Labour Inspection Convention, 1947 (No. 81) - Lithuania (Ratification: 1994)

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

Article 3(1) and (2) of the Convention. Additional functions entrusted to labour inspectors. Labour inspection activities with regard to resolution of labour disputes. The Committee notes that, in accordance with section 8 of the Regulations of the State Labour Inspectorate of the Republic of Lithuania approved by Order No. A1-316 of 12 May 2009, the State Labour Inspectorate (SLI) organizes the work of labour dispute commissions (LDCs). Furthermore, in accordance with section 221 of the Labour Code, which entered into force on 1 July 2017, labour dispute commissions operate under the territorial offices of the State Labour Inspectorate and the labour dispute commission chairperson is a civil servant of the State Labour Inspectorate. In this respect, the Government provides detailed information regarding the activities of labour dispute commissions, including the types of claims examined and the decisions taken. The Committee notes that the labour dispute commissions received 5,500 requests for settlement of labour disputes in 2016, 7,350 requests in 2020 and 2,284 requests in the first half of 2021. The Committee notes that according to the Government, during 2020, 23 operating LDCs processed an average of 599 claims each. Recalling that any further duties which may be entrusted to labour inspectors shall not be such as to interfere with the effective discharge of those primary duties, the Committee requests the Government to indicate if the civil servants of the SLI who perform the functions related to dispute resolution outlined in the Labour Code also perform labour inspection functions, and if so, what proportion of their time and resources are devoted, respectively, to dispute resolution functions and labour inspection functions.

Articles 5(a), 17 and 18. Cooperation between the SLI and the judiciary, legal proceedings and penalties. The Committee notes the Government’s indication, in response to the Committee’s previous request, that a cooperation agreement No. 17.9-3334 / BD-A-5 was signed on 6 October 2015 between the Prosecutor General Office of the Republic of Lithuania and the State Labour Inspectorate of the Republic of Lithuania under the Ministry of Social Security and Labour. It notes that under the agreement, SLI inspectors involved in the investigation of serious and fatal accidents at work shall be allowed to access pre-trial investigation materials, obtain information from pre-trial investigation officers about the causes of the death of victims at work, and access the minutes of witness interviews and other pre-trial investigation information significant for the SLI’s investigation. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the cooperation with the prosecutor’s office. The Committee also requests the Government to provide information on the number of cases referred to the prosecutors by labour inspectors and on the outcome of those proceedings, including sanctions assessed and collected, and any instances of imprisonment.

Articles 12 and 15(c). Inspection visits without previous notice and confidentiality of complaints. Regarding the possibility of carrying out inspection visits without previous notice, the Committee notes that according to the Government report, companies, institutions and organizations are informed about the planned inspections of the SLI by sending a notice in the prescribed form to their official e-mail address (if this is not technically possible, by fax). The notice of a scheduled inspection may be sent by post to the registered or other known business address declared by the company, institution or organization. The Government also indicates that SLI inspectors shall notify economic subjects of unscheduled inspections upon arrival. The Committee notes that, according to section 20 of the Order No. V-334 of 29 July 2014, on the Approval of the Rules for the Inspection of the Activities Economic Entities by the State Labour Inspectorate of the Republic of Lithuania, unscheduled inspections can be carried out only in the presence of a justified decision of the Chief State Labour Inspector, of the Head of the Territorial Division of SLI or of the Head of the SLI Prevention of Psychological Violence at Work in specific cases, such as (i) upon receipt of a written reasoned request or order from another competent public administration entity, (ii) upon receipt of an anonymous complaint about the actions or omissions of a particular economic entity, when, after evaluating the available information, there are suspicions that the activities of the economic entity may pose a threat to the values protected by legal norms, or (iii) upon receipt of a report of an incident at work that causes damage to the employee's health. The Committee notes that, according to the information provided by the Government, over the last decade, the SLI has been consistently seeking to reduce the number of unplanned inspections in order to save SLI’s limited human resources for carrying out the functions assigned to SLI.

