Labour Inspection Convention, 1947 (No. 81) - Cameroon (Ratification: 1962)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2022, published 111st ILC session (2023)

The Committee notes the observations of the Cameroon Workers’ Trade Union Confederation (CSTC), received on 31 August 2022.

Articles 3(1)(b), 10, 11 and 16 of the Convention. Human and material resources necessary for the discharge of the duties of the labour inspectorate. The Committee notes the Government’s indication, in reply to its previous comment on human, financial and material resources allocated to the labour inspectorate, that the labour inspectorate has 186 employees (183 in 2018). The Government also indicates that it has installed a fibre-optic local IT network interconnecting Yaoundé and the regional branches of the Ministry of Labour and Social Security (Ministry of Labour). The Government also states that eight vehicles have been purchased, making a total of 20 vehicles for the regional labour inspection units. According to the Government, nearly 684,536,800 CFA francs (about 1 million US dollars) have been allocated for inspections (information collected in 2019). As regards the number of inspections, the Government indicates that these increased from 2,787 in 2017 to 6,829 in 2021. In 2021, more than 55 per cent of these inspections were carried out in the wholesale and retail trade, restaurants and hotels, and also in services for the community, social services and personal services. The Committee also notes that, according to the CSTC, there is an absence of inspectors on the ground, which also means an absence of inspection activity in the informal economy. The Committee requests the Government to continue providing information on the number of labour inspectors, including information on their distribution in the regions, departments and districts. The Committee also requests the Government to continue providing information on the material resources allocated to labour inspectors. It further requests the Government to indicate the measures taken to ensure that labour inspectors supply technical information and advice to employers and workers, including in the informal economy, concerning the most effective means of complying with the legal provisions, in accordance with Article 3(1)(b) of the Convention.

Articles 3(1)(a), 6, 15(a) and 18. Status, conditions of service, integrity, independence and impartiality of labour inspectors. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that labour inspectors are public servants within the labour administration and that sometimes contractual employees of the administration with a certain record of service are appointed to these posts. Since no specific information has been provided on this subject, the Committee once again requests the Government to provide details regarding the period of appointment of labour inspectors, and on their conditions of service at the central, regional, departmental and district levels. In this regard, it requests the Government to provide information on salary scales and career prospects for labour inspectors, and to draw up a comparison with officials in other departments who perform similar duties, such as tax inspectors and police officers. The Committee also requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to provide labour inspectors with conditions of service such as to ensure that they are independent of improper external influences, as required by Article 6 of the Convention, and to give effect, in law and practice, to Article 15(a) of the Convention, which prohibits inspectors from having any direct or indirect interest in the undertakings under their supervision. The Committee further requests the Government to provide information on the conditions of service of contractual employees of the administration with a certain record of service and on the measures taken to ensure their independence and impartiality.

Article 3. Further duties entrusted to labour inspectors. Conciliation. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that labour inspectors continue to perform conciliation functions related to individual and collective disputes, and that the number of individual disputes was very high between 2017 and 2019 (8,580 in 2017 and 10,254 in 2019) but that thanks to the efforts of the labour inspectors this number decreased in 2020 and 2021. However, the Committee notes that this number remains very high, with 7,737 individual dispute cases in 2020 and 7,366 cases in 2021. The Committee recalls once again that, under Article 3(1)(a) and (2) of the Convention, the function of the system of labour inspection shall be to secure the enforcement of the legal provisions relating to conditions of work and the protection of workers while engaged in their work, and that any further duties entrusted to labour inspectors shall not be such as to interfere with the effective discharge of their primary duties. In its 2006 General Survey on labour inspection, paragraphs 72–74, the Committee considered that the time spent on conciliation may be detrimental to the discharge of primary inspection duties, as defined in Article 3(1) of the Convention, particularly when resources are limited. The Committee once again requests the Government to take the necessary steps as soon as possible to ensure that, in accordance with Article 3(2), any further duties entrusted to labour inspectors shall not be such as to interfere with the effective discharge of their primary duties, and to provide information on all progress made in this regard.

Article 4. Supervision and control of labour inspection by a central authority. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that labour inspectors organize joint inspections with other departments performing similar activities. Noting the absence of detailed information on this matter, the Committee once again requests the Government to provide information on the measures taken or envisaged to ensure the coordination of all the units with labour inspection duties and powers under the supervision and control of the Ministry of Labour and Social Security and to address the problems of overlapping functions between labour inspectors and officials of the National Social Welfare Fund (CNPS).

Article 7. Training of labour inspectors. The Committee notes that the Government, in its report on the Asbestos Convention, 1986 (No. 162), requests technical assistance from the Office to provide training for labour inspectors with regard to asbestos. Referring to its comments in relation to Convention No. 162, the Committee takes note of this request for technical assistance and expresses the hope that this assistance will be provided in the near future.

Articles 12 and 13. Powers of labour inspectors.In the absence of information on this matter, and referring to its previous comments, the Committee urges the Government to indicate whether the Ministry of Labour and Social Security’s user guide is still in force and, if so, whether it has been modified to ensure that labour inspectors provided with proper credentials are empowered to enter freely and without previous notice at any hour of the day or night any workplace liable to inspection, in accordance with Article 12(1)(a) of the Convention.

Article 18. Adequate and effectively enforced penalties. The Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that labour inspectors recorded 55 infringements in 2020 and 26 in 2021. The Government also indicates that the number of enforcement notices has increased considerably, from 489 in 2017 to 1,917 in 2021. The Committee notes the CSTC’s claim in its observations that employers often wilfully ignore the infringement reports drawn up by labour inspectors and court decisions in favour of workers and that the latter are thus unable to assert their rights. The CSTC recommends that the Government should commit to implementing a more coercive process with regard to labour disputes in order to secure the observance of workers’ rights by employers. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments in this respect. The Committee also requests the Government to provide information on the measures taken to ensure the imposition of adequate penalties for violations of the legal provisions enforceable by labour inspectors. It further requests the Government to provide information on the number of infringements recorded, penalties imposed and the amount of fines collected.

Articles 20 and 21. Annual inspection report. The Committee notes that the Government’s report contains information on the number of labour inspectors, the number of inspections and the number of infringements recorded. However, the Committee once again notes that no inspection report has been received by the ILO. The Committee therefore requests the Government to take the necessary steps to publish and communicate to the Office, in accordance with Article 20 of the Convention, an annual labour inspection report containing the information required by Article 21(a)–(g).

