Labour Inspection Convention, 1947 (No. 81) - Netherlands (Ratification: 1951)

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

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

The Committee notes the joint observations of the Netherlands Trade Union Confederation (FNV) and the National Federation of Christian Trade Unions (CNV) on Convention No. 81, received in 2021, which reiterate the observations of the FNV, CNV and the Trade Union Federation for Professionals (VCP) received in 2017.

Article 5(a) of Convention No. 81 and Article 12 of Convention No. 129. Cooperation between the labour inspection services and private institutions engaged in similar activities. The Committee notes that in reply to its previous comment, the Government indicates that inspectors and external experts (belonging to an OSH service or otherwise) operate independently of each other. The independence of the external expert is safeguarded by the system of certification. The Committee recalls once again that the report of the tripartite committee adopted by the Governing Body at its 322nd Session (November 2014) concerning the representation made under article 24 of the ILO Constitution relating to Conventions Nos 81 and 129 and the Occupational Safety and Health Convention, 1981 (No. 155) noted the lack of access of the labour inspectorate to the information held by private OSH services (for example, on emerging risks or trends). Therefore, the Committee urges the Government to provide information on the measures taken to promote effective cooperation between labour inspection and private OSH services (in particular for the exchange of relevant data), as well as on the impact of these activities on the work of the labour inspectorate. In this respect, the Committee also requests the Government to provide information on any measures adopted or envisaged following the initiation of discussions between the labour inspectorate and relevant actors, such as medical specialists, the association of occupational physicians (NVAB) and the association of OSH services (OVAL), which was noted in the Committee’s previous comment. 

Articles 12(1)(a) and 15(c) of Convention No. 81 and Articles 16(1)(a) and 20(c) of Convention No. 129. Inspections without previous notice. The Committee notes the Government’s reiterated statement, in reply to its previous comment, that in principle, the labour inspectorate only carries out unannounced inspection visits, and that the only exceptions to this principle are inspections of enterprises falling under the legislation relating to the control of major hazards involving dangerous substances. The Government indicates that in enterprises which fall under the legislation relating to the control of major-accidents hazards involving dangerous substances, the labour inspectorate checks whether the safety management system is well described, but also whether it works in concrete situations. Such inspections are extensive, usually take several days and require a great deal of involvement from companies. The Committee also notes the information provided on announced inspection visits in 2019 and 2020 (343 and 597 visits, respectively) and the Government’s indication that the capacity allocated to inspect the above enterprises has significantly increased since 2017. Lastly, it notes the Government’s indication that the labour inspectorate also carries out partially unannounced inspections. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the meaning of “partially announced inspections” and to continue to provide information on the number of unannounced inspections visits (disaggregated into totally and partially unannounced visits), the number and nature of violations detected and the measures undertaken.

Noting that the FNV and CNV reiterate that unannounced inspection visits are particularly important with respect to the control of major hazards involving dangerous substances, the Committee again requests the Government to provide its comments in this respect.

Article 14 of Convention No. 81 and Article 19 of Convention No. 129. Notification of occupational diseases. With regard to its previous comments on measures adopted or envisaged to ensure that the labour inspectorate is notified of cases of occupational diseases so that it carries out its duties effectively, theCommittee notes the Government’s indication that the Netherlands Centre for Occupational Diseases (NCvB) publishes annual reports on occupational diseases reported by occupational physicians and OSH services and that the labour inspectorate uses this information to establish inspection priorities. In this respect, the Committee notes that the FNV and CNV reiterate their view that employers should have the obligation to notify occupational diseases to the labour inspectorate, rather than holding only occupational physicians and OSH services responsible for notification to the NCvB.

While the Committee notes the more frequent publication of reports on occupational diseases by the NCvB (which is now annual and no longer biennial), it is bound to recall that the report of the tripartite committee adopted by the Governing Body at its 322nd Session (November 2014) concerning the representation made under article 24 of the ILO Constitution relating to Conventions Nos 81 and 129 and the Occupational Safety and Health Convention, 1981 (No. 155) considered that the system for the reporting of cases of occupational diseases did not appear to enable the labour inspectorate to carry out its preventive activities in a satisfactory manner given that the then biennial reports published by the NCvB enabled the inspectorate to take preventive action with regard to specific sectors, but did not enable it to react rapidly and carry out preventive activities or inspections in the specific workplaces concerned (paragraph 151). The Committee therefore requests the Government to continue to examine concrete ways in which the current system for notification of occupational diseases can be improved to ensure that the labour inspectorate is notified of cases of occupational diseases in a manner that enables the labour inspectorate to carry out its duties effectively, including for example, the intervention in workplaces where necessary (Articles 3(1)(a) and (b), 13, 17 and 18 of Convention No. 81 and Articles 6(1)(a) and (b), 18, 22, 23 and 24 of Convention No. 129) and the publication of annual labour inspection reports containing statistics of cases of occupational disease (Articles 20 and 21(g) of Convention No. 81 and Articles 26 and 27(g) of Convention No. 129).

The Committee also requests the Government to refer to its comment regarding the application of Article 11(c) (notification of occupational diseases) of Convention No. 155.

Articles 20 and 21 of Convention No. 81 and Articles 26 and 27 of Convention No. 129. Annual report on the work of the labour inspection services. The Committee notes that the labour inspection report of 2020, hyperlinked in the Government’s report and available in Dutch, appears to contain information on most of the subjects listed in Article 21 of Convention No. 81, with the exception of information on the number of workers employed in workplaces liable to inspection and statistics of violations detected. The Committee also notes that, in reply to its previous comment on Articles 26 and 27 of Convention No. 129, the Government indicates that there is no specific annual report for agriculture and that the labour inspection report of 2020 refers to the Agriculture & Green programme, which contains goals, activities and outcomes. The Committee also takes note of the Government’s indication that 400 inspections were carried out in agriculture between 2019 and 2020, most of them in the fields of OSH and fair work. Lastly, the Committee notes that the labour inspection report of 2020 does not appear to contain specific statistics for agriculture on the subjects listed in Article 27 of Convention No. 129. The Committee requests the Government to clarify whether the annual reports on the activities of the labour inspection services contain information on the number of workers employed in workplaces liable to inspection (Article 21(c) of Convention No. 81) and statistics of violations detected (Article 21(e) of Convention No. 81). It also requests the Government to clarify whether the above-mentioned reports contain information for agriculture on all the subjects listed in Article 27 of Convention No. 129.

Furthermore, the Committee requests the Government to refer to its above comment on Article 14 of Convention No. 81 and Article 19 of Convention No. 129 (notification of occupational diseases) as well as to its comment in its observation regarding the application of Articles 3, 10 and 16 of Convention No. 81 and Articles 6, 14 and 21 of Convention No. 129 (number of labour inspectors and the frequency of labour inspections, workload of labour inspectors and time spent on administrative tasks).

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

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

The Committee notes the joint observations of the Netherlands Trade Union Confederation (FNV) and the National Federation of Christian Trade Unions (CNV) on Convention No. 81, received in 2021, which reiterate the observations of the FNV, CNV and the Trade Union Federation for Professionals (VCP) received in 2017 and refer to the additional matters addressed below.

Articles 3, 10 and 16 of Convention No. 81 and Articles 6, 14 and 21 of Convention No. 129. Number of labour inspectors and the frequency of labour inspections to ensure the effective discharge of inspection duties. Workload of labour inspectors. Time spent on administrative tasks. Further to its previous comment on ensuring a sufficient number of labour inspectors and inspections to achieve adequate coverage of workplaces liable to inspection, the Committee notes that the Government indicates in its report that: (i) given the lack of information on the capacity of the labour inspectorate, in 2017 the inspectorate started with the Inspection Control Framework (ICF), which allows it to focus on certain risks or subjects, determine what it requires in terms of capacity (financially) to cover the chosen focus, as well as to use risk-based supervision and to be result-oriented; (ii) also in 2017, the coalitions parties in the Parliament made 50 million euros per year progressively available for strengthening the enforcement chain of the labour inspectorate in accordance with the ICF; (iii) between 2018 and 2020, the available resources of the labour inspectorate were mostly used for the recruitment, selection and supervision of new labour inspectors and investigators; (iv) in 2019 and 2020, the labour inspectorate had 1,335 and 1,348 full-time labour inspectors, respectively, and it is projected to grow to 1,541 full-time labour inspectors by the end of 2022 and to be at full capacity in 2023; and (v) in 2019 and 2020, 11,744 and 15,462 inspection visits were carried out, respectively. The Committee also notes the Government’s indication that the labour inspectorate currently pursues four goals under the ICF, namely: (a) restoring the balance between reactive investigations and active prevention-oriented inspections in the field of OSH; (b) increasing the proportion of joint inspections ofcompanies falling under the legislation relating to the control of major hazards involving dangerous substances; (c) increasing the extent to which the labour inspectorate works in an information-driven way; and (d) increasing the inspection coverage of fair working conditions. The Committee requests the Government to provide detailed information on the implementation of the Inspection Control Framework, the achievement of each of its four goals and its concrete impact on the work of the labour inspectorate, including on the inspectorate’s capacity to carry out its primary functions as set forth in Article 3(1) of Convention 81 and Article 6(1) of Convention 129, and to inspect workplaces with the necessary frequency and thoroughness. Noting the above-mentioned increase in the number of labour inspectors, it requests the Government to continue to provide information on the total number of labour inspectors, inspection visits, workplaces liable to inspection and workers employed therein, violations detected and penalties imposed, as well as on the number of industrial accidents and occupational diseases. The Committee requests the Government to specify in the requested information the statistics relating to the agricultural sector.

