Tripartite Consultation (International Labour Standards) Convention, 1976 (No. 144) - Spain (Ratification: 1984)

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2023, published 112nd ILC session (2024)

Previous comment

The Committee notes the observations of the Trade Union Confederation of Workers’ Commissions (CCOO), received on 4 August 2022. The Committee also notes the observations of the Spanish Confederation of Employers’ Organizations (CEOE) and the Spanish Confederation of Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises (CEPYME), as well as those of the CCOO and the General Union of Workers (UGT), transmitted by the Government in its report.

Article 1 of the Convention. Representative organizations. The Committee notes that, in its observations, the CEOE requests the inclusion of the CEPYME in the tripartite consultation procedures on the preparation of reports. In this respect, the Government indicates that it sent copies of the reports on ratified Conventions to the CEPYME. In this context, the Committee recalls that “the obligation to consult the representative organizations on the reports to be made concerning the application of ratified Conventions must be clearly distinguished from the obligation to communicate these reports under article 23, paragraph 2, of the Constitution. To fulfil their obligations under this provision of the Convention, it is not sufficient for governments to communicate to employers’ and workers’ organizations copies of the reports that they send to the Office. The consultations of the employers’ and workers’ organizations implies their active participation in the formulation and communication of their respective views. The comments on the reports that these organizations may subsequently transmit to the Office cannot replace the consultations which have to be held during the preparation of the reports” (see General Survey 2000 on Tripartite Consultation, paragraph 92). The Committee requests the Government to provide updated and detailed information on how consultation is guaranteed with all the employers’ organizations, including the CEPYME, in the procedures required under the Convention.

Articles 2, 5 and 6. Effective tripartite consultations. The Committee notes the detailed information provided by the Government concerning the consultations held with the social partners between June 2017 and June 2022 on matters relating to international labour standards covered by the Convention. With regard to the consultations concerning the reports on ratified Conventions, the Government indicates that such reports, once drafted, were sent to the social partners to enable them to make observations they considered important, and to which the Government responded. Subsequently, the observations of the social partners were sent, together with the reports, to the Office. The Government indicates that the views of the social partners are also included in the files for submitting and ratifying international labour instruments, which are sent to the Cortes Generales.

The Committee notes that the workers’ organizations - the CCOO and UGT - state that, while the timelines for the social partners to make their observations and contributions to the reports have improved, the Government continues to conduct consultation procedures in writing, despite the opposing position expressed by the workers’ organizations in this respect. The CCOO states that this consultation model is not tripartite, as the employers’ and workers’ organizations are not aware of the other parties’ observations and the Government’s responses to those until they receive the final version of the reports. The CCOO and UGT consider that it would be useful to explore procedures to guarantee effective tripartite consultations. In this regard, the CCOO maintains that such consultations could take place in in-person meetings with the three constituents, while the UGT has requested that the possibility be explored of establishing a tripartite committee specifically in charge of matters relating to international labour standards, or of holding consultations within a tripartite body with general economic, social or labour-related competence. The UGT highlights the failure to implement the Convention, as long as a new procedure to guarantee effective tripartite consultation is not established. In this respect, the Committee once again recalls that paragraph 2(3) of the Tripartite Consultation (Activities of the International Labour Organisation) Recommendation, 1976 (No. 152) sets out the possibilities available to Member States to undertake the tripartite consultations required by the Convention. Under the terms of paragraph 2(3)(d) of the Recommendation, consultations may not be undertaken in writing except “where those involved in the consultative procedures are agreed that such communications are appropriate and sufficient” (see 2000 General Survey on Tripartite Consultation, paragraph 71). Lastly, the Committee notes the CCOO’s statement that it may be useful to draft an annual report on the working of the procedures provided for in the Convention, in accordance with Article 6 of the Convention. Therefore, the Committee once again requests the Government to indicate how it takes into account the opinions expressed by the representative workers’ organizations on the working of effective prior consultative procedures provided for in the Convention, as well as on the possibility of establishing amended procedures in response to the concerns expressed by the trade union organizations in their observations. The Committee also requests the Government to continue to provide detailed and updated information on the content and outcome of the tripartite consultations held on all matters related to international labour standards covered by the Convention. The Committee also requests the Government to indicate whether, in accordance with Article 6, it has consulted the representative organizations to draft an annual report on the working of the consultative procedures provided for in the Convention and, if so, to indicate the outcome of these consultations and provide a copy of the relevant report.