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

The Committee notes the observations of the General Union of Workers of Cameroon (UGTC), received on 12 November 2012, and the Government’s communication on this subject, received on 25 February 2013.

The Committee also notes the new observations of the UGTC, received on 25 September 2015 and the Government’s response to the observations received on 2 December 2015. The Committee will examine the observations of the UGTC and the Government’s response thereto in due course. The Committee also notes the observations of the Cameroon United Workers Confederation (CTUC), received on 28 September 2015. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments on the observations of the CTUC.

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government on the effect given to Articles 5(b) and 7 of the Convention, concerning cooperation between labour inspectors and the social partners and the training of labour inspectors, respectively.

Articles 3(1), 10, 11 and 16 of the Convention. Human and material resources necessary for the discharge of the duties of the labour inspectorate. In its previous comment, the Committee requested the Government to provide information on the number of labour inspectors and the resources, including transport facilities, available to them in the various regional directorates, and on the measures introduced or envisaged to strengthen the labour inspectorate, particularly with regard to occupational safety and health (OSH). The Committee notes that the UGTC, in its observations of 2012, while recognizing the Government’s efforts to improve the working conditions of labour inspectors, considered that much still had to be done regarding the number of inspectors. The Government indicates in its report that there are ten labour inspectors in the central and coastal regions, five in each of the other regions, three in the departments and two in the arrondissements. Moreover, eight of the ten regional delegations have four-wheel drive vehicles, administrative offices are built and offices are furnished every year for labour inspectors, and the budget of the Ministry of Labour makes provisions for travel and hazard allowances in addition to allowances for missions to the interior of the country, in order to cover all additional expenses necessary for the discharge of their duties. The Committee also welcomes the Government’s indication that a programme to revitalize the labour inspection is currently being implemented to remedy the difficulties experienced by labour inspectors in the discharge of their duties. In this context, a large deployment of staff is envisaged following the completion of the induction course for the new group of administrators and labour controllers. It is also planned to extend the provision of vehicles to the delegations in the departments. The Committee requests the Government to provide additional information on the measures implemented in practice in the context of the programme to revitalize the labour inspection with a view to providing the labour inspectorate with the financial, human and material resources, including transport facilities, necessary for the effective discharge of their duties, particularly in the field of OSH.

Articles 3(1)(a), 6, 15(a) and 18. Status, conditions of service, integrity, independence and impartiality of labour inspectors. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to indicate whether labour inspectors benefited from the status of public servants with indefinite appointments, and to provide information on their salaries, including allowances, as compared to those of other officials in the administration who perform similar duties, such as tax inspectors. The Committee notes that, in its 2012 observations, the UGTC stated that corruption among labour inspectors constituted a threat and an obstacle to the observance of the rights of workers in enterprises. It also notes that the Government reiterates in its report that labour inspectors are public servants within the labour administration, but does not provide the specific information requested by the Committee. The Committee once again requests the Government to provide specific information on the period of appointment of labour inspectors, and on their conditions of service, not only at the central level, but also at regional, departmental and arrondissement levels, and in comparison with those of other officials in the administration who perform similar duties, such as tax inspectors. It also requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to provide labour inspectors with conditions of service such as to ensure that they are independent of improper external influences, as required by Article 6 of the Convention, and to give effect, in law and practice, to Article 15(a) of the Convention, which prohibits inspectors from having any direct or indirect interest in the undertakings under their supervision.

Article 3. Further duties entrusted to labour inspectors. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to take measures to relieve labour inspectors of conciliation duties, for example by reassigning these duties to a conciliation body created for that purpose, to enable labour inspectors to resume their primary duties within the meaning of Article 3(1) of the Convention. It notes the Government’s indication in its report that, in addition to the traditional functions entrusted to labour inspectors, the Labour Code provides for the assignment of conciliation duties. Referring also in this regard to paragraphs 72–74 of its 2006 General Survey on labour inspection, the Committee considers that the time spent on such a function may be detrimental to the discharge of their primary inspection duties, as defined in Article 3(1) of the Convention, particularly when resources are limited. It also draws the Government’s attention to the guidance provided in Paragraph 8 of the Labour Inspection Recommendation, 1947 (No. 81), under which “the functions of labour inspectors should not include that of acting as conciliator or arbitrator in proceedings concerning labour disputes”. The Committee therefore encourages the Government to take the necessary measures to relieve labour inspectors, in law and practice, of their conciliation duties, to enable them to devote themselves fully to the discharge of their primary functions, as set out in Article 3(1) of the Convention.

Article 4. Supervision and control of the labour inspection by a central authority. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to take measures to ensure that the labour inspection system operates under the supervision and control of a central authority, and to provide information on the measures taken or envisaged to ensure that action is taken on the recommendations made in the context of ILO assistance, with a view to the integration of all the units with labour inspection functions and powers, or coordinating and placing the units under the supervision and control of a central authority. The Committee also requested the Government to clarify the duties of labour inspectors and those of officials of the National Social Welfare Fund (CNPS), in order to remedy problems of overlapping functions between these two categories of officials with regard to social security. The Committee notes that the Government merely indicates that the labour inspectorate is under the supervision and control of the Ministry of Labour and Social Security (MINTSS). The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the measures taken or envisaged to ensure the coordination of all the units with labour inspection duties and powers under the supervision and control of the MINTSS and to address the problems of overlapping functions referred to above.

Articles 12, 13 and 17. Review of the legislation on the powers of labour inspectors. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that the MINTSS users’ guide establishing procedures for the Ministry’s various departments, sets out the requirement prior to inspecting a workplace of “a letter addressed to the head of the enterprise specifying the day, date and time of the visit”. Having noted the Government’s indication that, following the revision of the Labour Code in 1992 by the National Advisory Commission, the nature and scope of the powers of labour inspectors pursuant to Articles 12, 13 and 17 of the Convention had been considerably strengthened, the Committee requested it to provide information on the progress made with the draft revision of the Labour Code. The Committee notes that the only information provided by the Government on the above Articles is that labour inspectors have the power of injunction provided for by Article 13 of the Convention. The Committee also notes that, pursuant to section 108(1)(a) of the Labour Code of 1992, labour inspectors provided with proper credentials are empowered to enter freely and without previous notice at any hour of the day or night any workplace liable to labour inspection, in accordance with Article 12(1)(a) of the Convention. The Committee therefore emphasizes that the text of the MINTSS users’ guide is contrary to Article 12(1)(a) of the Convention, the terms of which are taken up in section 108(1)(a) of the Labour Code. It requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that the conduct of inspections, as reflected in the MINTSS users’ guide, is in conformity with Article 12(1)(a) of the Convention. It also once again requests the Government to provide information on the progress made with the draft revision of the Labour Code, and to provide copies of any new relevant texts adopted.