The Committee recalls that unannounced visits enable the inspector to enter the inspected premises without warning the employer or his or her representative in advance, especially in cases where the employer may be expected to attempt to conceal a violation, by changing the usual conditions of work, preventing a witness from being present or making it impossible to carry out an inspection (see 2006 General Survey on labour inspection, paragraph 263). With respect to the Committee’s previous request regarding the confidentiality of complaints, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that the Chief State Labour Inspector has also established in his orders that when a request for an unscheduled inspection of an economic entity aimed at examining a complaint is received, SLI’s inspectors are not allowed to disclose the identity of the complainant and divulge relevant information. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the number of scheduled and unscheduled inspection visits, and the number of both types of inspection visits that are conducted with previous notice to the economic entity. The Committee also requests the Government to indicate the number of unscheduled inspections that are conducted as a follow up to a complaint, the violations identified, and penalties applied.

Articles 20 and 21. Annual inspection report. The Committee notes that according to section 6, paragraph 13 of the new Labour Code, the SLI, by the 31st of December of 2019 and each subsequent year, shall submit a certificate on Labour Code implementation, monitoring and assessment of the results achieved to the Government and the Seimas with statistical information on the implementation of the Labour Code. The Committee notes that the annual reports of activity of the SLI are available on its website. The Committee requests the Government to ensure that the labour inspection report includes all the information required by Article 21.

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

Article 3(1) and (2) of the Convention. Additional functions entrusted to labour inspectors. Labour inspection activities in the area of irregular work. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to provide information on the actions undertaken by the labour inspectorate and the judicial authorities to ensure the enforcement of employers’ obligations with regard to the statutory rights of workers found, in the course of inspections, to be working irregularly. The Committee notes the Government’s indication regarding a series of activities aiming at the prevention and control of illegal work, undeclared work, undeclared self-employment and violations of the procedure for employing third-country nationals. The Committee notes in this respect that in 2020, the state labour inspectorate (SLI) carried out 4,161 inspections focused on illegal work, which resulted in the detection of 1,794 workers who were working illegally. The Government indicates that in 2020 the SLI undertook a series of consultations with employers, workers and their representative organizations on the issue of illegal work, focusing on the activities of small and medium-sized enterprises and first-year entities. The Government also provides details on the inspections of entities in the areas of the highest risk of breaching the requirements of occupational safety and health and labour legislation and reports the establishment of inspection groups specialised in controlling illegal labour.

The Committee notes that the Government does not provide information on cases in which the statutory rights of workers found to be working irregularly have been reinstated. In addition, the Committee notes that section 56 of the Law on Employment provides for measures to be taken by labour inspectors in cases of illegal work. The Committee further notes that according to this section, when such cases concern foreign workers, the labour inspectors request the employer to terminate the labour relations and notify the immigration authorities. The Committee recalls that 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, which is to protect the rights and interests of all workers and to improve their working conditions (see 2006 General Survey on labour inspection, paragraph 78). In this respect, the Committee also recalls 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 (see 2017 General Survey on instruments concerning occupational safety and health, paragraph 452). The Committee requests the Government to take measures to ensure that the functions assigned to labour inspectors with regard to irregular work do not interfere with the main objective of labour inspectors to ensure the protection of workers in accordance with labour inspectors’ primary duties as set forth in Article 3(1) of the Convention. It requests the Government to provide information on the time and resources that are allocated to the prevention and control of illegal or undeclared work as a proportion of inspectors’ overall time and resources.It once again requests the Government to indicate how the SLI ensures the enforcement of employers’ obligations with regard to the statutory rights of the workers found to be working irregularly, including migrant workers.

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

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

Article 3(1) and (2) of the Convention. Additional functions entrusted to labour inspectors. The Committee notes the information in the Government’s report that one of the additional functions performed by the state labour inspectorate (SLI) is the coordination of the control and prevention of illegal labour. In this regard, the Committee notes the information in the report on the activities of the SLI (submitted with the Government’s report) that in 2012, 3,729 inspections were carried out during which illegal work was monitored, and 4,497 such inspections were carried out in 2013. With reference to paragraph 78 of the 2006 General Survey on labour inspection, the Committee recalls that 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 accordingly requests the Government to provide information on action undertaken by the labour inspectorate and the judicial authorities to ensure the enforcement of employers’ obligations with regard to the statutory rights of the workers found, in the course of inspections, to be working irregularly.

