Texts of pending comments

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), reporting on the measures adopted in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic regarding social dialogue and the application of the Convention (such as the extension of the terms of office of union officers and representatives). The Committee welcomes the resumption of the activities of the standards subcommission of the Social Dialogue Commission, with a view to making progress on the tripartite processing of matters relating to the ILO supervisory bodies. In this regard, the Government states that the ILO has been invited to participate in the tripartite meetings and that forums are being opened to resolve differences between the provinces, the Government and the social actors.

The Committee also notes the observations of:

-the Industrial Confederation of Argentina (UIA), sent with the supplementary report, which underline the impetus given by the Government to social dialogue as a tool for reaching agreements to overcome the crisis and indicate that meetings have been held to move forward on pending issues;
-the General Confederation of Labour of the Argentine Republic (CGT RA), received on 27 September 2020, which refer to the measures adopted to address the pandemic and affirm that the trade union movement has laid the foundations for a sustained dialogue with the Government and the employers (they emphasize the importance of setting up an economic and social council);
-the Confederation of Workers of Argentina (CTA Autonomous), received on 30 September 2020, which denounce the Government’s persistence in refusing to align the trade union legislation to the Convention. The CTA highlights the efforts of the International Department of the Ministry of Labour, Employment and Social Security to keep the Social Dialogue Commission and its subcommissions active. However, it expresses regret that nothing has been done in these bodies regarding the reform of the Trade Unions Act. CTA Autonomous also submits additional allegations of violations of the Convention in practice (concerning delays and the refusal to register or grant legal personality to trade unions, crackdowns on public demonstrations in September 2019, criminalization of a strike of drivers in October 2019, espionage and political harassment at a provincial trade union office, and acts of interference in two trade union election procedures). The Committee requests the Government to send its observations on these matters.

The Committee hopes that the additional issues raised in these supplementary observations will also be examined and addressed in a tripartite manner in the context of the standards subcommission of the Social Dialogue Commission. The Committee expresses the firm hope that specific measures will be taken in the same context to address issues raised in previous observations, including bringing the legislation referenced and alluded to in this observation into conformity with the Convention.

Furthermore, the Committee reiterates the content of its comments adopted in 2019, which are reproduced below.

The Committee notes the observations of the UIA, with the support of the International Organisation of Employers, received on 30 August 2019, welcoming the creation of the Social Dialogue Commission, and particularly its subcommission on specific cases. The Committee also notes the observations of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), received on 1 September 2019, and of the CGT RA and CTA Autonomous, both received on 3 September 2019, and of the Confederation of Workers of Argentina (CTA Workers), received on 10 September 2019. The Committee notes that some of the matters raised by the social partners are the subject of cases that are before the Committee on Freedom of Association (among others, Cases Nos 3229, 3257, 3272 and 3315). The Committee notes that the other observations relate to matters already raised, such as allegations of police repression and restrictions on the exercise of the right to strike and other violations of the Convention. The Committee hopes that the matters raised will be examined and addressed in a tripartite manner within the framework of the Social Dialogue Commission.

With regard to, and following up the matters raised in 2018, the Committee welcomes the information provided by the Government on the establishment and operation of the Social Dialogue Commission through Decision No. 225/2019. The Committee notes in particular: (i) its functions, including acting as an intermediary with the social partners to improve compliance with ratified Conventions: (ii) the creation of two subcommissions – one on labour standards (for the examination of subjects related to regular reporting under articles 12, 29 and 23 of the ILO Constitution, as well as representations under article 24), and the other on specific cases (for the examination of complaints relating to freedom of association); and (iii) its initial activities (two plenary meetings, three meetings of the subcommission on standards and two of the subcommission on cases, which examined two cases that are before the Committee on Freedom of Association). The Committee encourages the Government to continue to reinforce this social dialogue body and requests it to continue providing information on developments in its work.

Articles 2, 3 and 6 of the Convention. Trade union independence and the principle of non-interference by the State. The Committee recalls that for many years it has been requesting the Government to take measures to amend the following provisions of Act No. 23551 of 1998 on trade union associations (LAS) and of the corresponding implementing Decree No. 467/88, which are not in conformity with the Convention:

Trade union status . (i) section 28 of the LAS, under which, in order to challenge an association’s status, the petitioning association must have a “considerably larger” membership; and section 21 of implementing Decree No. 467/88, which qualifies the term “considerably larger” by providing that the association claiming trade union status must have at least 10 per cent more dues-paying members than the organization that currently has the status; (ii) section 29 of the LAS, under which an enterprise trade union may be granted trade union status only when no other organization with trade union status exists in the geographical area, occupation or category; and (iii) section 30 of the LAS, under which, in order to be eligible for trade union status, unions representing a trade, occupation or category have to show that they have different interests from the existing trade union or federation, and that the latter’s status must not cover the workers concerned.

Benefits deriving from trade union status . (i) section 38 of the LAS, under which the check-off of trade union dues is allowed only for associations with trade union status, and not for those that are merely registered; and (ii) sections 48 and 52 of the LAS, which afford special protection (trade union immunity) only to representatives of organizations that have trade union status.

The Committee has noted the rulings of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation and other national and provincial courts finding various provisions of the legislation referred to above unconstitutional, particularly with regard to trade union status and trade union protection. Similarly, the Committee welcomes a recent opinion of 27 August 2019 of the Public Prosecutor submitted to the Supreme Court of Justice indicating that the system of the check-off of trade union dues as set out in section 38 of the LAS is prejudicial to the freedom of association of organizations that are only registered and is therefore unconstitutional.

The Committee also notes that the CTA Autonomous and the CTA Workers once again emphasize the need to amend these provisions of the LAS, as well as sections 31(a) and 41(a), which are reported to have been found unconstitutional by the Supreme Court of Justice. The organizations denounce the lack of political will by the Government in this regard, indicating that it has not proposed any amendments to the LAS and has not supported any of the draft amendments that have been submitted for this purpose and that, although a standards subcommission has been established in the Social Dialogue Commission, the subject of the need to bring the national legislation into conformity with the Convention has not been included on its agenda. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the reform of the labour legislation has undoubtedly not been raised for discussion in the Social Dialogue Commission because the social partners themselves have not secured the minimum level of agreement required.

The Committee expresses the firm hope that all the necessary measures will be taken without further delay to bring the LAS and its implementing Decree into full conformity with the Convention. The Committee considers that structured tripartite dialogue in the Social Dialogue Commission should provide an appropriate forum to carry out an in-depth tripartite examination with a view to the preparation of draft amendments that take into account all of the matters raised. Recalling that it has been requesting the amendment of the legislation referred to above for over 20 years, and that many of the provisions concerned have been found to be unconstitutional in specific judicial procedures, the Committee hopes and expects that it will be able to note tangible progress in the near future.

Delays in procedures for the registration of trade unions and to obtain trade union status. For many years, the Committee has been requesting the Government to take the necessary measures to avoid unjustified delays in procedures for the registration of trade unions or the granting of trade union status. The Committee notes that the ITUC, CTA Workers and CTA Autonomous once again denounce the persistence of delays and refusals by the administrative authorities to recognize trade union status and to simply register trade unions. They allege that, although the latter procedures should be completed within 90 days, the authorities paralyze the procedure for years or set out requirements not envisaged in the law, obliging the organizations concerned to operate without legal status. The organizations once again provide long lists of cases in which trade union registration has not been granted (alleging unresolved delays of up to 16 years) as well as cases of trade union status (including the applications by the Federation of Energy Workers of the Argentine Republic (FeTERA) and the CTA Workers, for which the initial applications were submitted 19 and 15 years ago, respectively), and they denounce the fact that the Government has not taken any measures to resolve the situation. The Committee also notes the Government’s indication that delays in the procedure for the registration of trade unions and the granting of trade union status are in the majority due to: (i) delays by the unions to comply with the requirements set out in the law; and (ii) the existence of pre-existing unions, which defend their position and lodge administrative and judicial appeals. The Committee recalls once again that such allegations of undue delays have been the subject of various cases brought before the Committee on Freedom of Association, both in recent complaints (Cases Nos 3331 and 3360) and more long-standing cases, and particularly the case relating to FeTERA, No. 2870, in which the Committee on Freedom of Association firmly urged the Government to take the necessary measures to grant the organization trade union status. The Committee once again firmly urges the Government to take the necessary measures to avoid unjustified delays or refusals in the procedures for the registration of trade unions or the granting of trade union status and to report any progress made in this respect. The Committee trusts that this issue will also be examined by the Social Dialogue Commission with a view to finding effective solutions which take into account the concerns of all the parties concerned.

Article 3. Right of trade unions to elect their representatives in full freedom and to organize their administration and activities. In its previous comments, the Committee noted the allegations made by workers’ organizations concerning interference by the Government in trade union elections and delays in the registration of trade union officers. The Committee also noted with concern that some of these allegations had already been the subject of recommendations by the Committee on Freedom of Association (in particular, in Cases Nos 2865 and 2979). The CGT RA and the CTA Autonomous also referred to the publication of Provision No. 17-E/2017 by the National Directorate of Trade Union Associations, which ordered the exclusion from the trade union register of organizations that had not confirmed their operational activity within three years, in compliance with the periodic legal requirement set out in the LAS (the CTA Autonomous alleged that this Provision conferred immense discretionary power to sanction trade unions which were critical of the Government). The Committee welcomes the fact that Provision No. 17-E has been set aside by the governmental Decision No. 751/2019. The Committee also notes the Government’s indication that: (i) the registration of officers is not subject to any time limits and the principal reason for delays is the submission of applications that are incomplete or lack documentation; and (ii) the procedure allows the examination of challenges to the electoral process, thereby guaranteeing the exercise of trade union democracy. The Committee also notes that the CTA Autonomous once again denounces: (a) interference with unions by the government authorities through the designation of delegates to assume administrative functions and to replace the representatives elected by the workers (although this has diminished over the past year, since December 2015, there has been interference of this type with 23 trade unions); and (b) the failure to issue, or delays in issuing, the accreditation of trade union officials, affecting their ability to avail themselves freely of the bank accounts of the unions and their capacity to operate, as well as other acts by the administrative authorities affecting the financing of unions, such as the failure to approve the document requiring the check-off of union dues. The Committee recalls once again the importance of ensuring non-interference by the administrative authorities in trade union elections and of avoiding undue delays in the accreditation of trade union officials, as well as ending any other interference that undermines the right of trade unions to elect their representatives in full freedom and to organize their administration and activities. In this regard, the Committee firmly hopes that the issues raised by the workers’ organizations will be examined in the near future by the Social Dialogue Commission with a view to the adoption of appropriate measures, including at the legislative level where necessary, and it requests the Government to provide information on any developments in this respect.

The Committee takes note of the supplementary information provided by the Government in the light of the decision adopted by the Governing Body at its 338th Session (June 2020), giving details of the measures adopted as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic (which it also noted in its observation regarding the Freedom of Association and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1948 (No. 87)), as well as providing detailed and updated information on the state of collective bargaining and on the collective agreements approved (in that connection, the Committee refers to its observation regarding the application of the Collective Bargaining Convention, 1981 (No. 154)).