Articles 20 and 21. Annual labour inspection report. Referring to its previous comments, the Committee once again notes that no labour inspection report has been received by the ILO. It reminds the Government of the requirement for the central labour inspection authority to publish and communicate to the ILO, in accordance with Article 20 of the Convention, an annual labour inspection report containing the information required by Article 21(a)–(g). The Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to communicate to the Office an annual report on the work of the inspection services, in accordance with Articles 20 and 21 of the Convention.

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

The Committee refers the Government to its observation and wishes in addition to raise the following points.

Article 3(2) of the Convention. Further duties entrusted to labour inspectors. The Committee notes that, in response to the Committee’s question in its observation of 2010 on measures taken to ensure that the conciliation and mediation duties undertaken by labour inspectors in the event of labour disputes do not interfere with the effective discharge of their primary duties, the Government states that inspection visits are planned on a quarterly basis at regional level but provides no further details. However, the Committee notes from information in the technical memorandum on the diagnosis of Cameroon’s labour administration and labour inspection systems, carried out following the Government’s request for technical assistance in May 2011 (2011 diagnosis), that labour inspectors’ work is still focused on labour dispute settlement and that there are very few visits to workplaces. According to information in the 2011 diagnosis, virtually all workers’ claims against employers are treated as individual disputes giving rise to conciliation proceedings, the parties being notified and summoned to attend. Workers’ complaints are not followed by inspections at the workplace; inspectors do everything from the office. Referring to the comments in its 2010 observation on this matter and to paragraphs 72–74 of its 2006 General Survey on labour inspection, the Committee again points out that the time and energy expended by inspectors in attempting to settle collective labour disputes should not be to the detriment of their primary duties. The Committee notes in this connection the recommendation in the 2011 diagnosis that workers’ grievances, where the employer fails to meet obligations laid down in the law or agreements in the enterprise as a whole, could be treated as a complaint giving rise to an inspection visit, the identity of the complaining worker being kept confidential. Furthermore, a conciliation unit could be set up to hear other claims. The Committee requests the Government to provide up-to-date information on the proportion of inspection work taken up by conciliation duties (number of cases, time spent, etc.) compared in relation to the primary functions of labour inspectors. It requests the Government to take both legislative and practical measures (such as reassigning these duties to a conciliation body created for the purpose) in order to relieve labour inspectors of conciliation duties so that they can resume their primary duties within the meaning of Article 3(1) of the Convention and thus carry out as many inspections as possible of industrial and commercial undertakings that are liable to inspection, thereby helping to avert situations that give rise to labour disputes.

Articles 3(1)(b) and 13. Preventive measures taken by labour inspectors. The Committee notes the information in the 2011 diagnosis that workers and employers have little knowledge of the legislation on labour, occupational safety and health (OSH) and of social security. It further notes that OSH prevention policy is inadequate, not to say inexistent, and that field visits take place only in the context of African Prevention Day. The Committee notes in this connection the recommendation made in the diagnosis that programmes to promote knowledge of the content of the law should be organized. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would indicate the preventive measures taken by the labour inspectorate (inspection visits focusing on prevention through information and education, preparation of information and awareness-raising campaigns and programmes to promote knowledge of the content of the law, preparation of promotional material to inform the public, etc.), in accordance with Article 3(1)(b) of the Convention.

In particular, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on all the preventive measures taken by the labour inspection services in the area of OSH, and on the adoption of measures with immediate executory force in the event of imminent danger to the health or safety of the workers (Article 13(2)(b)) of the Convention.

Article 4. Labour inspection system: supervision and control. The Committee notes the information in the 2011 diagnosis that there is no clearly defined central authority for the labour inspection system and that supervisory duties are entrusted to various officials. Although in the Ministry of Labour and Social Security (MINTSS) the Directorate of Industrial Relations (DRP) has a labour relations sub-directorate which is responsible for monitoring application of labour laws and regulations, there is no department or body either in the DRP or in the MINTSS that has responsibility for coordinating and centralizing labour inspection activities. Nor is there any coordination between the Directorate of Occupational Safety and Health (DSST) and the labour inspectorate. Furthermore, the 2011 diagnosis indicates an overlap in social security functions, since both labour inspectors and the collection officers of the National Social Welfare Fund (CNSP) have competence in this area. The Committee notes in this connection the recommendation in the diagnosis that all units that have labour inspection functions and powers should be integrated or else coordinated and placed under the supervision and control of a central authority. In order to ensure proper coordination of the tasks and responsibilities of the labour administration system, the MINTSS should have the means to share the statistical information, documents, databases and projects of the bodies that report to it. It would also be advisable to define clearly the duties of labour inspectors and the CNPS collection officers so as to avoid problems of overlapping functions. The Committee requests the Government to make all necessary arrangements to ensure that the labour inspection system operates under the supervision and control of a central authority, and to provide information on the measures taken or envisaged to ensure that action is taken on the abovementioned recommendations, and to provide copies of any relevant texts or documents.

Article 5(b). Cooperation between the inspection services and the social partners. In reply to the Committee’s question in its 2010 observation under this Article, the Committee notes that the Government merely indicates that cooperation between the labour inspectorate and the social partners is frank and constructive, and refers to social dialogue forums already communicated to the ILO, but provides no details of cooperation in bodies such as the National Labour Advisory Commission (CNCT), the National Commission for Health and Safety at Work (CNSST), the Synergy Committee and OSH committees. The Committee notes the information in the 2011 diagnosis that forums for social dialogue, for example in the CNCT and CNSST, seldom operate and cooperation with the social partners is in much greater evidence in the decentralized departments of the MINTSS. The Committee accordingly repeats its request to the Government to provide details, along with any available documents, of the content of the cooperation that takes place at national level in or with the abovementioned bodies and at regional level in the decentralized departments of the MINTSS. It refers in this connection to the guidance provided in Part II of Recommendation No. 81 on the types of collaboration possible between the labour inspectorate and organizations of employers and workers.