Articles 5(a), 17 and 18. Cooperation between the SLI and the judiciary, legal proceedings and penalties. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that pre-trial investigations are undertaken by prosecutors, including in the territorial offices, for violations of section 176 of the Criminal Code on safety and health protection at work. In 2013 and the first three months of 2014, 104 such pre-trial investigations were undertaken, and in 2013, charges were brought in 27 cases. The General Prosecutor’s Office is currently carrying out an assessment of those investigations that did not result in charges, as well as analysing the basis for such decisions, examining the drawbacks of pre-trial investigations and the main causes of acquittal. The results of this assessment will be discussed in a coordination meeting.

The Committee notes the Government’s statement that two coordination meetings were held between the management of the General Prosecutor’s Office and the SLI in 2013 to improve the effectiveness of their cooperation, and that organizational measures for the timely exchange of information in the investigation of accidents was discussed. The Government indicates that the SLI and the General Prosecutor’s Office intend to conclude a cooperation agreement aimed at more active cooperation between the territorial prosecutor’s offices and the SLI, and to ensure cooperation in the investigation of work accidents and pre-trial investigations. The Government further indicates that, training is planned for the officers in the General Prosecutor’s Office who undertake pre-trial investigations, with the participation of the SLI. The Committee requests that the Government provide information on the findings of the assessment being undertaken by the General Prosecutor’s Office of the pre-trial assessments and prosecutions undertaken related to safety and health at work. It also requests that the Government provide information on the cooperation agreement between the SLI and the General Prosecutor’s Office, once concluded and the specific steps taken pursuant to this agreement.

Articles 12 and 15(c). Possibility of carrying out inspection visits without previous notice and confidentiality of complaints. The Committee previously noted that according to the Law on Public Administration, inspection visits can be either scheduled checks with ten days prior notice to the employer or spot checks which can be carried out without previous notice in certain cases, such as following receipt of a written request from another administration body, where there is reasonable suspicion that an entity is violating the law and in order to ensure that violations previously identified have been eliminated.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication that a complaint may be investigated by conducting an unplanned inspection of the economic entity concerned. The report on the activities of the SLI indicates that these unplanned inspections constituted 62 per cent of the inspections undertaken in 2012, and 47 per cent of the inspections undertaken in 2013. The Government states that the decision whether to provide prior notification to the economic entity is taken by the inspector who is investigating the complaint on a case-by-case basis, pursuant to section 29.2 of Order No. V-6 of 13 January 2011 (made by the chief state labour inspector) on the rules for scheduled and non-scheduled inspections of economic entities. The Government further indicates that an economic entity is usually notified in advance about an unplanned inspection, unless the inspection relates to illegal work. However, in cases where the inspector considers that such a disclosure may impede the aims of the investigation, or the confidentiality requirements, the inspector is entitled not to provide advanced notification of an unplanned inspection. The Committee observes that, based on the information provided by the Government, it appears that employers are always notified in advance concerning planned inspection visits, and that the only situation in which an economic entity may not receive notification is in the case of an unplanned inspection visit pursuant to a complaint. With reference to paragraph 263 of its 2006 General Survey on labour inspection, the Committee recalls that the performance of a sufficient number of unannounced inspection visits in relation to inspections with prior notice is necessary to enable labour inspectors to discharge their obligation of confidentiality with regard to the source of any complaint and also to prevent the establishment of any link between the inspection and a complaint. The Committee therefore asks the Government to provide information on the measures taken or envisaged to ensure that the confidentiality of complaints is maintained in case of inspection visits carried out pursuant to a complaint. It also requests the Government to provide a copy of Order No. V-6 of 13 January 2011, of the chief state labour inspector, on the rules for scheduled and non-scheduled inspections of economic entities, with its next report.

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

Legislation. The Committee notes that the Government refers to certain legislative texts, which are not available to the ILO in their current versions. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would communicate copies of the following legislative texts in their current versions: (i) the Act on Public Administration; (ii) the Regulations of the State Labour Inspectorate; (iii) Order No. V-6 of 13 January 2011 of the Chief State Labour Inspector on the rules for scheduled and non-scheduled inspections of economic entities; (iv) the Occupational Safety and Health Act; (v) the Occupational Safety and Health Regulations; (vi) the new version of the Act on Insurance against Occupational Accidents and Diseases which, according to the Government, will come into effect on 1 January 2012; as well as a copy of any other laws that may affect the organization and functioning of the labour inspection system.

