Tripartite Consultation (International Labour Standards) Convention, 1976 (No. 144) - Chile (Ratification: 1992)

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2020, published 109th ILC session (2021)

The Committee takes note of the supplementary information provided by the Government in light of the decision adopted by the Governing Body at its 338th Session (June 2020). The Committee has examined the application of the Convention on the basis of the supplementary information received from the Government this year, as well as the information at its disposal in 2019.

The Committee also notes the observations of the Single Central Organization of Workers of Chile (CUT-Chile), received on 13 September 2018 and 6 October 2020. The Committee requests the Government to send its replies in this regard.

Tripartism and social dialogue. COVID-19 pandemic. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its supplementary report on the measures adopted to promote tripartism and social dialogue in the country. In this regard, the Government refers, among other measures, to the implementation of trade union training projects at the regional level within the framework of the trade union training fund, as well as the establishment of tripartite social dialogue forums at the national and regional levels in which consultations have been held on a broad range of labour issues, such as the regulation of the right to a lunch, the promotion of women’s work in certain sectors, vocational reskilling and the recognition of labour rights to household refuse collectors. However, the Committee notes the allegation by the CUT-Chile that workers’ organizations were not consulted regarding the new labour rules adopted in the context of the health emergency caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, such as: Act No. 21 227 of 6 April 2020 facilitating access to unemployment insurance benefits in exceptional circumstances; Act No. 21 220 of 26 March amending the Labour Code in respect of remote working; and the electronic severance procedure introduced by the Department of Labour. In the context of the global COVID-19 pandemic, the Committee recalls the broad guidance provided by international labour standards. The Committee encourages Member States to engage in broader tripartite consultations and social dialogue as a solid basis for drawing up and implementing effective responses to the deep-rooted socio-economic effects of the pandemic. The Committee invites the Government to provide updated information in its next report on the measures adopted in this respect, in accordance with Article 4 of the Convention and Paragraphs 3 and 4 of Recommendation No. 152, and particularly the measures adopted to build the capacities of constituents and strengthen tripartite mechanisms and procedures, as well as the challenges and good practices identified.

Articles 2 and 5 of the Convention. Effective tripartite consultations. The Committee notes the detailed information provided by the Government on the activities of the Higher Labour Council between 2017 and 1 January 2020. In particular, the Government refers to the holding of tripartite consultations on the possibility of ratifying the Protocol of 2014 to the Forced Labour Convention, 1930. The Government indicates that the Protocol was subsequently submitted to the Chamber of Deputies, where it is awaiting approval for ratification. Communications from the most representative organizations of employers and workers in the maritime sector were also forwarded on the amendments adopted in 2018 to the Maritime Labour Convention, 2006 (MLC, 2006). The Government also reports the establishment of various tripartite sectoral standing commissions, such as the Thematic Commission on Disability and the Thematic Commission on the implementation of the MLC. With regard to the latter, the Government indicates that it prepared an analysis of the national legislation with a view to identifying the necessary legislative adjustments to ensure compliance with the MLC, 2006. The Government once again refers to the organization in 2014, 2015 and 2019 of tripartite consultations within the framework of the Advisory Council on Occupational Safety and Health, as well as various regional tripartite workshops on the development of the National Occupational Safety and Health Policy (PNSST) with a view to giving effect to the provisions of the Promotional Framework for Occupational Safety and Health Convention, 2006 (No. 187). In this regard, the Government indicates, contrary to the indications made by the Production and Trade Confederation (CPC) in its observations of 1 September 2016, that employers’ organizations were also invited to participate in the tripartite workshops (held on 8 August and 22 July 2014 and 9 March 2015). Moreover, in 2017 and 2018, tripartite consultations and workshops were held, some with ILO collaboration, to draw up the National Occupational Safety and Health Programme, which was finally adopted on 2 February 2018. The Government adds that in April 2019 a new version of the Programme was submitted to the members of the Advisory Council for their views. The Government further reports that, within the working group on dock work, tripartite consultations have been held on the possible ratification of the Occupational Safety and Health (Dock Work) Convention, 1979 (No. 152), and that a formal request was made to the Office for technical assistance on 21 January 2020 for the preparation of an analysis of possible legal gaps in the national legislation in this respect.

