their activities, reasons for the exceptions, supervision of their activities). 3. The Committee reiterates its request to the Government to give a general appreciation of the manner in which the Convention is applied, including, for instance, extracts from official reports, information regarding the number and nature of the contraventions reported, and any other particulars bearing on the practical application of the Convention, as required by point V of the report form.

The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the very near future.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1996, published 85th ILC session (1997)

The Committee notes that the report provided by the Government contains no reply to its previous comments. It must therefore repeat its previous observation which read as follows:

Part II of the Convention. 1. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in reply to its earlier comments. The Government states, as in its previous reports since 1987, that the provincial governments have been urgently asked for their views and comments on the draft Rules under the Fee-Charging Employment Agencies (Regulation) Act, 1976, and that every effort is being made to accomplish this work. The Committee observes, however, that the Act has not yet been brought into operation. With reference to the comments the Committee has been making over a number of years on the same subject, it trusts that the Government will not fail to take the necessary measures with a view to bring the Act into operation in the nearest future in order to give legislative effect to the requirement of the Convention concerning the abolition of fee-charging employment agencies "within a limited period of time", but not "until a public employment service is established" (Article 3 of the Convention). 2. In its previous comments, the Committee noted the observations made in October 1993, and reiterated in October 1994, by the All-Pakistan Federation of Trade Unions stating that effective measures should be taken regarding supervision of agencies for recruiting workers abroad. It asked the Government to make its comments on the matters raised in these observations. The Government states in its reply that the present socio-economic conditions in the country do not permit it to abolish overseas employment-promoting agencies. The Government describes the arrangements made under the Emigration Ordinance of 1979 and Rules made thereunder for supervision of the Overseas Employment Promoters, the licensing system and the fixing of fees they are allowed to charge. The Committee notes this information. It would be grateful if the Government would continue to supply, in its future reports, any relevant information on the fee-charging employment agencies for which exceptions are allowed under Article 5 of the Convention, as required under Article 9 of the Convention (number of agencies concerned, scope of their activities, reasons for the exceptions, supervision of their activities). 3. The Committee reiterates its request to the Government to give a general appreciation of the manner in which the Convention is applied, including, for instance, extracts from official reports, information regarding the number and nature of the contraventions reported, and any other particulars bearing on the practical application of the Convention, as required by point V of the report form.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1995, published 82nd ILC session (1995)

Part II of the Convention. 1. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in reply to its earlier comments. The Government informs, as in its previous reports since 1987, that the provincial governments have been requested for expeditious supply of their views and comments on the draft Rules under the Fee-Charging Employment Agencies (Regulation) Act, 1976, and that every effort is being made to accomplish this work. The Committee observes, however, that the Act has not yet been brought into operation. With reference to the comments the Committee has been making over a number of years on the same subject, it trusts that the Government will not fail to take the necessary measures with a view to bring the Act into operation in the nearest future in order to give legislative effect to the requirement of the Convention concerning the abolition of fee-charging employment agencies "within a limited period of time", but not "until a public employment service is established" (Article 3 of the Convention).

2. In its previous comments, the Committee noted the observations made in October 1993, and reiterated in October 1994, by the All-Pakistan Federation of Trade Unions stating that effective measures should be taken regarding supervision of agencies for recruiting workers abroad. It asked the Government to make its comments on the matters raised in these observations. The Government states in its reply that the present socio-economic conditions in the country do not permit it to abolish overseas employment-promoting agencies. The Government describes the arrangements made under the Emigration Ordinance of 1979 and Rules made thereunder for supervision of the Overseas Employment Promoters, the licensing system and the fixing of fees they are allowed to charge. The Committee notes this information. It would be grateful if the Government would continue to supply, in its future reports, any relevant information on the fee-charging employment agencies for which exceptions are allowed under Article 5 of the Convention, as required under Article 9 of the Convention (number of agencies concerned, scope of their activities, reasons for the exceptions, supervision of their activities).

3. The Committee reiterates its request to the Government to give a general appreciation of the manner in which the Convention is applied, including, for instance, extracts from official reports, information regarding the number and nature of the contraventions reported, and any other particulars bearing on the practical application of the Convention, as required by point V of the report form.

[The Government is asked to report in detail in 1996.]

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1994, published 81st ILC session (1994)

Part II of the Convention. 1. In its report for the period July 1991-June 1992, the Government indicates once again, as in its previous reports since 1987, that the draft Rules under the Fee-Charging Employment Agencies (Regulation) Act, 1976, have been formulated and circulated to the provincial governments for their comments. The Government repeats that these Rules still have not been finalized. The Committee notes that the Government's report due for the period ending 30 June 1993 has not been received. It must therefore reiterate its hope that the Government will not fail to take the necessary measures with a view to bring the Act into operation in the nearest future in order to give legislative effect to the requirement of the Convention concerning the abolition of fee-charging employment agencies "within a limited period of time", but not "until a public employment service is established" (Article 3 of the Convention).

