Labour Inspection Convention, 1947 (No. 81) - Aruba

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

Article 3 of the Convention. Additional duties entrusted to labour inspectors related to immigration. The Committee notes that, according to the Government’s information in its report, labour inspectors work with the Police, the Department of Immigration and Alien Affairs (Dimas) and the Coast Guard (Guarda Nos Costa), in order to tackle the negative impact on the labour market caused by the influx of Venezuelan nationals fleeing the crisis in their country. The Committee recalls that, in accordance with Article 3(2) of the Convention, the function of the system of labour inspection is 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 which may be entrusted to labour inspectors shall not be such as to interfere with the effective discharge of their primary duties. In its 2006 General Survey, Labour inspection, paragraph 77, the Committee indicates that the Convention does not contain any provision suggesting that any worker be excluded from the protection afforded by labour inspection on account of their irregular employment status. The Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that the duties entrusted to labour inspectors do not interfere with the fundamental objective of securing the protection of workers in accordance with the primary duties set out in Article 3(1) of the Convention. It also requests the Government to provide further information on the number of cases in which labour inspectors played any role in the investigation or prosecution of migrant workers, the number of cases in which sanctions were imposed, the violations concerned and the specific sanctions imposed, including expulsion.

Articles 4, 5(a) and (b). Arrangements to promote coordination, cooperation and collaboration. The Committee previously noted that labour inspection services were under the responsibility of several ministries and departments. The Committee notes the indication in the Government’s report that labour inspectors are working in team with the Department of Public Health, the Dimas and the Police on combatting human trafficking and human smuggling. Moreover, the Government indicates that the Department of Public Health and the Technical Inspection Department are the authorities in charge of the health and safety of workers. When labour inspectors find dangerous working conditions, they communicate the findings to the corresponding authority for further action. In general, labour inspectors define their priorities by determining the opportunity and impact on the labour market of a particular occurrence in a specific sector. The Committee takes note of this information, which addresses its previous request.

Articles 13(1) and (2), 17 and 18. Powers of injunction of labour inspectors, legal proceedings and adequate penalties. The Committee previously noted that provisions of the State Ordinance Administrative Enforcement Act of 2013 concerning the imposition of fines and the suspension of work refer to the powers of the Minister of Labour and not to those of labour inspectors.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication that this authority has been mandated to the Director of the Department of Labour. In practice, as regards the imposition of fines, the labour inspectors firstly submit the official inspection reports internally for procedural and legal review. Fines may be issued later to the employer concerned. The Government indicates that considering the small-scale community of Aruba, in order to safeguard the safety of labour inspectors in the field, it is desirable to avoid any potential aggressive confrontation. The Government thus determines that it is not prudent to give each individual inspector the authority to impose fines in situ. The Government also indicates that the suspension of work may be invoked in case of violation of provisions regarding working hours, prohibition of child labour and labour performed by youth. Regarding safety and health at work, the competent authorities may impose fines in case of non-compliance and order the suspension of work in case of immediate danger to people, according to sections 2(3) and 5 of the Safety Ordinance. The Committee takes note of this information, which addresses its previous request.

Articles 20 and 21. The Committee notes that no annual inspection reports have been received by the Office since 2012. The Committee urges the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that annual labour inspection reports are regularly published and communicated to the ILO (Article 20 of the Convention), and that they contain information on all the subjects covered by Article 21(a)–(g).

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

With reference to its previous comments, the Committee notes the information provided by the Government concerning the adoption of the State Ordinance Administrative Enforcement Act of 2013 and the effect given to Article 12(1)(a) and (b) of the Convention. It also notes the copies of the annual labour inspection reports for 2008, 2009, 2010 and 2012, which the Government included in its report in response to the Committee’s request in the context of Article 20 of the Convention.

Articles 4, 5(a) and (b). Arrangements to promote coordination, cooperation and collaboration. The Committee previously noted that labour inspection services were under the responsibility of several ministries and departments.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication that several inspection services have been grouped together in inspection teams. These services are from the following units: the Department of Labour, technical inspections, the Department of Public Health, fire departments, police departments, coastguards and municipal inspectors. Inspections are coordinated at the Office of the Municipal Inspector, with the members of the team being selected based on the objectives of the particular inspection and information shared between teams. The Government indicates that the ongoing operation of team inspections is being considered in order to achieve maximum efficiency, flexibility and follow-up. The Committee requests the Government to continue providing information on the manner in which team inspections are carried out, including on the role played by the Labour Department in these teams and on the manner in which their labour inspection priorities are defined. The Committee also requests the Government to continue providing information on the measures taken to promote cooperation between the various inspection services and public institutions and collaboration with the employers’ and workers’ organizations, with a view to strengthening the effectiveness of labour inspection services.