Articles 3(1)(b) and 5(b), of the Convention. Preventive activities in the area of occupational safety and health (OSH) and collaboration with employers and workers and their organizations. With reference to the Committee’s previous comments concerning the application of legal provisions relating to OSH, the Government indicates that awareness raising is ensured through regularly updated information on OSH regulations which is available on the website of the State Labour Inspectorate. It also refers to the Act on Public Administration, as amended, which introduces a number of preventive measures including the provision of methodological guidance and advice. As a rule, employers are absolved from liability when they act in conformity with written advice or guidance issued publicly by the head of a supervisory body, even if it subsequently proves to be erroneous.

The Committee further notes the Government’s reference to financial incentives introduced by section 29 of the Act on Insurance against Occupational Accidents and Diseases, which provides that the amount of the social insurance contributions for occupational accidents which is to be paid by the employer, shall be calculated on the basis of the OSH status of establishments, with the State Labour Inspectorate providing the State Social Insurance Fund with the majority of the relevant indicators in this regard. The Committee understands that the OSH status is evaluated on the basis of, among other factors, the outcome of risk assessments which employers have to communicate to the State Labour Inspectorate in accordance with article 39(5) of the OSH Act, in compliance with the provisions of the OSH Regulations and the procedure established by the Chief State Labour Inspector. It further notes that it is planned – subject to the availability of resources – to introduce an e-service for the submission and processing of the relevant information.

The Committee finally notes from the limited statistical information provided in the Government’s report that, between 2008 and 2010, a decrease has been reported in the number of labour inspectors, the number of inspection visits, the number of entities and of workers subject to supervision, and the number of violations reported by the competent authorities, as well as the number of industrial accidents and occupational diseases.

The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the process through which the Labour Inspectorate provides guidance and supervision for the elaboration of risk assessments by employers and their follow-up. It would also be grateful if the Government would provide further information on the preventive activities carried out by the labour inspectorate in the framework of the Act on Public Administration and their impact on the functioning of the labour inspection system and the enforcement of the relevant legislation.

Noting that, in conformity with the Act on Public Administration, as a rule sanctions should only be imposed on an “ultima ratio” basis, the Committee requests the Government to continue to provide statistics on the number of violations detected and the penalties imposed for OSH violations.

Please also provide a description of the mechanism for the recording and notification of occupational accidents and cases of occupational diseases.

Recalling its previous comments on the importance of safety committees or similar bodies, the members of which should be authorized to collaborate directly with the officials of the labour inspectorate when investigations and inquiries into industrial accidents or cases of occupational diseases are carried out, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on all measures taken or envisaged to promote such arrangements of collaboration in the area of OSH. The Committee also once again requests the Government to indicate any further measures taken or envisaged in order to raise awareness among employers and workers on the vital importance of the enforcement of legislation on OSH.

Articles 5(a), 17 and 18. Legal proceedings and penalties. Cooperation between the State Labour Inspectorate and the judiciary. The Committee had previously noted a disparity between the cases referred to the Office of the Public Prosecutor and the number of cases which had actually given rise to legal proceedings and the suggested remedies by the Government, such as the need to strengthen cooperation and the exchange of information between the State Labour Inspectorate and the territorial prosecution offices. Noting moreover the Government’s reference to a meeting between the representatives of the Prosecutor-General’s Office and the State Labour Inspectorate, the Committee requests the Government to provide more detailed information on the measures taken to strengthen cooperation between the State Labour Inspectorate and the judiciary, and once again, to provide information on their impact.

The Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide additional information on the number of cases reported to the office of the public prosecutor, the initiation of relevant criminal proceedings and their outcome, as well as the notification to the State Labour Inspectorate of the decisions taken by the justice system.

