Demande directe (CEACR) - adoptée 1997, publiée 86ème session CIT (1998)

Convention (n° 158) sur le licenciement, 1982 - Maroc (Ratification: 1993)

The Committee notes that the Government's report has not been received. It hopes that a report will be supplied for examination by the Committee at its next session and that it will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous direct request, which read as follows:

The Committee notes the Government's first report with interest. It notes in particular the Government's statement that the draft Labour Code, currently being prepared, should give effect to Article 5 (improper grounds for termination) and Article 13 (consultation of workers' representatives in the event of termination for economic reasons) of the Convention. It asks the Government to provide details on these matters in its next report together with information on the following points.

Article 7. The Committee notes that the draft Labour Code allows a worker to be heard by the employer who intends to dismiss him for serious misconduct. It asks the Government to indicate how effect is given to Article 7 in other instances of termination for reasons related to the worker's performance or conduct.

Article 11. Lastly, the Committee notes that section 5 of the Standard Conditions of Employment of 23 October 1948 provides that a worker may be dismissed without notice for serious misconduct. The definition of serious misconduct set out in section 6 of the Order of 1948 includes the worker's unsuitability for the job or inability to perform the work for which he was hired. The Committee asks the Government to indicate what is understood by "unsuitability of the worker", for instance by providing copies of court decisions, and to indicate in detail the instances in which a worker whose employment is to be terminated is entitled to notice or compensation in lieu thereof. The Committee would like to point out that in any sense the term "unsuitability for the job"or "inability to perform the work for which he was hired" cannot possibly be regarded as "serious misconduct" within the meaning of Article 11. The Committee asks the Government to consider amendment of section 6 of the Order of 1948 to bring it in line with the requirement of Article 11.