Articles 13(1) and (2), 17 and 18. Powers of injunction of labour inspectors, legal proceedings and adequate penalties. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the State Ordinance Administrative Enforcement Act of 2013 provides inspectors with the authority necessary to impose fines and order the suspension of work. The Committee nevertheless notes that the provisions of this Act concerning the imposition of fines and the suspension of work refer to the powers of the Minister of Labour and not to those of labour inspectors. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the measures taken or envisaged to empower labour inspectors (in accordance with Article 13(2)(b)) to order measures with immediate executory force in the event of imminent danger to the health or safety of the workers. Recalling the Government’s previous indication that it was considering providing labour inspectors to impose administrative fines, the Committee further requests the Government to provide information on the measures taken in this regard.

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

Articles 4, 5(a) and (b) of the Convention. Arrangements to promote coordination, cooperation and collaboration. The Committee had previously noted that inspection services are split between the Safety Inspection Department, coming under the Ministry of Justice, health inspection matters under the Ministry of Health, and employment related inspections under the Labour Department. With reference to the Committee’s longstanding comments on this subject, the Government expresses regret at not having made any progress with regard to measures taken to ensure cooperation between the different inspection services and other public and private institutions as well as employers and workers or their organizations. The Government acknowledges further, that there are no systems for the recording of judicial decisions that could be accessed by the labour inspectorate.

The Committee requests the Government to provide details on the ways in which the various inspection services coordinate their action and cooperate with further public and private bodies, as well as employers’ and workers’ organizations, in order to create synergies and increase efficiency and to indicate any obstacles encountered in this regard. It reminds the Government that it may avail itself of ILO assistance in this area if it so wishes.

Article 12(1) (a) and (b). Right of free entry of inspectors. The Committee observes with regard to previous comments, that restrictions to the right of free entry to private premises could not be alleviated as, according to the Government, special training could not be afforded to labour inspectors, so that they qualify as extraordinary police officers with powers of entry into private premises which they have reasonable cause to believe to be liable to inspection. The Committee requests the Government to clarify whether the Committee on the Modernization of Labour Legislation (CMLL) has given consideration to legislative amendments aimed at vesting labour inspectors with the power to enter private premises and to indicate any measure taken in order to access the funds necessary for the training of labour inspection staff so as to enable them to have full powers of entry.

Articles 13(1) and (2), 17 and 18. Powers of injunction of labour inspectors. Legal proceedings and adequate penalties. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the revision of a number of labour ordinances was completed and bills were sent to the Department of Legislation in 2011 for a legal technical review, but that all bills, including the ordinances on temporary workers and its decrees and the ordinance on labour legislation, were yet to be discussed by the Advisory Council and the Social Economic Council.

The Committee recalls from its previous comments the Government’s assurances that it would communicate to the CMLL the need for measures to ensure that labour inspectors are authorized to order the stoppage of work in the event of non-compliance with national legislation and the need to enhance the power of labour inspectors to impose administrative fines on employers who have committed violations. The Committee recalls from previous comments that over the years a degree of impunity has arisen, partly enhanced by the absence of regular inspections and the lack of inspection service staff. The Committee once again requests the Government to communicate a copy of the amendments to the labour legislation submitted to the CMLL with a view to authorizing labour inspectors to issue injunctions with immediate effect and to impose administrative fines on employers who have committed violations and to keep the Office informed of any progress made in the adoption of the relevant bills.

Articles 20 and 21 of the Convention. Communication of a consolidated annual report. The Committee observes that annual labour inspection reports for 2008, 2009 and 2010 were not received by the Office, contrary to what is indicated in the Government’s report. Underlining the importance of making the fullest possible information available on each of the subjects enumerated in Article 21 on an annual basis, in order to assess the efficiency of labour inspection services provided, the Committee requests the Government to ensure that an annual report is submitted within the deadlines set by Article 20.

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

The Committee notes the Government’s report which was received on 23 November 2009, as well as the annual reports of the labour inspection authority for the years 2006 and 2007, forwarded with the Government’s report. It also notes the information provided in June 2010.