Articles 12 and 15(c). Possibility to carry out inspection visits without previous notice and confidentiality of complaints. The Committee notes from the Government’s report that according to the Law on Public Administration as amended in 2010, inspection visits can be either scheduled checks with ten days prior notice to the employer or spot checks which can be carried out without previous notice in certain cases (receipt of a written request from another administration body, if there are reasonable suspicions that an entity is violating the law, in order to ensure that violations identified during a previous check have been eliminated and in cases where the grounds for a spot check are established in the law). The Committee requests the Government to describe the procedure for the handling of complaints by the labour inspectorate and indicate the manner in which the confidentiality of complaints is ensured given that scheduled visits are subject to a ten-day notice to the employer.

Articles 10, 14, 16, 20 and 21. Annual report on the work of the labour inspection services. Noting once again that the central authority publishes an annual report which is publicly available on its website in Lithuanian, the Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide in its forthcoming reports a summary of the content of the annual report in relation to the issues listed in Article 21 of the Convention in order to enable the Committee to fully assess the effect given in practice to the requirements of the Convention.

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

The Committee notes the Government’s report for the period ending June 2009.

Articles 17 and 18 of the Convention. Legal proceedings and penalties. Cooperation with the justice system. Referring to its previous comments relating to the disparity between the number of cases referred to the Office of the Prosecutor and the number of cases which have actually given rise to legal proceedings, the Committee notes the new information provided by the Government according to which, in 2008, out of 308 cases – all concerning occupational safety and health – referred to the Office of the Prosecutor, only 21 gave rise to legal proceedings and led to 20 judgements of conviction. The Committee notes however with interest the communication by the Government of the audit carried out on the reasons for the disparity between cases referred to the Office of the Prosecutor and measures finally taken, and on the need to strengthen the cooperation and exchange of information between the State Labour Inspectorate and the territorial prosecution offices, as well as the capacities and expertise of the pre-trial investigation officers, prosecutors and experts carrying out forensic examinations. The audit suggests in particular that, with a view to strengthening cooperation, representatives of the State Labour Inspectorate and territorial prosecution offices should meet regularly and discuss the problems arising in prosecuting or sanctioning persons who have violated occupational safety and health regulations, analyse the mistakes made on the occasion of the relevant proceedings to avoid them in the future, and develop a streamlined practice of investigating the crimes in this area. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would take the necessary steps to ensure an effective cooperation between the State Labour Inspectorate and the Office of the Prosecutor with a view to achieving, according to Article 18 of the Convention, a more effective enforcement of the legal provisions on occupational safety and health, as recommended by the abovementioned audit. The Committee also asks the Government to indicate the impact of the measures taken with regard to the number and variety of penalties imposed by the judiciary.

Referring to its 2007 general observation, the Committee would also be grateful if the Government would take measures aimed at promoting such cooperation with the justice system more generally, so as to ensure that the work of the labour inspectors is properly supported through the sanctions imposed on the perpetrators of violations, not only in the area of occupational safety and health but equally with regard to the general conditions of work, such as hours of work, wages, child labour, leave, etc.

Article 5(b)  Collaboration between the labour inspection services and employers and workers. According to the audit, the labour inspectors face various obstacles in holding persons criminally liable under article 176 of the Criminal Code relating to the violation of safety and health protection requirements at work. Such obstacles include:

(i)    negligent actions of employees who are expected to ensure that working conditions do not raise any hazard to their life and health, and who should refuse to perform work which represents even a minimum threat;

(ii)   exemption of the employer from responsibility, even where such responsibility has been documented by the labour inspectorate, if the prosecution reveals that the worker could have avoided the accident, had she/he applied the safety precautions appropriately;

(iii)  failure by the managers to make an appropriate assessment of the risks and hazards and render employees responsible for their own actions as they exercise only episodic control and organize mere formal briefings, counselling and information procedures;

(iv)  alcohol consumption by workers (every third person who died at work was drunk);

(v)   unwillingness of workers, who depend entirely on their employer for their welfare, to disclose occupational safety and health related violations;

(vi)  difficulties in identifying the party responsible for violating article 176 of the Criminal Code as the “employer” for the purposes of the prosecution is not the person with overall responsibility, for example, the owner or managing director, but rather the employee responsible for occupational safety and health in enterprises with 50 or more employees. As powers are frequently shifted to people orally, it is difficult to prove who was actually responsible for occupational safety and health and this prevents proceedings from being instituted. The same happens when the deceased victim of an accident was the person responsible for occupational safety and health in the enterprise;

(vii) complicity between, on the one hand, the perpetrator/employer and, on the other, the victim or her/his family who refrain from informing the labour inspectorate on the circumstances of an accident or the existence of violations of occupational safety in the undertaking, in return for arrangements on future conditions of work or huge funeral allowances.

