Observation (CEACR) - adoptée 2012, publiée 102ème session CIT (2013)

Convention (n° 81) sur l'inspection du travail, 1947 - Arménie (Ratification: 2004)

The Committee notes the comments by the Republican Union of Employers of Armenia (RUEA) and the Confederation of Trade Unions of Armenia (CTUA), forwarded with the Government reports dated 28 October 2011 and 4 October 2012. The employers’ comments are discussed below in relation to Articles 16 and 18 of the Convention.

Legislation. The Committee notes with regret that the documents requested in previous comments have still not been submitted to the ILO, thus preventing it from carrying out a first assessment of the application of the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to provide the following texts as soon as possible:

• -The Administrative Infringements Code of 6 December 1985.
• -The Act of 17 May 2000 on the Organization and Conduct of Inspections, as amended on 23 June 2011.
• -The Act of 13 December 2004 on Administrative Conduct and Principles.
• -Government Decision No. 1146-N of 29 August 2004 establishing the State Labour Inspectorate within the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs, confirming the statutes of the State Labour Inspectorate and amending previous Government Decision (14 November 2002) No. 1821-N.
• -Government Decision No. 1893-N of 6 October 2005 on the provision of information to the State Labour Inspectorate.
• -Government Decision No. 1698-N of 2 December 2010 repealing Government Decision No. 2301-N of 6 October 2005 adopting the procedure for the submission of quarterly reports by employers to the State Labour Inspectorate.
• -Government Decision No. 115-N of 17 September 2009 on the reform of the labour inspection system.
• -Government Decision No. 876-N of 16 June 2006 establishing the form, use and procedure for issuing a copy of a workbook.
• -Government Decision No. 1882-N of 20 October 2005 on the procedure for publication, accounting, conservation and archiving of the employer’s internal and private legal documents.
• -The Public Service Act.
• -Any further law which might have been adopted within the Labour Inspection Reform, and which applies the provision of the Convention.

Article 5(b) of the Convention. Collaboration between labour inspectorate officials and employers and workers or their organizations. Further to its previous comments which were based on an observation of the CTUA, the Committee notes with interest the information provided by the Government according to which labour inspectors have regular working meetings with social partners, and participate in seminars organized by the CTUA and sectoral branches of trade unions. According to the Government, 210 seminars were held in 2010, in which 5,200 representatives of employers and workers took part, and 303 seminars were organized in 2011, attended by 6,891 employers’ and workers’ representatives. Five advisory seminars on Armenian labour legislation were organized under the auspices of the labour inspectorate, the CTUA and branch trade unions. t also notes that, in accordance with section 9 of the Law on State Labour Inspection, labour inspectors are bound to provide information to employers, trade unions and employees on methods of application of labour legislation. In this regard, it notes that in 2011, 115 employers submitted written requests for advice regarding the application of the labour legislation. The Government adds that since 2010, the inspectorate has been operating an electronic system for the reception and examination of requests for assistance and advice, as well as complaints. In 2010 and 2011, 96 and 194 requests/complaints were submitted, respectively. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide information as to the frequency of working meetings held with social partners, and the subjects covered by such meetings and their outcome. It further asks the Government to indicate whether other methods of collaboration with social partners exist and draws the Government’s attention to the guidelines provided in this regard in Part II of Recommendation No. 81 concerning labour inspection. It also requests the Government to provide information on the number of the complaints lodged and the type of matters raised via the electronic enquiry system, and the possible follow-up by the labour inspectorate.

Articles 3, 12, 13, 16, 17 and 18. Effective exercise of labour inspection functions through inspection visits and measures to prevent their obstruction. In its previous comments the Committee noted that 137 inspection visits had not materialized and requested clarifications in this regard. The Government indicates that, due to the continuing labour inspection reforms, the planned inspections were temporarily suspended. The Republican Union of Employers of Armenia adds that these visits were suspended as a follow-up to studies carried out by the Government which had found that inspections were too frequent, uncoordinated and often irrelevant. There are three inspection bodies, the State Labour Inspectorate, the State Hygiene and Anti-Epidemic Inspectorate and the National Centre for Technical Safety whose competencies overlap. The level of information exchange between theses bodies remains very limited and the inspection’s mandate, competence and its purpose are often not clear, thus impacting adversely on the investment climate and the country’s competitiveness. Consequently, the Government approved a reform of the inspection system under Decision No. 1135-N of 17 September 2009. According to the information provided by the Republican Union of Employers of Armenia that all inspectorates should have a system of risk-based inspections with joint databases, and that inspections should be simple, transparent and foreseeable. Consequently the Law of 17 May 2000 on the Organization and Conduct of Inspections was amended on 23 June 2011, in order to reflect these new requirements. In this regard, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that as a result of this amendment undertakings have been classified as high, middle and low-risk groups, and that the number of possible inspection visits might have been limited as a result of this classification. According to the Government, it is stipulated that an inspection visit in a high-risk undertaking may not be conducted more than once a year, every three years for a medium-risk undertaking and in a low-risk undertaking not more than every five years. It also notes that further limits to labour inspection visits appear to apply through ordinances or instructions issued by the head of the “respective State body”.