Article 5(a) and (b) of the Convention. Arrangements to promote cooperation and collaboration. With reference to its previous comments on this subject, the Committee notes from the Government’s report that no measure has been taken to promote cooperation between the various departments responsible for labour inspection as well as other public and private services that carry out similar activities. The Committee recalls that in previous years, over half of the controls carried out had resulted in reports which indicated, inter alia, that the enterprise was no longer at the address indicated, that it was no longer operating, that it was located in a private dwelling or even that it had no staff. The Committee notes that the annual labour inspection report for 2006 makes reference to the difficulties raised by the large number of workplaces located in private dwellings and the absence of certain employer registries.

The Committee once again refers to paragraphs 154–162 of its General Survey of 2006 on labour inspection, according to which cooperation between the inspection services and other public or private institutions would enable useful information to be sent to the labour inspectorate in order to define its priorities and improve its functioning. This includes, for instance, data enabling high-risk establishments to be identified or workplaces and undertakings which are liable to inspection to be located (e.g. through the tax authorities) as well as information on accidents at work and cases of occupational disease (through the social security services). The Committee also refers to its general observation of 2007 on the importance of effective cooperation between the labour inspection services and the justice system for increasing the effectiveness of labour inspection (General Survey, op. cit., paragraph 158). The Committee emphasizes in this regard that a system for the recording of judicial decisions accessible to the labour inspectorate can enable the central authority to make use of information on the handling of the case files submitted by or on the recommendation of labour inspectors and to include this information in the annual report, as envisaged in Article 21(e) of the Convention. The Committee finally emphasizes the importance of collaboration between the inspection staff and employers and workers or their organizations (General Survey, op. cit., paragraphs 165–171). The Committee once again requests the Government to provide information on measures taken or envisaged to ensure cooperation between the inspection services and other services, public and private institutions, as well as employers and workers or their organizations, as provided for in Article 5. With reference to its 2007 general observation in particular, the Committee requests the Government to indicate whether a system for the recording of judicial decisions is accessible to the labour inspectorate and any measures taken or envisaged to strengthen the cooperation between the labour inspection services and the justice system.

Article 12(1)(a) and (b). Right of free entry of inspectors. With regard to its previous comments on this issue, the Committee notes from the Government’s report that when an inspector reaches a supposed business address which in fact is a residence, the inspector may not enter the private dwelling as this would constitute a misuse of his/her authority to enter enterprises freely. This is so because of the limits set by the privacy provision of the Constitution of Aruba (article 1.16) and the provision regarding entry into homes (article 1.17) and is aimed at preventing any infringement on the rights of private citizens who may not be aware that their residential address was previously registered as a commercial address. When the establishment is obviously a place where business is conducted, the inspector may enter forcibly, according to article 9(a), section 3, of the State Ordinance on Worker Registration (AB 1994 GT 8). The word “forcibly” refers to forced entry by (a) inspectors accompanied by police officer(s), or (b) inspectors who have the special credentials of an extraordinary police officer. This latter authority is not vested in every inspector. At the moment, only the head of the labour inspectorate possesses this credential. It is envisaged to offer special training to all current labour inspectors so as to grant them this power. Recalling once again that under Article 12(1)(b), labour inspectors should be empowered to enter by day any premises which they may have reasonable cause to believe to be liable to inspection, the Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged, including training, so as to vest all labour inspectors with the power to enter premises freely by day for inspection purposes.

Article 13(1) and (2). Powers of injunction of labour inspectors. The Committee notes that the Committee for the Modernization of Labour Legislation (CMLL) is currently in recess pending the outcome of the amendments it has submitted with a view to authorizing labour inspectors to order the stoppage of work in the event of non-compliance with national legislation. It also takes note of the Government’s assurances that it will communicate the Committee’s previous comments on this issue to the CMLL for its due attention. The Committee requests the Government to communicate with its next report the amendments to the labour legislation which have been submitted by the CMLL with a view to authorizing labour inspectors to order the stoppage of work in the event of non-compliance with national legislation. It trusts that such amendments will take due account of both types of measures envisaged in Article 13 of the Convention, i.e. measures ordered by labour inspectors to secure compliance with the legal provisions relating to the health or safety of the workers and measures with immediate executory force in the event of imminent danger to the health or safety of the workers, for which there is no need to rely on a violation of the law.