The Committee notes with concern the obstacles faced by the labour inspectorate in the enforcement of the legal provisions relating to occupational safety and health. It would like to draw the Government’s attention to Article 3(1)(b) of the Convention which identifies as one of the essential functions of the labour inspection system the supply of technical information and advice to employers and workers concerning the most effective means of complying with the legal provisions, and to the guidance provided in Paragraphs 4–7 of Recommendation No. 81 on the specific forms of collaboration that could be maintained between the labour inspectorate and employers and workers in regard to health and safety. It stresses, in particular, the creation of safety committees or similar bodies, the members of which should be authorized to collaborate directly with the officials of the labour inspectorate when investigations and, in particular, inquiries into industrial accidents or occupational diseases are carried out. The Committee would also like to emphasize that specific information should be provided to the employers by the labour inspectorate on the long-term financial benefits derived from proper observance of the safety and health requirements at the workplace, benefits which are much higher than the immediate costs of the measures to be taken to this end.

The Committee urges the Government to take steps without delay in order to raise awareness among employers and workers on the vital importance of the enforcement of legislation on occupational safety and health as well as on the complementary roles of the social partners in helping the labour inspectorate ensure the enforcement of the relevant legislation. The Committee also requests the Government to take measures without delay so as to enhance the collaboration between employers and workers or their representatives with a view to ensuring the enforcement of article 176 of the Criminal Code. The Committee requests the Government to indicate in its next report the measures taken in relation to the above.

Articles 20 and 21. Annual report on the work of the labour inspection services. The Committee notes that the central authority publishes an annual report which is publicly available on its website in Lithuanian. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide in its forthcoming reports on the application of the Convention a summary of the content of the annual report in relation to the issues listed in Article 21 of the Convention (laws and regulations relevant to the work of the inspection service, staff of the labour inspection service, statistics of workplaces liable to inspection and the number of workers employed therein; statistics of inspection visits; statistics of violations and penalties imposed; statistics of industrial accidents; and statistics of occupational diseases).

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

The Committee notes the Government’s report for the period ending June 2007.

Articles 17 and 18 of the Convention. Legal proceedings and penalties. The Committee notes the Government’s information in reply to its previous comment concerning the lack of legal proceedings instituted in 2004 in relation to the numerous cases of violations submitted to the Office of the Prosecutor by the labour inspectorate. The data sent by the Government for 2006 show that, of the 324 cases referred to the Office of the Prosecutor, legal proceedings were instituted in three cases. With reference to its general observation of 2007, the Committee recalls that the effectiveness of the binding measures taken by the labour inspectorate depends to a large extent on the manner in which the judicial authorities deal with cases referred to them by labour inspectors, both institutions having the common objective of ensuring the enforcement of legal provisions relating to conditions of work and the protection of workers. It is therefore highly desirable, firstly, to take measures to raise the awareness of judges concerning the complementary roles of the courts and the labour inspectorate and, secondly, to enable labour inspectors to be informed of the action taken on the cases that they have referred, so that they can review where necessary their criteria for assessing situations in which, with a view to bringing an end to a violation, it may be more appropriate to use other means than prosecution in the courts or recommending that legal action be taken. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would indicate the reasons for the disparity between the number of cases referred to the Office of the Prosecutor and the number of cases which have actually given rise to legal proceedings and to indicate the violations which have given rise to prosecutions and also any penalties which have been imposed. Furthermore, it requests the Government to indicate whether measures to ensure effective cooperation between the labour inspection system and the judicial system have been taken or contemplated and, if so, to give examples of them.

Articles 20 and 21. Annual report on the work of the labour inspection services. The Committee notes the detailed statistics concerning the work of the labour inspection services for 2006 which appear in the Government’s report on the application of the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether this information is published by the central authority in a report and, if so, to send a copy to the Office within a reasonable time after its publication and, if not, take the necessary measures to give full effect to the Convention on this point.