The Committee also notes the observations of (i) the Industrial Confederation of Argentina (UIA), communicated with the Government’s supplementary report; (ii) the General Confederation of Labour of the Argentine Republic (CGT-RA), received on 27 September 2020; and (iii) the Confederation of Workers of Argentina (CTA Autonomous), received on 30 September 2020. The Committee notes that these observations give information related to the role of collective bargaining in the management of the pandemic, as well as its use in the context of the crisis, which the Committee examines in its observation regarding the application of Convention No. 154. In addition, the Committee notes that the observations of CTA Autonomous also contain new allegations of violations of the Convention in practice, especially of anti-union dismissals.

The Committee requests the Government to communicate its comments in respect of the above-mentioned allegations, and hopes that they will be taken up and examined in a tripartite manner within the Social Dialogue Commission.

With regard to other pending issues, the Committee reiterates its comments adopted in 2019, reproduced below.

The Committee notes the Government’s replies to the previous observations of the Confederation of Workers of Argentina (CTA Autonomous), the General Confederation of Labour of the Argentine Republic (CGT RA) and the Federation of Energy Workers of the Argentine Republic (FeTERA).

The Committee welcomes the establishment of the Social Dialogue Commission and refers in that regard to its observation on the application of the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87).

The Committee also notes the observations of the Industrial Confederation of Argentina (UIA), received on 30 August 2019. The Committee also notes the observations of the CGT RA and the CTA Autonomous, both received on 3 September 2019. The Committee notes that the latter observations include allegations of violations of the Convention in law and practice, and particularly restrictions on collective bargaining (with reference, for example, to section 3 of Decree No. 508/18, which allegedly imposes a ceiling on wage adjustments for the voluntary simplified scheme in relation to collective bargaining). The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments in this regard and invites it to address any pending issues in the context of the Social Dialogue Commission.

The Committee also takes due note of the detailed information provided by the Government on the situation with regard to collective bargaining in the country (in this respect, the Committee refers to its observation on the application of the Collective Bargaining Convention, 1981 (No. 154)). The Committee requests the Government to continue providing information on the number of collective agreements that have been concluded and that are in force, the sectors covered and the number of workers covered by the agreements, as well as on any further measures adopted to promote the full development and utilization of collective bargaining, in accordance with the Convention.

COVID-19. The Committee notes the observations of the Confederation of Workers of Argentina (CTA Autonomous) received on 30 September 2020, alleging that in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, domestic workers, a group in a situation of high vulnerability with regard to their rights, do not have access to the leave, benefits and protection established by the Government, including protection against dismissal and suspension of their contract of employment. The CTA Autonomous also alleges violations of the Convention affecting migrant, unregistered and outsourced workers and workers with disabilities. The Committee requests the Government to send its comments regarding these observations and in response to its previous comments.

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 provided by the Government this year, as well as the information at its disposal in 2019.

The Committee notes the observations of the Industrial Confederation of Argentina (UIA), forwarded by the Government in its supplementary report of 2020. It also notes the observations of the General Confederation of Labour of the Argentine Republic (CGT RA), received on 30 September 2020, and of the Confederation of Workers of Argentina (CTA Autonomous), received on 6 October 2020. The Committee requests the Government to provide its replies in this regard.

In its supplementary report, the Government indicates that, in the context of the measures adopted to address the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic and social distancing measures, social dialogue spaces have been used with the social partners. In this respect, the Government refers, among other measures, to the adoption of the Necessity and Emergency Decree No. 329/2020, in which emphasis is placed on the importance of social dialogue in relation to the measures adopted to preserve jobs. However, the Committee notes the claim by the UIA that employers’ representatives were not consulted regarding the measures adopted. The CTA Autonomous denounces the lack of social dialogue and emphasizes that the Government has confined itself to systematically and constantly issuing necessity and emergency decrees adopting measures in response to the effects of the pandemic without consulting the social partners. The CTA Autonomous indicates that the Government, instead of concluding agreements through the Commission on Social Dialogue and the Future of Work, in which the three trade union confederations and all employers’ organizations are represented, has concluded agreements solely with one part of the representatives of workers and employers, thereby excluding important economic sectors. The Committee also notes that the CGT RA refers to the holding of tripartite meetings on 7 and 27 April 2020, in which agreement was reached on the establishment of a minimum for the wages of inactive workers. It adds that it is planned to establish a post pandemic committee of tripartite composition. The Committee also notes the information provided by the CGT RA concerning the meetings that it has held with, among other actors, various Government institutions, employers and organizations representing the popular economy on the subject of the effects of the crisis resulting from the pandemic and the measures that could be adopted. In relation to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Committee recalls the broad guidance provided by international labour standards. The Committee encourages member States to engage in tripartite consultation and broader social dialogue as a solid basis for the formulation and implementation of effective responses by the tripartite constituents to the deep-rooted socio-economic effects of the pandemic. The Committee invites the Government to continue to provide updated information in its next report on the impact of the measures taken in this respect, in accordance with Article 4 of the Convention and Paragraphs 3 and 4 of Recommendation No. 152, including with regard to steps taken to reinforce the capacity of the tripartite constituents and strengthen mechanisms and procedures, as well as challenges and good practices identified.

Tripartism and social dialogue. The Committee notes the Government’s indication in its supplementary report that the period covered by both reports has been characterized by intense tripartite activity and social dialogue. In this respect, the Government reports the subjects covered by the meetings of the Standing Advisory Committee of the Occupational Risks Act (CCP-LRT) held in 2017 and 2018. The Government indicates that tripartite discussions were held in these meetings on the technical aspects of the Bill on occupational prevention and protection. In April 2019, the Commission on Social Dialogue and the Future of Work was created as a national tripartite body by Decision No. 225/2019. The Committee notes that the Commission on Social Dialogue and the Future of Work includes the permanent participation of a member of the ILO. The mandate of the Commission includes collaboration with the social partners to improve compliance with the ILO Conventions ratified by Argentina and analysis of current labour issues with a view to proposing reforms of the national legislation in relation to the Conventions. The Committee notes with interest the records of the meetings of the Commission on Social Dialogue and the Future of Work held in 2019, which were attached to the Government’s report, and in which it was agreed that discussions would be held in the Commission on three areas: standards, public policies and individual ILO cases, and any other issue relating to international labour standards. The Government adds that tripartite consultations were held on issues related to the implementation of various ILO Conventions on occupational safety and health and minimum wages. The Committee further notes that on 18 June 2020, Argentina was elected a member of the United Nations Economic and Social Council for the following three years. The Government also reports the adoption of measures, drawn up in collaboration with the social partners and the support of the Office, for the establishment of the Economic and Social Council as a national tripartite body for the exchange of views between the various social sectors. In this connection, the CGT RA indicates that a tripartite meeting was held on 15 July 2020 with the assistance of the Office, in which views and experiences were exchanged on the operation of economic and social councils in other countries. In this regard, the Committee notes that the UIA and the CGT RA place emphasis on the need to set up the Economic and Social Council to reach the necessary consensus to stimulate productivity growth and the creation of decent employment in light of the crisis caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. Finally, the Committee notes the reports provided by the Government with its supplementary report on the situation of collective bargaining in the country in 2019 and the list of the various collective labour agreements that have been registered by the administrative authorities in 2020. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the tripartite consultations held within the framework of the Commission for Social Dialogue and the Future of Work in relation to the application of the Convention and their outcome. It also requests the Government to provide updated information on the situation with regard to the establishment and operation of the Economic and Social Council for Development, and on the composition and nature of the consultations held in the Council.

Articles 2 and 5 of the Convention. Adequate procedures. Effective tripartite consultations. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to provide information on the content and outcome of the tripartite consultations held on all the matters relating to international labour standards covered by the Convention. The Committee also requested the Government to indicate the manner in which the views expressed by the social partners on the operation of the consultation procedures required by the Convention are taken into account. The Committee further requested the Government to indicate whether the National Commission for Tripartite Consultation regarding the Application of International Labour Standards is still active and, if so, to provide information on its activities. The Committee notes the detailed information provided by the Government on the tripartite consultations held on 3 May 2017, 11 July 2018 and 7 August 2018 on the matters relating to international labour standards required by the Convention. In particular, the Government indicates that the most representative organizations of workers and employers were consulted through these consultations on the items included on the agenda of the 106th, 107th and 108th Sessions of the Conference, and on the re-examination of unratifed Conventions and Recommendations. The annual list of reports that Argentina has to provide under article 22 of the ILO Constitution on the application of ratified Conventions was also presented to the social partners, who were invited to indicate their views in writing before 1 August of the corresponding year. However, the Committee observes that the Government has not indicated the manner in which the views expressed by the representative organizations of workers and employers on the operation of the consultation procedures required by the Convention are taken into account. Nor has the Government indicated whether the National Commission for Tripartite Consultation regarding International Labour Standards is still active. Finally, the Government indicates in its supplementary report that, between September 2019 and 2020, social dialogue and consultations continued to be held periodically on all matters relating to international labour standards through remote media. In particular, the Government indicates that, in the standards subcommittee of the Commission on Social Dialogue, tripartite consultations were held on issues relating to the supervisory system. It adds that it is planned to adopt measures to facilitate responses to the requirements of the supervisory system, such as the creation of links in each province. The UIA indicates that tripartite consultations were also held on the submission of instruments and the ILO Standards Review Mechanism (SRM). The Committee requests the Government to provide updated information on the content and outcome of the tripartite consultations held on all the matters relating to international labour standards covered by the Convention. The Committee once again requests the Government to indicate the manner in which the views expressed by the representative organizations of workers and employers on the operation of the consultation procedures required by the Convention are taken into account. It also reiterates its request for the Government to indicate whether the National Commission for Tripartite Consultation regarding the Application of International Labour Standards, referred to in previous reports, is still active and, if so, to provide information on its activities and their outcome.

Article 5(1)(b). Tripartite consultations on the submission of instruments to the National Congress. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to provide information on the consultations held regarding the proposals made to the National Congress in relation to the submission of the Seafarers’ Identity Documents Convention (Revised), 2003 as amended (No. 185). In this regard, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that it requested the views of the social partners on the submission of the Employment and Decent Work for Peace and Resilience Recommendation, 2017 (No. 205). However, the Government does not indicate whether the social partners were consulted concerning the submission of Convention No. 185. The Committee further notes that Convention No. 185, the Transition from the Informal to the Formal Economy Recommendation, 2015 (No. 204), and Recommendation No. 205 are still pending submission to the National Congress. The Committee refers to its 2016 observation regarding the obligation of submission and once again requests the Government to provide information on the consultations held and the proposals made to the National Congress in relation to the submission of Convention No. 185.

The Committee takes note of the supplementary information provided by the Government in the light of the decision adopted by the Governing Body at its 338th Session (June 2020), which provides detailed and updated information on the state of collective bargaining and on the collective agreements approved in the country.