Article 6. Status and conditions of service of labour inspectors. The Committee notes the information from the Government that the number of labour inspectors rose from 106 in 2008 to 329 in 2012, and that all labour inspectors are labour administration staff members. However, the Government provides no clarification as to the status and conditions of service of the various categories of inspectors, controllers, assistant controllers, clerks, contract staff, decision-makers and other staff referred to in the 2008 annual inspection report. The Committee asks the Government to provide information on the status and conditions of work of the 329 labour inspectors mentioned above. Please indicate in particular whether they have the status of public servants with indefinite appointments and provide information on their wages, including allowances, as compared to those of other officials in the administration or officials performing similar duties, such as tax inspectors. The Government is asked to provide copies of any legal texts applying to these matters.

It also asks the Government to specify the grades or categories and specializations of these inspectors, and their geographical distribution, indicating whether they assume all the functions defined in Article 3(1) of the Convention, namely: (a) securing enforcement of the legal provisions relating to conditions of work and the protection of workers; (b) supplying information and advice to workers and employers; and (c) engaging in activities that improve the labour legislation.

Article 7. Initial training and further training of labour inspectors. The Committee notes the information in the 2011 diagnosis that in the various units visited by the mission, labour inspectors do not have the full capacity or knowledge needed to perform the duties assigned to them, as they receive only initial training and are seldom given further training. They have not attended specialized courses on the prevention of risks at work. The Committee notes in this connection the recommendations made in the diagnosis to the effect that an appropriate body should determine the means for checking the particular qualifications required and that there should be permanent mechanisms for ensuring that inspectors have access to such training throughout their career. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the initial training and further training provided for labour inspectors in the course of their employment (subjects covered, number of participants, duration, etc.) and on the measures taken or envisaged to ensure that action is taken on the abovementioned recommendations.

Articles 9, 10, 11 and 16. Human and material resources available to the labour inspection services. The Committee notes the information in the 2011 diagnosis that material resources, such as buildings, furniture, office equipment, computer equipment, means of communication and vehicles, are limited or inadequate, or even obsolete. Workplace inspections are rare and, according to the reports on inspection work, OSH-related inspections at workplaces are virtually non-existent. The Committee notes the recommendations in the diagnosis to the effect that appropriate measures should be taken to endow the MINTSS with the necessary financial resources and a sufficiently large staff to cover the national territory, and that the number of inspectors with appropriate knowledge in safety and health matters in the regional offices should be increased. The Committee notes with interest the Government’s reference to the reinforcement of the material resources available to inspectors (electronic office equipment, transport facilities, office supplies, etc.). It notes, however, that the Government provides no details in this regard. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would indicate the measures taken or envisaged to implement the abovementioned recommendations, in particular to step up human and material resources to enable labour inspectors to perform their duties in the area of OSH.

It also asks the Government to provide up-to-date information on the number of labour inspectors and the material resources (premises, computers, printers, telephones, etc.) in the various regional directorates, including the number and type of transport facilities made available to labour inspectors and controllers carrying out their functions in the regions.

Articles 12, 13 and 17. Review of the legislation on the powers of labour inspectors. The Committee notes the information in the 2011 diagnosis that the MINTSS users’ guide to establishing procedures for the Ministry’s various departments, indicates as a requirement to be met prior to inspecting a workplace “a letter addressed to the head of the enterprise specifying the day, date and time of the visit”. The Committee notes in answer to the comments it has been making for years about the lack of any legislative provisions on the powers to be conferred on labour inspectors for the performance of their duties, the Government’s statement that the National Advisory Commission has just revised the 1992 Labour Code and that the nature and scope of labour inspectors’ powers pursuant to Articles 12, 13 and 17 of the Convention, have been considerably strengthened. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the status of the draft revision of the Labour Code. It would be grateful if the Government would provide a copy of the draft or of any relevant final text.

Articles 20 and 21. Annual report on labour inspection. The Committee notes that no report on the work of the labour inspectorate has been received at the ILO. It notes that the Government again expresses the need for technical assistance in producing annual inspection reports but does not indicate, as the Committee had requested in its observation of 2010, the steps taken to this end. In its previous comments, the Committee pointed out that technical assistance is useful for updating the register of workplaces for the creation of which, according to the Government’s last report, studies have been launched. It notes in this connection the information in the 2011 diagnosis that databases and enterprise registers are virtually non-existent in the regional offices. The figures produced by the CNPS are not shared directly with the MINTSS and are incomplete because many enterprises and workers are still not declared. The Committee notes the recommendations in the 2011 diagnosis that registering of enterprises should be set up in every regional office, and organized with the help of the existing databases at the CNPS, and that the registration of enterprises and their employees with the CNPS should be more effectively monitored. The Committee invites the Government to address a formal request for technical assistance to the Office for the purpose of setting up a register of workplaces and preparing and publishing an annual inspection report as required by the Convention.

It asks the Government to provide information on the steps taken to this end and on all other measures taken or envisaged, including the establishment of ongoing cooperation between the labour inspectorate and other Government agencies and public or private institutions that have relevant data.

Articles 2(1), 3(1), 16, 17 and 23. Labour inspection and child labour. The Committee requests the Government to provide detailed information on the labour inspectorate’s work in the area of child labour (number of offences detected, investigations, prosecutions, convictions and criminal sanctions applied, available means of redress, etc.).

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

The Committee notes the Government’s report received at the ILO on 1 September 2012. It also notes the observations made by the General Union of Workers of Cameroon (UGTC) in a communication of 29 October 2012, received at the ILO on 12 November 2012. The Committee asks the Government to send any comments it deems appropriate on these observations.

The Committee also notes with interest that in May 2011, the Government sought and received technical assistance from the ILO to carry out an assessment of the labour administration and labour inspection services. It notes that the recommendations made in the assessment, which was completed in May 2011, to a large extent reflect the Committee’s previous comments on the application of the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged, if necessary with financial assistance to be sought in the context of international cooperation, to gradually put in place a labour inspection system that meets the requirements of the Convention, in the light of the recommendations made in the abovementioned assessment.

The Committee raises other matters in a request addressed directly to the Government.