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

Legal proceedings and penalties. The Committee notes the Government’s detailed report and the information it contains in response to its previous request. It notes that, according to the statistics provided for 2004, of the 263 cases communicated to the Office of the Prosecutor, none have led to the initiation of criminal proceedings. The Committee recalls the importance attached to the establishment and effective application of adequate penalties for violations of the legal provisions and for obstructing labour inspectors in the performance of their duties, in accordance with Article 18 of the Convention. It requests the Government to indicate in its next report the reasons why none of the cases transmitted to the office of the Prosecutor in 2004 led to criminal proceedings.

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

The Committee notes the Government’s detailed report and the replies to its previous comments.

Increase of labour inspection staff and of the number of inspection visits.  Articles 10 and 16. The Committee notes with interest the increase of the number of inspectors from 234 in 2001 to 269 in 2003 and of the number of the inspection visits by 2,982 (16.6 per cent) in 2002, particularly putting more emphasis on small and medium-sized enterprises.

Reimbursement of travel expenses.  Article 11, paragraph 2. Also noting with interest the indication that the Government has introduced an administrative procedure for the reimbursement of the expenses incurred by using private cars of inspectors while on duty, the Committee would be grateful if the Government would supply to the ILO a copy of the regulation "The procedure of use of private cars for service needs and remuneration for it".

Annual inspection report.  Article 20, paragraph 3. Noting that, according to the Government, annual inspection reports for 2001 and 2002 have been published and placed on the web site of the Labour Inspectorate and noting, however, that this site was not accessible to the ILO, the Committee would be grateful if the Government would ensure that the abovementioned reports are duly communicated.

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

The Committee notes the Government’s reports for the period ending 1 June 2001, which contain the Government’s reply with reference to its previous comments. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the following points.

Labour inspection staff and inspection visits (Articles 10 and 16). With respect to its previous comments, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that the present number of inspectors is not sufficient to ensure the effective discharge of the duties of the inspectorate and that the number of inspection visits is not sufficient as well. It also notes that according to the report, the number of enterprises actually inspected (14,934) amounts to merely 9.1 per cent of the total number of enterprises liable to inspection (163,856) as of January 2001, while that of workers inspected (816,515) accounts for 71.8 per cent of the total number of workers liable to inspection (1,137,428). The Committee accordingly requests the Government to provide information on measures taken or envisaged to increase the labour inspection staff as well as to ensure adequate frequency of inspection visits, in particular to small- and medium-sized enterprises.

Means of transport (Article 11, paragraph 2). With reference to its previous comments, the Committee notes the information provided by the Government that the Labour Inspectorate is financed from the State budget in accordance with article 2 of the State Labour Inspection Law. It notes, however, that the competent authority does not compensate transport expenses incurred by the inspectors as a result of exploitation of private cars for fulfilment of official duties. The Committee asks the Government to provide further information as to the extent the transport expenses for official duties of inspectors are covered by the Government’s budget in practice and to take the necessary measures as to fully comply with the requirements of the abovementioned provision of the Convention.

Enforcement of the posting of notices (Article 12, paragraph 1(c)(iii)). With regard to its previous comments, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that national law has no corresponding regulation as laid down in this provision of the Convention. The Committee asks the Government to describe whether the inspectors do in practice enforce such posting of notices despite the lack of related legal provisions.

Publication of an annual report (Article 20). With respect to its previous comments, and referring to the information supplied by the Government in its 1999 report, that under article 6, paragraph 20, of the State Labour Inspection Law, the Inspectorates are obliged to report their activities annually to the Minister of Social Security and Labour, the Committee takes note of a summarized document, entitled "Report on the activities of the State Labour Inspectorate in 2000" annexed to the Government’s detailed report. The Committee notes, however, that in its subsequent reports, the Government did not specify as to whether the annual inspection report is published; it also notes that no report has been transmitted to the ILO in a published form. The Committee therefore requests the Government to confirm whether the annual report is published in an appropriate manner and to transmit it to the ILO in due course as provided for in this Article.