The Committee also notes (i) the observations of the Industrial Confederation of Argentina (UIA), communicated with the Government’s supplementary report and relating to the role of collective bargaining in the management of the COVID-19 pandemic, alluding in particular to the adoption of bipartite protocols on action to prevent spread of the disease in workplaces; (ii) the observations of the General Confederation of Labour of the Argentine Republic (CGT RA), received on 27 September 2020, regarding the application of the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98). Those observations provide information on the situation of collective bargaining in the context of the pandemic, referring in particular to agreements between the CGT RA and the UIA in respect of a minimum wage floor and stability of employment, and recommending the automatic 60-day approval of the agreements concluded under section 223bis of the Labour Contracts Act and in accordance with the parameters agreed by the social partners. In that connection, those organizations allude to Ministerial Resolution No. 397/2020 which, as agreed, implements automatic approval of agreements; they report that certain sectoral agreements have been signed within this framework. The CGT RA adds that while most organizations postponed the formal start of 2020 negotiations, due to continued restrictions imposed by the pandemic, a number of unions began and completed their collective agreements; and (iii) the observations of the Confederation of Workers of Argentina (CTA Autonomous), received on 30 September 2020, also regarding collective bargaining in the context of the pandemic, and indicating that CTA Autonomous was not consulted in respect of the measures taken after the agreement between the CGT and the UIA, although the organization had asked to be included and had proposed measures to the authorities. It regrets that, in confronting the crisis, use had not been made of social dialogue through the Social Dialogue Commission. The observations also refer to the Supreme Court ruling of 3 September 2020, giving exclusive collective bargaining rights to workers’ organizations with trade union status. The Committee notes that CTA Autonomous goes on to refer to observations by the Association of State Workers (ATE), which affirm that: (i) not all provinces have legislation that specifically guarantees State workers’ right to bargain collectively and that very few provinces have signed a collective labour agreement; and (ii) there is no guarantee of the existence of an impartial body that can act in cases of collective disputes between the State and its employees.

The Commission welcomes the use of collective bargaining in the management of the pandemic. The Committee also stresses the importance of a broad social dialogue with all representative workers’ and employers’ organizations when taking action to address crises affecting the interests of their members. The Committee requests the Government to communicate its observations regarding the issues raised in these supplementary observations.

The Committee reviewed the application of the Convention on the basis of the additional information received from the Government and the social partners this year (see Article 5 below), and the information at its disposal in 2019.

The Committee notes the observations of the Industrial Confederation of Argentina (UIA), received on 30 August 2019. The Committee also notes the observations of the Argentine Federation of the Judiciary (FJA), received on 27 August 2019, as well as of the General Confederation of Labour of the Argentine Republic (CGT-RA), received on 3 September 2019, and of the Confederation of Workers of Argentina (CTA Workers), received on 10 September 2019.

The Committee welcomes the creation of the Social Dialogue Committee and refers, in this respect, to its observation on the application of the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87).

Article 5 of the Convention. Promotion of collective bargaining in the country. The Committee notes the detailed information provided by the Government concerning the collective bargaining situation in the country in 2017 (in which a total of 1,004 collective agreements and accords were signed, covering 4,180,000 workers), in 2018 (in which a total of 1,653 agreements and accords were signed, covering 4,300,000 workers) and in the first three months of 2019 (during which a total of 1,518 approved agreements and accords were signed, covering 3,982,813 workers).

Collective bargaining of workers in the national judiciary. In its previous comments, the Committee urged the Government to take the necessary measures to guarantee the collective bargaining rights of workers in the national judiciary and the provinces. The Committee notes that, once again, the Government refers to the division of powers and recalls that the regulation of collective bargaining in the national judiciary falls within the exclusive competence of the Supreme Court and the legislative branch. The Government adds, in this respect, that two bills in that area had been submitted recently, which had lost parliamentary status without being addressed. Regarding the judiciaries of the different provinces, the Government indicates that progress has been made, reflected in intense bipartite negotiation activities, and indicates that collective bargaining is implemented in the Autonomous City of Buenos Aires, as well as in the provinces of Buenos Aires, Tucuman, Chaco, Rio Negro and Mendoza. The Committee also notes that the CGT RA states that the national judiciary continues to invoke its independence to evade the exercise of collective bargaining; and that the FJA reports that neither at the national level nor in 23 of the country’s 28 provinces is the right of collective bargaining of workers in the judicial system respected. The Committee also recalls that these inadequacies in the promotion of collective bargaining of workers in the national judiciary have been the subject of various cases before the Committee on Freedom of Association (for example, Cases Nos 3078 and 3220). The Committee trusts that the Social Dialogue Committee will carry out an analysis of the necessary measures, adapted to national conditions, including legislation, which must be adopted to ensure the right to collective bargaining of workers in the national judiciary and in all the provinces of Argentina. The Committee encourages the Government to consider the possibility of inviting representatives of the judicial and legislative powers in question to engage with the Social Dialogue Committee for the purposes of this discussion. The Committee requests the Government to keep it informed of any developments in this respect.

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 proceeded with the examination of the application of the Convention on the basis of the supplementary information received from the Government this year, as well as on the basis of the information at its disposal in 2019.

The Committee notes the observations from the Confederation of Workers of Argentina (CTA Autonomous) and the Industrial Confederation of Argentina (UIA), received on 30 September and 1st October 2020, respectively. The Committee requests the Government to send its comments in this regard.

Articles 3 and 4 of the Convention. National policy. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that there has been no progress in the approval of the Bill amending Act No. 12713 of 29 September 1941 on Home Work (Act No. 12713). The Committee requests the Government to provide detailed and updated information on the measures taken or envisaged with a view to improving the situation of homeworkers, particularly those adopted to address the effects of the crisis triggered by the COVID-19 pandemic. The Committee also requests the Government to indicate the employers’ and workers’ organizations that have been consulted regarding the formulation, application and revision of these measures. The Committee further requests the Government to continue providing information on any progress made in the adoption of the Bill amending Act No. 12713.

Articles 4(2)(c) and 7. Equality of treatment in relation to protection in the field of occupational safety and health. Application of safety and health laws and regulations to homeworkers. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to indicate whether the occupational safety and health legislation provides for equal treatment between homeworkers and other wage earners, and whether it is applied taking into account the special characteristics of home work. The Committee notes the Government’s reiteration that, under section 9 of the Home Work Act (No. 12713), premises on which home work is performed must meet health and safety requirements as determined by the competent authority. The Government also refers, among other provisions, to section 22 of Decree No. 118755/42 regulating Act No. 12713, which establishes that workshop premises must comply with the relevant health and safety provisions. The Government further indicates that, under section 22 of the Decree regulating Act No. 12713, the rules on health and safety measures laid down in the general legislation on occupational health, safety and risks for other workers apply to homeworkers. Under Resolution No. 15552/2012 SRT, these rules also apply to telework. The Committee notes, however, that the Government has not provided information in its report on the manner in which the existing legislation on occupational safety and health is applied, taking due account of the special characteristics of home work. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any measures adopted or envisaged in the area of occupational safety and health that take due account of the special characteristics of home work. The Committee also requests the Government to indicate the types of work and substances prohibited in home work, in accordance with the requirements of Article 7 of the Convention.

Article 4(2)(d). Equality of treatment in relation to remuneration. The Committee notes the approval of an agreement on 16 November 2017 by the Eighth Wage Committee for Home Work in the Footwear Industry, under which the parties agreed to grant to the workers included in the scope of application of Act No. 12713 the increases to the minimum wage agreed under Collective Labour Agreement No. 652/12 on workers from the footwear and related industries. This agreement provides for a gradual increase of 23 per cent in the minimum wage of such workers and a one-off payment not classified as remuneration of 6,000 pesos. The Committee requests the Government to continue providing updated and detailed information on the measures adopted or envisaged with a view to encouraging equality of treatment in terms of remuneration between homeworkers in the various sectors of the economy and other wage earners.

Article 4(2)(e). Equality of treatment in relation to social security protection. In reply to the Committee’s previous comments, the Government indicates that homeworkers, like workers employed in a workplace, are fully covered by the social security system (pension, health, family allowance, unemployment and risk schemes). The Government adds that, to access the benefits of the social security system, homeworkers, like other workers, must be registered and make contributions and their employers must pay the required contributions. The Committee notes, however, that the Government reports high levels of informality in the home work sector, especially in the garment and footwear sectors. With a view to addressing informality in these sectors, the Ministry of Labour and Federal Administration of Public Revenues established the Minimum Workers Indicator, as a tool to calculate the minimum workforce required to undertake an activity in a workshop on the basis of several factors such as the number of machines used and the number of garments or shoes to be produced. The Government indicates that, by targeting different actors in the production chain, it is more effectively combating labour informality and protecting the rights of employees, whether they work in factories, workshops or at home. The Committee requests the Government to provide detailed information on the measures adopted or envisaged to guarantee in practice the access of homeworkers, under equal conditions to other workers, to the social security system, including any measures adopted to combat informality in home work. The Committee also requests the Government to provide updated statistical information, disaggregated by sex, on the number of homeworkers who are covered by the various social security schemes.

Article 4(2)(f). Equality of treatment in relation to training. The Committee requests the Government to provide detailed and updated information on the measures adopted or envisaged to ensure equality of treatment between homeworkers and other wage earners in relation to training.

Article 6. Labour statistics. Article 9 and Part V of the report form. Application in practice. The Committee requests the Government to provide detailed and updated information on the measures adopted or envisaged to ensure that statistics on homeworkers, disaggregated by sex and age, including those under the teleworking model, are gathered and analysed. The Committee also requests the Government to provide updated information regarding the application in practice of the Convention, including copies of court decisions in relation to the principles of the Convention and extracts from inspection reports, and to indicate the number of inspections carried out and their outcomes, including with regard to workers under the teleworking model.

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 proceeded with the examination of the application of the Convention on the basis of the supplementary information received from the Government this year, as well as on the basis of the information at its disposal in 2019.

The Committee notes the observations of the Confederation of Workers of Argentina (CTA) and the Industrial Union of Argentina (UIA) received on 30 September and 1 October 2020, respectively. The Committee requests the Government to send its reply in this regard.

Promotion of telework. The Committee notes the adoption on 16 March 2020 of Decision 2020-207-APN-MT, which promotes telework for national public sector workers, except for essential service workers, and recommends that private enterprises operate at a minimum staffing level and adopt telework. On 16 March 2020, Decision No. 21/20 was also adopted, which provides that employers allowing employees to work from their private homes must inform their occupational risk insurer (ART) of the address where the work will be performed and the frequency of that work. That address will then be considered as a workplace under the Occupational Risk Act. In addition, the Committee notes the supplementary information provided by the Government. In particular, it notes with interest the adoption of Act No. 27555 of 30 July 2020 (hereinafter Act No. 27555) regulating telework. Section 2 of Act No. 27555 provides that contracts are considered as telework contracts “where the completion of activities, performance of work or provision of services (…) is carried out entirely or partially in the home of the worker, or in locations separate from the premises of the employer, through the use of information technologies.” Section 2 also provides that the minimum legal requirements for telework contracts shall be established by a special law, while activity-specific regulations shall be established through collective bargaining. The Committee also notes that Act No. 27555 provides that workers on a home work contract have the same rights and obligations as those working on site (section 3), including the rights to freedom of association and collective bargaining (sections 12 and 13) and protection from occupational risks (section 14). Section 3 also provides that the wages of workers engaged in telework must not be less than what they would receive for on-site work. Section 4 provides that working hours must be agreed in advance and in writing, in accordance with the legally established limits. Act No. 27555 also regulates the right to digitally disconnect (section 5), the option to amend working hours to provide care in certain cases (section 6) and the right to receive training (section 11). The Act also establishes a number of obligations for employers, such as the obligation to provide the equipment, tools and support necessary to perform the work, and to reimburse any connectivity and/or service consumption costs that workers might incur as a result of teleworking (sections 9 and 10). Lastly, Act No. 27555 provides that the transfer of workers from on-site work to telework must be voluntary and agreed in writing (section 7), and can be revoked by the worker at any time (section 8).