Furthermore, the Committee notes the information provided by the Government in reply to its previous comment on the meaning of the term “social impact” of the work of the labour inspectorate, which implies that the labour inspectorate tries to enforce regulations at workplaces where the risks are the highest and that by eliminating the highest risks it makes sure that the main harm is taken care of. In this regard, the Committee recalls that the report of the tripartite committee adopted by the Governing Body at its 322nd Session (November 2014) concerning the representation made under article 24 of the ILO Constitution relating to Conventions Nos. 81 and 129 and the Occupational Safety and Health Convention, 1981 (No. 155) requested the Government to ensure that the number and frequency of labour inspections is sufficient to ensure the effective discharge of inspection duties and compliance with the respective legal provisions in all workplaces, including enterprises that are not considered to be in high-risk sectors and small enterprises (paragraph 137). The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the measures adopted or envisaged to ensure that non-high-risk workplaces and small enterprises are inspected as often and as thoroughly as is necessary to ensure the effective application of the relevant legal provisions.

Lastly, with regard to the administrative tasks entrusted to labour inspectors, the Committee takes note of the Government’s information indicating that multiple measures have been taken to facilitate labour inspectors in administrative tasks, such as the provision of standardized formats for letters and fine reports, the deployment of senior inspectors as peer review of, or support for, other inspectors in the drafting of reports, as well as the establishment of an inspection support desk (“Inspectieondersteuning”) which assists inspectors in the administrative preparation of inspection projects by refining information, conducting preliminary research and selecting the correct addresses of companies to be inspected. The Government also indicates that the adoption of measures to facilitate the work of inspectors will continue to be one of the focuses of the labour inspectorate. The Committee takes note of the information provided and it requests once again the Government to specify the proportion of time spent by labour inspectors on administrative tasks, in relation to the primary functions of labour inspection.

Article 3(1) and (2) of Convention No. 81 and Article 6(1) and (3) of Convention No. 129. Functions of labour inspectors with regard to foreign workers. Further to its previous comment on inspections performed in conjunction with the police department that deals with residency issues, the Committee notes that the Government indicates in its report that when working jointly with the police department, while the police investigates whether there are migrants in an irregular situation, the labour inspectorate is concerned with compliance of the labour legislation with respect to migrant workers, who are entitled to fair work and wages irrespective of their legal status. The Committee recalls that the involvement of inspection staff in joint operations with the police is not conducive to the relationship of trust that it is essential to enlisting the cooperation of employers and workers. Workers in a vulnerable situation may not be willing to cooperate with the labour inspection services if they fear negative consequences as a result of inspection activities, such as being fined, losing their job or being expelled from the country. The Committee requests the Government to provide further information on the concrete actions undertaken by labour inspectors in cases where, in the discharge of their duties, they encounter violations of the legal provisions related to conditions of work and protection of wages for migrant workers, including those in an irregular situation, specifying how it ensures that these workers are actually granted their statutory rights, such as the payment of unpaid wages, social security benefits or the conclusion of an employment contract, and further specifying the amounts recovered and the number of contracts concluded in this respect.

The Committee notes that the FNV and CNV reiterate that migrant workers are especially vulnerable to abusive labour conditions and are very critical of the results of the work of the labour inspectorate in this respect, indicating that: (a) cases (i.e. accidents at work, physical abuse and unpaid wages) take so long to be inspected that, in the meantime, the workers concerned may be dismissed, feel victimized or are discouraged from filing again a complaint; (b) obvious infringements are not inspected, nor are they fined; and (c) inspections operate in a very fragmented manner, with the result that cases are not coordinated. The Committee requests the Government to provide detailed comments in this respect.

The Committee notes that the FNV and CNV also reiterate that very few cases of non-compliance are actually brought to the courts by migrant workers without the required work permit or residence permit and that while these possibilities exist formally, the protection of undocumented migrant workers lacks substance. Moreover, the FNC and CNV state that the number of prosecuted cases of labour exploitation and convicted offenders decreases every year and therefore the prosecution of such cases is lagging behind and labour exploitation often remains unpunished in the Netherlands. In this respect, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that several complaints are filed with the labour inspectorate on cases that may involve labour exploitation, but that only a few are brought to court because most cases either do not have the characteristics of labour exploitation or do not meet the high burden of proof established in this respect, although in such cases there may be a serious detriment to workers by employers that can be examined and investigated under administrative law. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the number and outcome of judicial proceedings on all matters, including labour exploitation, resulting from inspections carried out or actions taken by labour inspectors.

Lastly, the Committee also notes that the FNVandCNV indicate that the aforementioned vulnerability of migrant workers is sustained by the role of temporary employment agencies, which number 14,000 companies (22,000 if payrolling enterprises are included) and actively recruit migrant workers in the Netherlands, sometimes under deceptive pretentions. The FNV and CNV also indicate that migrant workers have become a business model for temporary employment agencies as well as for housing facilitators and transporting companies. In this regard, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that an advisory team was set up to advise the Cabinet on the protection of migrant workers and actions to be taken with respect to them, including combating labour exploitation, and that in October 2020 this team recommended increasing the capacity of the labour inspectorate in order to strengthen supervision in the temporary employment agency sector. The Government states that if a new Cabinet decides to consider such a recommendation, the labour inspection’s coverage of the temporary employment agency sector would increase and thus also the likelihood of detection of malpractices. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the measures adopted or envisaged to strengthen labour inspection in temporary employment agencies, including the follow-up measures taken following the recommendation of the Cabinet's advisory team in 2020 on this matter.

Noting that the FNV and CNV reiterate that the labour inspectorate is neither authorized nor sufficiently equipped to ensure the application of the collective agreements in relation to temporary posted workers, the Committee again requests the Government to provide its comments in this respect.

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

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

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

Article 3(1) and (2) of Convention No. 81 and Article 6(1) and (2) of Convention No. 129. Functions of labour inspectors with regard to foreign workers. The Committee previously noted the Government’s indication that labour inspectors are responsible for controlling whether foreign workers hold the required work permit, but not whether they hold the required residence permit. It also noted that labour inspectors are often accompanied by the police department that deals with residency and other issues for foreigners during inspection visits. The Government indicated that the labour inspectorate tries to prevent labour exploitation by controlling compliance with the legal provisions, and by preventing employers from hiring individuals that are not authorized to work in the Netherlands, who are especially vulnerable to exploitation. The Government further explained that there are no immediate consequences for workers when they are illegally employed, and that only employers may be fined under the relevant legal provisions.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication, in reply to the Committee’s request, that where labour inspectors detect non-compliance with regard to the payment of wages, they inform the workers concerned about this violation and the obligation of their employer to pay the outstanding wages. The Government reiterates that workers, including undocumented foreign workers, can bring a claim against their employer for outstanding wages, and that they ultimately can bring their claims before the civil courts but that labour inspectors have no role in this respect. It also notes the Government’s reply to the Committee’s request that no information is available on the number of cases in which foreign workers without the required work permit or residence permit have been granted their due rights. In this respect, the Committee also notes the observations made by the Netherlands Trade Union Confederation (FNV), the National Federation of Christian Trade Unions (CNV) and the Trade Union Federation for Professionals (VCP) received on 31 August 2017 that with respect to preventing abusive labour conditions for foreign workers, there is a pressing need to enforce the existing regulations. These three unions indicate that migrant workers are the most affected by violations relating to the minimum wage and other labour rights as they are over-represented in at-risk sectors, such as building and construction, transport and agriculture. The unions further indicate that very few cases are actually brought to the courts by foreign workers without the required work permit or residence permit. The trade unions add that while these possibilities exist formally, the protection of undocumented foreign workers lacks substance. In addition, the FNV, CNV and VCP observe that the labour inspectorate is neither authorized nor sufficiently equipped to ensure the application of the collective agreements in relation to temporary posted workers.

The Committee recalls its General Survey on labour inspection, 2006, in which it pointed out that the primary duty of labour inspectors is to protect workers and not to enforce immigration law and that any cooperation between the labour inspectorate and immigration authorities should be carried out cautiously keeping in mind that the main objective of the labour inspection system is to protect the rights and interests of all workers, and to improve their working conditions (paragraphs 78 and 161). In this respect, the Committee also recalls that in its General Survey on certain occupational safety and health instruments, 2017, it indicated that workers in a vulnerable situation may not be willing to cooperate with the labour inspection services if they fear negative consequences as a result of inspection activities, such as the loss of their job or expulsion from the country (paragraph 452). The Committee requests the Government to reply to the comments made by the FNV, CNV and VCP. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the manner in which it ensures that any inspections performed in conjunction with the police department that deals with residency do not interfere with the main objective of labour inspectors to ensure the protection of workers in accordance with labour inspectors’ primary duties as provided for in Article 3(2) of Convention No. 81 and Article 6(3) of Convention No. 129.