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

The Committee notes the Government's reports for the period from 1995 to 1 June 1997.

1. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the application of the following Articles of the Convention:

Article 6 of the Convention. The Committee asks the Government to clarify whether labour inspection staff and, in general, public servants of level "B" enjoy any additional protection of stability of their employment as compared to the protection of ordinary employees; to indicate the reasons and the procedure for dismissal from the office of heads of department and other subdivisions and other personnel of the Labour Inspectorate by the Chief State Labour Inspector under section 4 of article 15 of the Labour Inspectorate Law; and to indicate whether the term "other personnel", used in section 4 of article 15 of the Labour Inspectorate Law, covers ordinary labour inspectors.

Article 11, paragraph 2. The Committee has taken note of the indication provided by the Government that competent authorities (Government, Ministry of Finance) so far make no effort to cover compensations paid to labour inspectors for making use of their own cars and for transportation costs in cities related to performance of their duties. Please provide information on the arrangements made or envisaged in order to give effect to this provision of the Convention.

Article 20, paragraph 3. The Committee notes that a copy of the annual report published by the central inspection authority was not received by the ILO and requests the Government to transmit a copy of such report to the ILO within the time period indicated in Article 20, paragraph 3, of the Convention.

2. The Committee also requests the Government to provide further information on the following points:

Article 2, paragraph 1, of the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to indicate in which cases the inspection of job safety is entrusted to other specialized inspectorates.

Article 3, paragraph 1(c). Please indicate whether under the national legislation labour inspectors are required to bring to the notice of the competent authority defects or abuses not specifically covered by existing legal provisions.

Article 10. The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether the number of labour inspectors is considered as sufficient in order to secure the effective discharge of the duties of the inspectorate.

Article 15, paragraph (b). The Committee asks the Government to indicate the duration of the duty of labour inspectors not to reveal any manufacturing or commercial secrets or working process after leaving the labour inspection service.

Article 15, paragraph (c). Please indicate the provision of the national legislation that gives effect to Article 15, paragraph (c), of the Convention.

Article 16. Please indicate whether the Government of the Republic of Lithuania considers the number of enterprises inspected per year as sufficient in order to secure the effective application of the relevant legal provisions.

Article 17, paragraph 2. The Committee asks the Government to indicate the provision of the national legislation that gives to labour inspectors the discretion to give warning and advice instead of instituting or recommending proceedings.

Article 27. The Committee asks the Government to indicate whether under the legislation of the Republic of Lithuania the arbitration awards and collective agreements are among the legal provisions enforceable by labour inspectors.

Parts IV and V of the report form. Please give a general appreciation of the manner in which the Convention is applied and practical difficulties encountered in the application of the Convention.

3. The Committee asks the Government to provide clarification in respect of the following:

Article 8. Please indicate whether any special duties were assigned to men and women employees.

Article 12, paragraph 1(a). The Committee asks the Government to indicate whether the term "at any time of the day", used in paragraph 1 of article 7 of the Labour Inspectorate Law, actually covers night hours.

Article 12, paragraph 1(b). Please indicate the provision of the national legislation that gives effect to this provision of the Convention.

Article 12, paragraph 1(c)(iii). Please indicate the provisions of the national legislation which authorize labour inspectors to enforce the posting of notices required by the legal provisions.

Article 19, paragraph 2. Please describe the content of periodical reports of inspectorate's divisions.

Article 26. Please provide information in respect of the decisions, if any, made by the competent authority in relation to this Article.

4. The Committee asks the Government to provide copies of the following documents:

-- Procedure for determination of occupational diseases, approved by the Government of the Republic of Lithuania on 12 July 1994;

-- Regulations for investigation and registration of accidents, approved by the Government of the Republic of Lithuania on 8 August 1994;

-- Resolution No. 1195 of the Government of the Republic of Lithuania "On the improvement of material base and encouragement of employees of institutions of control and some other state institutions", dated 28 November 1994;

-- Regulations of the ministry of social security and labour establishing job skill requirements for labour inspectors, procedure for their training, improvement of skills and testing (mentioned in article 19 of the Law on the State Labour Inspectorate).

-- Order No. 31 of the State Labour Inspectorate, dated 13 March 1995.