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

The Committee notes the Government’s report and its replies to the comments made by the General Confederation of Labour – Liberty of Cameroon (CGT–Liberté) in 2007 and 2008 and by the General Union of Workers of Cameroon (UGTC) in October 2008 concerning various shortcomings of the labour inspection system in relation to the requirements of the Convention.

Article 3(1)(a) and (b) of the Convention. Duties of labour inspectors. Based on the information contained in the annual inspection report for 2008, the Committee notes that, instead of ensuring the presence of labour inspectors at the workplace with a view to enforcing the legal provisions relating to conditions of work and the protection of workers, most of the working time of labour inspectors is devoted to resolving labour disputes through conciliation activities. In such conditions, these activities are clearly detrimental to the discharge of their primary duties as defined in Article 3(1) of the Convention. The Committee is bound to draw the Government’s attention to paragraph 2 of the same Article which stipulates that any further duties which may be entrusted to labour inspectors shall not be such as to interfere with the effective discharge of their primary duties or to prejudice in any way the authority and impartiality which are necessary to inspectors in their relations with employers and workers. Furthermore,
Paragraph 8 of the Labour Inspection Recommendation, 1947 (No. 81), specifically advises against entrusting inspectors with the duty to act as conciliator or arbitrator in proceedings concerning labour disputes. In a previous report (2004), the Government had justified the allocation of these duties to inspectors by a need to relieve the pressure on the courts. However, the Committee considers that the volume of work created by these duties results in a disproportionate mobilization of the labour inspectorate’s resources to the detriment of its activities relating to enforcement, advice and improvement of the legislation referred to in the Convention. Given that labour disputes are often caused by a lack of understanding of the legal provisions or failure to comply with them, inspectors can make a major contribution to reducing labour disputes through educational activities and, if necessary, repressive action. The Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate the measures taken to ensure that the conciliation or mediation duties undertaken by labour inspectors in the event of a labour dispute do not interfere with the discharge of their primary duties and to provide information on any progress made in that regard, as well as any relevant document.

With regard to the specific matter of the supervisory powers of labour inspectors, raised by the CGT–Liberté, the Committee notes that, according to the Government, this matter should be examined in the context of the overall revision of the Labour Code under way. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the progress made with regard to the draft reform of the Labour Code, including in particular the developments affecting the nature and scope of the powers of labour inspectors in relation to Articles 12, 13 and 17 of the Convention. It would be grateful if the Government would provide a copy of any relevant draft or final text.

Articles 6, 9 and 10. Labour inspection staff (composition, status and conditions of service). According to the Government, the inspection staff is composed of 106 inspectors (77 men and 29 women). Noting with interest that the National School of Administration and Magistracy (ENAM) reopened in 2006, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the developments relating to the number and qualifications of labour inspectors during the period covered by the next report, including their geographical distribution.

The Committee understands, based on the information contained in the Government’s report received in 2008, that the remuneration of labour inspectors was increased by 15 per cent under Decree No. 2008/099 of 7 March 2009 applicable to both civilian and military staff, with retroactive effect from 1 April 2008. In response to the allegation made by the CGT–Liberté that the remuneration, working conditions and benefits of other administrators graduating from the ENAM are more favourable than those granted to labour inspectors, the Government emphasizes in its communication received in 2009 that “the Head of State has raised the salaries of public servants, including labour inspectors, in full fairness and without discrimination”. Noting that the annual inspection report for 2008 mentions various categories of inspection staff (inspectors, controllers, assistant controllers, clerks, contract public servants, decision-makers and other staff), the Committee requests the Government to indicate those who have the status of labour inspector under section 105 of the Labour Code and to provide further information on the status and conditions of service of each category of staff carrying out inspection activities.

Article 11. Means of action of inspectors. In reply to the point raised by the UGTC concerning the lack of means of action (computer equipment and means of transport) of the labour inspectorate, the Government pointed out in a communication sent to the ILO dated 5 December 2007 that, under the three-year budgetary programme for the period 2008–10, departmental labour offices were to be equipped with rolling stock. The Committee requests the Government to provide further information on the developments relating to the number of vehicles in the labour inspectorate’s fleet, to ensure, in any case and if necessary with the help of international financial cooperation, that labour inspectors are provided with the means essential for the performance of their duties (computerized office equipment, transport facilities, consumables etc.) and to keep the Office informed of any progress made in that regard.

Article 5(b). Collaboration between labour inspection officials and the social partners. In reply to the UGTC’s allegations concerning the lack of collaboration between the labour inspectorate and the social partners, the Government indicated in its 2008 report that such collaboration took place at both the national level within the National Labour Advisory Commission, the National Occupational Safety and Health Commission and the Synergy Committee and at the regional level within the decentralized services through inspections by labour inspectors, occupational safety and health committees, committees organizing labour day celebrations and various commissions. Drawing the Government’s attention to the guidance provided in Part II of Recommendation No. 81 on the types of collaboration possible between the labour inspectorate and organizations of employers and workers, the Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide details, as well as any documents available, on the content of the collaboration that takes place within or with the above bodies taking into account the objective of the Convention.

Articles 20 and 21. Annual report of the labour inspectorate. The Committee notes with interest that, following efforts lasting many years, a report on the work of the labour inspectorate for 2008 has been provided and contains information and statistics on inspections by branch of activity, industrial accidents, the workplaces and workers covered and the violations noted and penalties imposed. However, it notes that the Government once again expresses a need for technical assistance from the ILO to overcome various practical obstacles (inconsistent compliance with periodic reporting obligations across the various bodies and shortcomings in the methods of collecting and processing data) to the preparation of an annual report in accordance with the provisions of Articles 20 and 21.

Further to its general observation of 2009, the Committee also notes with interest the Government’s indication that studies have been launched with a view to creating a register of workplaces liable to inspection. It emphasizes the importance of creating and regularly updating a register (containing, in accordance with paragraph (c) of Article 21, information on the workplaces liable to inspection and the number of workers employed therein) to assess the rate of coverage of the inspectorate in relation to its area of competence and determine measures to improve it. The Committee trusts that the technical assistance from the Office requested by the Government for the purposes of preparing and publishing an annual inspection report as required by the Convention will therefore also concern the measures to be implemented to create and then update a register of workplaces. It would be grateful if the Government would keep the ILO informed of the steps taken in that regard, including the implementation of inter-institutional cooperation, as well as any difficulties encountered.