Articles 17 and 18. Legal proceedings and adequate penalties. The Committee notes from the Government’s report that the CMLL has not yet concretely addressed the issue of measures to increase the power of the labour inspectors and that the proposals made to this effect, listed in the Government’s 2005 report, are still pending. Furthermore, with regard to the Government’s previous assurances that it would draw up rules and directives to ensure that employers were convinced of its determination to enforce strict compliance with labour legislation, including by means of penalties, the Committee notes the Government’s statement in its latest report that it will keep the Committee informed of any progress made regarding the ordinances and decrees for labour inspection. The Committee recalls that in its previous report, the Government referred to the need to enhance the power of labour inspectors to impose administrative fines on employers who have committed violations and explained that over the years a degree of impunity had arisen, partly enhanced by the absence of regular inspections and the lack of inspection service staff. The Committee also notes that the annual inspection report for 2006 refers to the need to provide labour inspectors with training so that they obtain the credentials of extraordinary police officers, as in the absence of such credentials, labour inspectors do not have the power to impose sanctions.

The Committee once again recalls that, according to the General Survey, op. cit., paragraph 291, it is essential for the credibility and effectiveness of the system for the protection of workers, for the proceedings instituted or recommended by labour inspectors against employers guilty of violations to be sufficiently dissuasive and to make employers in general aware of the risks they run if they fail to meet their obligations. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would indicate in its next report any measure taken or envisaged to ensure that a sufficiently dissuasive mechanism is in place with a view to achieving strict compliance with labour legislation, including by means of penalties, and to send copies of any relevant legal text.

Article 20. Annual inspection report. The Committee notes that the text of the annual inspection report of the Technical Inspection Department for year-end 2008 was not sent with the Government’s report, contrary to what is indicated therein. Recalling that the obligation to communicate annual reports under Article 20 of the Convention is an ongoing one, the Committee would be grateful if the annual inspection report for 2008 along with the subsequent ones were submitted with the Government’s next report.

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

The Committee notes the Government’s reports received in 2006 and 2007, the labour inspection reports and the technical reports for 2002, 2003, 2004 and 2005.

Article 5(a) and (b) of the Convention. The Committee notes that, in reply to its previous comments, the Government states in its report that it has not adopted any measure to promote cooperation between the various departments responsible for labour inspection. The labour inspection reports also show that a large number of controls (for example, 475 out of 845 conducted in 2004) result in reports which indicate, inter alia, that the enterprise is no longer at the address indicated or that it is no longer operating, that it is located in a private dwelling or even that it has no staff. With reference to paragraphs 154 to 162 of its General Survey of 2006 on labour inspection, the Committee emphasizes that the support of certain public and private services that carry out similar activities is essential for the functioning of the labour inspectorate. Cooperation between the inspection services and institutions would enable useful information to be sent to the labour inspectorate in order to define its priorities and improve its functioning. This include information on accidents at work and cases of occupational disease (social security services) and also data enabling high-risk establishments to be identified or locating workplaces and undertakings which are liable to inspection (tax authorities). The Committee also emphasizes that closer cooperation between the competent administrative and judicial authorities, which might be based on stepping up training and raising the awareness of judges, would make for improved handling of the case files submitted by or on the recommendation of labour inspectors, as well as increasing the effectiveness of labour inspection (paragraph 158 of the General Survey). It hopes that the Government will take measures in the near future to promote cooperation between the inspection services and other Government services and public and private institutions performing similar activities and, if necessary, cooperation between the inspection staff and employers and workers or their organizations (paragraphs 165 to 171 of the General Survey) and that it will send information on all further developments in this respect.

Article 12, paragraph 1(a) and (b). Right of free entry of inspectors. The Committee notes the Government’s additional explanations with regard to the points which were raised in 1999 by the trade unions with regard to obstacles that might be faced by inspectors in the performance of their duties in larger enterprises, particularly multinationals. According to the Government, under no circumstances do major enterprises prevent the labour inspectors from conducting their visits. Indeed, the latter have good relations with most major enterprises and are given the information they request. On the other hand, it can happen that, when inspectors carry out unscheduled visits, the person responsible for the staff register is absent. Moreover, the Committee notes that efforts are being made to submit measures for the consideration of the Committee for the Modernization of Labour Laws (CMLL) aimed at enabling labour inspectors to enter private dwellings the addresses of which have been sent to the authorities as being business addresses. The Committee reiterates that pursuant to the provisions of Article 12, paragraph 1(a) and (b), of the Convention, labour inspectors must be empowered to enter freely at any hour of the day or night any workplace liable to inspection, and to enter by day any premises which they may have reasonable cause to believe to be liable to inspection, in order to discharge their duties. The absence of the employer or his representative does not constitute valid grounds for preventing this right from being exercised. The Committee therefore asks the Government to supply information on the measures taken to ensure that labour inspectors have the right of free entry in accordance with the Convention.