However, the Government notes the allegation by the CUT-Chile in its observations that, in practice, effective tripartite consultations on labour issues have not been held in the Higher Labour Council, which only operates for information purposes. In this respect, the CUT-Chile alleges that the social partners were not consulted prior to the submission of various international labour standards, some of which have been ratified. In particular, it maintains that tripartite consultations were not held in relation to the following instruments: the Violence and Harassment Convention, 2019 (No. 190), the Work in Fishing Convention, 2007 (No. 188), the Protocol of 2002 to the Occupational Safety and Health Convention, 1981, the Private Employment Agencies Convention, 1997 (No. 181), the Safety and Health in Mines Convention, 1995 (No. 176), the Protection of Workers’ Claims (Employer’s Insolvency) Convention, 1992 (No. 173), the Collective Bargaining Convention, 1981 (No. 154), the Rural Workers’ Organisations Convention, 1975 (No. 141), the Labour Inspection (Agriculture) Convention, 1969 (No. 129), and the Labour Inspection Convention, 1947 (No. 81). The CUT-Chile adds that, while the Government has held consultations with the Office concerning the possible denunciation of the Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention, 1989 (No. 169), the social partners have not been consulted on this subject. The CUT-Chile also alleges that it did not receive copies of the reports on ratified Conventions, submitted under article 22 of the ILO Constitution sufficiently in advance to be able to comment on them. In this respect, the Committee recalls that, “[i]n order to be ‘effective’, consultations must take place before final decisions are taken, irrespective of the nature or form of the procedures adopted […] The effectiveness of consultations thus presupposes in practice that employers’ and workers’ representatives have all the necessary information far enough in advance to formulate their own opinions” (see the 2000 General Survey on tripartite consultation, paragraph 31). Finally, the Committee notes that the Government has not provided information on the tripartite consultations held on replies to questionnaires concerning items on the agenda of the International Labour Conference, the re-examination at appropriate intervals of unratified Conventions and of Recommendations, and proposals for the denunciation of ratified Conventions (Article 5(1)(a), (b), (c) and (e)). The Committee therefore requests the Government to provide detailed and updated information on the specific content, frequency and outcome of the tripartite consultations held on all the matters relating to international labour standards covered by Article 5(1) of the Convention. Moreover, in light of the observations of the CUT-Chile, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the consultations held with the social partners on the manner in which the functioning of the procedures required by the Convention could be improved, including the possibility of establishing a schedule for the preparation of reports sufficiently in advance (Article 5(1)(d)).

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2019, published 109th ILC session (2021)

The Committee notes the observations made by the Single Central Organization of Workers of Chile (CUT-Chile), received on 13 September 2018. The Committee requests the Government to send its comments on the observations of CUT-Chile.

Articles 2 and 5 of the Convention. Effective tripartite consultations. The Committee notes with interest the detailed information provided by the Government concerning the activities of the High Labour Council during the reporting period. In particular, the Government refers to the creation of a number of standing sectoral tripartite committees, such as the Thematic Committee on Disability and the Thematic Committee on the Implementation of the Maritime Labour Convention of 2006 (MLC, 2006). The Government indicates that the latter examined the national legislation in order to identify legislative adjustments needed to ensure compliance with the MLC, 2006. The Government again refers to the holding of tripartite consultations in 2014 and 2015 within the framework of the Advisory Council for Occupational Safety and Health, as well as various regional tripartite workshops for the development of the "National Occupational Safety and Health Policy (PNSST)", with a view to implementing the provisions of the Promotional Framework for Occupational Safety and Health Convention, 2006 (No. 187). In this regard, the Government indicates that, contrary to what was stated by the Confederation of Production and Commerce (CPC) in its observations of 1 September 2016, employers' organizations were also invited to participate in these tripartite workshops (8 August and 22 July 2014, and 9 March 2015). In addition, in 2017–18, tripartite consultations and workshops were held, some of them with the collaboration of the ILO, in order to draw up the “National Programme on Occupational Safety and Health”, which was finally adopted on 2 February 2018. The Committee notes, however, the observations of CUT-Chile, in which it maintains that it did not receive copies of the report on ratified Conventions, submitted under article 22 of the ILO Constitution, sufficiently in advance to be able to comment on them. In this context, the Commission recalls that "in order to be 'effective', consultations must take place before final decisions are taken, irrespective of the nature or form of the procedures adopted … . The effectiveness of consultations thus presupposes in practice that employers’ and workers’ representatives have all the necessary information far enough in advance to formulate their own opinions.” (see 2000 General Survey on tripartite consultations, paragraph 31). Finally, the Committee notes that the Government has not provided information on the tripartite consultations held on replies to questionnaires concerning International Labour Conference agenda items, the submission of instruments to the National Congress, the re-examination at appropriate intervals of unratified Conventions and of Recommendations, and proposals for the denunciation of ratified Conventions (Article 5(1)(a), (b), (c) and (e)). The Committee therefore requests the Government to provide detailed up-to-date information indicating the specific content, frequency and outcome of the tripartite consultations held on all matters relating to international labour standards covered by Article 5(1) of the Convention. In the light of the observations of CUT-Chile, the Committee also requests the Government to provide information on consultations held with the social partners on how the functioning of the procedures required by the Convention could be improved, including the possibility of establishing a timetable for drafting reports sufficiently in advance (Article 5(1)(d)).