Finally, noting in the magazine of the Ministry of Labour and Social Security (MTSS) dated 1 January 2010 that the number of diseases included on the list of occupational diseases covered under the social security system has increased from 44 to 49 under Order No. 051/MINTSS/SG/DSST, the Committee requests the Government to ensure that the labour inspectorate is informed of cases of occupational disease, so that the relevant information is also included in the abovementioned annual report, in accordance with paragraph (g) of Article 21.

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

The Committee takes note of the Government’s report received at the ILO on 1 September 2008 and the enclosed documentation. It also notes the observations on the application of the Convention by the General Union of Cameroon Workers, received on 20 October 2008. It proposes examining the report and the trade union’s observations at its next session, as well as any other comments that the Government might wish to submit on the points raised in these observations.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2007, published 97th ILC session (2008)

The ILO received on 23 November 2006, the Government’s reply to observations from the General Union of Cameroon Workers (UGTC) dated 30 August 2006 which the Committee had examined at its previous session. The Committee notes that new observations reached the ILO from the UGTC on 21 August 2007 and from the Confederation of Labour – Liberty of Cameroon (CGTL) on 12 September 2007. The Committee notes that the observations from these organizations, which the ILO sent to the Government in September 2007, largely concern matters raised in the Committee’s observation of 2006. The Committee hopes that the Government will reply to the latter observation in its report due in 2008.

1. Articles 1, 6, 10, 11, 13, 16, 20 and 21 of the Convention. Insufficient staff, pay conditions and means of action of labour inspectors. Annual report on the work of the inspectorate. Inefficient and deteriorating inspection system. In reply to the UGTC’s observations of 2006 on the lack of inspectors and material facilities, the Government indicates that the inspectorate works in all ten provinces of the country and that the new organizational chart of the Ministry of Labour and Social Security provides for inspection services to be established in the departments and in certain districts with a high concentration of labour. Furthermore, five competitions have been held to recruit staff for the labour and social security corps. Only the provincial labour delegates have service vehicles because resources are lacking. In its communication of August 2007, the UGTC again emphasizes the lack of staff and the total absence of material facilities in the premises that house inspectors. The Committee also notes the observations from the CGTL, which raise a matter addressed in 2004 by the Confederation of Public Service Unions (CSP), namely that inspectors’ conditions of service and pay expose them to the influence of employers and weaken their authority to issue injunctions. The Committee hopes that the Government will be in a position in its next report to provide information on progress, particularly regarding the staff and means of action of the inspectorate and the organization and working of the inspection system. Please indicate in particular the measures taken or envisaged to ensure that labour inspectors are independent of all improper external influence.

The Committee also urges the Government to take measures to ensure that an annual report on the work of the labour inspectorate, containing all available information on the subjects listed at Article 21 of the Convention, is published and sent to the ILO, in accordance with Article 20. The Committee would be grateful if, to this end, the Government would take measures without delay for defining a method for uniform collection and processing of relevant information, and keep the ILO informed of progress in this regard.

Lastly, the Government is also asked to provide information on the results of the reading of the text on the supervisory powers of labour inspectors which, according to the Government’s statement in 2005, had been submitted to the National Labour Advisory Committee.

2. Article 5(b). Collaboration between labour inspection officials and the social partners. In its observations sent in August 2007, the UGTC asserts that there is no cooperation at all between labour inspectors, employers and workers. The Committee refers the Government to its previous comment on this matter in which it noted that the Labour Code does not deal with the issue of cooperation in labour inspection, and draws the Government’s attention to Part II of Recommendation No. 81, which provides useful guidelines on the nature and type of measures that might be taken to encourage such collaboration, with the employers too, in the area of occupational safety and health. It would be grateful if, in consultation with the employers and workers, the Government would entertain the possibility of implementing such measures, and asks it to keep the ILO informed of the results of such collaboration.

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

The Committee notes the Government’s report, its brief reply to the Committee’s previous observation concerning comments made by the Confederation of Public Service Unions (CSP) and the General Union of Cameroon Workers (GUCW) received at the ILO in September 2004. It also takes note of the new observations sent to the ILO by the GUCW dated 30 August 2005 and 30 August 2006.

1. Inadequate resources, ineffectiveness and deterioration of the labour inspection system. In its comments received at the ILO on 22 September 2004, the CSP alleges that certain Articles of the Convention are not properly applied. It notes with regret that there was no cooperation whatsoever between labour inspectors, employers and workers (Article 5 of the Convention); inspectors’ working and pay conditions made them vulnerable and exposed them to influence by employers (Article 6); and this is reflected, inter alia, by the non-application of Article 13 concerning inspectors’ authority to make orders for the elimination of risks to workers’ health and safety. The CSP also asserts that inspections are confined to enterprises in the private sector and never give rise to the application of penalties (Articles 16 and 17).

The same points were made by the GUCW in an observation of 27 August 2004, which also mentioned that local offices were poorly equipped and even lacked a supply of drinking water, and that there were no means of transport (Article 11).

In comments of 29 May 2005, the Government replied to the observations of the abovementioned organizations, stating that it was awaiting proof of the GUCW’s allegations concerning the labour inspectors’ lack of authority and resources. As to the inspectors’ supervisory authority, the Government indicated that the relevant text was to be submitted for examination to the Tripartite Synergy Committee for referral to the officers of the National Labour Advisory Commission, the only body with authority to issue opinions and proposals on labour legislation and regulations.

On 30 August 2005, the GUCW sent further comments to the ILO on the application of the Convention in which it referred to its previous observation and indicated that, in addition, as a result of restructuring, the Ministry of Employment, Labour and Social Insurance had been split into two ministries, with several inspectors being assigned to the new Ministry of Employment and Vocational Training, with the result that “workplace inspection had taken a punishing”.

Under cover of a letter of 29 November 2005, the Government sent to the ILO the GUCW’s reply regarding proof of its allegations, referring the Government to the reports of the annual conferences of officials of the central and external departments of the Ministry of Labour and Social Security.

The Committee further notes that, according to the general and legislative information sent by the Government, effect is given in law to every provision of the Convention. It notes, however, that there are no reports or extracts of reports on the practical working of the labour inspection enabling the Committee to assess its effectiveness or its weaknesses. Yet, in a direct request to the Government in 2002, the Committee noted the information that teams were to be despatched to collect reports from the departmental and provincial inspectorates and that technical assistance was to be sought from the ILO to improve skills in the collection and analysis of the statistics needed to draw up such reports. No such measures appear to have been taken and, according to the Government, it is still difficult to produce a general report on the labour inspection services.