Article 5(a) and (b) of Convention No. 81 and Articles 12 and 13 of Convention No. 129. Cooperation between the labour inspection services and other government services and public or private institutions engaged in similar activities. 1. Cooperation among the labour inspection services at the Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment, and with inspection services in other ministries. The Committee previously noted the call of the FNV, CNV and VCP for a more uniform line of action in the different operation modes of the various inspectorates. The Committee notes that the Government refers, in reply to the Committee’s request to discuss this issue with the social partners, to the existing cooperation mechanisms between the labour inspection services and to the institutionalization of discussions on labour inspection issues between the labour inspection services of the Ministry and the FNV, including through the setting up a joint working group with representatives of the labour inspectorate and the FNV. The Committee takes note of this information.

2. Activities to promote effective cooperation between labour inspection and private occupational safety and health (OSH) services. The Committee recalls that the report of the tripartite committee adopted by the Governing Body at its 322nd Session (November 2014) concerning the representation made under article 24 of the ILO Constitution relating to Conventions Nos 81 and 129 and the Occupational Safety and Health Convention, 1981 (No. 155) noted the lack of access of the labour inspectorate to the information held by private OSH services (for example, on emerging risks or trends), which cover 93 per cent of employees. In this respect, the Committee notes the Government’s reference, in reply to the Committee’ request, to the initiation of discussions between the labour inspectorate and relevant actors, such as medical specialists, the association of occupational physicians (NVAB) and the association of OSH services (OVAL). The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the measures taken to promote effective cooperation between labour inspection and private OSH services (in particular for the exchange of relevant data), and to provide information on the impact of these activities on the work of the labour inspection services.

Article 7(3) of Convention No. 81 and Article 9(3) of Convention No. 129. Training of labour inspectors. The Committee recalls that the abovementioned tripartite committee set up to examine the representation made under article 24 of the ILO Constitution considered that, where specialized technical tasks are assigned to labour inspectors, they should receive additional training. The Committee notes the Government’s indication, in reply to the Committee’s request to consider discussing specific training needs with the Works Council and the social partners, that these training needs are already being regularly discussed with the Works Council; the Government adds that such needs were discussed in the working group set up with representatives of the labour inspectorate and the FNV in 2016, and that they will continue to be discussed in the regular meetings between the labour inspectorate and the FNV in 2017. The Committee takes note of this information.

Article 14 of Convention No. 81 and Article 19 of Convention No. 129. Notification of occupational diseases. The Committee recalls that in its report, the tripartite committee considered that the system for the reporting of cases of occupational disease to the Netherlands Centre for Occupational Diseases (NCvB) (publication by the NCvB of anonymized reports every two years) did not seem to enable the labour inspectorate to intervene rapidly in the specific workplaces concerned, and that the information collected by the NCvB did not appear to be complete as not all cases of occupational diseases appeared to be reported to that Centre.

The Committee notes the reiterated views expressed by the FNV, CNV and VCP that employers should have the obligation to notify occupational diseases to the inspectorate, rather than holding occupational physicians responsible for notification to the NCvB. In this respect, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that while this issue is subject to intense political consideration, it should be recalled that following the introduction of the requirement to report occupational diseases to the NCvB rather than the labour inspectorate, the number of the cases reported had increased significantly. The Committee, with reference to its comment under the Occupational Safety and Health Convention, 1981 (No. 155), notes that the Government also refers to ongoing efforts to increase the notification rate of occupational diseases, including proposed legislative changes to improve reporting by occupational physicians working for occupational health services. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the measures taken or envisaged to ensure that the labour inspectorate is notified of cases of occupational diseases in a manner that enables the labour inspectorate to carry out its duties effectively, including for example, the intervention in workplaces where necessary (Articles 3(1)(a) and (b), 13, 17 and 18 of Convention No. 81 and Articles 6(1)(a) and (b), 18, 22, 23 and 24 of Convention No. 129) and the publication of annual labour inspection reports containing statistics of cases of occupational disease (Articles 20 and 21(g) of Convention No. 81 and Articles 26 and 27(g) of Convention No. 129).

Article 15(c) of Convention No. 81 and Article 20(c) of Convention No. 129. Principle of the confidentiality of complaints. The Committee notes the Government’s statement, in reply to its previous request, that in principle, the inspectorate only carries out unannounced inspection visits, and that the only exceptions to this principle are inspections of enterprises which fall under the legislation relating to the control of major hazard installations dealing with dangerous substances, as such inspections are much more complex. Such inspections constituted less than 2 per cent of all inspection visits undertaken in 2014 and 2015, according to the statistics provided by the Government. In this respect, the Committee notes the observations made by the FNV, CNV and VCP that unannounced inspection visits are particularly important with respect to the control of major hazard installations concerning dangerous substances. The Committee requests the Government to reply to these comments. The Committee also requests that any inspections of enterprises relating to the control of major hazard installations concerning dangerous substances, including the extent and nature of prior notice provided, the number of violations detected, and remedial measures undertaken.

Issues specifically concerning labour inspection in agriculture

Articles 26 and 27 of Convention No. 129. Annual report on the work of the labour inspection services in agriculture. The Committee notes that the Government has once again not communicated a report on the labour inspection activities in agriculture (either as a separate report or as part of its general annual report). It notes the information provided by the Government on the number of labour inspections in the agricultural sector, and the Government’s reference to a document communicated with the Government’s report which contains some information on the labour inspection activities in the agricultural sector in 2015 with regard to OSH and undeclared work. Recalling that a considerable number of statistics on labour inspection in agriculture were already provided in previous reports of the Government, the Committee once again requests the Government to publish an annual report on the work of the inspection services in agriculture, or include this information in its general annual report, in accordance with Article 26(1) of the Convention, and to transmit a copy of this annual report to the Office, in accordance with Article 26(3).

Issues specifically concerning the application of Convention No. 81 in the Caribbean Part of the Netherlands

Articles 1–21 of Convention No. 81. Operationalization of a labour inspection system in the Caribbean Part of the Netherlands under the responsibility of the Dutch Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment. The Committee previously noted the Government’s explanations that the Dutch Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment became responsible for ensuring compliance with the legal provisions in the Caribbean Part of the Netherlands. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the labour inspection authority established in the Caribbean Part of the Netherlands currently employs four labour inspectors, is in the process of ongoing professionalization and forms part of the social affairs and employment unit of the State Agency for Caribbean Netherlands. The Government also indicates that the labour and occupational safety and health laws concerning the Caribbean Part of the Netherlands are currently being reviewed with a view to their modernization and that as of early 2018, annual labour inspection reports as required under Articles 20 and 21 of the Convention will be provided. The Committee encourages the Government to pursue its effort to implement the Convention, and requests it to continue to provide information on the effect given in law and practice to each provision of the Convention in the process of further operationalization of the labour inspectorate, including by indicating the legislative and regulatory provisions relevant to labour inspection. The Committee also requests the Government to provide information on the progress made with the review of the labour legislation, and to provide copies of any legislative texts adopted to this effect.

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

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

The Committee notes the joint observations made by the Netherlands Trade Union Confederation (FNV), the National Federation of Christian Trade Unions (CNV) and the Trade Union Federation for Professionals (VCP) on Conventions Nos 81 and 129, received on 31 August 2017, reiterating that no noticeable improvements in the application of the Conventions have occurred following the recommendations in the report of the tripartite committee adopted by the Governing Body at its 322nd Session (November 2014) concerning the representation made under article 24 of the ILO Constitution relating to Conventions Nos 81 and 129 and the Occupational Safety and Health Convention, 1981 (No. 155). In this respect, the Committee notes that the trade unions emphasize that they appreciate the exchange and work with the labour inspectorate, but that the Government does not provide sufficient means to the labour inspectorate.

Articles 3, 10 and 16 of Convention No. 81 and Articles 6, 14 and 21 of Convention No. 129. Number of labour inspectors and the frequency of labour inspections to ensure the effective discharge of inspection duties. Workload of labour inspectors. Time spent on administrative tasks. The Committee recalls that the tripartite committee in its report requested the Government to ensure that the number and frequency of labour inspections is sufficient to ensure the effective discharge of inspection duties and compliance with the respective legal provisions in all workplaces, particularly in enterprises that are not considered to be in high-risk sectors, and in small enterprises. The tripartite committee also encouraged the Government to ensure that administrative tasks entrusted to labour inspectors do not affect the effective discharge of their primary duties, in accordance with Article 3(2) of Convention No. 81 and Article 6(3) of Convention No. 129.

The Committee notes the observations made by the FNV, the CNV and the VCP that only 3.5 per cent of companies in high-risk sectors are inspected (where vulnerable categories like migrant workers are overrepresented), that the labour inspectorate is extremely understaffed and would require at least an additional 100 full-time labour inspectors as a result of having to deal with an extreme workload (due to an increase in the number of occupational accidents, the increasing scope of inspections and the increasing complexity of labour market fraud). The organizations indicate that if the capacity of the labour inspectorate is not substantially increased, there is a significant risk that workers will be exploited.

The Committee notes the information provided in the Government’s report that the number of labour inspections has continued to decrease to 21,138 in 2015 and 18,910 in 2016 (continuing the decreasing trend previously noted, from 39,610 inspections in 2005 to 22,641 in 2014). In this regard, the Committee also notes the Government’s indication that, since 2015, an increased focus has been placed on the social impact of labour inspection activities, with the number of inspections remaining important, but no longer being an objective in itself. The Committee also notes that the Government confirms the reiterated observations made by the FNV, the CNV and the VCP relating to an increased workload as a result of the need of labour inspectors to deal with an increasing number of legal objections and appeals from employers against the decisions and actions of the labour inspectorate. In this respect, the Committee notes the Government’s reiterated indication that the inspectorate intends to reduce the time spent on administrative tasks as much as possible and that inspectors are encouraged to address inefficient work processes and administrative loads and make proposals for the improvement of the inspectorate’s management.