Article 13, paragraphs 1 and 2. Powers of injunction of labour inspectors. The Committee notes that measures have been proposed by the CMLL with a view to authorizing labour inspectors to order the stoppage of work in the event of non-compliance with national legislation. It would like to draw the Government’s attention to the provisions of the Convention which distinguish two kinds of powers aimed at affording protection to workers against risks to their health. Inspectors must have the right to make or have made orders requiring, firstly, such measures as may be necessary to secure compliance, within a specified time limit, with the legal provisions relating to the health or safety of the workers and, secondly, measures with immediate executory force in the event of imminent danger to the health or safety of the workers. It is important to note that, in the latter case, it is not necessary to establish the existence of a violation of the legislation, the existence of an imminent danger being sufficient grounds for ordering a measure with immediate executory force. The Committee hopes that the Government will ensure that the measures proposed by the CMLL will incorporate the distinction made by Article 13 of the Convention in such a way that, in the event of imminent danger to the health and safety of the workers, there is no need to establish the existence of a violation of the law in order to impose a stoppage of work until such time as the conditions of health and safety in question are restored.

Articles 17 and 18. Legal proceedings and adequate penalties. According to the Government, the CMLL has also proposed measures to increase the power of labour inspectors to impose administrative fines on employers who have committed violations. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would send drafts of the relevant texts and, if they have been adopted, to send copies of the final texts.

The Government explains that over the years a degree of impunity has arisen, partly enhanced by the absence of regular inspections and the lack of inspection service staff. In order to rectify the situation, it considers it necessary to make an effort, initially, to ensure that the employers are convinced of the determination to enforce strict compliance with labour legislation, including by means of penalties. It announces that rules and directives for the employers and for the public are being drawn up to this effect. After a transition period allowing employers to comply with the proscribed rules, it will impose the application of penalties in the event of violations. In this regard, the Committee underlines, in paragraph 292 of its 2006 General Survey on labour inspection, that it is essential for the credibility and effectiveness of the system for the protection of workers for violations to be identified by national legislation and for the proceedings instituted or recommended by labour inspectors against employers guilty of violations to be sufficiently dissuasive and to make employers in general aware of the risks they run if they fail to meet their obligations. The Committee reiterates that inspectors should, nevertheless, have the capacity to refrain from having recourse to immediate penalties for ensuring the application of legal provisions and thus give priority to securing conformity (Article 17, paragraph 2), a follow-up visit after giving the employer a time limit generally being enough to achieve the desired objective (paragraph 283 of the General Survey). The Committee asks the Government to supply information in its next report regarding the progress made on the drawing up of rules and directives for the application of labour legislation intended for employers and the public, and to send copies of the relevant texts once they have been adopted.

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

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It hopes that a report will be supplied for examination by the Committee at its next session and that it will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous direct request, which read as follows:

The Committee takes note of the Government’s report and of the replies to its previous comments and to the workers’ representatives’ observations concerning shortcomings in the labour inspection system. The Committee notes that, according to the Government, labour inspectors as a rule perform their duties properly but understaffing prevents them from systematically checking the effectiveness of their actions. The Government furthermore acknowledges that the level of the penalties incurred by employers is too low and needs to be adjusted. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would continue to provide information on any measures to increase the strength of the labour inspectorate and raise the level of penalties.

Further to the undertaking given in its report, the Government is asked to indicate what arrangements have been made to promote collaboration between the various departments involved in labour inspection (Article 5(a) of the Convention) and any steps taken to promote collaboration between officials of the labour inspectorate and employers and workers or their organizations (Article 5(b)).

The Committee observes that the reasons cited by larger enterprises to prevent inspectors from carrying out visits are not relevant and could fall within the scope of Article 18. As Article 12(1) of the Convention provides, labour inspectors should be entitled to enter freely all workplaces covered by the Convention and to carry out the inspection, even in the absence of the employer or his representative. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would take the necessary steps to this end and keep the Office informed of them.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2003, published 92nd ILC session (2004)

The Committee takes note of the Government’s report and of the replies to its previous comments and to the workers’ representatives’ observations concerning shortcomings in the labour inspection system. The Committee notes that, according to the Government, labour inspectors as a rule perform their duties properly but understaffing prevents them from systematically checking the effectiveness of their actions. The Government furthermore acknowledges that the level of the penalties incurred by employers is too low and needs to be adjusted. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would continue to provide information on any measures to increase the strength of the labour inspectorate and raise the level of penalties.