In a new observation dated 30 August 2006, the GUCW reiterates its views on the situation of the labour inspectorate and adds that there is no longer an inspectorate for want of inspectors and resources. It again reports that some labour inspectors are subject to corruption by employers and that inspectors have no authority in the performance of their tasks.

The Committee urges the Government to take steps to ensure that an annual report on the activities of the labour inspectorate, containing all available information on the subjects listed at Article 21 of the Convention, is drawn up, published and sent by the central inspection authority to the ILO, in accordance with Article 20. It would be grateful if the Government would at once take measures to establish a method for uniform collection and processing of the relevant information and to report to the ILO all progress made towards this end.

The Government is also asked to provide information on the text concerning the powers of the labour inspectorate which, the Government says, has been submitted to the National Labour Advisory Commission, and on the outcome of the Commission’s examination of the text.

2. Collaboration between officials of the labour inspectorate and the social partners. The Committee notes that in reply to its direct request of 2004, the Government states that collaboration between officials of the labour inspectorate and workers or their organizations (Article 5(b)) is regulated by Title II of the Labour Code. The Committee notes that these provisions say nothing of collaboration in labour inspection, and draws the Government’s attention to Part II of Recommendation No. 81, which provides useful guidelines on the nature and form of measures that could be taken to encourage such collaboration, with employers as well as workers, in the area of occupational safety and health. It would be grateful if the Government would consider, in consultation with the employers and the workers, the possibility of implementing such measures, and if it would keep the ILO informed of the results of such collaboration.

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

Referring to its observation and further to its previous comments, the Committee requests the Government to provide detailed additional information on the following provisions.

Article 3, paragraph 2 of the Convention. In connection with the requirements of Article 16.

Article 4. In connection with Articles 19, 20 and 21.

Articles 8 and 10. By stating the geographical distribution and the respective duties of labour administrators, labour controllers and deputy labour controllers, given the functions and areas assigned by the Convention to the labour inspection system.

Article 13. By giving details of the exercise in practice of the power of labour inspectors and medical labour inspectors to order measures with immediate executory force in the event of imminent danger to the health or safety to the workers.

Article 14. By communicating Decree No. 78-546 of 28 December 1978, which is not attached to the report as stated.

Article 18. By referring to relevant developments in relation to paragraph 263 of the 1985 General Survey on labour inspection.

Articles 19, 20 and 21. By indicating any steps taken to obtain technical assistance from the ILO for the purpose of implementing these provisions.

The Committee also notes, in accordance with the information contained on page 38 of a handbook entitled "Labour inspection - Guide for inspection visits", published in 2000, that "the inspector should not fail to advise the head of the enterprise or his representative of the inspection visit". In this regard, the author of the publication also strongly advises that account should be taken not systematically but only exceptionally of the principle of visits without prior notification prescribed by Article 12, paragraph 1, of the Convention. The Committee notes the arguments put forward by the author to support this point of view and observes that they are contrary not only to the Convention but also to section 108(1)(a) of the Labour Code. Under these provisions, it is prior notification which should be the exceptional practice, not an unannounced visit, as emphasized in paragraphs 158 ff. of the abovementioned General Survey. It therefore requests the Government to indicate the legal value of the abovementioned document and the established practice in this matter.

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

The Committee notes the Government’s report, which responds in part to its previous comment. It also notes that observations were formulated by the General Union of Cameroon Workers (GUCW), dated 27 August 2004, and by the Confederation of Public Service Unions (CSP), dated 2 September 2004, with regard to Articles 5, 6, 11, 13, 16 and 18 of the Convention. The International Labour Office sent these comments to the Government on 8 and 11 October 2004, respectively, in order to invite it to submit any observation which it might wish to make with regard to the points raised. The Committee will examine at its next relevant session the points raised in the abovementioned comments and the information sent in response by the Government.

The Committee is addressing a direct request regarding certain points to the Government.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2001, published 90th ILC session (2002)

The Committee notes the Government’s reports and the comments sent by the Federation of Free Trade Unions of Cameroon. It asks the Government to provide additional information on the following points.

Article 3 of the Convention. The Committee asks the Government to indicate whether labour inspectors are responsible for drawing the competent authority’s attention to defects or abuses not specifically covered by existing legal provisions, as required by paragraph 1(c), and to explain how it is ensured that the conciliation duties conferred on inspectors by sections 139 and 158 of the Labour Code with a view to settling social conflicts, do not interfere with the authority and impartiality which inspectors need in their relations with employers and workers (paragraph 2).

Article 4. The Committee notes, that according to Decree No. 98/150 of 24 July 1998 to organize the Ministry of Employment, Labour and Social Welfare, in respect of its supervisory functions the Labour Inspectorate reports to several bodies including the Directorate of Labour, the Directorate of Social Insurance, the Directorate of Occupational Health and Safety, the Provincial Labour Inspection and Social Welfare Brigade, and the Departmental Delegation for Employment, Labour and Social Welfare. It would appear from the information supplied by the Government that the General Inspectorate is the central labour inspection authority. The Committee points out, however, that this is not clear from the terms of the abovementioned Decree. It therefore asks the Government to indicate the central authority responsible for the supervision and control of the labour inspectorate and, in accordance with Article 20, for drawing up an annual inspection report. The Government is asked to send a copy of the organizational chart of the Ministry of Labour and Social Insurance.

Article 7. The Committee notes that CRADAT (African Regional Labour Administration Centre) in Yaoundé is largely responsible for providing continuous training for inspectors. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide detailed information on the areas of training covered and the frequency of courses.

Articles 8 and 10. The Committee notes that the labour inspectorate is made up of 34 departmental services and ten provincial services and has 373 technical staff. The Government is asked to provide information on the distribution of the above staff by job category and sex and to indicate whether any special duties are to be assigned to women inspectors.