The Committee finally notes the Government’s indication that the capacity of the labour inspectorate was subject to an independent assessment carried out at the request of Parliament in 2016. The Government states that the assessment found that annual plans and multi-annual plans of the inspectorate were well developed and based on sound risk evaluations. The assessment noted that determining whether the inspectorate had sufficient capacity required further information and depended on more explicit goal setting. The Committee once again requests the Government to ensure a sufficient number of labour inspectors and labour inspections to achieve adequate coverage of workplaces liable to inspection for the effective discharge of inspection duties. In this respect, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on any follow-up measures taken following the assessment of the capacity of the labour inspectorate in 2016, as well as any measures taken or contemplated to facilitate labour inspectors’ capacity to fulfil their duties in light of the increasing number of legal objections and appeals from employers.

Noting the Government’s indication that it focuses on the social impact of labour inspection activities, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the meaning of the term “social impact” in this context as well as on how such impact is measured, and requests it to continue to provide labour inspection statistics (including on the number of labour inspectors, the number of workplaces liable to inspection and the workers employed therein, the number of labour inspections, the number of violations detected and the penalties imposed, as well as the number of industrial accidents and cases of occupational disease). The Committee also once again requests the Government to specify the proportion of time spent by labour inspectors on administrative duties, in relation to the primary functions of labour inspection, and on any concrete steps taken to reduce the time spent on such tasks.

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

Article 3(1) and (2) of the Convention. Functions of labour inspectors concerning the control of foreign workers without the required work permit. The Committee previously noted the Government’s indication that labour inspectors check compliance with the legal provisions pertaining to all workers, including foreign workers that are undocumented. While labour inspectors control whether foreign workers hold the required work permit, the control of the required residence permit does not fall within their responsibility. It also noted the Government’s statement that the labour inspectorate and the Immigration and Naturalization Service (IND) do not conduct joint inspection visits, but noted from the information available on the website of the labour inspectorate that labour inspectors are often accompanied by the (foreigners) police during inspection visits.

The Committee notes the Government’s indications that the labour inspectorate tries to prevent labour exploitation by controlling compliance with the legal provisions concerning working conditions, working hours, minimum wages and illegal employment. Accordingly, the labour inspectorate tries to prevent employers from hiring individuals that are not authorized to work in the Netherlands, who are especially vulnerable to exploitation. It further explains that there are no immediate consequences for workers when they are illegally employed; only employers may be fined under the relevant legal provisions, and the Government reiterates that undocumented foreign workers without the required residence permits can claim their outstanding wages before the civil courts. The Committee requests the Government to provide detailed information on the actions taken by the labour inspectorate in relation to foreign workers where they are found to be working without the required work permits (informing foreign workers about their rights to claim their outstanding wages before the civil courts, notification to the immigration authorities, etc.). Please also provide information on the number of cases in which foreign workers without the required work or residence permits have been granted their due rights (number of cases submitted to the courts and their outcome), and the role played by labour inspectors in this regard.

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

The Committee notes the observations made by the Netherlands Trade Union Confederation (FNV), the National Federation of Christian Trade Unions (CNV) and the Trade Union Federation of Professionals (VCP) (formerly the Trade Union Confederation of Middle and Higher Level Employees’ Unions (MHP)), as well as the joint observations made by the Confederation of Netherlands Industry and Employers (VNO-NCW) and the Royal Association of Dutch SME Entrepreneurs (MKB Netherlands), communicated by the Government.

Follow-up to the recommendations of the tripartite committee (representation made under article 24 of the Constitution of the ILO)

The Committee notes that the report of the committee set up to examine the representation alleging non-observance by the Netherlands of this Convention, the Labour Inspection (Agriculture) Convention, 1969 (No. 129), and the Occupational Safety and Health Convention, 1981 (No. 155), made under article 24 of the ILO Constitution by the FNV, the CNV and the VCP was adopted by the Governing Body at its 322nd Session (November 2014).

It notes that that the FNV, CNV and VCP allege that the Government does not give appropriate follow-up to the recommendations of the tripartite committee, that there is a lack of a meaningful consultation process to find solutions and that no specific measures were proposed or introduced by the Government to address the recommendations in the representation. On the other hand, the VNO-NCW and the MKB Netherlands refer to some recent positive developments in relation to the issues raised in the representation.

Occupational safety and health (OSH) system introduced in the Netherlands in 2007. The Committee notes the Government’s explanations concerning the Dutch OSH policy and legislation. The Government indicates that a framework of rights, duties and goal-based regulations has been established in the national legislation (the public domain), and that the social partners, which are at the heart of a functioning OSH system, agree, in so-called OSH catalogues, on ways and methods to achieve healthy and safe working conditions in specific branches in order to comply with the goal-based regulation (the private domain). The Government indicates that, in this system, it has both facilitating and enforcement roles.

Articles 3(1) and (2) and 10 of the Convention. Workload of labour inspectors. Time spent on administrative tasks. The Committee recalls that the report of the tripartite committee examined the question of increase in the administrative tasks of labour inspectors (such as correspondence and drafting reports) at the expense of labour inspections. In this regard, the Committee requested the Government, in its previous comment, to provide information on the proportion of time spent by labour inspectors on administrative duties, in relation to their primary functions. In this regard, the Committee notes the Government’s reply that the careful recording of information on inspection visits and interventions is an administrative requirement, but that the inspectorate intends to reduce the time spent on administrative tasks as much as possible. This is intended, for example through the digitalization of tasks, and encouraging labour inspectors to make proposals for the improvement of inefficiencies that are observed in the management of work. The Government further indicates that labour inspectors spend 62 per cent of their time on labour inspections and tasks directly related to the handling of cases (preparing inspections and tasks following inspections, such as recording inspection results and findings, preparing improvement/prohibition notices or infringements reports), and that they spend 38 per cent of their time on training and the provision of advice.

The Committee notes that the FNV, CNV and VCP indicate that it is not clear from the Government’s report how much time labour inspectors actually spend on their primary duties. It further notes the indications of the FNV, CNV and VCP that according to the 2014 annual labour inspection report, the decisions of the labour inspectorate are increasingly judicially challenged, which results in labour inspectors spending more time on collecting and recording information and dealing with objections and appeals from employers. In this regard, the Committee also notes the Government’s explanation that the decrease in the number of labour inspection visits is partly due to cases having become more complex and time-consuming (cases involving notorious offenders, cases involving several employers, etc.). The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments to the observations made by the FNV, CNV and VCP, and once again requests the Government to provide information on the proportion of time spent by labour inspectors on administrative duties, in relation to the primary functions of labour inspection. Noting the increase in the complexity of cases, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the measures it is taking to ensure a sufficient number of labour inspections to ensure the effective discharge of inspection duties.

Article 5(a). Cooperation between the labour inspection services and other government services and public or private institutions engaged in similar activities. 1. Cooperation among the labour inspection services at the Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment, and with inspection services in other ministries. The Committee notes the Government’s reply to the Committee’s request as to the efforts made to improve cooperation between inspection services, that the operational directorates within the labour inspectorate work closely together, and that there are various instances of cooperation with other state inspection departments and enforcement agencies, including through discussions of the Inspector-Generals of the state inspection departments in the Inspection Council, which meets ten times a year. In this regard, it also notes the reference of the FNV, CNV and VCP in their observations to the 2014 report of a national OSH research institute, which criticized the many different operation modes of the various inspectorates and advocated a more uniform line of action. The Committee invites the Government to discuss with the social partners how cooperation among the operational directorates of the labour inspectorate at the Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment, and with inspection services in other ministries can be improved. 2. The activities undertaken to promote effective cooperation between labour inspection and private occupational safety and health (OSH) services. The Committee notes that the report of the tripartite committee considered the lack of access that the labour inspectorate has to the information held by OSH services (for example, on emerging risks or trends in particular health and safety issues) and noted the Government indications that assessments by the inspectorate to determine high-risk sectors are based on many different sources, but these assessments do not appear to be based on information held by private OSH services which cover 93 per cent of employees. The Committee notes that, in reply to its previous request concerning the promotion of effective cooperation between labour inspection and private OSH services (in particular for the exchange of relevant data), the Government refers to a programme aimed at improving OSH in companies, this includes, among other things, knowledge sharing with OSH services and consultations with the association of OSH services (OVAL). The Committee requests the Government to provide detailed information on the activities undertaken in the framework of the abovementioned programme to promote cooperation between the labour inspectorate and OSH services, and the impact of these activities on the work of the labour inspection services.

