Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2024, published 113rd ILC session (2025)

Tripartite Consultation (International Labour Standards) Convention, 1976 (No. 144) - Botswana (Ratification: 1997)

The Committee notes the observations from the Botswana Federation of Trade Unions (BFTU), transmitted by the Government in its report. The Government is requested to provide its comments in this regard.

Articles 2, 3 and 5(1) of the Convention. Effective tripartite consultations. Freedom of choice of workers’ and employers’ representatives. The Government indicates that social dialogue is carried out through several tripartite and tripartite plus bodies. It indicates that the last tripartite consultations were held within: (i) the High Level Consultative Committee (Sub-HLCC) in March 2023; (ii) the Decent Work Steering Committee in April 2023; and (iii) the Labour Law Review Committee in August 2023; (vi) the Minimum Wages Advisory Board (MWAB) in August 2023; and (v) the Labour Advisory Board (LAB) in May 2021. The report states that tripartite consultations were held within the LAB on the possible ratifications of the Labour Inspection Convention, 1947 (No. 81) and the Labour Inspection (Agriculture) Convention, 1969 (No. 129). In this respect, the Committee notes with interest that, following these tripartite consultations, the Government ratified both Conventions on 22 December 2022. The Government also reports that the LAB had previously considered draft proposals for aligning the labour laws with international labour standards, which were scheduled to be submitted to Parliament in November 2023. Finally, while reiterating that, pursuant to section 143 of the Employment Act, meetings of the LAB need to be held quarterly, the Government points out that, since 2021, the LAB was not in a position to hold tripartite consultations due to several membership expirations. It also adds that the MWAB was not convened in 2022. The Government indicates in this regard that the process for appointing new members to these bodies was initially delayed by the social partners’ reluctance to comply with the new requirements, but was under way at the time of reporting.

As to the observations of the BFTU in relation to the LAB, the Committee notes that it raised concerns in November 2022 (BFTU/admin/c-2022/475) and on 6 December 2022 with the Minister of Labour and Home Affairs on: (i) the Government’s reluctance or delay in ratifying and domesticating ILO Conventions, in particular, the Occupational Safety and Health Convention, 1981 (No. 155), the Promotional Framework for Occupational Safety and Health Convention, 2006 (No. 187) and the Violence and Harassment Convention, 2019 (No. 190); and (ii) the inactivity or non-functionality of the LAB and other tripartite structures, and their effect on social dialogue. The BFTU furthermore criticizes the Government’s communication concerning gender representation on the LAB (MLHA 4/2/2 II (8)), which stresses the gender disparity in the BFTU’s nominees for the LAB, requesting the BFTU to resubmit nominees for possible consideration. The BFTU indicates that it does not object to the principle of gender parity, but the fact that the communication suggests that the Government is entitled to consider the BFTU’s nominees for the LAB. Finally, as regards consultations on reports on ratified Conventions, the BFTU disagrees with the information provided by the Government that the reports submitted to the ILO in 2019 and 2020 were shared with social partners and that no comments were provided by the latter. The BFTU points out that social partners were not consulted on the 2021 reports and confirms that it has not responded to the 2022 reports. Regarding the latter, the Committee notes the BFTU’s indication that, in most instances, the Government shares its reports with a delay and limits the response period to a few days.

Taking note of the suspension of the work of the LAB since 2021, the Committee wishes to draw the Government’s attention to the fact that, in accordance with Article 5(2) of the Convention, tripartite consultations on the issues listed by the Convention must be undertaken at appropriate intervals fixed by agreement with the workers’ and employers’ representatives, but at least once a year. The Committee also wishes to recall that, pursuant to Article 3, the representatives of employers and workers for the purposes of the procedures provided for in this Convention shall be freely chosen by their representative organizations, where such organizations exist. The Committee also recalls that, to be “effective”, the consultations must necessarily take place before final decisions are taken, irrespective of the nature or form of the procedures adopted. The effectiveness of consultations thus presupposes in practice that employers’ and workers’ representatives have all the necessary information far enough in advance to formulate their own opinion (see 2000 General Survey on tripartite consultation, paragraph 31). In view of the above, the Committee expresses the hope that the national procedures aimed at ensuring effective tripartite consultations on the matters required by the Convention will be made operational in the near future and asks the Government to indicate progress made in this respect. The Committee also requests the Government to indicate whether the new requirements for nominations as part of the LAB were determined after consultation with the most representative organizations of employers and workers and how they give effect to the principle established by the Convention that employers’ and workers’ representatives shall be freely chosen by their representative organizations. Furthermore, noting that the Government has not provided the specific information requested on the consultations held on all the items listed under Article 5 of the Convention, the Committee once again requests the Government to provide detailed information on the content, frequency and outcome of the tripartite consultations held by the relevant bodies, in particular, the LAB.