2. In its earlier comments, the Committee also noted the information supplied by the Government as regards the regulation of the "overseas employment promoters", under the Emigration Ordinance, 1979, and Rules made thereunder. It notes the observations made in October 1993 by the All Pakistan Federation of Trade Unions stating that effective measures should be taken with a view to supervision of agencies for recruiting the workers abroad. The Committee therefore would be grateful if the Government would make its observations on the matters raised in this communication and, more generally, would continue to supply, in its future reports, any relevant information on the fee-charging employment agencies for which exceptions are allowed under Article 5 of the Convention, as required under Article 9 of the Convention (number of agencies concerned, scope of their activities, reasons for the exceptions, supervision of their activities).

3. Please give a general appreciation of the manner in which the Convention is applied, including, for instance, extracts from official reports, information regarding the number and nature of the contraventions reported, and any other particulars bearing on the practical application of the Convention, as required by point V of the report form.

[The Government is asked to supply full particulars to the Conference at its 81st Session and to report in detail for the period ending 30 June 1994.]

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1993, published 80th ILC session (1993)

Part II of the Convention. The Committee takes note of the Government's reply to its earlier comments. The Government indicates, as in its previous reports since 1987, that draft Rules under the Fee-Charging Employment Agencies (Regulation) Act, 1976, have been formulated and circulated to the provincial governments for their comments. The Committee notes that these rules are yet to be finalized. It therefore once again expresses the hope that the Government will not fail to take the necessary measures to bring the Act into operation in the very near future in order to give legislative effect to the requirement of the Convention concerning the abolition of fee-charging employment agencies "within a limited period of time", but not "until a public employment service is established" (Article 3 of the Convention).

In its earlier comments, the Committee also noted the information supplied by the Government as regards the regulation of the "overseas employment promoters", under the Emigration Ordinance, 1979 and rules made thereunder. It asks the Government to continue to supply, in its reports, any relevant information on the fee-charging employment agencies for which exceptions are allowed under Article 5 of the Convention, as required under Article 9 of the Convention (number of agencies concerned, scope of their activities, reasons for the exceptions, supervision of their activities).

Finally, the Committee would be grateful if the Government would give a general appreciation of the manner in which the Convention is applied, in reply to point V of the report form.

[The Committee asks the Government to report in detail for the period ending 30 June 1993.]

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1992, published 79th ILC session (1992)

The Committee notes with regret that the Government's report has not been received. It must therefore repeat its previous observation which read as follows:

Part II of the Convention. The Committee took note of the information supplied by the Government in its report. It also noted the information provided to the Conference Committee and the discussion on that occasion. The Committee noted in particular from the Government's report that the Provincial Governments had been requested to let the Federal Government have their views with regard to the application of the Fee-Charging Employment Agencies (Regulation) Act, 1976, in the different parts of the country. Further to its earlier comments, the Committee cannot but reiterate the hope that the Government will take the necessary measures to bring the Act into operation at an early date, or will adopt any other relevant provision, to give legislative effect to the requirement of the Convention, concerning the abolition of fee-charging employment agencies (Article 3 of the Convention). The Committee also noted the information supplied by the Government as regards the regulation of the "overseas employment promoters", under the Emigration Ordinance, 1979 and Rules made thereunder. It would be grateful if the Government would continue to supply, in its future reports, any relevant information on the fee-charging employment agencies for which exceptions are allowed under Article 5 of the Convention, as required under Article 9 of the Convention and point V of the report form.

The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the very near future.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1990, published 77th ILC session (1990)

The Committee notes that the Government's report has not been received. It must therefore repeat its previous observation which read as follows:

Part II of the Convention. The Committee took note of the information supplied by the Government in its report. It also noted the information provided to the Conference Committee and the discussion on that occasion. The Committee noted in particular from the Government's report that the Provincial Governments had been requested to let the Federal Government have their views with regard to the application of the Fee-Charging Employment Agencies (Regulation) Act, 1976, in the different parts of the country. Further to its earlier comments, the Committee cannot but reiterate the hope that the Government will take the necessary measures to bring the Act into operation at an early date, or will adopt any other relevant provision, to give legislative effect to the requirement of the Convention, concerning the abolition of fee-charging employment agencies (Article 3 of the Convention). The Committee also noted the information supplied by the Government as regards the regulation of the "overseas employment promoters", under the Emigration Ordinance, 1979 and Rules made thereunder. It would be grateful if the Government would continue to supply, in its future reports, any relevant information on the fee-charging employment agencies for which exceptions are allowed under Article 5 of the Convention, as required under Article 9 of the Convention and point V of the report form.

TEXT

The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the very near future.