The Committee notes that, in its observations, the CTA emphasizes that, while Act No. 27555 includes the rights and obligations established in the Convention and in the Home Work Recommendation, 1996 (No. 184), the effective exercise of these rights is problematic in practice, since they depend on collective bargaining conducted at a later stage. In addition, the CTA maintains that the effective enforcement of the obligations is subject to subsequent regulation by the competent state bodies. Moreover, the CTA indicates that the Act considers telework as a new employment contract (section 2) and not as an arrangement or option available to the employer for organizing work under the Employment Contracts Act (Act No. 20.744). The CTA also states that including the option of working by objectives (section 4(1) of the Act) renders the right of the worker to limit working hours (section 4(2)) and to disconnect (section 5) null and void in practice. With regard to occupational safety and health, the CTA maintains that section 14 of Act No. 27555 undermines the protection of workers, as it provides that accidents that occur at work are “presumed” to be occupational, while the Occupational Risks and Accidents Act (No. 24557) currently in force provides that such accidents are “deemed” to be occupational. The Committee also notes the CTA’s indication that Act No. 27555 expressly provides for its entry into force 90 days from the eventual end date of the social, preventive and obligatory isolation period established by Emergency Decree No. 297/2020 currently in force, and that, consequently, it is impossible to determine when the Act will enter into force. The CTA emphasizes that, although the number of workers engaged in telework has increased exponentially during the pandemic, their working conditions are unknown. As the Act is not yet in force owing to the extension of the social, preventive and obligatory isolation period, employers have unilaterally established the parameters for teleworking, without any kind of public oversight. The CTA indicates that the only exception in this regard has been the signing of the “Agreement regulating telework under the COVID-19 (coronavirus) pandemic restrictions” between the judiciary of the province of Buenos Aires and the Judicial Association of Buenos Aires, which remains in force only during the social, preventive and obligatory isolation period. The CTA also maintains that there is no register of workers engaged in telework either prior to or during the pandemic, contrary to the guidance provided by Paragraph 7 of Recommendation No. 184.

The Committee notes the UIA’s statement that the brevity of the legislative process by which Act No. 27555 was adopted did not allow for an effective social dialogue process to be held. The UIA indicates that, in the discussions held during the adoption process, the employer organizations expressed deep concern over various provisions of the Act that were difficult to apply in practice and that, moreover, were contrary to international labour standards. In this regard, the UIA indicates that Act No. 27555 does not establish an objective criterion for determining when remote work is considered as a contract performed under teleworking arrangements and when it is considered as work occasionally performed remotely, which is excluded from the regime of home work under the Convention. Furthermore, the UIA is opposed to the prohibition in Act No. 27555 against contacting workers outside of working hours (section 5(2) of the Act), and the obligation of the employer to have a system in place that prevents communication with workers outside of their working hours (section 4(2)). Lastly, the UIA refers to section 17(1) of Act No. 27555, which provides that in the case of transnational remote work, the national law applicable to the work contract is either that of the country where the work is performed or that of the country where the employer is domiciled, depending on which is more favourable to the worker. The UIA also refers to section 17(2) of the Act, which provides that collective agreements (concluded under section 2 of Act No. 27555) should establish a maximum number for these contracts. In this regard, it considers that cases in which Argentine law would not apply would contradict the territoriality principle established in the Employment Contracts Act (Act No. 20.744) and create a situation of legal uncertainty that could undermine compliance with international agreements. The Committee requests the Government to send detailed and updated information on the application in practice of Act No. 27555 of 30 July 2020, including the date of its entry into force, and updated statistical information on the number of workers that have begun to telework, disaggregated by age, sex and sector, and on the number of collective agreements concluded under section 2 of the Act. The Committee also requests the Government to send information on the manner in which the right to limit working hours and to disconnect is ensured. Recalling also that telework can be a useful means of enabling access to employment for individuals who sometimes face greater obstacles in this regard (such as young people, women, persons with disabilities and older people), the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the impact of Act No. 27555 on the employment of such individuals.

The Committee notes the Government’s first report on the application of the Convention, and also the observations of the General Confederation of Labour of the Argentine Republic (CGT RA) and by the Confederation of Workers of Argentina (CTA Workers), received on 31 August and 11 September 2018, respectively. Following a first review of the information and documents available, the Committee draws the Government’s attention to the issues referred to below. If considered necessary, the Committee may come back to other matters at a later stage.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. The Committee notes with deep concern the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the protection of fishers’ rights as laid out in the Convention. In this regard, the Committee refers to the resolution adopted by the Governing Body in its 340th Session (GB.340/Resolution) concerning maritime labour issues and COVID-19 disease, which calls on Member States to take measures to address the adverse impacts of the pandemic on fishers’ rights.

General questions of application. Legislation and collective labour agreements. The Committee notes that the Government provides limited information on the application of the Convention, merely referring to the legislation or collective agreements in relation to most points, without specifying the relevant provisions. It also notes that some of the collective agreements mentioned by the Government, for example agreement 538/10, have been replaced by new collective agreements. In order to have the information needed to examine the application of the Convention, the Committee requests the Government to provide detailed information on the points made below, reproducing where possible the text of the applicable legal provisions or collective agreements. The Committee also requests the Government to clarify which collective agreements applicable to fishers are in force.

Article 5. Basis of measurement. The Committee notes that the Government does not provide any information on the application of Article 5. The Committee requests the Government to indicate: (a) whether, for the purpose of the Convention, length overall (LOA) is used in place of length (L) as the basis for measurement, in accordance with the equivalence set out in Annex I; (b) whether, for the purpose of the paragraphs specified in Annex III, gross tonnage is used in place of length (L) or length overall (LOA) as the basis for measurement, in accordance with the equivalence set out in Annex III; and (c) the reasons for the decisions taken under (a) and (b) above and the consultations held.

Article 8(1) and (3). Responsibility of the fishing vessel owner. The Committee notes that Act 20.094 of 1973 (the Shipping Act), which applies to fishing vessels, provides that the shipowner, namely, the user of a vessel under the direction and governance of a skipper designated by the owner, is responsible for the obligations assumed by the skipper (sections 170 and 174). The Committee requests the Government to indicate the legal provisions that guarantee that: (i) the fishing vessel owner has the overall responsibility to ensure that the skipper is provided with the necessary resources and facilities to comply with the obligations of the Convention (Article 8(1)); and (ii) the skipper is not constrained by the fishing vessel owner from taking any decision which the skipper considers necessary for the safety of the vessel and its safe navigation and safe operation, or the safety of the fishers on board.

Article 9(5) and (6). Minimum age. Hazardous work. Night work. Trainees. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the minimum age for working on board a fishing vessel is 18 years, referring, inter alia, to Decree 1117/2016 of the Ministry of Labour, Employment and Social Security (Ministry of Labour) determining hazardous types of work for young persons, which establishes that young persons under 18 years of age are prohibited from working at sea or on inland waterways, whatever their activity or task. The Committee also notes that, under section 501.0104 of the Maritime, River and Lake Shipping Regulations adopted by Decree 770/2019, young persons between 16 and 18 years of age can only be recruited as “trainees”, including as trainee fishers. The Committee requests the Government to specify whether trainees aged between 16 and 18 years can be authorized to perform hazardous work on board fishing vessels. If so, it requests the Government to provide information on: (i) the national laws or regulations or decision of the competent authority which provide for it and the consultations held in this regard; and (ii) the manner in which the health, safety and morals of trainees are fully protected and it is ensured that they have received adequate specific instruction or vocational training and have completed basic pre-sea safety training. The Committee also requests the Government to indicate whether trainees between 16 and 18 years of age can work at night, specifying the definition of “night”. If so, the Committee requests the Government to indicate how effect is given to the detailed requirements established by Article 9(6)(a) and (b) (exceptions to the night work restriction).

Articles 13 and 14. Hours of rest. The Committee notes, with regard to hours of rest, that the Government cites several collective agreements and refers in particular to the terms of collective agreement 580/10. The Committee notes that the aforementioned agreement and most collective agreements in force for maritime fishing vessels provide for minimum uninterrupted hours of rest of eight hours per day, which is less than the limit of ten hours in any 24-hour period established by Article 14 of the Convention. The Committee recalls that Article 13 of the Convention provides that fishers must be given regular periods of rest of sufficient length to ensure safety and health. In addition, Article 14 of the Convention provides that, for fishing vessels remaining at sea for more than three days, Members shall, after consultation, establish the minimum hours of rest to be provided to fishers, which shall not be less than: (i) ten hours in any 24-hour period; and (ii) 77 hours in any seven-day period. Temporary exceptions may only be permitted for limited and specified reasons, with fishers receiving compensatory periods of rest. The competent authority, after consultation, may establish alternative requirements which must be substantially equivalent and not jeopardize the safety and health of the fishers. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures taken to give full effect to Articles 13 and 14 of the Convention. It also requests the Government to indicate, reproducing the text of the provisions in force, whether the skipper of a fishing vessel has the right to suspend the schedule of hours of rest and require a fisher to perform any hours of work necessary for the immediate safety of the vessel, the persons on board or the catch, or for the purpose of giving assistance to other boats or ships or persons in distress at sea, and whether fishers are granted a compensatory period of rest (Article 14(4)).

Article 16(b) and Annex II. Fisher’s work agreement. Minimum particulars. The Committee notes that section 636 of the Shipping Act constitutes the general legislative framework which establishes the requirement to conclude an individual agreement – “adjustment contract” – between the crew member, on the one hand, and the shipowner, on the other. The Committee also notes that various examples of collective agreements for the fishing sector establish the terms of the respective adjustment contracts. The Committee observes that the elements of adjustment contracts established by collective agreements do not include minimum particulars that must appear in the fisher’s work agreement, in accordance with Annex II of the Convention; missing particulars include: provisions (food) supplied, conditions of termination of the agreement, paid annual leave, entitlement to repatriation, reference to the relevant collective agreement, and minimum periods of rest. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures taken to ensure that all fishers’ work agreements include, as a minimum, the detailed requirements contained in Annex II.

Article 17(a). Fisher’s work agreement. Prior review and advice. The Committee requests the Government to provide detailed information on procedures for ensuring that a fisher has an opportunity to review and seek advice on the terms of the fisher’s work agreement before it is concluded.