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

The Committee notes the observations of the Trade Union Confederation of Workers’ Commissions (CCOO) and the General Union of Workers (UGT), received on 11 and 17 August 2017, respectively. The Committee also notes the Government’s replies to the previous observations of the CCOO and the UGT, included in its report.

Articles 2 and 5 of the Convention. Effective tripartite consultations. The Committee notes the detailed information provided in the Government’s report regarding the consultations carried out with the social partners between 2014 and 2017. With regard to the previous observations of the trade union organizations, the Government indicates that, between 2014 and 2016, the reports on ratified Conventions were sent to the social partners at the same time as they were provided to the ILO. The Government indicates that, on occasions, the reports were not sent first to the social partners, owing to the high number of reports to be drafted and their complex preparation, which entails requesting reports from various ministries. However, it states that it will undertake, as far as possible, to send the reports to the social partners before they are sent to the ILO so that their observations can be incorporated into the corresponding report and that the Government can respond to them. In this context, the UGT indicates in its observations that this year, the Government sent the reports on the ratified Conventions to the social partners on 7 July 2017. The UGT appreciates this change in the Government’s approach. Additionally, the UGT and CCOO maintain that the procedure of written consultation is inadequate to guarantee the effective consultation with the social partners required under the Convention. The UGT therefore refers to the need to study the possibility of applying a new consultation procedure, through either a committee specifically in charge of matters relating to ILO activities or a body with general competence in the economic, social or labour fields. The CCOO indicates that no consultations were held with the social partners on the implementation or functioning of the procedures envisaged in the Convention. In its reply, the Government refers to the establishment of the Economic and Social Council in 1991, a governmental consultative body dealing with socio-economic and labour issues, attached to the Ministry of Employment and Social Security. The Government adds that the tripartite consultations were held in a way deemed appropriate, through written communication, and that the social partners did not request that meetings should be held on matters related to the reports. The Committee recalls that in Paragraph 2(3) of the Tripartite Consultation (Activities of the International Labour Organisation) Recommendation, 1976 (No. 152), the possible ways for member States to carry out the consultations required by the Convention are listed. Under the terms of the Recommendation, the consultations should not be undertaken through written communications except “where those involved in the consultative procedures are agreed that such communications are appropriate and sufficient” (see 2000 General Survey on tripartite consultation, paragraph 71). The Committee requests the Government to continue providing up-to-date information on the content and outcome of the tripartite consultations held on all matters related to international labour standards covered by the Convention. The Committee also requests the Government to indicate how it takes into account the opinions expressed by the representative workers’ organizations on the functioning of effective prior consultative procedures required under the Convention, as well as the possibility of establishing amended procedures in response to the concerns expressed by the trade union organizations in their observations.

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

Article 5(1) of the Convention. Effective tripartite consultations. The Committee notes the Government’s report received in December 2014 and the observations made by the Trade Union Confederation of Workers’ Commissions (CCOO) and the General Union of Workers (UGT), which were transmitted to the Government in September 2014. These two confederations, inter alia, express their concern over the fact that they only receive copies of reports on the application of ratified Conventions either very late (as from the second week of September) or only once the Government has sent them to the Office. The Committee invites the Government to send any comments that it considers appropriate on the observations of the CCOO and the UGT.

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

The Committee notes the Government’s report, which describes the written communications made to the representative organizations on the matters covered by the Convention. With reference to the previous observation, the Government states that many practical and ad hoc meetings have been held on issues of an international nature, particularly before the Council of Ministers of the European Union and in the context of technical cooperation with Latin America. The Government indicates its readiness to look into the possibility of a schedule of periodic meetings with general objectives, which could be in addition to written communications, for all the representative organizations of employers and workers in relation to ILO matters. The Committee trusts that the Government will continue providing information in its reports on developments relating to the consultation procedures required by Article 2 as it relates to the issues addressed in Article 5.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2000, published 89th ILC session (2001)

The Committee notes the observations made by the General Union of Workers (UGT), in a communication addressed to the ILO in January 2000 and transmitted to the Government, on the failure of the latter to organize the meeting with the social partners, that it had requested, to study the establishment of more appropriate consultation procedures to give effect to the Convention. The UGT indicates that the comments it has been making for many years on application of the Convention remain unchanged. The Committee requests the Government to make any comment it deems appropriate in reply to these observations.