Article 7(3). Training of labour inspectors. The Committee notes that the tripartite committee considered that, where specialized technical tasks are assigned to labour inspectors, they should receive additional training. The Committee notes that the Government indicates, in response to the Committee’s previous request on the training provided to labour inspectors in the areas of psychosocial stress, chemical substances, nanoparticles and the evaluation of risk assessments, that meetings are organized with specialized inspectors and experts in the field of biological agents, psychological workload, dangerous substances, etc. It further notes the Government’s reference to a specialized course on psychosocial risks. The Government further indicates that the inspectorate closely monitors developments with regard to new occupational risks, such as nanotechnology and provides special training when sufficient scientific knowledge is available. The FNV, CNV and VCP emphasize that in their view, which is supported by the Works Council of the labour inspectorate, labour inspectors are not sufficiently equipped with knowledge and skills to fulfil their duties. The Committee requests the Government to consider discussing specific training needs with the Works Council of the labour inspectorate and the social partners. Please provide information on the outcome of these discussions, and where applicable, any measures taken as a result.

Articles 10 and 16 of the Convention. Number of labour inspectors and the frequency of labour inspections to ensure the effective discharge of inspection duties. The Committee recalls that the tripartite committee examined the question of the number of labour inspectors and of labour inspections, the focus of inspections on high-risk companies (leaving other companies under inspected) and the absence of inspections in small enterprises (with fewer than 20 workers). In this regard, the tripartite committee noted that, between 2005–13, the number of labour inspectors decreased from 478 to 439 and the number of labour inspections decreased from 39,610 to 23,321. The tripartite committee also noted the Government’s reference to the particularities of the Dutch OSH system and its indication that fewer inspections do not mean a fall in the quality of enforcement or in compliance with laws and regulations, but are rather a consequence of the efficient deployment of inspection capacity and the active involvement of companies and social partners to tackle OSH issues.

The tripartite committee welcomed the involvement of the social partners and of enterprises in compliance monitoring and assessment, as well as the development of new methods of collaboration and involvement, but considered that they cannot replace the compliance and enforcement functions of the labour inspectorate. Especially in workplaces where trade union representation is low, such as in SMEs, workers are unlikely to be in a sufficiently strong position to take over responsibility from the labour inspectorate for ensuring compliance with the legal obligations. In this regard, the tripartite committee also noted that the Government did not reply to the trade union’s allegations that a significant number of employers do not have a risk-assessment system and do not comply with their obligations under the Working Conditions Act to seek expert OSH assistance.

In reply to the Committee’s request concerning the number and frequency of labour inspections (particularly in enterprises that are not considered to be in high-risk sectors and in small enterprises), the Committee notes the Government’s indication that all sectors are covered by labour inspections. It also notes the Government’s indication that, while labour inspectors focus on high risk sectors, inspections are also undertaken following certain signals (such as industrial accidents and complaints from individuals, workers or their representatives). The Committee notes from the statistics provided by the Government that the number of labour inspections has continued to decrease (from 23,321 in 2013 to 22,641 in 2014). According to the Government’s explanation, this is partly as a result of cases having become more complex and time-consuming. The Committee also notes that no distinction is made in the statistics provided concerning labour inspections in enterprises not considered to be high-risk and in small enterprises.

In relation to the statistics provided by the Government, the Committee notes that the FNV, CNV and VCP emphasize the decrease of labour inspections, interventions, preventive measures, sanctions, and financial penalties, whereas the VNO-NCW and the MKB Netherlands emphasize the increase in the number of labour inspectors (from 439 in 2013 to 464 in 2014) which is more than prior to the OSH system reform in 2007, and the decrease in the number of industrial accidents. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide statistics on the activities of the labour inspection services (including the number of workplaces liable to inspection and the workers employed therein, the number of labour inspections, the number of violations detected and the penalties imposed, as well as the number of industrial accidents and cases of occupational diseases). In this respect, the Committee requests the Government to aggregate the number of labour inspections by indicating the number of labour inspections in high-risk sectors and in small and medium-sized enterprises. Please also provide information on the number of labour inspections carried out following complaints made by workers in small enterprises, and the number of labour inspections concerning the compliance of employers with regard to risk-assessments and their obligations under the Working Conditions Act to seek expert OSH assistance.

Article 14. Notification of occupational diseases. The Committee recalls that the report of the tripartite committee considered that the system for the reporting of cases of occupational disease does not appear to enable the labour inspectorate to carry out its preventive activities in a satisfactory manner. The tripartite committee considered that the anonymized reports of the Netherlands Centre for Occupational Diseases (NCvB), published every two years, enable the inspectorate to take preventive action with regard to specific sectors, but do not seem to enable it to react rapidly and carry out preventive activities or inspections in the specific workplaces concerned. Moreover, it considered that the information in the report of the NCvB does not appear to be complete due to the reporting of occupational diseases.

The Committee refers to its 2015 comments under the Occupational Safety and Health Convention, 1981 (No. 155) where it noted the Government’s indication on the measures that are being considered to improve the reporting of occupational diseases to the NCvB. The Committee also notes the views expressed by the FNV, CNV and VCP that employers should have the obligation to notify occupational diseases to the inspectorate, rather than holding occupational physicians responsible for notification to the NCvB. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments in relation to the abovementioned observations of the FNV, CNV and VCP.

Article 15(c). Principle of the confidentiality of complaints. The Committee notes that the tripartite committee emphasized that unannounced labour inspections should be made to ensure that when inspections are conducted as a result of a complaint, the fact of the complaint is kept confidential.

In this regard, the Committee notes the Government’s indication, in response to the Committee’s request to indicate the number of unannounced labour inspection visits, in relation to the overall number of inspection visits, that in principle, the inspectorate only carries out unannounced inspection visits. The only exceptions are inspections of enterprises which fall under the legislation relating to the control of major-accidents hazards involving dangerous substances, because they are much more complex (447 inspections of the 22,641 inspections in 2013). In the case of a complaint, the inspectorate is required under section 26 of the Working Conditions Act not to disclose any personal details of the worker to the employer. In cases where the possibility exists that a complaint could be traced back to a worker, the inspector can propose to the worker that the complaint be filed by the works council or employee representation.

In this regard, the Committee also notes the observations made by the FNV, CNV and VCP, that the Government’s indications on the relation between announced and unannounced inspection visits is not substantiated and sharply contradicts the experience and observations of other stakeholders. The Committee also notes the observations made by the VNO-NCW and MKB Netherlands that the Dutch system of announced and unannounced inspection visits ensures a good balance. The Committee requests the Government to provide detailed statistics on the number of announced and unannounced inspection visits. Please also indicate how many inspections visits were made as a result of a complaint, compared with regular inspection visits.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2014, published 104th ILC session (2015)

Follow-up to the recommendations of the tripartite committee (representation made under article 24 of the Constitution of the ILO)

The Committee notes that the Governing Body at its 322nd Session, in November 2014, approved the report of the tripartite committee set up to examine the representation made by the Netherlands Trade Union Confederation (FNV), the National Federation of Christian Trade Unions (CNV) and the Trade Union Federation for Professionals (VCP) (formerly the Trade Union Confederation of Middle and Higher Level Employees’ Unions (MHP)) under article 24 of the ILO Constitution, alleging non-observance by the Netherlands of the Convention, the Labour Inspection (Agriculture) Convention, 1969 (No. 129), and the Occupational Safety and Health Convention, 1981 (No. 155) (GB.322/INS/13/7). The Governing Body entrusted the Committee to follow up on the issues raised in the report in respect of the application of the Convention and Conventions Nos 129 and 155.

The Committee asks therefore that the Government provide information on the issues raised by the tripartite committee for their examination by the Committee at its next session, in particular on:

• (i) the steps taken to ensure that administrative tasks entrusted to labour inspectors do not affect the effective discharge of their primary duties. In this regard, the Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide information on the proportion of time spent by labour inspectors on administrative duties, in relation to the primary functions of labour inspection (Article 3(2) of the Convention);
• (ii) the efforts made by the Government to improve cooperation among the operational directorates of the Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment and with the inspection services in other ministries; and the activities undertaken to promote effective cooperation between labour inspection and private occupational safety and health (OSH) services, in particular for the exchange of relevant data (Article 5(a));
• (iii) the provision of additional training where more specialized tasks are assigned to labour inspectors. In this regard, the Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide information on the training provided to labour inspectors in the areas of psychosocial stress, chemical substances, nano-particles in the workplace and the evaluation of risk assessments (frequency, duration and number of participants), in so far as labour inspectors are tasked with duties in this respect (Article 7(3));
• (iv) the measures taken to ensure that the number of labour inspectors and the frequency of labour inspections are sufficient to ensure the effective discharge of inspection duties and compliance with the respective legal provisions in all workplaces, particularly in enterprises that are not considered to be in high-risk sectors and in small enterprises. Please provide relevant statistics in this regard, including on the number of workplaces liable to inspection and the number of workplaces covered by inspection visits (please specify the corresponding number of high-risk workplaces, workplaces not considered to be high-risk and small enterprises); and statistics on violations detected and penalties imposed (including information on the legal provisions to which they relate, in particular the Working Conditions Act (risk assessments and organization of OSH expert assistance) and statistics on industrial accidents and occupational diseases (Articles 10 and 16);
• (v) the outcome of the examination of the ways in which the system for the notification of occupational diseases can be improved and, if applicable, the actions taken in this regard (Article 14);
• (vi) the number of unannounced labour inspection visits, in relation to the overall number of other inspection visits, as one of the means to ensure the confidentiality of complaints (Article 15(c)).

The Committee notes the information in the Government’s report received on 29 August 2014, in reply to the Committee’s previous comments. The Committee notes that most of the previous comments made by the Committee are related to the questions dealt with in the above representation. The Committee will therefore examine the relevant information provided in the Government’s report at its next session, together with the information provided by the Government in response to the issues raised by the tripartite committee.