Article 21. Repatriation. Observing that the Government’s report does not contain any information on this matter, the Committee requests the Government to provide detailed information on the application of Article 21, particularly with respect to: (i) the laws, regulations or other measures which prescribe the precise circumstances entitling a fisher to repatriation, the maximum duration of service periods on board following which a fisher is entitled to repatriation, and the destinations to which fishers may be repatriated (Article 21(1) and (3); (ii) the person responsible for bearing the cost of repatriation (Article 21(2)); and (iii) the agreements in force for the repatriation of a fisher when the vessel owner fails to provide for repatriation, as well as for recovering the corresponding costs from the vessel owner (Article 21(4)).

Article 22. Recruitment and placement. The Committee notes that several of the applicable collective agreements (for example, agreements 701/14 and 586/10) provide that, in order to complete crew numbers, enterprises can ask the trade unions for the necessary personnel or hire personnel directly with the obligation to notify the union for their inclusion in the union’s labour pool. The Committee also notes the Government’s indication that, taking up the concept already envisaged in other collective agreements, collective agreement 729/2015 provides for the setting up of the Single Recruitment Centre (CUCGEMARA), a tripartite body comprising employers’ associations, the trade union and the labour administrative authority, with the aim of organizing the recruitment of seafarers. The Government indicates that this mechanism has yet to become operational and will form a fundamental part of seafarers’ access to fishing vessels. The Committee requests the Government to describe how it is ensured that the recruitment and placement service which operates according to a collective agreement functions in a proper manner and has adopted measures for the protection and promotion of fishers’ employment rights in accordance with Article 22(3)(a) and (b), namely, a prohibition on using means intended to prevent or deter fishers from engaging for work, and a prohibition on fees or other charges for recruitment or placement being borne directly or indirectly, in whole or in part, by fishers. The Committee also requests the Government to provide information on the setting up and operation of CUCGEMARA.

Article 24. Payment of fishers. Transfers to families. The Committee notes that the Government refers, inter alia, to various collective agreements without mentioning the relevant provisions. The Committee notes that section 673 of the Shipping Act refers to “transfers made to third parties” by order of crew members. The Committee also notes that although some collective agreements establish the possibility for crew members to ask for advances on their wages, the agreements do not regulate transfers of wages to their families. The Committee requests the Government to provide detailed information on the manner in which it is ensured that all fishers working on board fishing vessels are given a means to transmit all or part of their payments received, including advances, to their families at no cost.

Articles 25 and 26. Accommodation. The Committee notes that the Government refers to several collective agreements without mentioning the relevant provisions. The Committee notes that section 678 of the Shipping Act provides that when crew members are obliged to sleep on board, the shipowner must provide them with adequate accommodation, whether individual or collective, in accordance with the available amenities and review category. The Committee also notes that the collective agreements referred to by the Government do not regulate the accommodation aspects mentioned in Article 26 of the Convention or give effect to the detailed requirements on crew accommodation contained in Annex III of the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or contemplated to give effect to Article 26 and Annex III of the Convention, specifying any other requirement that may have been adopted in accordance with paragraphs 15 (minimum headroom), 39 (floor areas), 47 (dimensions of berths) and 62 (sanitary facilities) of Annex III, and providing information on related consultations.

Article 27. Food. The Committee notes that the Government does not provide any information on the application of Article 27. The Committee also notes that section 640 of the Shipping Act provides that the shipowner is obliged to provide adequate food for crew members while they are on board. The Committee observes that some of the applicable collective agreements provide that: (i) the vessel owner shall bear sustenance and food costs for crew members on fishing vessels, quantifying such costs; and (ii) shipping companies shall be obliged to conduct an analysis of the potability of water on maritime fishing vessels at least once every six months. The Committee also notes that, among the collective agreements analysed, only collective agreement 768/19 provides that “the vessel owner shall provide high-quality food in sufficient quantity” (section 11). The Committee therefore notes that the measures taken by the Government do not give full effect to Article 27 of the Convention, which provides that each Member shall adopt laws, regulations or other measures requiring that: (a) the food carried and served on board be of a sufficient nutritional value, quality and quantity; and (b) potable water be of sufficient quality and quantity. The Committee requests the Government to take the necessary steps to give full effect to the provisions of Article 27(a) and (b) and paragraphs 78 and 79 of Annex III to the Convention with respect to all fishing vessels covered by it.

Articles 29 and 30. Medical care. The Committee notes that the Government provides general information on the application of Article 29 and does not provide any information on the application of Article 30 (fishing vessels of 24 metres in length or over). It also notes that sections 659 et seq. of the Shipping Act give effect to the requirement to provide medical care on land provided for by Articles 29(e) and 30(f) of the Convention and that some collective agreements, for example collective agreements 727/15 and 768/19, provide that any staff who fall ill or suffer an accident on board, either at sea or in port, shall be assisted by the vessel owner while they are under contract. With regard to the requirements relating to medical equipment (Articles 29(a) and (c) and 30(a)), the Committee observes that some of the applicable collective agreements contain the obligation to have a first-aid kit on board, in accordance with the requirements of the Argentine Naval Authority (PNA). The Committee requests the Government to provide detailed information on whether and how account is taken of the number of fishers on board, the area of operation and the length of the voyage, and the measures adopted to comply with the following requirements of Article 29 with respect to all fishing vessels covered by the Convention: (i) to have at least one fisher on board who is qualified or trained in first aid and other forms of medical care and who has the necessary knowledge to use the medical equipment and supplies; and (ii) to be equipped for radio or satellite communication with persons or services ashore that can provide medical advice. The Committee also requests the Government to specify the provisions established by the PNA for fishing vessels covered by the Convention relating to medical equipment and supplies, indicating whether they are accompanied by comprehensible instructions for the medical personnel on board. Lastly, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on national laws and regulations or other measures adopted to give effect to the additional requirements on medical care established by Article 30 with respect to fishing vessels of 24 metres in length or over.

Articles 31–33. Occupational safety and health and accident prevention. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the general legislation on occupational safety and health (OSH) applies to the fishing sector (in particular, Decree-Law 19.587/1972 on occupational safety and health and Act 24.557 on occupational risks and its amendments). The Committee also notes that Argentina has ratified the International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Fishing Vessel Personnel, 1995 (STCW-F), through Act 26.981 and that its implementing regulations (RETIMMAR draft bill) are in the process of being adopted. The Committee notes that the CGT RA indicates that, according to data from the Administrative Tribunal for Shipping at the Naval Centre and other bodies, there is a high accident rate in the fishing industry in Argentina. It also indicates that between 2000 and 2017, in a fleet of 700 fishing vessels, there have been 41 shipwrecks with 86 fatalities, a figure that includes seven crew members who are still missing. The Committee notes the various initiatives referred to by the Government and the CGT RA adopted to improve protection of the health and lives of workers in the fishing sector, such as (i) the “Technical cooperation and assistance framework agreement”, of 16 February 2017, between the Under-Secretariat for Fishing and Aquiculture at the Ministry of Agri-Industry and the Occupational Risk Supervisory Authority (SRT), aimed at reducing the accident rate in the fishing sector; (ii) the “Technical cooperation and assistance agreement”, of 31 October 2017, between the PNA and the SRT (continuation of the framework agreement); and (iii) the “Draft handbook of good fishing practices” for beam trawlers prepared by the quadripartite working commission for the fishing sector. However, the Committee notes that the general information provided by the Government does not enable an assessment of how effect is given in the fishing sector to general OSH legislation or how the particular features of work on board fishing vessels have been taken into account and how the risks associated with this type of work have been assessed. The Committee requests the Government to provide detailed information on the application in law and in practice of the provisions of Article 31, in particular: (a) the prevention of occupational accidents, occupational diseases and work-related risks on board fishing vessels, including risk evaluation and management, training and on-board instruction of fishers; (b) training for fishers in the handling of types of fishing gear they will use and in the knowledge of the fishing operations in which they will be engaged; (c) the obligations of fishing vessel owners, fishers and others concerned, regarding safety and health on board; (d) the reporting and investigation of accidents on board fishing vessels flying its flag; and (e) the setting up of joint committees on occupational safety and health or, after consultation, of other appropriate bodies. The Committee also requests the Government to provide information on risk evaluation in relation to fishing and on the participation of fishers or their representatives in such evaluation (Article 33). Lastly, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on national laws or regulations or other measures adopted to give effect to the additional requirements of Article 32 which apply to fishing vessels of 24 metres in length or over normally remaining at sea for more than three days and, after consultation, to other vessels.

Articles 34–37. Social security. The Committee notes that the Government does not provide information on the application of Articles 34–37 of the Convention. It also notes that the CGT RA and CTA Autonomous state that the National Executive Authority has annulled the “single social tax for agri-business” which enabled small-scale fishers to have social protection (medical coverage and social security), and that this results in an increase in informal employment in the sector. The Committee requests the Government to provide detailed information on the social security protection enjoyed by fishers ordinarily resident in its territory and their dependants, indicating: (i) the applicable branches of social security and the related benefits; (ii) the applicable laws and regulations; and (iii) how it is guaranteed that conditions of protection for fishers are no less favourable than those applicable to other workers, including employed and self-employed persons, ordinarily resident in Argentina. The Committee also requests the Government to send its comments on the observations of the CGT RA and CTA Autonomous.

Article 40. Flag State responsibilities. Supervisory system. The Committee notes the Government’s reference to additional protocol No. 2 to “Agreement No. 22 of 17 March 2015 on cooperation, collaboration and assistance with respect to enforcement of the Maritime Labour Convention, 2006, as amended (MLC, 2006), and the Work in Fishing Convention, 2007 (No. 188), of the International labour Organization (ILO)” between the Ministry of Labour, the Ministry of Security and the SRT (cooperation agreement). The Committee notes that additional protocol No. 2 divides supervisory duties relating to the Convention between the Labour Secretariat at the Ministry of Labour, the SRT and the PNA, according to their respective areas of competence. The Committee also notes the observations of the CGT RA, according to which the Ministry of Labour currently has limitations on access to vessels liable to inspection. The Committee requests the Government to send its comments in this regard.

Article 41. Flag State responsibilities. Fishing certificate. The Committee notes that sections 5 et seq. of the protocol regulate the issuing of the “certificate of work in fishing” (“valid document”) which has a period of validity of three years. The Committee requests the Government to provide an example of a fishing certificate issued under additional protocol No. 2 to the cooperation agreement, together with the inspection reports on the basis of which the certificate was issued.

Articles 43(2)–(4) and 44. Port State responsibilities. Inspections. Prohibition on more favourable treatment. The Committee notes the lack of information on the application of Articles 43(2)–(4) and 44. The Committee requests the Government to provide detailed information on the control measures adopted by the port State in the event of non-compliance with the provisions of the Convention, in accordance with Article 43(2)–(4), indicating the number and nature of cases examined and the type of measures adopted. The Committee also requests the Government to indicate in what manner effect is given to the principle of not giving more favourable treatment to fishing vessels flying the flag of any State that has not ratified the Convention (Article 44).

In order to provide a comprehensive view of the issues relating to the application of the ratified Conventions on social security, the Committee considers it appropriate to examine Conventions Nos 17 (workmen’s compensation for accidents), 42 (workmen’s compensation for occupational diseases, revised), and 102 (minimum standards) together.