The Committee recalls that in its previous observation it noted that the Government undertook to consult the social partners in order to find an appropriate solution to the practical problems of application raised by the UGT and the Trade Union Federation of Workers’ Commissions (CC.OO.). The Committee expresses the hope that the Government’s next report would supply information on real progress achieved in establishing an effective consultation procedure, as required by Article 2 of the Convention, to the satisfaction of all parties concerned.

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

The Committee takes note of the Government's report and the information provided in reply to its previous observation. It notes that the consultation procedures, on which the General Union of Workers (UGT) and the Trade Union Federation of Workers Commissions (CC.OO.) commented, have remained unaltered since the previous government report. However, it observes that the Government has undertaken to consult the two representative organizations mentioned above so as to study alternative procedures to find an appropriate solution to the problems raised concerning application in practice. In view of the Government's positive attitude, the Committee trusts that its next report will bear witness to real progress in the elaboration of a consultation procedure within the meaning of Article 2 of the Convention to the satisfaction of all interested parties.

The Committee further notes with interest the detailed information submitted by the Government on consultations undertaken during the reporting period on each of the questions under Article 5, paragraph 1, of the Convention.

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

The Committee notes the comments formulated by the General Union of Workers (UGT) in its communication addressed to the ILO in January 1998, a copy of which was transmitted to the Government. The UGT emphasizes that the Government has made considerable effort to communicate the reports due under article 22 of the ILO Constitution to the representative organizations. However, the time-limits granted to organizations are too short to ensure effective consultations. The UGT, moreover, reiterates its previous comments concerning the lack of consultations on the re-examination of the unratified Conventions, as provided for under Article 5, paragraph 1(c), of the Convention. The Committee refers to its previous observation, in which it recalled that in the General Survey of 1982, it distinguished the simple exchange of information from consultation which constitutes a process assisting in decision-making (paragraph 42) and requests the Government to respond, where it deems appropriate, to the comments made by the UGT. The Committee also requests the Government to provide detailed responses in its next report to the questions raised in its previous observation which read as follows:

The Committee notes the comments received from the Trade Union Federation of Workers' Commissions (CC.OO.) in May 1995 and from the General Union of Workers (UGT) in July 1995. The Committee also notes the Government's report, received in August 1995, which refers to the comments made by the UGT and provides information in response to the Committee's previous observation.

1. The Committee notes that the General Union of Workers (UGT) reiterates its previous comments, alleging that the Government still does not hold effective consultations on ILO standards and activities. In particular, the UGT denounces the lack of consultations on the re-examination of unratified Conventions (Article 5, paragraph 1(c) of the Convention) and the difficulties encountered in holding effective consultations on the Government's reports due under article 22 of the ILO Constitution (Article 5, paragraph 1(d)). The workers' committees consider that the Economic and Social Council is not an appropriate body to supervise the application of the Convention and that the trade unions have not been consulted on the required procedures. The CC.OO. recalls in particular that Article 2 of the Convention lays down the obligation to ensure effective consultations which, under the terms of Article 5, paragraph 2, shall be undertaken at appropriate intervals fixed by mutual agreement.

2. The Committee notes the Government's statement in its report that it is ready to find any solution that resolves the practical problems of application raised. The Government emphasizes that it has established direct personal contacts in order to ensure that all written communications are received by the competent bodies of all the social and economic organizations. It also refers to a possible change in the system of consultation, provided that this is explicitly accepted by all the parties involved.