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2016, published 106th ILC session (2017)

The Committee notes the observations of the Confederation of Production and Commerce (CPC), received on 1 September 2016, on the application of the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to send its comments on the observations of the CPC.

Articles 2 and 5 of the Convention. Effective tripartite consultations. In response to the Committee’s previous comments, the Government refers to the consultations held with the CPC and the Single Central Organization of Workers of Chile (CUT) regarding the submission of the Domestic Workers Convention, 2011 (No. 189), ratified by Chile in June 2015, and indicates that the legislation giving effect to Convention No. 189 was adopted in March 2016. The Government adds that it consulted the CUT and the CPC in May 2015 on the possible ratification of the Maritime Labour Convention, 2006 (MLC, 2006), and the Seafarers’ Identity Documents Convention (Revised), 2003 (No. 185). The Government reports that, in their replies, both the CPC and the CUT expressed their agreement with the ratification of both instruments. The Government indicates in its report that it has carried out significant initiatives in accordance with the provisions of the Convention. In this respect, the Committee notes with interest the adoption on 29 August 2016 of Act No. 20.940, section 4, which establishes a High Labour Council; a tripartite advisory body mandated to participate in the development of public policy proposals and recommendations aimed at strengthening and promoting social dialogue and a culture of fair, modern and collaborative industrial relations. In its most recent observations, the CPC indicates that the drafting process of the Bill did not respect the principles of social dialogue established in the Convention, as the dialogue carried out by the Government only considered the opinion of the workers. Moreover, the CPC maintains that the Government and the workers requested reports from the ILO Subregional Office in Santiago without notifying the employers to justify points raised in the Bill, which the CPC considers interference. The Committee further notes the launching on 4 August 2016 of the National Occupational Safety and Health Policy (PNSST), a policy linked to the ratification in 2011 of the Promotional Framework for Occupational Safety and Health Convention, 2006 (No. 187). The Government indicates in its report that the PNSST was developed with the participation of the social partners and that regional dialogue workshops were held with the participation of the most representative organizations of employers and workers. In its most recent observations, the CPC refers to the regional workshops held by the Government in 2014 to gather the views of the actors involved in occupational safety and health, noting that the CPC was only invited to and participated in the opening and closing activities in the ILO Subregional Office in Santiago, Chile, and that, as a result, certain enterprises associated with the CPC did not formally participate in the launch activities. The CPC indicates that it nevertheless sent in writing its points of view on the draft of the PNSST prepared by the Presidential Advisory Council, the tripartite body responsible for analysing the draft. In its report, the Government also refers to participatory dialogues carried out in July 2016 with, inter alia, enterprises and trade unions in connection with the development of the Human Rights and Enterprises Action Plan and the establishment of the Ministerial Advisory Committee on Migration and International Affairs pursuant to Ministerial Decree No. 5 of 29 January 2016, the functions of which include ensuring that public policies and programmes are designed and implemented in dialogue with citizens, including workers and employers. The Committee requests the Government to continue reporting on the effective tripartite consultations held on the matters relating to international labour standards, as required by Articles 2 and 5 of the Convention. The Committee refers to its observation on the obligation of submission established under article 19(5) and (6) of the ILO Constitution, in which it notes that 30 instruments adopted by the International Labour Conference are pending submission. The Committee requests the Government to report on the effective tripartite consultations held on the proposals submitted to the National Congress in connection with the submission of the instruments adopted by the Conference (Article 5(1)(b) of the Convention), as well as on the unratified Conventions and Recommendations to which effect has not yet been given (Article 5(1)(c) of the Convention).