The Committee notes the Government’s first report on Convention No. 102. The Committee notes the observations of the Confederation of Workers of Argentina (CTA Workers), and of the Confederation of Workers of Argentina (CTA Autonomous), received in 2017, on the application of Conventions Nos 17 and 42. The Committee notes the observations of the General Confederation of Labour of the Argentine Republic (CGT RA) received on 31 August 2018, of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), received on 1 September 2018, and of the Confederation of Workers of Argentina (CTA Workers), received on 11 September 2018, on the application of Convention No. 102.

Article 2 of Convention No. 17. Application to non-registered workers. In its previous comment, the Committee urged the Government to send its reply concerning: the manner in which the Convention is applied to workers who have not been registered by their employers; who ensures compensation to these workers and payment of medical costs in the event of occupational accidents; and what penalties are applied to employers who fail to meet the obligation to insure their workers against occupational accidents. The Committee notes with interest the indication provided by the Government in its report that, in conformity to Section 1 of Act No. 27348 of 2017, injured workers who have not been registered by their employers can initiate a procedure with the Medical Commissions for the determination of their grade of incapacity and the award of compensation and medical aid in line with Act No. 24557 of 13 September 1995 concerning occupational risks. Alternatively, they can go to court through an expedited judicial process. In case of lack of registration and insolvency of the employer, compensation is covered by a Guarantee Fund. Concerning the penalties applied to employers who fail to meet their obligation of insuring workers, the Committee notes the indication provided by the Government that, in the framework of the actions performed by the Integral Labour and Social Security Inspection System, the State together with the Provinces carry on actions and inspections aiming at detecting non-registered work and can apply sanctions and fines to employers.

Article 5 of Convention No. 17. Payment of compensation in a lump sum. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that section 2(4) of Act No. 26773 of 2012 provided that the general principle of compensation is to make a lump-sum payment, subject to any adjustments established, and requested the Government to indicate how it is ensured, in law and in practice, that the lump-sum payment is properly utilized. The Committee notes the Government’s reply in which it explains that, in addition to the lump sum provided, injured workers with a disability below 66 per cent will be provided with “professional requalification” assistance, which constitutes a benefit in kind, aiming at the reintegration of the worker in the labour market. Recalling that Article 5 of the Convention requires the compensation in case of permanent injury or death to take the form of a periodical payment, and provides that this payment can be converted into a lump sum if the competent authority is satisfied that it will be properly utilized, the Committee once again requests the Government to indicate how it is ensured, in law and in practice, that the lump-sum payment is properly utilized.

Article 9 of Convention No. 17. Free medical and surgical assistance. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in reply to its previous request concerning the right to medical and surgical assistance free of charge.

Article 10 of Convention No. 17. Artificial limbs and surgical appliances. In its previous comments, the Committee several times requested the Government to provide information concerning a draft decision on chronic cases prepared by the Occupational Risks Supervisory Authority (SRT), requiring occupational risk insurers (ART) to conduct periodic checks on the state of artificial limbs and surgical appliances that have been supplied. The Committee notes that the Government indicates that the SRT has issued Resolution No. 180/2015 which establishes that in some chronic cases a check-up should be carried out by a medical professional specializing in Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation and by the assigned specialist professionals corresponding to the pathology, to evaluate the condition of the prosthetic, orthotic and/or technical assistance equipment delivered or the need to prescript a new one. The control should be on an annual basis. The Committee takes due note of this information.

Article 2 of Convention No. 42. Review of the national list of occupational diseases. In its previous comment, the Committee requested the Government to review the list of occupational diseases in accordance with the Convention’s aim of relieving workers in the trades and industries listed from the burden of proving that they actually have been exposed to the risk of the disease in question. It also requested the Government to change from restrictive to indicative the enumeration of the pathological symptoms resulting from exposure to the corresponding substances given in the left hand column of the list of occupational diseases in Decree No. 658/96. In addition, the Committee urged the Government to take concrete measures to include the addition of the loading, unloading or transport of merchandise in general to the activities likely to cause anthrax; decrease the requirement of exposure for primary epitheliomatous cancer of the skin to 5 years in accordance with the findings of the World Health Organization (WHO); and make an express reference to silicosis with or without pulmonary tuberculosis. The Committee notes the reply by the Government that Decree No. 658 of 1996 lists a wide range of diseases considered as occupational diseases, on which the Jurisdictional Medical Commissions have to certify a direct causal link with the work. In addition, section 2 of Decree No. 1278 of 2000 provides that the Central Medical Commission can acknowledge other diseases as having occupational origin, on a case-by-case basis, when the worker or his/her rightful beneficiaries present a petition aimed at demonstrating the direct causal link between the disease and the work performed. While noting the specific tasks of the Central Medical Commission, the Committee hopes that the Government will be able to indicate the measures taken to bring the national list of occupational diseases into full conformity with this Article of the Convention, concerning: (i) reconsidering the enumeration of the pathological symptoms related to the occupational disease; (ii) adding the loading, unloading or transport of merchandise in general to the activities likely to cause anthrax; (iii) the decrease of years of exposure required in cases of primary epitheliomatous cancer of the skin to 5 years, in accordance with the findings of the WHO; and (iv) the express reference to silicosis in the national list of occupational diseases.

Application in practice of Conventions Nos 17 and 42. Assessment of work related injury by Medical Commissions. The Committee notes that the CTA Workers in its observations alleges that Act. No. 27348 of 2017, which sets out the competence of the Medical Commissions created by section 51 of Act No. 24241 of 1993, is unconstitutional, and it refers to decisions of the National Supreme Court of Justice in this regard. More specifically, the CTA Workers indicate that these administrative organs take mandatory decisions on the occupational origin of accidents or of diseases, and on the degree of incapacity and amount of compensation to be paid to injured workers or their survivors, and that this mandatory preliminary procedure prevents access to justice. The CTA Autonomous, for its part, alleges that Medical Commissions have been attributed competences that go beyond their mandate, and indicates that when injured workers appeal the decision of the Medical Commission before the court the payment of compensation is suspended. As a result, according to the CTA Autonomous, injured workers often feel compelled to accept a lesser compensation than what they consider they should be entitled to. The Committee requests the Government to provide statistical information concerning the number of claims denied by the Medical Commissions, out of the total number of claims treated. The Committee also requests the Government to indicate how Medical Commissions operate in practice and how the State ensures that their decisions are taken in a manner that guarantees due compensation to victims of occupational accidents and diseases. Furthermore, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the number of cases in which the decision of the medical commission was revised or overturned following an appeal before the court of the initial decision by injured workers.

Article 65(10), in conjunction with Article 71(3), of Convention No. 102. Adjustment of pensions in payment. The Committee notes the observations of the ITUC, the CGT RA and the CTA Workers on the modification of the indexation formula of long-term social security benefits and of child and family allowances introduced by Act No. 27426 of 2017. The CGT RA points out that, while the previous indexation formula was based for equal parts on the variation in the contributions paid to the National Social Security Administration (ANSES) and on the changes in the level of wages (the greater between the average taxable remuneration index of workers in stable employment, RIPTE and general level of the National Consumer Price Index prepared by the National Institute of Statistics and Censuses), the new formula is based on the inflation, which is weighted in at 70 per cent, and the RIPTE, weighted in at 30 per cent. The CTA Workers alleges that, because of this change in the pension formula, the total expenditure for pensions has had in 2018 an estimated decrease between 6.5 billion and 7.5 billion Argentine pesos (ARS) with respect to the total expenditure calculated through the previous formula. The Committee recalls that, according to Article 65(10) of the Convention, the rates of periodical payments in respect of old age, employment injury (except in case of incapacity for work), invalidity and death of breadwinner, must be reviewed following substantial changes in the general level of earnings where these result from substantial changes in the cost of living. In this connection, the Committee recalls that, in its 2011 General Survey, Social security and the rule of law, paragraphs 477–485, it considered that, whichever method is used for adjustments in the level of benefits, the purchasing power of pensions should be maintained, and that this can be done both by adjusting pensions to substantial changes in the cost of living, and raising the standard of living of pensioners by adjusting pensions to substantial changes in the general level of earnings. The Committee also draws attention to Article 71(3) of the Convention, which establishes the State’s responsibility to ensure that the necessary actuarial studies and calculations concerning the financial equilibrium of social security funds are made periodically and, in any event, prior to any change in benefits. In light of the above, the Committee requests the Government to explain how the new pension indexation method will ensure that the purchasing power of pensions in payment is maintained despite changes in the formula, and to provide information on variations in the level of wages and in the consumer price index over the next reporting period. The Committee also requests the Government to provide any available information – actuarial studies or other – on the projected impact of such changes in the indexation formula on the financial sustainability of pension funds.

Article 71 of Convention No. 102. Collective financing and general responsibility of the State for the due provision of benefits. The Committee notes the indication provided by the Government that Act No. 27430 of 2017 introduced a deduction for employers from the average employees’ salaries on which monthly contributions are paid. The Committee observes that according to Resolution No. 3 of 2018 of the Social Security Secretariat, read in conjunction with Article 173(c) of Act No. 27430 of 2017, the amount of this deduction corresponds in 2019 to about ARS7,000, and will be increasing until 2022. The Committee notes the allegations made by the CTA Workers, according to which this will result in less resources for the ANSES and particularly for pensions, taking into account the current situation where the sustainability of the pension system is threatened by the high external debt of the country. The Committee recalls that Article 71(2) of the Convention provides that the total of the insurance contributions borne by the employees protected shall not exceed 50 per cent of the total of the financial resources allocated to the protection of employees and their spouses and children, and observes that the above-mentioned deductions in the amount of contributions paid by employers entail a proportional increase of the employees’ share of contributions. The Committee further recalls that, as set out in Article 71(3), the member State must take all measures required to ensure the due provision of the benefits provided in compliance with the Convention, and must ensure that the necessary actuarial studies and calculations concerning financial equilibrium are made prior to any change in benefits, the rate of insurance contributions, or the taxes allocated to covering the contingencies in question. Considering current changes in the legislation concerning employers’ contributions, the Committee requests the Government to provide statistical information on the total of insurance contributions borne by the employees protected for each of the accepted Parts of the Convention, calculated as percentage of the total resources allocated to the protection of employees, their spouses and their children. The Committee further requests the Government to indicate whether the impact of the employers’ contributions deduction has been assessed prior to its implementation to ensure that the sustainability of social insurance funds is maintained despite the decrease in funding resulting from such measure, and to provide any actuarial study carried out in this respect.

The Committee has been informed that, based on the recommendations of the Standards Review Mechanism Tripartite Working Group, the Governing Body has decided that member States for which Conventions Nos 17 and 42 are in force should be encouraged to ratify the more recent Employment Injury Benefits Convention, 1964 [Schedule I amended in 1980] (No. 121) or accept the obligations in Part VI of the Social Security (Minimum Standards) Convention, 1952 (No. 102) (see GB.328/LILS/2/1). Conventions Nos 121 and 102 (Part VI) reflect the more modern approach to employment injury benefits. The Committee therefore encourages the Government to follow up the Governing Body’s decision at its 328th Session (October–November 2016) approving the recommendations of the SRM tripartite working group and to consider ratifying Convention No. 121 or accepting the obligations in Part VI of Convention No. 102 as the most up-to-date instruments in this subject area.