3. The Committee recalls that the Convention lays down that the nature and form of the consultation procedures shall be determined in accordance with national practice. Member States are obliged only to ensure that they are "effective", as required by Article 2, paragraph 1. With reference to its General Survey, the Committee points out once again that effective consultations are consultations which enable employers' and workers' organizations to have a useful say in matters relating to the activities of the ILO referred to in the Convention and the Recommendation. In the case under consideration, it observes that the above-mentioned workers' organizations do not consider written communications to be sufficient to give full effect to the provisions of the Convention. In these circumstances, and taking into account the positive attitude of the Government, the Committee considers it appropriate to suggest that the parties concerned would study the other possible methods proposed by Recommendation No. 152, though the list of such methods is not exhaustive. In addition, the Committee also recalls that Article 6 provides for the issue of an annual report on the working of the procedures "when this is considered appropriate after consultation with the representative organizations".

4. The Committee trusts that the Government will supply, in its next detailed report on the application of the Convention, information on the progress achieved with a view to operating appropriate procedures in order to ensure effective consultations to the satisfaction of all the parties concerned, taking into account the observations made, on the one hand, and the national practice, on the other hand.

The Committee requests the Government once again to take the measures necessary, as soon as possible, to bring its practice into full conformity with the essential provisions of the Convention.

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

The Committee notes the Government's report and the information which it contains in reply to its previous observation. The Government refers to the exchanges of information which have taken place during the period covered by the report. In addition, it indicates that no action has been taken as a result of the Committee's previous comments, since no alternative consultation procedure has been proposed by the representative organizations of employers and workers. In this regard, the Committee wishes to recall that in its 1982 General Survey it distinguished the simple exchange of information from consultation which constitutes a process assisting in decision-making (paragraph 42). Furthermore, the Committee notes that the Government's report contains insufficient information in response to its previous comments and trusts that in its next report it will provide complete replies to the questions raised in its previous observation which read as follows:

The Committee notes the comments received from the Trade Union Federation of Workers' Commissions (CC.OO.) in May 1995 and from the General Union of Workers (UGT) in July 1995. The Committee also notes the Government's report, received in August 1995, which refers to the comments made by the UGT and provides information in response to the Committee's previous observation.

1. The Committee notes that the General Union of Workers (UGT) reiterates its previous comments, alleging that the Government still does not hold effective consultations on ILO standards and activities. In particular, the UGT denounces the lack of consultations on the re-examination of unratified Conventions (Article 5, paragraph 1(c) of the Convention) and the difficulties encountered in holding effective consultations on the Government's reports due under article 22 of the ILO Constitution (Article 5, paragraph 1(d)). The workers' committees consider that the Economic and Social Council is not an appropriate body to supervise the application of the Convention and that the trade unions have not been consulted on the required procedures. The CC.OO. recalls in particular that Article 2 of the Convention lays down the obligation to ensure effective consultations which, under the terms of Article 5, paragraph 2, shall be undertaken at appropriate intervals fixed by mutual agreement.

2. The Committee notes the Government's statement in its report that it is ready to find any solution that resolves the practical problems of application raised. The Government emphasizes that it has established direct personal contacts in order to ensure that all written communications are received by the competent bodies of all the social and economic organizations. It also refers to a possible change in the system of consultation, provided that this is explicitly accepted by all the parties involved.

3. The Committee recalls that the Convention lays down that the nature and form of the consultation procedures shall be determined in accordance with national practice. Member States are obliged only to ensure that they are "effective", as required by Article 2, paragraph 1. With reference to its General Survey, the Committee points out once again that effective consultations are consultations which enable employers' and workers' organizations to have a useful say in matters relating to the activities of the ILO referred to in the Convention and the Recommendation. In the case under consideration, it observes that the above-mentioned workers' organizations do not consider written communications to be sufficient to give full effect to the provisions of the Convention. In these circumstances, and taking into account the positive attitude of the Government, the Committee considers it appropriate to suggest that the parties concerned would study the other possible methods proposed by Recommendation No. 152, though the list of such methods is not exhaustive. In addition, the Committee also recalls that Article 6 provides for the issue of an annual report on the working of the procedures "when this is considered appropriate after consultation with the representative organizations".