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

Article 5 of the Convention. Effective tripartite consultations. In reply to the previous observation, the Government indicates that, during the first quarter of 2014, it sought the views of the Confederation of Production and Commerce (CPC) and the Single Central Organization of Workers (CUT) concerning the ratification of the Domestic Workers Convention, 2011 (No. 189). The Committee notes with interest that, through an address of the President of the Republic dated 3 September 2014, Convention No. 189 was submitted to the National Congress for ratification. The Committee also notes the observations made by the CUT, indicating that there remains a lack of regulation of Convention No. 144, but that an important signal was sent by the new authorities, which took office in March 2014, through the holding of consultations concerning the submission and ratification of Convention No. 189. The Government indicated its intention to hold consultations, at least once a year, concerning the matters covered by Article 5, in agreement with the most representative organizations of employers and workers, and of making progress with the submission of the remaining instruments. The CUT indicated its interest in the Labour Inspection Convention, 1947 (No. 81), and the Labour Inspection (Agriculture) Convention, 1969 (No. 129); the Dock Work Convention, 1973 (No. 137), the Rural Workers’ Organisations Convention, 1975 (No. 141), the Labour Administration Convention, 1978 (No. 150), the Collective Bargaining Convention, 1981 (No. 154), the Protection of Workers’ Claims (Employer’s Insolvency) Convention, 1992 (No. 173), the Safety and Health in Mines Convention, 1995 (No. 176), the Home Work Convention, 1996 (No. 177), the Private Employment Agencies Convention, 1997 (No. 181), the Seafarers’ Identity Documents Convention (Revised), 2003 (No. 185), the Maritime Labour Convention, 2006 (MLC, 2006), and the Work in Fishing Convention, 2007 (No. 188). The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the effective tripartite consultations held concerning the proposals submitted to the National Congress on the Conventions referred to above (Article 5(1)(b) and (c)) and on the other matters relating to international labour standards covered by the Convention.

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

Effective tripartite consultations. The Committee takes note of the report received in October 2013 referring to tripartite administrative measures implemented by the Government for the protection of workers’ health and safety. The Government also indicates that the Labour Directorate has introduced a procedure for the establishment and operation of regional tripartite councils of users of the Labour Directorate. As to the still outstanding issue of the submission to the National Congress of the instruments adopted by the Conference, the Government states that it will explore the best means of taking into account the views of the employers and the workers. The Committee requests the Government to provide in its next report information on the tripartite consultations held with the representative organizations concerned on the matters relating to international labour standards required by Articles 2 and 5 of the Convention. The Committee refers to its observation regarding the obligation to submit established in article 19(5) and (6) of the ILO Constitution, in which it indicates that 28 instruments adopted by the International Labour Conference are awaiting submission. It requests the Government to report on the effective consultations held with the social partners on the proposals made to the National Congress in connection with the submission of instruments adopted by the Conference (Article 5(1)(b) of the Convention).

[The Government is asked to reply in detail to the present comments in 2014.]

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

Effective tripartite consultations. With reference to its 2009 observation, the Committee notes the Government’s detailed reply received in September 2011. The Government recalls that there are no provisions in national law establishing rules to determine the most representative organizations in the light of international labour Conventions. In the context of the Convention, the Government considers the various organizations which by their number, sectoral representation and influence in local matters can be considered representative organizations and influential actors in labour matters in the country. The Government indicates that it has invited to comment on reports on the application of ratified Conventions the Confederation of Production and Trade (CPC), the National Confederation of Micro, Small and Medium-sized Enterprises of Chile (CONAPYME), the Single Confederation of Workers (CUT), the Autonomous Central Union of Workers (CAT) and the National Union of Workers (UNT) (Article 5(1)(c) of the Convention). The Government indicates that it has the firm intention of continuing effective tripartite consultations with the most representative national bodies of workers and employers, but not exclusively with any one of them. The Committee refers to its 2009 observation in which it indicated that by using the phrase “representative organizations” in the plural, the Convention invites governments to include in the procedures those representative organizations which have indicated their interest in participating in the tripartite consultations required by the Convention. The Committee invites the Government to include information in its next report on the effective tripartite consultations held with the representative organizations concerned in relation to international labour standards which are required by the Convention (Articles 2 and 5).