Further to the undertaking given in its report, the Government is asked to indicate what arrangements have been made to promote collaboration between the various departments involved in labour inspection (Article 5(a) of the Convention) and any steps taken to promote collaboration between officials of the labour inspectorate and employers and workers or their organizations (Article 5(b)).

The Committee observes that the reasons cited by larger enterprises to prevent inspectors from carrying out visits are not relevant and could fall within the scope of Article 18. As Article 12(1) of the Convention provides, labour inspectors should be entitled to enter freely all workplaces covered by the Convention and to carry out the inspection, even in the absence of the employer or his representative. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would take the necessary steps to this end and keep the Office informed of them.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2002, published 91st ILC session (2003)

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It hopes that a report will be supplied for examination by the Committee at its next session and that it will contain full information on the following points raised in its previous direct request:

The Committee notes the Government’s reports for the period ending 31 May 1999. It also notes the comments made by workers’ representatives concerning the functioning of the labour inspectorate and the absence of practical measures for the implementation of the legislative provisions giving effect in law to the Convention.

According to the workers’ representatives, the operation of the labour inspectorate is in contradiction with the Convention with regard to the following points.

1.  Hours of work of labour inspectors. The working time of inspectors is limited to the morning and a part of the afternoon, which means that inspections by night are not possible.

2.  Total number of inspections. This number is very low in relation to the number of workplaces.

3.  Official reports of violations. Labour inspectors do not properly discharge their duty to make official reports on cases of infringements of labour laws.

4.  Level of penalties. The maximum financial penalties set out in the various labour laws are inadequate and should be revised to avoid frustration among labour inspectors and to achieve the preventive effect which is their main goal.

5.  Authority of labour inspectors. According to the comments made by the trade unions SEPA and ABV, labour inspectors are often prevented from supervising the application of legal provisions in major enterprises, and particularly multinationals. ABV calls upon the Government to grant them the support of the police force so that, where necessary, they can enter workplaces, carry out routine controls, impose sanctions and make official reports of the violations observed.

The Committee requests the Government to indicate its views on the allegations made above concerning shortcomings in the application of Articles 12, paragraph 1(a), 13, 16 and 18 of the Convention, and to provide additional information on the following points.

Articles 6 and 16. The Committee notes the information on the process of reorganizing the Department of Labour and harmonizing the labour legislation and the new Code on Penal Procedures with regard to labour inspection. Noting with interest that the staff of the inspection services of the Labour Inspection Section of the Department of Labour has been upgraded, but that the training of labour inspectors is encountering difficulties of a practical nature which prevents them, among other matters, from carrying out inspections with a minimum frequency of two per year per establishment, the Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide information on the progress and impact of the reorganization of the Department of Labour and the upgrading of labour inspectors, as well as on inspection activities and the frequency of inspections in industrial and commercial establishments.

Articles 4 and 5. Noting that labour inspection functions are divided between the Department of Technical Inspection of the Ministry of Justice, the Department of Public Health of the Ministry of Health, the Department of Economic Affairs of the Ministry of Economy and the Immigration Department of the Police Department, the Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide the necessary clarifications on the manner in which effect is given to Article 4, under which labour inspection shall be placed under the supervision and control of a central authority, and Article 5, which prescribes that the central authority shall make arrangements to promote: (a) effective cooperation between the inspection services and other Government services and public or private institutions engaged in similar activities; and (b) collaboration between officials of the labour inspectorate and employers and workers or their organizations.

Article 7. Noting the information concerning the conditions of recruitment and the methods of training inspectors during their employment, as well as the training announced by the Government, the Committee requests the Government to indicate the number of inspectors engaged in the various bodies of the inspection system, and the number of those benefiting from each of the training methods referred to by the Government in its report.

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

The Committee notes the Government’s reports for the period ending 31 May 1999. It also notes the comments made by workers’ representatives concerning the functioning of the labour inspectorate and the absence of practical measures for the implementation of the legislative provisions giving effect in law to the Convention.

According to the workers’ representatives, the operation of the labour inspectorate is in contradiction with the Convention with regard to the following points.