Other questions

Article 3(1) and (2). Additional functions entrusted to labour inspectors. The Committee previously noted from the annual report on the work of the labour inspectorate that about one third of the labour inspections carried out in 2010 related to the control of illegal employment (that is, the Foreign National Employment Act and the Minimum Wage and Holiday Allowance Act).

The Committee notes the Government’s indication that since two years ago, labour inspectors are also entrusted with controlling whether foreign workers hold the required work permits, but that they have no competence regarding the stay of undocumented foreign workers. It further notes the Government’s indication that labour inspectors are entrusted with controlling compliance with the legal provisions in the areas of minimum wages, working hours and OSH, irrespective of whether foreign workers are undocumented. It also notes that the Government states that the labour inspectorate and the Immigration and Naturalization Service (IND) have separate responsibilities, and do not conduct joint inspection visits. However, the Committee also notes from information available on the website of the labour inspectorate that labour inspectors are often accompanied by the (foreigners) police during inspection visits.

It finally notes the Government’s indications that undocumented foreign workers without the required residence permits can claim their outstanding wages before the civil courts, just as other workers. Referring once again to its indications, in paragraph 78 of its 2006 General Survey on labour inspection, that the primary duty of labour inspectors is to protect workers and not to enforce immigration law, the Committee asks that the Government indicate the measures taken or envisaged to ensure that the functions of verifying the legality of employment do not interfere with the effective discharge of the primary duties of the labour inspectors relating to the observance of workers’ rights, and do not prejudice the relationship of trust with employers and workers.

It asks the Government to provide information on the applicable procedure and the legal and practical consequences for foreign workers, where they are found to be working without the required work permit. It also once again asks that the Government provide information on action undertaken by the labour inspection services in the enforcement of employers’ obligations with regard to the statutory rights of undocumented foreign workers for the period of their effective employment relationship, such as the payment of wages and other benefits, especially in cases where they are expelled from the country.

[The Government is asked to reply in detail to the present comments in 2015.]

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

With reference to its observation the Committee would like to raise the following additional questions.

Article 3(b) of the Convention. Technical information and advice to employers and workers. The Committee notes that the Government has developed a demand-driven digital information system for employers and workers providing information on the legislation, ways of complying with it and new and emerging risks. The Committee asks the Government to describe in further detail the demand-driven digital information system and to provide an indication of its impact.

Articles 14, 20 and 21 of the Convention. Recording and notification of occupational accidents and diseases. Annual report on the work of the labour inspectorate. The Committee takes note of the 2010 annual report which is available on the Internet site www.arbeidsinspectie.nl as well as the English summary of the report provided by the Government. However, it has been unable to find statistics of cases of occupational disease in the annual report. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the Netherlands Centre for Occupational Diseases (NCVB) is responsible for the analysis of cases of occupational disease. In its 2009 comment under the Occupational Safety and Health Convention, 1981 (No. 155), the Committee had noted, in response to the observations made by the FNV with regard to the under-reporting of occupational diseases, the adoption of measures to improve the reporting of occupational diseases in the national registration system of the National Committee on Occupational Diseases, including improved communication with the experts responsible for submitting the reports by providing tailor-made information to these experts, offering feedback and refresher courses, as well as developing guidelines to empower experts to report occupational diseases. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would indicate any further steps taken or envisaged in order to ensure that the labour inspectorate is informed of cases of occupational disease. It also requests the Government to ensure that annual reports of the work of the labour inspectorate include statistics on cases of occupational disease (Article 21(g) of the Convention).

Article 15(c). Obligation of confidentiality regarding the source of complaints. The Committee notes that, in accordance with section 26 of the WCA, labour inspectors may only disclose the names of individuals submitting a complaint or reporting a contravention of the WCA and the provisions based on it, to their superiors in office, except where the individuals submitting a complaint or reporting a contravention have made a statement in writing to the effect that they do not object to their name being disclosed. Referring also to its comment under Convention No.155, the Committee requests the Government to transmit a copy of the relevant internal instruction of the labour inspectorate of 17 June 2008, which protects the anonymity of complainants.

Bonaire, St. Eustacius and Saba. The Committee notes from the Government’s report that on 10 October 2010, Bonaire, St. Eustacius and Saba became part of the Dutch polity and that the Netherlands Antilles no longer exist. The Government is confined to indicating that the Convention was not implemented in the Netherlands Antilles. The Committee notes that, given that Bonaire, St. Eustacius and Saba are now part of the Netherlands, the Conventions ratified by the Netherlands, including Convention No. 81, are fully applicable to them. The Committee therefore requests the Government, given the particularities of these parts of the Netherlands, to indicate the way in which the Convention is implemented in each one of them.

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

The Committee takes note of the observations made by the Netherlands Trade Union Confederation (FNV), the National Federation of Christian Trade Unions (CNV) and the Trade Union Confederation of Middle and Higher Level Employees’ Unions (MHP) in a communication dated 31 August 2011 which was communicated to the Government on 19 September 2011. It notes that in their comments, the three trade union organizations reiterate to a large extent observations already made in their communications of September and August 2007 with regard to the impact of the revised Working Conditions Act, 2007 (and the related Working Conditions Decree and Working Conditions Regulations) on the functioning of the labour inspection system. The Committee requests the Government to make any observation it deems appropriate in relation to these comments.

Articles 3, 5, 7, 9, 10, 13 and 16 of the Convention. Functioning of the labour inspection system in the area of occupational safety and health (OSH). The Committee notes the information contained in the annual report on the work of the labour inspectorate to the effect that between 2008 and 2010, the number of labour inspectors was further reduced from 465 to 431 and that the number of inspection visits decreased from 35,000 to 31,849. It notes that according to the previous and current comments of the FNV, CNV and MHP, the chance for a company to be visited by an inspector is only once in every 30 years on average and that one inspector corresponds to about 30,000 workers.

The Committee notes that, in the view of the Government, this reduction has to be seen in the context of the new national occupational safety and health policy, introduced after the entry into force of the revised Working Conditions Act in 2007; this policy has resulted in efficiency gains in the deployment of inspectors and in very good conditions for workers (corroborated, according to the Government, by surveys affirming the high level of worker satisfaction, as well as a risk level of occupational accidents that is below the European average).

In the opinion of the Government, the differentiation made by the new OSH policy between the “public and private domains” allows for “self-activation”, meaning that the social partners have the opportunity to find appropriate ways of complying with targets in the various sectors, thus enabling labour inspectors to focus on sectors with substantial working environment problems. General rules and targets for the protection of workers are laid down by the Government in the “public domain”, while in the “private domain” the social partners agree on ways and methods to achieve and implement these public targets by means of “catalogues (or Arbocatalogues)” which, once approved by the labour inspectorate, are legally binding and taken into account by labour inspectors during inspections. Over 150 “catalogues” have been concluded between employers and workers, in the framework of a Government subsidy scheme covering over half of the workers in the country, and the social partners are taking measures to implement the “catalogues” in individual workplaces.

The Government adds that the function of providing technical information and advice to employers and workers on means of complying with legal provisions, in the context of the new national occupational health and safety (OSH) policy, is largely assumed by private occupational safety and health services (the so-called Arbodiensten), which provide advice on working conditions and occupational safety and health policy to companies in a way which is adapted to their specific situation. The Government further indicates that Arbodienst enterprises cover about 92 per cent of the workforce, are independent and required to comply with certain legal obligations, including sufficient expertise in industrial medicine, safety and hygiene and organizational science and, according to the Government, they help companies to convert legal commitments and scientific views into specific measures.

The Committee also notes the Government’s indication that measures are to be adopted in 2011 to help employers cope with the new requirements of the so-called “ARIE” Regulations on working with dangerous substances, which the Confederation of Netherlands Industry and Employers (VNO–NCW) had described in the past as too complex and creating a heavy administrative burden. These measures encompass the design and dissemination of relevant education as well as information measures taken following the feasibility studies carried out by the National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM) as well as tailor-made consultation and advice in individual workplaces, by means of: (i) the system of Arbodiensten; and (ii) several private institutions which provide information on OSH, training for employees, certification and monitoring of workplaces and machinery.

The Committee recalls that according to Article 10 of the Convention, the number of labour inspectors should be sufficient to secure the effective discharge of the duties of the inspectorate in the light of the number of the workplaces liable to inspection, the number of workers employed therein, the number and complexity of the legal provisions to be enforced as well as the material means placed at the disposal of the inspectors and the practical conditions under which visits of inspection must be carried out in order to be effective. Moreover, according to Article 16, workplaces should be inspected as often and as thoroughly as is necessary to ensure the effective application of the relevant legal provisions.

The Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide information on:

• (i) the impact of the new OSH policy on levels of compliance with labour law and the prevention of industrial accidents and cases of occupational disease including psychosocial aspects, which constitute one of the priorities mentioned in the Government’s previous report (Articles 3(1)(a) and (b));
• (ii) the evaluation of the needs of the labour inspection system in terms of human resources in the light of the number of workplaces liable to inspection and the number of workers employed therein in the context of the new OSH policy (Article 10);
• (iii) the powers given to the labour inspectors with a view to remedying defects observed in plant, layout or working methods which they may have reasonable cause to believe constitute a threat to the health and safety of the workers, including measures with immediate executory force in the event of imminent danger to the health and safety of the workers (Article 13);
• (iv) the impact of the collaboration with the social partners in the implementation of the “catalogues” on labour law compliance in workplaces in various sectors and branches (Article 5(b));
• (v) the operation in practice of the system of “Arbodiensten”, in particular, the procedure for the authorization of these enterprises, the manner in which they are supervised by the labour inspectorate, their functioning (scope of activity, safeguards of independence, whether the use of their services is voluntary or statutorily mandated, the costs associated with their services, their availability to small- and medium-enterprises, etc.) as well as their impact on compliance with labour legislation in individual workplaces (Articles 5(a) and 9);
• (vi) the measures adopted to facilitate compliance with the so-called “ARIE” Regulations and their impact (Articles 3(1)(b) and 5(b));
• (vii) the implementation of a pilot project mentioned in the Government’s report which includes training to inspectors with respect to nanotechnology risks (Articles 3(1)(b) and 7(3)).

Articles 3(1) and (2). Additional functions entrusted to labour inspectors. The Committee notes from the annual report on the work of the labour inspectorate that among 31,849 inspection visits in 2010, 10,500 related to the control of illegal employment (i.e. the Act on Employment of Foreigners Workers (WAV) and the Minimum Wage and Holiday Allowance Act (WML)). It understands that among the current inspectors, 171 have been charged with the control of illegal employment and wages in collaboration with the Social Security Investigation and Information Service (SIOD), a special department working together with the police and tax authorities. The Committee further notes that inspections were targeted at sectors where the risk of illegal employment was suspected to be very high. Such inspections were facilitated through research and joint actions with the Immigration and Naturalization Service (IND), the Employee Insurance Agency (UWV), the Tax Department, the Social Insurance Bank (SVB), the municipalities, the SIOD and the police, as well as through data exchange between the IND and the UWV.

The Committee would like to recall that the primary role of the labour inspectorate, pursuant to Article 3(1), is to secure the enforcement of the legal provisions relating to conditions of work and the protection of workers and to supply technical information and advice; any further duties which may be entrusted to labour inspectors should not be such as to interfere with the effective discharge of the primary duties or to prejudice in any way the authority and impartiality which are necessary to inspectors in their relations with employers and workers (paragraph 2 of the same Article). The Committee notes that, in view of the diminishing human resources available to the inspection services, calling upon inspectors to monitor the legality of the employment relationship will necessarily entail a proportionate reduction in inspection of conditions of work. With regard to workers from third countries (non-EU) in particular, the Committee recalls that according to paragraph 78 of its 2006 General Survey on labour inspection, the primary duty of labour inspectors should be to protect workers and not to enforce immigration law. The function of verifying the legality of employment should have as its corollary the reinstatement of the statutory rights of all the workers if it is to be compatible with the objective of labour inspection.

The Committee requests the Government to specify the impact of the activities carried out by the labour inspectorate in the area of illegal employment on the enforcement of legal provisions relating to conditions of work and the protection of workers including the outcomes of administrative decisions, court rulings, etc.

The Committee also asks the Government to specify the role of the labour inspectors in the framework of joint actions with the IND and the police and to indicate the manner in which the enforcement of employers’ obligations with regard to the rights of undocumented foreign workers is ensured for the period of their effective employment relationship, especially in cases where such workers are expelled from the country.

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

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

With reference to its observation, the Committee would like to request information on the following points concerning the Act on Working Conditions (Health and Safety), which came into force on 1 January 2007.

Article 2 of the Convention. Scope of application. The Committee notes that, according to section 30(1) of the Act, the Minister of Social Affairs and Employment may exempt categories of businesses, establishments or working relationships from the requirements laid down in or by virtue of section 5 (elaboration of risk inventory and assessment) and sections 12–18 (cooperation, consultation and particular rights of the works council, the staff representation body and employees affected). The Committee requests the Government to indicate any such exemptions granted.

Article 3(1)(b). Technical information and advice to employers and workers. The Committee observes that the Act on Working Conditions establishes a preventive approach to occupational safety and health (OSH) based on the preparation and periodic revision of a risk inventory and assessment by the employer in consultation with the works council, the staff representation body or the employees affected. The Committee recalls that, according to Article 3(1)(b), one of the essential functions of the labour inspection system is to supply technical information and advice to employers and workers concerning the most effective means of complying with the legal provisions. The Committee notes in this regard that section 8 of the Act provides that the employer shall ensure that employees are given appropriate information about their duties and the associated risks as well as on the measures in place to prevent or limit these risks, and that she/he will ensure that they are provided with adequate training. The Committee requests the Government to provide details on relevant educational activities carried out by the labour inspectorate so as to ensure the implementation of the Working Conditions Act by all parties concerned.

Article 4(1) and Article 9. Structure of the labour inspectorate and collaboration with technical experts. The Committee notes that, according to section 24(2) of the Act, officials other than those of the Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment shall be charged with monitoring compliance with regard to certain categories of work designated by the Minister of Social Affairs and Employment and the other minister in question. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the categories of work with respect to which officials other than those of the Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment are charged with monitoring compliance with the Act.

Article 7. Conditions for recruitment of labour inspectors. The Committee notes that, according to section 24(1) of the Act, compliance with the provisions of the Act will be monitored, in general, by officials in the Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment designated by the Minister by resolution. The Committee requests the Government to specify the criteria on the basis of which labour inspectors are designated.

Article 12(1)(a). Right to enter workplaces liable to inspection at any hour of the day or night. The Committee notes that, according to section 24(3) of the Act on Working Conditions, inspectors are entitled to enter dwellings without the inhabitant’s consent. According to section 24(4), they are also entitled to initiate an investigation into an accident at work at any time. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would specify whether labour inspectors are, in general, authorized without prior notice to enter workplaces liable to inspection at any hour of the day or night to perform inspection activities relating to OSH or other areas of conditions of work, and to send copy of any relevant legal provisions.

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

Further to its previous observation, the Committee takes note of the Government’s report containing information in reply to the issues raised by the National Federation of Christian Trade Unions (CNV) in September 2007, and the Netherlands Trade Union Confederation (FNV) in August 2007 on the new Act on Working Conditions. It also notes the attached unofficial translation of the Act on Working Conditions (Health and Safety), which came into force on 1 January 2007, and the communication by the FNV of further comments received in August 2009 and transmitted to the Government on 16 September 2009.

Impact of the European Framework Directive in the area of occupational
safety and health with regard to the application of the Convention

1. The Committee notes the replies provided by the Government to the comments previously made by the CNV, and the FNV on the new Act on Working Conditions. The Committee observes that these comments concerned in essence the difficulties that may arise in the application of the new Act which is based, according to the Government, on the following principles of the European Framework Directive in the area of occupational safety and health (OSH): no additional rules above European Union OSH regulations; legislation should only set aims to be achieved as concretely as possible but should not prescribe the means for achieving them; it is the responsibility of employers and employees to determine how to achieve these aims; less rules and lower administrative burdens and less inspection pressure on companies. The FNV and CNV question the impact of the Act on the conditions of work in terms of: univocal application of the law; equal application of the law regardless of the relative weight of employers and workers’ organizations at sector and company levels; the need for continuous improvement of applicable standards; the need to continue to protect workers against conditions of work that undermine their welfare, for instance, through discrimination; and the decline in the number of labour inspectors who will be called upon to verify the application of the Act. The Government replies in essence that the labour inspectorate, regardless of a recent reduction in its staff which is due to a general reduction of the number of civil servants, will be in charge of supervising the univocal and harmonious application of the prevention principles as a minimum and will ensure the continuous improvement of the applicable standards where necessary. It further indicates that prevention with regard to psycho-social aspects, such as working under psychological pressure, stress and violence, is one of the priorities of the labour inspectorate and refers to other legal provisions as concerns the protection against discrimination at work.

The Committee requests the Government to provide information, including statistical data, on the application of the Act on Working Conditions and, in particular, the effect this Act may have on the prevention of occupational accidents and diseases, including psycho-social aspects and related diagnosis. It would also be grateful if the Government could communicate statistics on the staff of the labour inspection service disaggregated by sex and by area of competence (OSH, so-called working conditions, working hours, wages and illegal employment).

2. The Committee also notes the Government’s reply to the comments previously made by the Confederation of Netherlands Industry and Employers (VNO–NCW) according to which the so-called “Arie” regulation on working with dangerous substances is too complex and creates a heavy administrative burden. The Government indicates in this regard that the Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment has requested the Social Economic Council (SER) for advice on this regulation and was waiting for it. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would keep the ILO informed of the content of the advice provided by the SER and of any measures taken in order to help the employers to cope with the new requirements set in the new regulation.

3. The Committee finally notes the latest comments made by the FNV in its communication dated 28 August 2009 as to the need for specific training to be provided to labour inspectors in the area of technical skills relating to nanotechnology risks and requests the Government to provide its reply thereto.