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government, which answers the points raised in its previous direct request and has no further matters to raise in this regard.

The Committee notes the observations of the Confederation of Workers of Argentina (CTA Workers) and the General Confederation of Labour of the Argentine Republic (CGT RA), received on 31 August 2018. The Committee also notes the observations of the Confederation of Workers of Argentina (CTA Autonomous), received on 1 September 2018. The Committee requests the Government to send its reply in this regard.

Article 2 of the Convention. Scope of application. Exclusions. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that section 3 of Act No. 26844 excludes seven categories of workers from its scope of application. The Committee requested the Government to specify the reasons for these exclusions, to indicate the protection provided to such workers and to provide information on any prior consultations held on this matter with the most representative organizations of domestic workers and employers. The Committee notes that, regarding the exclusion of persons recruited by legal entities for the performance of domestic services (section 3(a) of Act No. 26844), the Government indicates that Act No. 26844 provides for, among other measures, the establishment of simplified procedures for the registration of domestic workers by private persons (family households) who require their services, as such persons do not have the organizational structure that most employers (legal entities) do. The Government adds that access to these simplified procedures is unnecessary in the case of legal entities that recruit domestic workers, as they possess the organizational structure of an enterprise. The Government indicates that these workers receive protection under the general regulations on labour contracts established in Act No. 20744. The Committee also notes the Government’s indication that the exclusion, envisaged in subparagraph (b) of Act No. 26844, of persons related to the head of household (such as parents, children, siblings or grandchildren) or persons who have a non-employment-based relationship with the employer through some degree of kinship or through cohabitation, is based on the fact that there is no employment relationship in those cases. The Government indicates that the other exclusions envisaged in section 3 of Act No. 26844 are based on the fact that there are already regulations and collective agreements that cover those cases. However, the Committee notes that the Government has not indicated which regulations and collective agreements apply in such cases. Lastly, the Committee notes that the Government has not indicated whether prior consultations were held with the social partners on these exclusions. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the regulations and collective agreements covering workers who come within the scope of the exclusions set out in section 3(c), (d), (e), (f) and (g) of Act No. 26844. The Committee once again requests the Government to provide information on any prior consultations on these exclusions held with the most representative organizations of domestic workers and employers.

Articles 3(2)(a) and (3). Freedom of association. The Committee recalls that the specific characteristics of domestic work, which often include a high degree of dependence on the employer (particularly in the case of migrant domestic workers) and the frequent isolation of domestic workers in their places of work, make it particularly difficult for domestic workers to form and join trade unions. Therefore, the protection of the freedom of association is particularly important in this sector. Taking into consideration the specific characteristics of domestic work, the Committee requests the Government to provide detailed information on the measures adopted or envisaged to raise awareness among domestic workers of their rights and to guarantee in practice the right of domestic workers to freedom of association, and on the impact of these measures.

Articles 3(2)(a) and (d) and 11. Right to collective bargaining. Discrimination on the basis of sex. Minimum wage. With regard to the measures adopted to give effect to the principle of equal remuneration for men and women workers for work of equal value in the domestic sector, the Government indicates that a gender equity bill (INLEG 2018 10434057 APN PTE) was submitted to Congress in March 2018 and is under consideration. The Committee notes the approval on 10 August 2018 of the Resolution of the National Commission on Private Household Labour (CNTCP), which defines hourly and monthly wages for workers in the domestic sector with no gender distinction. Section 1 of the Resolution provides for the implementation between 1 June 2018 and 31 May 2019 of an increase in the minimum wage established for the various categories of domestic workers. However, the Committee notes the claim of CTA Autonomous that workers in private households are not covered by the adjustable minimum living wage (SMVM). It adds that, because the SMVM does not apply to domestic workers, the pay scales established for them are lower than the SMVM applicable to workers in the private sector. The Committee also notes that the CNTCP is composed of government representatives and representatives of the social partners. Under section 62 of Act No. 26844, where there is a vote taken by the CNTCP, the vote cast by the Chair, who is one of the representatives from the Ministry of Labour, will count twice and so is determinative. In this regard, CTA Autonomous claims that this provision is contrary to the principle of the equality of the parties, as the chair, a Ministry of Labour representative, has the power to resolve differences between employers and workers. CTA Autonomous also refers to section 67 of Act No. 26844, which assigns a wide range of competencies to the CNTCP, including functions of collective bargaining. CTA Autonomous maintains that the right of workers in private households to collective bargaining is therefore restricted. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the measures adopted or envisaged to guarantee and promote the right of these workers to collective bargaining. The Committee also requests the Government to provide updated statistical information, disaggregated by sex, on the impact of the wage increases introduced by the National Commission on Private Household Labour (CNTCP) on the average wage received by domestic workers in practice.

Article 4. Minimum age. In reply to its previous comments, the Committee notes that the Government refers to Act No. 26941 on the general scheme of penalties for labour violations, which provides that employers who fail to comply with the prohibition of child labour must pay a fine of between 50 and 2,000 per cent of the monthly value of the worker’s SMVM. It also notes the awareness raising and information campaigns based on the theme “No to domestic child labour” and conducted under the MERCOSUR Regional Plan for the Prevention and Elimination of Child Labour. The Government indicates that this regional plan provides for the implementation of a communication strategy to raise awareness of and disseminate information on the consequences of work on children’s and young people’s lives, and on the impact of regional integration efforts in the area of preventing and eliminating child labour. However, the Committee notes the claim of the CGT RA that it is necessary to adopt a regulation governing supervisory mechanisms to ensure compliance with section 12 of Act No. 26844, which prohibits the recruitment for domestic work of school-age minors who have not completed their compulsory education. The Committee requests the Government to continue providing detailed and updated information on the measures adopted or envisaged to eliminate child domestic labour, and on their impact. The Committee once again requests the Government to provide information on the measures adopted or envisaged to give effect in practice to section 12 of Act No. 26844, including the establishment of effective mechanisms to monitor compliance with its provisions.

Article 5. Abuse, harassment and violence. In reply to the Committee’s previous comments, the Government refers once again to Act No. 26485 on comprehensive protection for women, which includes workplace violence against women as a category. The Government also refers to the development of the “Guide for women workers in private households”, which includes information on the hotlines available for reporting cases of gender-based violence, and on prevention measures. The Committee also notes the launch of the 144 free national hotline, which provides information, guidance and counselling to women in situations of violence throughout the country, 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. However, the CGT RA maintains that it is necessary to establish protection bodies and specific complaint mechanisms to deal with cases of workplace violence in the domestic sector and to develop relocation and rehabilitation programmes for domestic workers who have been victims of abuse, harassment and violence that include temporary housing and health care services. It indicates that it is also necessary to implement educational programmes on violence in the domestic sector, particularly in the context of the Training Institute for Domestic Service Personnel. The Committee requests the Government to provide updated information on the specific measures that have been taken to ensure that men and women domestic workers benefit from effective protection against all forms of abuse, harassment and violence and to indicate their impact. The Committee also requests the Government to provide statistical information on the number of complaints of harassment, abuse and violence received in the context of domestic work and submitted to the various competent bodies, and on their outcome, the penalties imposed on the perpetrators and the remedies provided.

Article 6. Fair terms of employment and decent working and living conditions. The Committee notes the Government’s indication, in reply to its previous comments, that section 47 of Act No. 26844, which establishes the obligation of live-in employees to leave the premises within five days if their work contract is terminated, should be interpreted in accordance with sections 42 and 45 of the Act. These sections set forth the obligation of the employer to grant a notice period of ten to 30 days, in accordance with the worker’s length of service, in the event of dismissal without justification. The Government indicates that, in cases of dismissal without justification, the five-day period for leaving the premises should therefore be calculated starting from the end of the notice period. The Government adds that those employers that do not give a notice period must grant financial compensation in addition to severance pay. However, the Committee notes that the Government has not indicated whether any mechanism has been put in place beyond the additional financial compensation to ensure that, in the event of dismissal for reasons other than serious misconduct, live-in domestic workers are not required to leave the premises before the end of the notice period. The Committee therefore asks the Government to provide information on the measures adopted or envisaged to guarantee in practice that, in the event of dismissal for reasons other than serious misconduct, live-in domestic workers have the right to remain in the household during the 15-day notice period.

Article 7. Information on terms and conditions of employment. In reply to the Committee’s previous comments, the Government indicates that the “Guide for women workers in private households” was published in 2017 to inform women domestic workers of their employment rights and obligations, and to inform employers of the administrative process for the registration of workers. Stakeholders that participated in the preparation of the guide included the Union of Private Household Auxiliary Employees (UPACP), the Housekeepers’ Union of the Argentine Republic (SACRA), the ILO and the Training Institute for Domestic Service Personnel. The guide includes information on topics such as the trial period, notice period, severance pay, wages and bonuses, the minimum working day and overtime, weekly rest period, leave and holidays, and retirement. The Government also refers once again to section 6 of Act No. 26844, which provides that the employment relationship is assumed to be of indefinite length without the need for proof from the worker unless otherwise established by a written contract or the registration of the worker with the Federal Public Revenue Administration (AFIP). However, the Committee notes that the Government has not provided information on the mechanisms put in place to ensure that domestic workers who have not concluded a written contract can benefit from the trial period provided for in section 7 of Act No. 26844. Lastly, the Committee notes that, according to information available on the web site of the Department of Communication of the Government of Entre Rios province, employment books are issued for free at the various branches of the Ministry of Labour and the departmental offices as proof of the employment contract. However, the Committee notes that the Government has not provided a copy of this employment book and indicates that it has not yet been regulated by law. The Committee requests the Government to continue sending updated information on the measures adopted or envisaged to ensure that domestic workers are duly informed of their terms and conditions of employment in an appropriate and accessible manner. It once again requests the Government to provide information on the mechanisms put in place to ensure that domestic workers who have not concluded a written contract can benefit from the trial period provided for in section 7 of Act No. 26844. The Committee once again requests the Government to provide a copy of the employment book and to adopt the measures necessary for its regulation.

Article 8(1), (2) and (4). Migrant domestic workers. Job offer or employment contract prior to crossing national borders. Right to repatriation. In reply to the Committee’s previous comments, the Government indicates that no recruitment of foreign domestic workers for employment in Argentina has been recorded. The Government also indicates that, in collaboration with the ILO, the “Migrant passport for domestic service” has been developed, which provides information on the documents migrants should have and on the rights established by national law to workers in this sector. The “Guide for private household workers” also includes information on topics such as the applicable migration legislation, the rights of migrant workers, the employer’s obligations under labour legislation, the procedure for requesting temporary residence in Argentina and the special migration regulations applying to nationals of MERCOSUR member countries and associated countries. Regarding the terms of repatriation of migrant domestic workers on the expiry or termination of their employment contract, the Government indicates that the national legislation on the subject does not regulate these conditions. Lastly, the Committee notes that the Government has not provided information on the manner in which it is ensured that migrant domestic workers receive a written job offer or employment contract, in accordance with Article 8(1) of the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to continue providing information on the measures adopted or envisaged to ensure that migrant domestic workers are aware of their rights under the national legislation. The Committee once again requests the Government to provide information on the manner in which it is ensured that migrant workers receive a written job offer or employment contract specifying the conditions of employment prior to crossing national borders.