4. The Committee trusts that the Government will supply, in its next detailed report on the application of the Convention, information on the progress achieved with a view to operating appropriate procedures in order to ensure effective consultations to the satisfaction of all the parties concerned, taking into account the observations made, on the one hand, and the national practice, on the other hand.

The Committee requests the Government once again to take the measures necessary, as soon as possible, to bring its practice into full conformity with the essential provisions of the Convention.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1995, published 82nd ILC session (1995)

The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government in its report and the comments made by the General Union of Workers (UGT). The UGT states that the Government has never provided it with copies of its reports, but each year has sent only a copy of the questionnaires it receives from the ILO and asks the representative organizations for relevant comments, but gives them very little time to reply. The UGT acknowledges that this last matter can be remedied since the workers' organizations are able to send their observations directly to the ILO. However, it adds, the Government's failure to send the reports means that the unions do not know what steps the Government claims to be taking to ensure compliance with international standards, and are unable to make any comparison with their own positions. In a communication of 30 September 1994 the UGT asked the Government for the reports drawn up by the Ministry of Labour and Social Security. The Government asserts that it has treated the UGT in the same way as the other industrial organizations and lists the measures taken - giving their dates - which include the sending of reports. The Committee points out that one of the subjects to be dealt with in the consultations provided for in the Convention is matters arising out of reports to be made to the International Labour Office under article 22 of the ILO Constitution (Article 5, paragraph 1(d), of the Convention). It also points out that for such consultations to be effective it would be appropriate for employers' and workers' organizations to become acquainted with the content of the reports due under the ILO Constitution. The Committee notes that the reports requested must reach the International Labour Office within a prescribed time-limit. Consequently, the Committee is bound to ask the Government once again, under procedures "which ensure effective consultations" (Article 2), to take measures necessary to facilitate consultations between representatives of the Government, the employers and the workers on the items covered by the Convention (Article 5, paragraph 1), to the satisfaction of all the parties. Furthermore, the Committee would be grateful if the Government would indicate the nature of any reports and recommendations produced as a result of the consultations.

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

The Committee notes the comments received from the Trade Union Federation of Workers' Commissions (CC.OO.) in May 1995 and from the General Union of Workers (UGT) in July 1995. The Committee also notes the Government's report, received in August 1995, which refers to the comments made by the UGT and provides information in response to the Committee's previous observation.

1. The Committee notes that the General Union of Workers (UGT) reiterates its previous comments, alleging that the Government still does not hold effective consultations on ILO standards and activities. In particular, the UGT denounces the lack of consultations on the re-examination of unratified Conventions (Article 5, paragraph 1(c) of the Convention) and the difficulties encountered in holding effective consultations on the Government reports due under article 22 of the ILO Constitution (Article 5, paragraph 1(d)). The workers' committees consider that the Economic and Social Council is not an appropriate body to supervise the application of the Convention and that the trade unions have not been consulted on the required procedures. The CC.OO. recalls in particular that Article 2 of the Convention lays down the obligation to ensure effective consultations which, under the terms of Article 5, paragraph 2, shall be undertaken at appropriate intervals fixed by mutual agreement.

2. The Committee notes the Government's statement in its report that it is ready to find any solution that resolves the practical problems of application raised. The Government emphasizes that it has established direct personal contacts in order to ensure that all written communications are received by the competent bodies of all the social and economic organizations. It also refers to a possible change in the system of consultation, provided that this is explicitly accepted by all the parties involved.

3. The Committee recalls that the Convention lays down that the nature and form of the consultation procedures shall be determined in accordance with national practice. Member States are obliged only to ensure that they are "effective", as required by Article 2, paragraph 1. With reference to its General Survey, the Committee points out once again that effective consultations are consultations which enable employers' and workers' organizations to have a useful say in matters relating to the activities of the ILO referred to in the Convention and the Recommendation. In the case under consideration, it observes that the above-mentioned workers' organizations do not consider written communications to be sufficient to give full effect to the provisions of the Convention. In these circumstances, and taking into account the positive attitude of the Government, the Committee considers appropriate to suggest that the parties concerned would study the other possible methods proposed by Recommendation No. 152, though the list of such methods is not exhaustive. In addition, the Committee also recalls that Article 6 provides for the issue of an annual report on the working of the procedures "when this is considered appropriate after consultation with the representative organizations".