Article 5(1)(b). Tripartite consultations prior to the submission to the National Congress of the instruments adopted by the Conference. The Government indicates in its report that it has complied strictly with Article 5(1) of the Convention. The Committee refers to its observation on the obligation of submission envisaged in article 19(5) and (6) of the Constitution of the ILO in which it indicates that 28 instruments adopted by the International Labour Conference are awaiting submission. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the effective consultations held with the social partners concerning the proposals made to the National Congress on the occasion of the submission of the instruments adopted by the Conference.

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

Effective tripartite consultations. The Committee notes the Government’s detailed report received in November 2009. The Committee recalls its observations of 2007 and 2008 in which it noted the comments made by the National Union of Workers of Chile (UNT), received in June and August 2007. The UNT alleged systematic discrimination, complaining that it was excluded from the meetings convened in accordance with the Convention, particularly meetings to discuss ILO-related matters. The UNT wished to be consulted in accordance with Articles 2, 3 and 5 of the Convention. The Committee notes the Government’s replies received in April 2009 recalling the existence of three trade union confederations established in accordance with national law. The Government indicates that, on 10 February 2009, the Single Confederation of Workers (CUT) had a membership of 447,971 workers, compared to the National Union of Workers with a membership of 41,113 workers. According to the Government, the clearly larger membership of the CUT, the fact that it is a national trade union confederation providing general representation of the interests of Chilean workers and the fact that it combines all productive sectors in both the private and public sectors, means that the CUT is indisputably representative for the purposes of Articles 1, 2 and 5. The Government maintains that ignoring that representativeness would mean ignoring the will of the workers freely exercising their right to choose the workers’ association which most reflects their right to organize. The Government observes that the procedures for ensuring effective consultations as set out in Article 5 make no reference to the appointment of delegates for the International Labour Conference in accordance with the provisions of article 3 of the ILO Constitution. In its report, the Government states that the CUT was deemed the only organization having the “representative” nature established in the Convention. The Committee refers to paragraphs 34–38 of its 2000 General Survey on tripartite consultations. In this General Survey, the Committee indicated that although the Convention requires that the most representative organizations of employers and workers participate in consultations, it does not in any way prevent the involvement of representatives of other organizations. The Committee understands that, by using the phrase “representative organizations” in the plural, the Convention invites Governments to include in the procedures those representative organizations which have indicated their interest in participating in the tripartite consultations required by the Convention. The Committee recalls that the Government previously indicated that Chilean workers are organized in three trade union confederations: the Single Confederation of Workers, the Autonomous Confederation of Workers and the National Union of Workers of Chile. The Committee therefore requests the Government to examine once again, in consultation with the interested representative organizations, the manner in which it can be ensured that the representative organizations of workers participate in the tripartite consultations concerning international labour standards required by the Convention (Articles 2 and 5 of the Convention).

Article 5, paragraph 1, subparagraphs (b) and (c). Tripartite consultations required by the Convention. The Committee refers to its observation on the fulfillment of the obligation to submit the instruments adopted by the Conference to the National Congress. The Committee once again requests the Government to provide information on the tripartite consultations required by the Convention with regard to this constitutional obligation.

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

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It is therefore bound to repeat its 2007 observation, in which the following matters were raised.

Article 5, paragraph 1(b) and (c), of the Convention. Tripartite consultations required by the Convention. The Committee noted the Government’s report received in September 2007, in which the Government stated that there had been no changes in the information sent in the previous report. It notes that the ratification of Convention No. 169 was registered on 15 September 2008. The Committee hopes that in its next report the Government will be able to provide information on the prospects for ratification of the other Conventions referred to in previous reports (Conventions Nos 152, 160, 171 and 181). The Committee refers the Government to its observation on compliance with the obligation to submit the instruments adopted by the Conference to the National Congress and hopes that the Government will shortly provide information on the tripartite consultations required by the Convention in respect of the abovementioned constitutional obligation.