Article 9. Freedom to reach agreement with the employer on whether to reside in the household. Right to keep possession of travel and identity documents. In reply to the Committee’s previous comments, the Government indicates that Act No. 26844 addresses the case of both live-in and live-out domestic workers. The parties can freely agree the arrangements under which the domestic worker will be recruited. The Government refers to section 15 of Act No. 26844, which regulates the terms of employment of live-in domestic workers. The Committee observes that paragraph (a) of this section provides that live-in domestic workers shall be provided with “clean, furnished accommodation provided solely for the use of employees, in accordance with the terms defined by the implementing authority or the National Commission on Private Household Labour.” In this regard, the Committee recalls that Paragraph 17 of Domestic Workers Recommendation, 2011 (No. 201), provides that “[w]hen provided, accommodation and food should include, taking into account national conditions, the following: (a) a separate, private room that is suitably furnished, adequately ventilated and equipped with a lock, the key to which should be provided to the domestic worker; (b) access to suitable sanitary facilities, shared or private; and (c) adequate lighting and, as appropriate, heating and air conditioning in keeping with prevailing conditions within the household (…)”. Regarding the right of domestic workers to keep possession of their travel and identity documents, the Government indicates that employers who withhold workers’ travel and/or identity documents are liable to the penalties imposed for the crimes that such behaviour could constitute, such as improper withholding, theft and identity crimes. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the measures adopted or envisaged to guarantee in practice that domestic workers are free to reach agreement on whether or not to reside at their place of work. It also requests the Government to indicate whether measures have been adopted by the National Commission on Private Household Labour to establish the terms of accommodation of live-in domestic workers specified in section 15(a) of Act No. 26844. The Committee also requests the Government to provide detailed information on how the right of domestic workers to keep possession of their travel and identity documents is guaranteed in practice, including on the provisions of the legal system under which employers who withhold these documents are penalized.

Article 10(3). Periods during which domestic workers are not free to dispose of their time as they please. The Committee observes that the Government’s report does not include information on this provision of the Convention. The Committee once again requests the Government to provide information on how periods during which domestic workers are not free to dispose of their time as they please and remain at the disposal of the household are regarded as paid hours of work.

Article 12. Methods of payment. Payment in kind. The Committee notes the copy provided by the Government of compulsory payment receipt form F.102/B of the Federal Public Revenue Administration (AFIP), whereby wage payments to private household workers are recorded. The Committee also notes that, in reply to its previous request, the Government indicates that the wages of domestic workers must be paid in legal tender and that neither national legislation nor collective agreements provide for the possibility to pay a proportion of wages in the form of payments in kind.

Article 13. Right to a safe and healthy working environment. The Committee notes that, in accordance with section 75 of Act No. 26844, domestic workers come under the scope of Act No. 24557, on occupational risks, and Act No. 26773, governing remedies for harm resulting from occupational accidents and illnesses. The Government refers to section 74(a) of Decree 467/2014 implementing Act No. 26844, which sets out the employer’s obligation to insure the domestic worker through an occupational risk insurer (ART) authorized to provide coverage in the jurisdiction of the employer’s home. However, this section provides that the obligation to insure the domestic worker shall not enter into force until the bodies responsible for regulating occupational risk (the SRT) and insurance (the SSN) and the AFIP enact the provisions necessary to adapt the existing system to the characteristics of domestic work. Section 74(c) provides that occupational risk coverage payments shall be made in advance and shall be reported and recorded by the employer in the month in which benefits are extended. Section 74(e) provides for the implementation of activities by the SRT and ARTs to encourage the prevention of risks arising from the work of private household employees, and requires these bodies to make available on their web sites informative material on domestic accident prevention. Lastly, the Government refers to the approval of SRT Resolution No. 46/2018 on the provision of digital occupational risk insurance policies, which contains special provisions on occupational risk insurance contracts held by employers of workers in private homes. The Committee requests the Government to adopt the relevant measures to enact the provisions necessary to adapt the system of insurance and remedy for harm resulting from occupational accidents and illnesses to the characteristics of the special arrangements for workers in private homes, and to provide detailed information in this regard. The Committee also requests the Government to send information on the measures adopted to promote the coverage of domestic workers through occupational risk insurers (ARTs). The Committee also requests the Government to provide statistical information, disaggregated by sex and age, on the number of domestic workers covered by ARTs.

Article 14. Social security. In reply to the Committee’s previous comments, the Government indicates that there are approximately 517,000 registered domestic workers. The Committee notes the adoption of measures by the AFIP to promote the registration of domestic workers. In particular, the Government indicates that, in May 2018, operations were carried out in various private neighbourhoods of the Autonomous City of Buenos Aires by officials of the AFIP General Directorate of Social Security Resources, in which employers were urged to regularize the situation of the domestic workers employed in their households. During these operations, information and visual materials were disseminated to domestic workers on their rights and obligations and they were provided with individual counselling, including the registration of the claims of those workers who reported that they were not registered. The AFIP identified 1,051 domestic workers, of whom 40 per cent were not registered. Between May and July 2018, the AFIP contacted some 65,000 high-income taxpayers and requested them to regularize the situation of the domestic workers employed by them. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that, owing to this measure, the employment of 36,000 workers in private homes was formalized in July 2018, which represented a 7.5 per cent increase in the number of registered domestic workers, of whom 98 per cent were women. However, the workers’ organizations CTA Autonomous and CTA Workers report that, despite the measures adopted by the AFIP, the number of non-registered domestic workers remains high. In particular, CTA Autonomous states that 57 per cent of workers in private households were not registered in 2018. Regarding the universal child and pregnancy allowances, the Government indicates that informal domestic workers are not excluded from receiving these allowances, as both unregistered workers and domestic workers are eligible to receive both benefits. For its part, the CGT RA emphasizes that there are no mechanisms to monitor compliance in practice with this Article of the Convention, nor are there statistics on the number of registered domestic workers. The Committee requests the Government to continue providing updated statistical information, disaggregated by sex, on the rate of unregistered employment in the domestic sector. The Committee once again requests the Government to provide statistical information, disaggregated by sex, on the percentage of domestic workers who have secured a job with social security contributions and coverage since the entry into force of Act No. 26844. The Committee also requests the Government to continue providing updated information on the measures adopted or envisaged to encourage the registration of domestic workers.

Article 15. Private employment agencies. In reply to the Committee’s previous comments, the Government indicates that the legal system prohibits the operation of private employment agencies, except for authorized temporary employment agencies. The Committee also notes that, in accordance with section 29 of the Employment Contracts Act, should an unauthorized situation arise in practice which is comparable to the operation of a private employment agency, the employment relationship shall be considered to be concluded with whomever the work is provided to, and the contracting third party shall be jointly responsible with the direct employer for the obligations arising from the employment relationship. The Committee also notes that workers recruited by temporary employment agencies shall be considered to be in a continuous or intermittent ongoing relationship of dependence with such agencies (section 26 of the Employment Contracts Act). However, the Committee observes that the Government has not provided statistics on the number of domestic workers recruited through these authorized temporary recruitment agencies, nor has it indicated how it gives effect to Article 15(1) of the Convention. The Committee once again requests the Government to provide statistics on the number of domestic workers, particularly migrant workers, who are recruited through temporary recruitment agencies authorized by the competent authority, and on how it gives effect to Article 15(1) of the Convention.

Article 16. Access to the justice system. The Committee notes the detailed information provided by the Government on the procedures of the Labour Court for Private Household Employees of the Autonomous City of Buenos Aires, and on its functions and competencies. Act No. 26844 establishes the obligation of the parties to attend a conciliation hearing before submitting a claim. Section 2 of Decree No. 467 of 2014 provides for the establishment of a Compulsory Labour Conciliation Service for Private Household Employees (SECOPECP). However, the Decree was never implemented, and therefore prior conciliation is not mandatory in practice. The Government also indicates that, from the adoption of Act No. 26844 to August 2018, the above-mentioned Labour Court processed 23,437 files, of which 14,457 were spontaneously submitted agreements and 8,990 were lawsuits. In its observations, CTA Autonomous reports that, under section 51 and related provisions of Act No. 26844, domestic workers in the Autonomous City of Buenos Aires are excluded from the jurisdiction of the labour courts and are required to settle their disputes through the above-mentioned court, which has an administrative function. CTA Autonomous also reports that legal representation is optional for domestic workers, while under the general regulations for all other workers it is mandatory. Regarding domestic workers whose legal disputes have been filed outside of the Autonomous City of Buenos Aires, the Government indicates that such domestic workers must settle their disputes through the ordinary labour courts. The Government adds that, although the provinces can comply with the justice administration system provided for in Act No. 26844, to date none of them has done so. The Committee once again requests the Government to provide detailed, updated information on the measures taken to guarantee in practice domestic workers’ effective access to the justice system, including measures to provide free legal assistance to domestic workers. The Committee also requests the Government to continue sending updated statistical information, disaggregated by sex and region, on the number of claims submitted by domestic workers to the various competent courts, the penalties imposed on the perpetrators and the remedies provided. It also requests the Government to indicate the legal procedure that must be observed by domestic workers to resolve their labour disputes through the provincial labour courts.

Article 17(2) and (3). Labour inspection. Access to household premises. The Government indicates that, in practice, the principle of the inviolability of the home (barring express order from the competent judge) enshrined in article 18 of the Constitution coexists with the legislation authorizing inspectors to enter workplaces. The Government indicates that there are still no specific regulations governing the access of labour inspectors to household premises on which domestic workers are employed. The CGT RA indicates that, in practice, labour inspections are not conducted in private households, as it is claimed that this would be a violation of private life. The Committee recalls that Article 17(3) of the Convention provides that “[i]n so far as compatible with national laws and regulations, such measures shall specify the conditions under which access to household premises may be granted, having due respect for privacy.” The Committee therefore requests the Government to adopt the measures necessary to establish the conditions under which access by labour inspectors to household premises may be granted, having due respect for privacy. The Committee also requests the Government to provide updated information on the number of inspections conducted in the sector, the number of infringements detected and the penalties imposed.

Application of the Convention in practice. The Committee requests the Government to continue providing extracts of court decisions on matters related to the application of the Convention.

Comments adopted by the CEACR: Argentina

Adopted by the CEACR in 2020

C087 - Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2020, published 109th ILC session (2021)

C098 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2020, published 109th ILC session (2021)

C111 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2020, published 109th ILC session (2021)

C144 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2020, published 109th ILC session (2021)

C154 - Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2020, published 109th ILC session (2021)

C177 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2020, published 109th ILC session (2021)

C177 - Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2020, published 109th ILC session (2021)

C188 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2020, published 109th ILC session (2021)

Adopted by the CEACR in 2019

C042 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2019, published 109th ILC session (2021)

C151 - Replies received to the issues raised in a direct request which do not give rise to further comments (CEACR) - adopted 2019, published 109th ILC session (2021)

C189 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2019, published 109th ILC session (2021)