4. The Committee trusts that the Government will supply, in its next detailed report on the application of the Convention, information on the progress achieved with a view to operating appropriate procedures in order to ensure effective consultations to the satisfaction of all the parties concerned, taking into account the observations made, on the one hand, and the national practice, on the other hand.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1993, published 80th ILC session (1993)

1. The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government in its report and the comments made by the General Union of Workers (UGT) which considers, among other things, that consultation procedures should not be limited to written communications. It notes Act No. 21 of 17 June 1991 establishing the Economic and Social Council which, according to the Government's previous report, would be able to examine the matter of selecting a different consultation procedure. It notes the Government's indication that the above Council only came into operation in October 1992. The Committee observes that the Act of 1991 does not establish the participation of government representatives in the Council which acts in an advisory capacity for the Government particularly when legislation is prepared to regulate labour matters. Furthermore, according to the Government, since the Council is an autonomous body, there is nothing to prevent it from dealing with matters concerning international labour relations.

2. The Committee also notes that other observations made by the UGT reiterate its previous comments on a number of points to which the Government has replied: the Committee notes the Government's reply concerning the financing of any necessary training of participants in the procedures (Article 4, paragraph 2, of the Convention), and consultations on questions arising out of reports to be made to the International Labour Office under article 22 of the ILO Constitution (Article 5, paragraph 1(d)).

The Committee also observes that, according to the UGT, despite the fact that it expressly requested them, no consultations were held to examine the ratification of certain Conventions, particularly the Social Security (Minimum Standards) Convention, 1952 (No. 102) (Article 5, paragraph 1(c)).

3. The Committee notes the Government's statement that it is open to any proposals from employers' and workers' representative organizations to make the consultations more effective (Article 2). It would be grateful if the Government would continue to provide information on any progress made in this respect, indicating in particular the extent to which the above-mentioned Economic and Social Council is consulted on matters concerning ILO standards and activities.

4. Lastly, the Committee asks the Government in its next report to provide the information required on consultations on each of the subjects listed in Article 5, paragraph 1, particularly points (c) (re-examination at appropriate intervals of unratified Conventions) and (d) (consultations on reports to be made under article 22 of the Constitution).

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

The Committee has taken note of the Government's report and of the information supplied in response to its previous observation. That observation mentioned the comments received from the General Union of Workers (UGT) concerning failure to apply Articles 2, 4 and 5 of the Convention.

The Committee points out that the trade union organisation alleged, in essence, the absence of consultation prior to the choice of procedures; the summary nature of consultations held at unduly short notice and with a frequency left to the Government's sole discretion; and the absence of arrangements made for the financing of the necessary training of participants in the consultation procedures.

The Government supplies detailed information in reply to each of the points previously raised. The procedure of consultation through written communication is not the outcome of a unilateral decision on the Government's part but is a continuation of an already established procedure even before the ratification of the Convention; such communications, used on all questions concerning the ILO, were regarded as "appropriate and sufficient" within the meaning of paragraph 2(3)(d) of Recommendation No. 152 and had not been contested hitherto. The Government describes the modus operandi of the procedure for consultation on the matters referred to in Article 5, paragraph 1, of the Convention and points out with regard to the frequency of consultations, which is the subject of paragraph 2, that the "appropriate intervals" are in practice determined by the cycle of ILO activities. As to training of participants in the procedures, for which provision is made in Article 4, paragraph 2, it appears from the Government's report that the Government does not consider it "necessary", because the persons concerned are heads of industrial organisations who regularly participate in ILO activities and in particular in the work of the Conference.

Lastly the Committee notes that one of the reasons for the choice of written communications was that there has hitherto been no coordinating body at the state level. In that connection it observes that the Government refers in its report to the forthcoming establishment of the Economic and Social Committee, which would be able to examine the question of choosing another mechanism of consultation to apply Convention No. 144 from among those suggested by Recommendation No. 152.