1. Hours of work of labour inspectors. The working time of inspectors is limited to the morning and a part of the afternoon, which means that inspections by night are not possible.

2. Total number of inspections. This number is very low in relation to the number of workplaces.

3. Official reports of violations. Labour inspectors do not properly discharge their duty to make official reports on cases of infringements of labour laws.

4. Level of penalties. The maximum financial penalties set out in the various labour laws are inadequate and should be revised to avoid frustration among labour inspectors and to achieve the preventive effect which is their main goal.

5. Authority of labour inspectors. According to the comments made by the trade unions SEPA and ABV, labour inspectors are often prevented from supervising the application of legal provisions in major enterprises, and particularly multinationals. ABV calls upon the Government to grant them the support of the police force so that, where necessary, they can enter workplaces, carry out routine controls, impose sanctions and make official reports of the violations observed.

The Committee requests the Government to indicate its views on the allegations made above concerning shortcomings in the application of Articles 12, paragraph 1(a), 13, 16 and 18 of the Convention, and to provide additional information on the following points.

Articles 6 and 16. The Committee notes the information on the process of reorganizing the Department of Labour and harmonizing the labour legislation and the new Code on Penal Procedures with regard to labour inspection. Noting with interest that the staff of the inspection services of the Labour Inspection Section of the Department of Labour has been upgraded, but that the training of labour inspectors is encountering difficulties of a practical nature which prevents them, among other matters, from carrying out inspections with a minimum frequency of two per year per establishment, the Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide information on the progress and impact of the reorganization of the Department of Labour and the upgrading of labour inspectors, as well as on inspection activities and the frequency of inspections in industrial and commercial establishments.

Articles 4 and 5. Noting that labour inspection functions are divided between the Department of Technical Inspection of the Ministry of Justice, the Department of Public Health of the Ministry of Health, the Department of Economic Affairs of the Ministry of Economy and the Immigration Department of the Police Department, the Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide the necessary clarifications on the manner in which effect is given to Article 4, under which labour inspection shall be placed under the supervision and control of a central authority, and Article 5, which prescribes that the central authority shall make arrangements to promote: (a) effective cooperation between the inspection services and other Government services and public or private institutions engaged in similar activities; and (b) collaboration between officials of the labour inspectorate and employers and workers or their organizations.

Article 7. Noting the information concerning the conditions of recruitment and the methods of training inspectors during their employment, as well as the training announced by the Government, the Committee requests the Government to indicate the number of inspectors engaged in the various bodies of the inspection system, and the number of those benefiting from each of the training methods referred to by the Government in its report.

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

The Committee notes that the Government's report has not been received. It hopes that a report will be supplied for examination by the Committee at its next session and that it will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous direct request, which read as follows:

The Committee notes the indication contained in the Government's report for the period ending June 1993 that at the time of reporting the Government had not completed its reorganization and restructuring of the Labour Department involving projects such as the complete revision of the existing labour legislation for better conformity with relevant ILO Conventions and to meet present-day social and cultural needs; the development of an organizational structure and operational scheme for the labour administration; the upgrading of the labour inspectorate and the improvement of the industrial and public relations activities of the labour administration.

Article 5 of the Convention. Further to its previous comments, the Committee notes with interest that the inspectorate actually informs, advises and provides guidance to individuals, public and private organizations concerning compliance with labour laws in response to requests or complaints, or during inspection visits.

Articles 6 and 7. Further to its previous comments, the Committee notes the Government's indication that special training courses were taken by six out of the ten inspectors in 1992 and by two of the 11 inspectors in 1993. It notes from the Government's report however that there has not been a follow-up to the preliminary mission by an ILO official in November 1992, following the request made to the Office in June 1992. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any developments in this regard.

Articles 16, 20 and 21. The Committee notes with interest the statistical information regarding the number of inspections and the number of workers involved for the years 1990, 1991, 1992 and 1993. The Committee hopes that the measures for the reorganization of the Labour Department and the upgrading of the labour inspectorate referred to by the Government in its cover letter to its report will enable it to ensure that workplaces are inspected as often and as thoroughly as is necessary and that annual labour inspection reports containing all the particulars listed in Article 21 will be compiled, published and transmitted to the Office within the time-limits laid down in Article 20. Please supply all particulars in the next report.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1995, published 83rd ILC session (1996)

The Committee notes the indication contained in the Government's report for the period ending June 1993 that at the time of reporting the Government had not completed its reorganization and restructuring of the Labour Department involving projects such as the complete revision of the existing labour legislation for better conformity with relevant ILO Conventions and to meet present-day social and cultural needs; the development of an organizational structure and operational scheme for the labour administration; the upgrading of the labour inspectorate and the improvement of the industrial and public relations activities of the labour administration.

