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

Convention (n° 29) sur le travail forcé, 1930 - Royaume-Uni de Grande-Bretagne et d'Irlande du Nord (Ratification: 1931)
Protocole de 2014 relatif à la convention sur le travail forcé, 1930 - Royaume-Uni de Grande-Bretagne et d'Irlande du Nord (Ratification: 2016)

1. Domestic workers from abroad. The Committee referred, in its comments from 1994, to information presented to the Working Group on Contemporary Forms of Slavery of the Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities of the Commission on Human Rights of the United Nations, according to which certain employers, of whom the majority are of foreign origin, withhold the wages and identity documents (passports) of foreign workers in their domestic service. The Committee requested the Government to communicate information on the legislation applicable to such workers, on the conditions of entry and stay in the United Kingdom and on measures taken to investigate the allegations as well as on the sanctions imposed.

In the report of 1996 (E/CN.4/Sub.2/1996/24, paragraph 74) of the same working group, note was taken of the indications previously supplied to this group by the representative of the non-governmental organization Kalayaan, according to which whatever the consequence of the "exceptional" status of permit of entry for domestic workers, such workers are not protected either by the Immigration Law or by the British labour laws. These workers are authorized to work for an employer whose name is specified on the passports of the workers, who thus cannot change jobs in case of abuse by the employer.

In its report the Government indicates that under the Immigration Rules persons who are not nationals of countries of the European Economic Area must obtain a work permit if they wish to work in the United Kingdom. The requests must be addressed by the employer to the Department of Employment and Education and are granted on the condition that they pertain to jobs which require highly technical qualifications and experience and which cannot be met by the resident population. In the case of domestic workers, to whom a work permit cannot be granted, since the work is not skilled labour, a special authorization is granted outside the Immigration Rules and according to strict criteria: the authorization for entry into the country must be obtained abroad, the person must be at least 18 years of age and must have worked for the employer for 12 to 24 months depending on whether the request is for a visit to the country or for other purposes, the worker is interviewed and informed, in a pamphlet, of the places to go in case assistance is required. The employer must set forth in a written statement the conditions of salary, housing and support, a copy of which is given to the worker who must then indicate his or her agreement. The officials responsible for processing the entry permits must verify the voluntary nature of the agreement and assure themselves that the worker has understood the rights he or she is entitled to in the United Kingdom. Such interviews are carried out without the presence of the employer. The Government emphasizes that any person, regardless of nationality or the purpose of stay in the country, has the right to the full protection of the penal law and can report to the police any physical abuse or deprivation of liberty. Cases of such abuse have been brought before the courts and have resulted in convictions and sanctions. The Government also indicates that foreign workers, including those in domestic service, have the same right as national workers to benefit from the protection against dismissal, a detailed salary report, a written contract on the conditions of work, and means of recourse against the employer for non-fulfilment of agreed conditions.

The Committee takes note of the comments presented by the Trades Union Congress (TUC) on this question in its communication received on 31 October 1996. The TUC alleges that an average of 12,000 permits yearly are issued abroad for domestic workers, of which the majority are women who emigrate from developing countries, and whose work permits are linked to specific employers (the person thus cannot change employers), which opens the way for exploitation, as evidenced by the abundance of cases of abuse. The TUC refers in its comments to the non-governmental organization Kalayaan, which has documented 2,100 cases of domestic workers who escaped and reported abuses of which they have been victims including the confiscation of passports, the non-payment of wages, the impossibility of travel, excessive hours of work (10 to 16 hours, seven days a week), terrible food and housing conditions, physical abuse, threats, and sexual assaults including some cases of rape.

The Committee observes that the situation of workers who cannot terminate an employment relationship, although freely entered into, does not correspond to the contract, and in addition restrictions imposed on the freedom of movement and the use of force to exact work or service are elements which constitute a violation of the Convention.

The Committee has taken note of the indications of the Government concerning the cases which have been brought before the courts, and it requests the Government to communicate details concerning the court decisions, including the number of convictions and the penal sanctions imposed, in accordance with Article 25 of the Convention.

The Committee requests the Government to supply information on measures taken to ensure that the restrictions imposed on the change of employment by domestic workers do not give rise to the exploitation of captive labour.

The Committee will also consider this matter under Convention No. 97, ratified by the United Kingdom.

2. Article 2(2)(c) of the Convention. Referring to Part I of its observation under the Convention, the Committee requests the Government to indicate whether the arrangements made under rule 4(3) of the Prison Rules 1964, as amended in 1995, may be applied to remand prisoners and, if so, to what extent. Also, recalling that remand prisoners at Blakenhurst prison were able to participate in work if they so wished and were encouraged to do so, the Committee requests the Government to specify the means by which remand prisoners were so encouraged.