The Committee would be grateful if the Government would continue to supply information on all developments with regard to the way in which it ensures "effective" consultations within the meaning of Article 2 on each of the matters referred to in Article 5, paragraph 1, of the Convention.

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

With reference to its previous observation, the Committee notes the Government's report on the application of the Convention, particularly as regards the measures taken to give effect to Article 5, paragraph 1(d), of the Convention concerning consultations on the reports made under article 22 of the ILO Constitution. It also notes the comments made by the General Union of Workers (UGT). The UGT alleges, in the first place, that the procedure of holding consultations by means of written communications, which is currently being used, was decided upon unilaterally by the Government without prior consultation with the representative organisations of employers and workers, as required by Article 2, paragraph 2. The trade union organisation also states that no arrangement has been made, in accordance with Article 4, paragraph 2, between the competent authority and the representative organisations for the financing of any necessary training of participants in consultation procedures. Finally, the UGT considers that consultations on the points set out in Article 5, paragraph 1, are held in a summary manner and generally within too short a period, and that paragraph 2 of the same Article is not given effect in practice since the frequency of these consultations is left for the Government to fix alone.

The Committee would be grateful if the Government would supply the Office with information containing replies to these allegations.

[The Government is asked to report in detail for the period ending 30 June 1991.]

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

With reference to its previous comments, the Committee takes note of the Government's reply to the comments submitted by the Trade Union Confederation of Workers' Commissions concerning the application of the Convention. In a communication dated 7 February 1989, the above organisation alleged, inter alia, that the representative trade union organisations were not consulted on the content of the reports which were due in 1988, under article 22 of the Constitution, which is an infringement of Article 5 of the Convention.

In its reply, the Government expresses the opinion that Article 5, paragraph 1(d) does not imply that there must be prior consultations on the substance of the reports in question, and that the preparation of the reports is exclusively the responsibility of the Government. The Government concludes that the questions calling for consultations with the occupational organisations are questions raised once the reports have been drawn up. It adds that it is always ready to receive comments from the occupational organisations and that it never fails to transmit them without delay to the ILO.

In the first place, the Committee wishes to point out, as it does in its General Survey of 1982 (paragraph 124) on Convention No. 144 and Recommendation No. 152, that the provisions of Article 5, paragraph 1(d) go beyond the obligation for member States to communicate reports that is stipulated in article 23, paragraph 2, of the Constitution. Consultations are called for not on every report but only on those concerning Conventions whose application poses problems. In the case of reports on the application of ratified Conventions, due under article 22 of the Constitution, the consultations are often concerned essentially with the substance of the reply to comments by the supervisory bodies.

Lastly, and at a more general level, the Committee feels that it is useful to recall its position regarding the scope of the obligation to hold prior consultations provided for by the Convention. The principle generally accepted during the preliminary work on the Convention is that the outcome of the consultations should not be regarded as binding and that the ultimate decision rests with the Government. However, the consultations in the meaning of the Convention are none the less compulsory and should be held before the proposed measures are ultimately decided upon (see the above-mentioned General Survey, paragraphs 42 to 45).

The Committee trusts that the Government will take the above comments into consideration and that, in future, it will hold the required consultations on "questions arising out of reports" due under article 22 of the Constitution, in accordance with the letter and spirit of the provisions of the Convention.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1989, published 76th ILC session (1989)

Further to its previous comment, the Committee takes note of the information supplied by the Government in its last report, and in particular the information concerning the application of Article 5, paragraph 1, of the Convention.

The Committee also notes the information concerning the application of Article 6, to the effect that, until now, it has not been deemed appropriate to produce an annual report on the working of the procedures covered by the Convention. It requests the Government to state whether, in accordance with this provision, the employers' and workers' representative organisations have been consulted on this matter.

Finally, the Committee notes the comments submitted by the Trade Union Confederation of Workers' Committees alleging, among other points, that the Government has not consulted the representative trade union organisations on the questions which might arise from the reports to be presented to the ILO under article 22 of the Constitution, in accordance with Article 5, paragraph 1(d). These comments were received on 28 February and forwarded to the Government on 2 March 1989. The Committee requests the Government to indicate its opinion on this subject.