Article 12. The Committee notes that, according to section 108 of the Labour Code, the authority of labour inspectors extends only to establishments liable to inspection. Referring to paragraph 165 of its General Survey of 1985 on labour inspection, the Committee wishes to draw the Government’s attention to the case of undertakings which are not officially or recognizably subject to inspection but which nonetheless employ workers covered by the labour legislation. Emphasizing that labour inspectors must be authorized to enter these premises by day (paragraph 1(b)), it asks the Government to provide information on the manner in which it is ensured that workers employed in these premises are covered by this provision or, if they are not covered, to take measures to that end and report on them to the ILO.

Article 13, paragraph 2(b). With reference to its previous comments and noting with interest that section 95(3) of Act No. 92/007 of 14 August 1992 issuing the Labour Code authorizes the labour inspector or medical labour inspector to order immediately enforceable measures in the event of imminent danger for the health and safety of workers, the Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide copies of any texts to implement this provision together with information on its effects in practice.

Article 14. The Committee notes that, according to the Government, employers must report within three days to the National Social Security Fund any industrial accidents or cases of occupational disease, a copy of the report being sent to the competent labour inspector who will hold an enquiry if the fund so requests. It also notes that if the employer fails to do so, the worker has three years in which to report. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide copies of any texts on the procedure for reporting industrial accidents and cases of occupational disease.

Article 18. The Committee notes that fines for breaches of the legislation covered by the labour inspectorate are set by section 166 to 168 of the Labour Code. It also notes that fines are also imposed for obstructing labour inspectors or medical labour inspectors in the performance of their duties. Referring in this connection to paragraph 263 of its General Survey of 1985 on labour inspection, the Committee draws the Government’s attention to the importance of having a system for reviewing the amounts of fines to ensure that they are sufficiently dissuasive in spite of any monetary fluctuations.

Articles 19, 20 and 21. The Committee notes the difficulties caused by a lack of human and material resources which are preventing the publication of a national general report on the work of the inspection services. The Committee notes that there are plans to send out teams to collect reports from departmental and provincial inspectorates and to request technical assistance from the ILO in order to improve abilities to collect and analyse the statistics needed to produce the reports. The Committee hopes that the request for technical assistance will be favourably received and that the Government will not fail to provide information in its next report on progress made in giving practical effect to the abovementioned Articles of the Convention.

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

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

Article 13, paragraph 2(b), of the Convention. For many years the Committee has been requesting the Government to take the necessary measures to give effect to this Article of the Convention, which provides that labour inspectors shall be empowered to make orders requiring measures to be taken with immediate executory force in the event of imminent danger to the health or safety of the workers. Since 1978, the Government has been indicating that the necessary measures were being taken to amend the law. The Committee notes the Government's indication in its last report that these measures have not yet been taken and expresses the firm hope that the necessary modifications will be adopted in the near future. Articles 16, 20 and 21. The Committee once again notes that no annual inspection report has been provided since those relating to the years 1978 and 1979. It recalls that these reports are an essential means of determining how the inspection system is working in practice and whether workplaces are being inspected as often and as thoroughly as necessary. It once again hopes that the Government will transmit to the Office, within the time-limits set out in the Convention, annual reports on the activities of the inspection services and that they will contain all the information required by 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 1995, published 83rd ILC session (1996)

Article 13, paragraph 2(b), of the Convention. For many years the Committee has been requesting the Government to take the necessary measures to give effect to this Article of the Convention, which provides that labour inspectors shall be empowered to make orders requiring measures to be taken with immediate executory force in the event of imminent danger to the health or safety of the workers. Since 1978, the Government has been indicating that the necessary measures were being taken to amend the law. The Committee notes the Government's indication in its last report that these measures have not yet been taken and expresses the firm hope that the necessary modifications will be adopted in the near future.

Articles 16, 20 and 21. The Committee once again notes that no annual inspection report has been provided since those relating to the years 1978 and 1979. It recalls that these reports are an essential means of determining how the inspection system is working in practice and whether workplaces are being inspected as often and as thoroughly as necessary. It once again hopes that the Government will transmit to the Office, within the time-limits set out in the Convention, annual reports on the activities of the inspection services and that they will contain all the information required by the Convention.

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

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

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government.

Article 13, paragraph 2(b), of the Convention. For many years the Committee has been asking the Government to take the necessary measures to give effect to this Article of the Convention, which requires that labour inspectors be empowered to make or have made orders requiring measures with immediate executory force in the event of imminent danger to the health or safety of the workers. Since 1978, the Government has been indicating that the necessary measures were being taken to amend the law. The Committee hopes that the Government will soon be able to indicate that the necessary amendment has been made and brought into force.

Articles 16, 20 and 21. The Committee notes that no annual inspection reports have been provided since those for 1978 and 1979. It recalls that such reports are an essential means of determining how the inspection system works in practice and whether it is ensured that workplaces are inspected as often and as thoroughly as necessary. It hopes that the Government will send annual reports on the activities of the inspection service to the Office within the time-limits set by the Convention and that these reports will include all the information required by the Convention.

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

Article 13, paragraph 2(b), of the Convention. In answer to the Committee's earlier comments, the Government refers to the provisions of Title IV and Annex I of Order No. 039/MTPS/IMT of 26 November 1984, which establish a four-day minimum period for the execution of orders, and considers that these are measures with immediate executory force. The Committee points out that the above provisions give effect to paragraph 2(a) of this Article (under which inspectors must be empowered to order certain alterations to the installation or plant, to be carried out within a specified time-limit) but not to paragraph 2(b) which applies to cases of emergency in which the inspector must be empowered to make orders requiring "measures with immediate executory force in the event of imminent danger to the health or safety of the workers". In such cases (e.g. when there is a danger of asphyxia, explosion, collapse of plant, etc.), the procedure laid down by the provisions of Order No. 039/MTPS/IMT is not adequate to avert the danger, which could materialise before the expiry of the four-day minimum time-limit imposed when an order is issued. The Committee hopes that, bearing these explanations in mind, the Government will take the necessary measures (either as part of the revision of the Labour Code, or by supplementing Order No. 039/MTPS/IMT with an appropriate provision) to confer on labour inspectors the powers laid down by Article 13, paragraph 2(b), of the Convention.

Articles 20 and 21. The Committee notes with regret that, despite the Government's assurances that it would provide regular annual inspection reports, no report has been received by the International Labour Office since 1982. It trusts that the Government will not fail to take the necessary steps to ensure that, in future, these reports, containing information on all the subjects listed at Article 21, are published and transmitted to the International Labour Office within the time-limits laid down by Article 20.