The Committee recalls that under Article 3 of the Convention, the labour inspection functions exercised through inspection visits serve not only an enforcement but also an advisory and preventive purpose. Indeed, as indicated in paragraph 85 of the Committee’s 2006 General Survey on labour inspection, the two functions of enforcement and advice are inextricable. The Committee also recalls that according to paragraphs 105–107 of the 2006 General Survey, the powers that labour inspectors have under Article 13 of the Convention, including powers of injunction with immediate effect, serve an exclusively preventive purpose as they are aimed at eliminating or at least reducing occupational risks and hazards which constitute a danger to the health or safety of the workers, irrespective of the existence of a violation of legal provisions. If hazards have arisen as a result of non-compliance with legal provisions, then Articles 17 and 18 of the Convention apply so that persons responsible for such violations are held accountable. The Committee is of the view that limiting the number of inspection visits to a specific number for a certain time period raises obstacles to the effective performance of labour inspection functions, including the important preventive functions entrusted upon labour inspectors by Article 13. Moreover, it goes against the principle of unannounced visits, which is reflected in Article 12 of the Convention, and is intended to ensure that inspectors may carry out inspections at any time, without previous notice both for preventive purposes and as a useful means to address attempts to conceal labour violations (paragraphs 261–263 of the 2006 General Survey).

The Committee would be grateful if the Government would communicate Decision No. 1155-N of 17 September 2009 on the reform of the labour inspection system and explain the impact of this reform on the structure, coordination, working methods and priorities of the labour inspectorate. In this context, the Committee refers to the labour inspection audit that was conducted in 2009 within the ILO project “Enhancing Labour Inspection Effectiveness” and requests the Government to detail whether the labour inspection reform took into account the findings and outcomes of the audit. It would also be grateful to receive a copy of the government study mentioned by the Republican Union of Employers of Armenia on the reform of the labour inspection system.

The Committee also requests the Government to communicate a copy of the amendments of 2011 to the law of 17 May 2000 on the organization and conduct of inspections and indicate whether the labour inspectorate still has the possibility to carry out unannounced visits or visits outside the schedule applicable to a workplace’s risk classification for enforcement or preventative purposes, and whether labour inspectors have the power to issue injunctions with immediate effect in case of imminent danger to the health or safety of the workers. It also requests the Government to communicate any ordinances and instructions issued in relation to labour inspection activities and to indicate the nature of the bodies issuing such instructions within the labour inspection system.

The Committee notes that, according to the Republican Union of Employers of Armenia, the number of inspections was halved compared to the previous year, but revealed undeclared work cases were doubled. In this regard, it notes that according to the Government, during 2009–11, almost 2,650 cases of undeclared work were disclosed. Please also specify the measures ordered by the labour inspectorate when cases of undeclared work are discovered and the impact of these measures on the principal objective of the labour inspectorate under the Convention, which is the enforcement of legal provisions relating to conditions of work and the protection of workers while engaged in their work.

Articles 19, 20 and 21. Annual reports on the work of the labour inspectorate. The Committee notes that, once again, a consolidated annual report for the period under review, that contains the type of data and statistics set out in Article 21 of the Convention, was not submitted to the Office. It also notes the indications made by the Government that an annual inspection report for 2010 has been discussed with the social partners in the Republican Tripartite Commission, and that the annual inspection report for 2011 will be discussed at the upcoming session of this Commission. The Committee takes note of the comments of the Republican Union of Employers of Armenia, highlighting the delayed publication of the annual inspection report and the fact that up to the present, the annual inspection report for 2011 has not been discussed in the Tripartite Commission. With reference to its general observation of 2010 the Committee recalls that when well prepared, the annual reports offer an indispensable basis for the evaluation of the results in practice of the activities of the labour inspection service and, subsequently, the determination of the means necessary to improve their effectiveness. The Committee once again urges the Government to take all necessary measures for the elaboration and publication by the central labour inspection authority of an annual report containing all the information required under Article 21 of the Convention and to keep the Office informed of any progress made in this regard. The Committee also invites the Government to provide its views in relation to the comments of the Republican Union of Employers of Armenia as regards the delay in both the publication of annual inspection reports, and their submission to the Republican Tripartite Commission.

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