Effective tripartite consultations. The Committee noted the observations made by the National Union of Workers of Chile (UNT), received in June and August 2007. On 17 August 2007, the Office sent a copy of these observations to the Government. The UNT alleged systematic discrimination, complaining that it was excluded from the meetings convened in accordance with the Convention, particularly meetings to discuss ILO-related matters. The UNT wished to be consulted in accordance with Articles 2, 3 and 5 of the Convention. The Committee noted that in its report the Government stated that Chilean workers were organized in three confederations: the Single Central Organization of Chilean Workers (CUT), the Autonomous Central Union of Workers (CAT) and the UNT. The Committee asks the Government to communicate more detailed information on how Articles 1, 2 and 5 of the Convention are applied, so as to ensure that the most representative organizations of workers, like the UNT, participate fully in the tripartite consultations on international labour standards required by the Convention.

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

1. Article 5, paragraph 1(b) and (c), of the Convention. Tripartite consultations required by the Convention. The Committee takes note of the Government’s report received in September 2007, in which the Government states that there have been no changes in the information sent in the previous report. In its direct request of 2006, the Committee welcomed the fact that the Instrument for the Amendment of the Constitution of the ILO, 1997, had been approved by the National Congress. Furthermore, Convention No. 169 was undergoing its second constitutional reading in the Senate with the procedure for its parliamentary approval pending. The Committee hopes that in its next report the Government will be able to provide other information on the prospects for ratification of the other Conventions referred to in previous reports (Conventions Nos 152, 160, 171 and 181). The Committee refers the Government to its observation on compliance with the obligation to submit the instruments adopted by the Conference to the National Congress and hopes that the Government will shortly provide information on the tripartite consultations required by the Convention in respect of the abovementioned constitutional obligation.

2. Effective tripartite consultations. The Committee notes the observations made by the National Union of Workers of Chile (UNT), received in June and August 2007. On 17 August 2007, the Office sent a copy of these observations to the Government. The UNT alleges systematic discrimination, complaining that it is excluded from the meetings convened in accordance with the Convention, particularly meetings to discuss ILO-related matters. The UNT wishes to be consulted in accordance with Articles 2, 3 and 5 of the Convention. The Committee notes that in its report the Government states that Chilean workers are organized in three central unions: the Single Central Organization of Chilean Workers (CUT), the Autonomous Central Union of Workers (CAT) and the UNT. The Committee invites the Government to send its comments on the UNT’s observations together with more detailed information on how Articles 1, 2 and 5 of the Convention are applied so as to ensure that the most representative organizations of workers participate fully in the tripartite consultations on international labour standards required by the Convention.

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

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

Tripartite consultations required by the Convention. The Committee notes the reply to its previous direct request contained in the report received in January 2006. The Government indicates that the Instrument for the Amendment of the Constitution of the ILO, 1997, has been approved by the National Congress. Furthermore, Convention No. 169 is undergoing its second constitutional reading in the Senate, with the procedure for its parliamentary approval pending. The Committee welcomes the information provided and hopes that the Government will continue providing information on the ratification prospects of other Conventions referred to in previous reports (Conventions Nos. 152, 160, 171 and 181) (Article 5, paragraph 1(c), of the Convention). The Committee refers to the observation that it is making on compliance with the obligation to submit the instruments adopted by the Conference to the National Congress and hopes that the Government will provide information in the near future on the tripartite consultations required by the Convention in relation to that constitutional obligation (Article 5, paragraph 1(b)).

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

In reply to its direct request of 2001, the Government indicates that the Tripartite Commission on Convention No. 144 has not yet made a final decision concerning the eventual ratification of Conventions Nos. 152, 160, 171 and 181. The Committee hopes that the Government will keep it informed on the matter and that it will provide in its next report detailed information on the consultations held on all the items specified in Article 5, paragraph 1, of the Convention, as well as on the reports or recommendations formulated as a result of these consultations.