Article 5 of the Convention. Further to its previous comments, the Committee notes with interest that the inspectorate actually informs, advises and provides guidance to individuals, public and private organizations concerning compliance with labour laws in response to requests or complaints, or during inspection visits.

Articles 6 and 7. Further to its previous comments, the Committee notes the Government's indication that special training courses were taken by six out of the ten inspectors in 1992 and by two of the 11 inspectors in 1993. It notes from the Government's report however that there has not been a follow-up to the preliminary mission by an ILO official in November 1992, following the request made to the Office in June 1992. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any developments in this regard.

Articles 16, 20 and 21. The Committee notes with interest the statistical information regarding the number of inspections and the number of workers involved for the years 1990, 1991, 1992 and 1993. The Committee hopes that the measures for the reorganization of the Labour Department and the upgrading of the labour inspectorate referred to by the Government in its cover letter to its report will enable it to ensure that workplaces are inspected as often and as thoroughly as is necessary and that annual labour inspection reports containing all the particulars listed in Article 21 will be compiled, published and transmitted to the Office within the time-limits laid down in Article 20. Please supply all particulars in the next report.

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

The Committee notes that the Government's report has not been received. It hopes a report will be supplied for examination at its next session containing information in reply to its previous direct request which read as follows:

Article 5 of the Convention. The Committee notes the Government's indication that there are no arrangements to promote the effective cooperation and collaboration between the inspection services and other government services and public and private institutions, as well as employers and workers or their organisations. It would be glad if the Government would indicate any measures taken or envisaged in this respect.

Articles 6 and 7. The Committee notes the Government's indication that training is urgently required for inspection staff. Please indicate any measures taken or envisaged - perhaps with the technical cooperation of the ILO - to ensure that the requirements of these Articles are met.

Articles 16, 20 and 21. Further to its earlier comments, the Committee notes that the present strength of the inspection staff enables inspection visits to enterprises at least once a year. It has also noted the view of the Aruba Trahadornan Federation (FTA) that the Government should be more active in safeguarding the rights of workers under the Convention. It recalls the importance of publishing regular inspection reports as required by the Convention, as a means of assessing how the inspection system is working and what further measures are called for. It hopes that the necessary measures will be taken to ensure that an annual report is published and forwarded to the ILO, and that it contains all the information required by Article 21. Please include details in the next report.

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

The Committee notes the information provided in the Government's report.

Article 5 of the Convention. The Committee notes the Government's indication that there are no arrangements to promote the effective cooperation and collaboration between the inspection services and other government services and public and private institutions, as well as employers and workers or their organisations. It would be glad if the Government would indicate any measures taken or envisaged in this respect.

Articles 6 and 7. The Committee notes the Government's indication that training is urgently required for inspection staff. Please indicate any measures taken or envisaged - perhaps with the technical cooperation of the ILO - to ensure that the requirements of these Articles are met.

Articles 16, 20 and 21. Further to its earlier comments, the Committee notes that the present strength of the inspection staff enables inspection visits to enterprises at least once a year. It has also noted the view of the Aruba Trahadornan Federation (FTA) that the Government should be more active in safeguarding the rights of workers under the Convention. It recalls the importance of publishing regular inspection reports as required by the Convention, as a means of assessing how the inspection system is working and what further measures are called for. It hopes that the necessary measures will be taken to ensure that an annual report is published and forwarded to the ILO, and that it contains all the information required by Article 21. Please include details in the next report.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1991, published 78th ILC session (1991)

The Committee notes that the Government's report has not been received. It hopes that a detailed report in the form approved by the Governing Body will be supplied for examination by the Committee at its next session and that it will contain full information on the matter raised in its previous direct request, which read as follows:

Articles 20 and 21 of the Convention. The Committee notes that the annual inspection report has not been received by the International Labour Office. It hopes that in future these reports, containing all the information laid down in Article 21 of the Convention, will be communicated within the time set forth in Article 20.

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

Articles 20 and 21 of the Convention. The Committee notes with regret that the annual inspection report has not been received by the International Labour Office. It hopes that in future these reports, containing all the information laid down in Article 21 of the Convention, will be communicated within the time-limits set forth in Article 20.