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

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

The Committee takes note of the Government’s report received on 29 August 2007 and the replies to its previous comments, as well as the communication by the National Federation of Christian Trade Unions (CNV) on the new Act on Working Conditions. It also notes the communications from the Confederation of Netherlands Industry and Employers (VNO–NCW) dated 6 August 2007, and the Netherlands Federation of Trade Unions (FNV) dated 30 August 2007, forwarded by the ILO to the Government on 17 September 2007 and 13 September 2007, respectively. The Committee requests the Government to send to the ILO any comments it deems appropriate on the points raised by the above organizations so that the Committee can examine them together with the information contained in the report. It would be grateful if the Government would also provide a copy of the Act on Working Conditions (Health and Safety), which it indicates came into force on 1 January 2007.

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

The Committee notes the Government’s report and the annual inspection reports for 2003 and 2004 that it provides, as well as comments made by the National Federation of Christian Trade Unions (CNV) and the Confederation of Netherlands Industry and Employers (VNO-NCW). It requests the Government to provide additional information in its next report on the following points.

1. Supervision of the application of legal provisions. The Committee notes with interest that the labour inspection service has been relieved of various functions of an administrative nature. It notes, however, that the volume of the labour inspectorate’s activities related to the monitoring of the illegal employment of foreign workers is much greater than that accounted for by activities concerning the application of the provisions relating to employment conditions and the protection of workers while engaged in their work. In this regard, the Committee invites the Government to ensure that the labour inspectors secure the application in practice of all the legal provisions for which they are responsible under Article 3, paragraph 1(a), of the Convention, as well as to ensure that the additional functions allocated to the labour inspectors do not prevent them from exercising their main functions, in conformity with Article 3, paragraph 2, of the Convention.

2. Supply of technical information and advice. The Committee notes that, according to the VNO-NCW, the obligations resulting from a new Regulation of 2004 on the listing and assessment of risks are extremely complex for a number of enterprises which are not familiar with specific prevention and protection procedures. The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether measures have been taken or envisaged so that the labour inspectorate can provide the necessary technical information and advice, in conformity with Article 3, paragraph 1(b), of the Convention.

3. Cooperation with other inspection services. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide information on the agreements concluded in 2004 between the labour inspectorate and other inspection services to which it refers in its report (Article 5(a)).

4. Staff of the labour inspectorate. The Committee notes the concern expressed by the CNV concerning the reduction of the supervisory functions of the labour inspectorate between 2003 and 2004 and the reduction in the number of inspectors exercising functions in the field of safety and health. It requests the Government to provide information on the number, nature and geographic distribution of the workplaces subject to the control of the labour inspectorate and the number of workers employed in such workplaces (Article 10).

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

The Committee notes the Government’s report, the annual inspection report for 2001 and the attached report of the Netherlands Advisory Council on International Affairs for the same period.

The Committee notes with interest that, under the terms of the 1998 Working Conditions Act, which empowers labour inspectors to impose administrative fines based on a published list corresponding to the various types of violations of the law, penalties can be adapted so that they are adequate, within the meaning of Article 18 of the Convention. Fines are increased for repeat offenders and the size of enterprises is also taken into account in setting the level of the penalties. According to the Government, this administrative procedure has the positive effect of substantially decreasing the workload of the courts, and the inspection report for 2001 shows a significant increase in financial penalties in relation to the previous year and a subsequent doubling in the corresponding budget item.

The Committee also notes, in relation to Article 5(b), which provides that the competent authority shall make appropriate arrangements to promote collaboration between officials of the labour inspectorate and employers and workers or their organizations, that the Cabinet and the Labour Foundation have invited employers and workers to enter into agreements to improve working conditions and, as a consequence, reduce the number of people receiving invalidity benefit.

Among other measures to guarantee safety and health at high-risk workplaces, the Government refers to the entry into force of the Decree of 1999, under which high-risk enterprises have to draw up a safety report, and which gave rise to the establishment throughout 2001 of the coordination machinery required for this purpose between the competent bodies concerned.

Finally, the Committee notes that the labour inspection services continue to take action to combat child labour and reported violations relating to both the employment of children between 13 and 15 years of age and the obligation of the employer to provide information and instructions concerning work-related risks.

The Committee would be grateful if the Government would continue providing information on any new measures taken to give effect to the provisions of the Convention, and the impact of such measures on the degree to which the labour legislation on conditions of work and the protection of workers while engaged in their work is applied.

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

The Committee notes the Government's report and the documents annexed thereto, as well as the information supplied in reply to its previous comments. It also notes the inspection report for 1997.

Articles 8 and 10 of the Convention. Noting the information concerning labour inspection personnel for 1997 and 1998, the Committee would be grateful if the Government would specify the proportion of women labour inspectors and indicate the manner in which effect is given to Article 8 of the Convention, which provides that where necessary, special duties may be assigned to men and women inspectors.

Article 14. The Committee notes that the Government is evaluating the level of application of the provisions of the law regarding the obligation to report occupational diseases to the labour inspectorate and has taken steps to correct shortcomings which had been observed in this regard. It notes that such shortcomings arise from the employers' uncertainty regarding the defining criteria for an occupational disease, as well as their fear of the consequences of diseases being recognized as such. Moreover, from the workers' point of view, since the social security benefits do not differ as a result of the origin of the disease, there is no incentive for them to supply the pertinent information to the labour inspectorate. The Government states that despite action undertaken by the labour inspectorate to encourage notification of occupational diseases, such notification falls short of the reality and cannot therefore constitute an effective planning aid to direct inspection efforts to prevent occupational disease. The Committee notes that the Government proposes amendments to the legislation to establish a system whereby the obligation to notify the labour inspectorate of occupational diseases is removed. The Occupational Safety and Health Services, obligatory within all enterprises employing workers, shall be obliged to report occupational diseases to a body to be determined. This body will be responsible for recording all occupational diseases, producing statistics, analysing the available information and disseminating information on occupational diseases. The Government states that the new legislation will be adopted by November 1999. the Committee hopes that this information will be brought to the notice of the labour inspection services in conformity with this Article of the Convention. It consequently requests the Government to supply the definitive text of the new provisions and to provide details in its next report of the progress achieved in respect of their implementation.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1998, published 87th ILC session (1999)

Further to its previous comments, the Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its report.

1. Statistics on occupational diseases (Article 14 of the Convention). The Committee notes the statistics provided by the Government in reply to its 1996 general observation. It also notes the indication in the 1994 "Working Conditions Inspection Programme" to the effect that in relation to notification of industrial diseases, the National Occupational Disease, a project initiated in 1993 with the aim to improve the recognition and notification of occupational disease by employers under section 9 of the Working Conditions Act, was being continued in 1994. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the progress in the compilation of the statistics and their impact on the programme of work of the labour inspectorate.

2. Fisheries inspection project (Article 3, paragraph 1). The Committee notes from the 1994 "Working Conditions Inspection Programme" that a national inspection in the sea fishing industry was being carried out in conjunction with the shipping inspectorate. The Committee would appreciate if the Government would provide a copy of any official document containing the results of the inspection as well as information on any further concerted inspection in this field.

3. Annual inspection report (Articles 20 and 21). The Committee hopes that the Government will send to the ILO a copy of the most recent annual report published by the central inspection authority on the work of the labour inspection services.

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

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its report for the period ending May 1995 and in the 1993 annual labour inspection report. It notes in particular the reorganization and merger of the various inspection functions in the new Inspection Service (SZW). It also notes with interest the introduction, by stages, of a new approach to government enforcement policy on conditions of work. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would continue to provide information on the implementation of the new approach to enforcement in practice, and in particular the place in the new scheme of the function of labour inspectors to supply technical information and advice to employers and workers concerning the most effective means of complying with the legal provisions including during inspection visits (Article 3, paragraph 1(b), of the Convention) and the place of unannounced inspection visits (Article 12, paragraph 1(a)).

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

The Committee notes the information provided in the Government's report in reply to its previous comments pursuant to earlier observations made by the Netherlands Trade Union Federation (FNV). It expresses the hope that current efforts in strengthening the Factory Inspectorate and improving its efficiency will be pursued further.

Article 21 of the Convention. The Committee notes the information provided regarding laws and regulations relevant to the work of the inspection service (Article 21(a)), staff of the labour inspection service (Article 21(b)), and statistics of occupational diseases (Article 21(g)). Please include such information in future published annual reports on the work of the inspection service as required by the Convention. With respect to the last item the Committee notes some continuing difficulties in collecting industrial accident statistics but that attempts have been made to improve the reporting system. It hopes the efforts at improving the system will continue to be pursued.

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

The Committee notes the comments made by the Netherlands Trade Union Federation (FNV) expressing doubts as to the capability of the labour inspectorate and calling for the extension of qualified industrial health care and safety services in undertakings. In this regard, the Goverment has indicated that there will be a strengthening of the Factory Inspectorate's policy and that an effort is being made to improve the efficiency of the Factory Inspectorate, so as to enhance capacity while considering expansion.

The Committee asks the Government to provide in future reports full information on the efforts made to improve the operation of the inspection services and, in particular, with respect to adequate training of inspectors (Article 7(3) of the Convention) and adequate strength (Article 10).

Article 21 of the Convention. The Committee notes that the Government's annual labour inspection reports do not contain complete information on: Article 21(a): laws and regulations relevant to the work of the inspection service; Article 21(b): staff of the labour inspection service; Article 21(g): statistics of occupational diseases. With respect to the last item, the Committee notes the Government's indication that the data cannot be supplied in full since collecting data concerning occupational diseases is rather complicated. The Committee nevertheless hopes that further efforts will be made in this regard in the light of the first paragraph above.