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

The Committee notes the Government’s report, which contains detailed information for the period ending 30 August 2001. The Committee notes with interest the work undertaken by the Tripartite Commission on Convention No. 144 relating to the effective consultations required by the Convention, and particularly to promote the ratification of Conventions. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would continue providing detailed information in its next report on the application of the Convention, with an indication of the outcome of the consultations held with regard to the possibility of ratifying Conventions Nos. 152, 160, 171 and 181 (Article 5, paragraph 1(c) of the Convention).

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

The Committee has noted with interest the Government's reports received in December 1996 and October 1997. It invites the Government to continue to provide detailed information on the application of the Convention and requests it to indicate, in its next report, the employers' and workers' organizations consulted together with the content of the discussions held during the consultations on the denunciation of the Underground Work (Women) Convention, 1935 (No. 45).

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

The Committee notes with interest the information provided by the Government on the ratification of Conventions Nos. 121, 131, 135, 140 and 161 of the ILO. It however notes that the Government's second report has not been received. It hopes that a report will be supplied for examination by the Committee at its next session and that it will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous direct request, which read as follows:

The Committee notes the Government's first report on the application of the Convention. It notes also the report received in October 1995. It notes that the consultations required by the Convention are held by means of written communications (the Government refers to Paragraph 2(3)(d) of the Tripartite Consultation (Activities of the International Labour Organization) Recommendation, 1976 (No. 152)). The Committee also notes that the Government has set up a Tripartite Commission on Convention No. 144. In this respect, it requests the Government to continue providing detailed information on the application of the Convention, including precise information on the following points:

Article 5, paragraph 1(c), of the Convention. The Committee trusts that the Government will continue to supply information on consultations held to examine the measures which could be taken to promote the implementation and ratification, as appropriate, of other basic ILO Conventions, which it indicates are the inspiration for national legislation.

Article 5, paragraph 1(e). The Government states that during the period covered by the report on the application of Convention No. 144 no Conventions have been denounced. The Committee requests the Government to include precise information in its next report on the possibility of holding consultations, within the framework of the Tripartite Commission, on the denunciation of the Night Work (Bakeries) Convention, 1925 (No. 20), to which the Government has referred in its reports on the application of that Convention, as well as on the denunciation of the Old-Age Insurance (Industry) Convention, 1933 (No. 35), and the ratification of any other Convention, the possibility of which was mentioned by a Government representative to the Conference Committee on the Application of Standards in June 1995.

Article 6. Please include precise information in the next report on the consultations that have been held with the representative organizations on the possibility of issuing an annual report on the working of the procedures provided for in the Convention.

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

The Committee notes the Government's first report on the application of the Convention. It notes also the report received in October 1995. It notes that the consultations required by the Convention are held by means of written communications (the Government refers to Paragraph 2(3)(d) of the Tripartite Consultation (Activities of the International Labour Organization) Recommendation, 1976 (No. 152)). The Committee also notes that the Government has set up a Tripartite Commission on Convention No. 144. In this respect, it requests the Government to continue providing detailed information on the application of the Convention, including precise information on the following points:

Article 5, paragraph 1(c), of the Convention. The Committee notes that, within the framework of the Tripartite Commission on Convention No. 144, a study has been commenced concerning the ratification of new Conventions. The Government refers to Conventions Nos. 121, 131, 135, 140, 141, 161 and 138. The Committee trusts that the Government will continue to supply information on this subject, and on any other consultations held to examine the measures which could be taken to promote the implementation and ratification, as appropriate, of other basic ILO Conventions, which it indicates are the inspiration for national legislation.

Article 5, paragraph 1(e). The Government states that during the period covered by the report on the application of Convention No. 144 no Conventions have been denounced. The Committee requests the Government to include precise information in its next report on the possibility of holding consultations, within the framework of the Tripartite Commission, on the denunciation of the Night Work (Bakeries) Convention, 1925 (No. 20), to which the Government has referred in its reports on the application of that Convention, as well as on the denunciation of the Old-Age Insurance (Industry) Convention, 1933 (No. 35), and the ratification of any other Convention, the possibility of which was mentioned by a Government representative to the Conference Committee on the Application of Standards in June 1995.

Article 6. Please include precise information in the next report on the consultations that have been held with the representative organizations on the possibility of issuing an annual report on the working of the procedures provided for in the Convention.