CMNT_TITLE

The Committee notes the Government’s detailed report and the attached documents, including Decree No. 2000-747 of 1 August 2000 issuing the specific conditions of service of the agents of the labour inspectorate and the new regulations issued in 2000 and 2001 concerning the provision to the staff of the labour inspectorate of various specific bonuses. However, the Committee notes that the Government does not indicate its position with regard to the comments made by the trade union CGT PTT of the Department of L’Aisne in a letter dated 28 December 1999, transmitted to the ILO by the Government on 9 February 2000. In the view of the trade union, the exclusion of private law contractual workers in the postal services from the purview of the labour inspectorate is contrary to the provisions of the Convention. In particular, it draws attention to the absence of protection of these workers, whose contractual conditions are, it alleges, in violation of the labour legislation and are resulting in the abusive precariousness of their situation. According to a note published in June 2000 by the Central Support and Coordination Mission of the Decentralized Labour and Employment Services (MICAPCOR), the question of the competence of the labour inspectorate with regard to staff representatives has henceforth been resolved by point 122 entitled "case of public sector enterprises" of Circular DRT No. 3 of 1 March 2000 respecting administrative decisions concerning the dismissal of protected employees. The note indicates that, as the postal services are henceforth considered to be a public industrial and commercial establishment, under Decisions 18824 and 18826 of the Conseil d’Etat dated 13 November 1998, the Labour Code therefore applies to private law employees and, in these circumstances, the labour inspectorate is competent to intervene where these employees are concerned if their duties are of the same nature as those envisaged by the Labour Code. The MICAPCOR is reported to have expressed an identical opinion in a note dated 12 July 1999, published in the "notes of the mission No. 38 of July 1999". The Committee notes that, according to the information provided by the Government under Article 26, in most cases it is the MICAPCOR which responds to the question of whether certain public law entities are subject to the Labour Code, and therefore to supervision by the labour inspectorate, as governed by this Convention. The Committee hopes that the Government will not fail to provide clarifications concerning the liability of postal service establishments to supervision by the labour inspectorate, provide copies of any relevant text and indicate the measures taken to ensure the application of legal provisions respecting conditions of work and protection to workers engaged in these establishments under private law contracts.

With reference to its previous comments concerning the observations made by the trade union organizations Force Ouvrière (FO) and the French Democratic Confederation of Labour (CFDT) concerning the freeze imposed on the National Labour Inspection Council (CNIT), the Committee notes that, according to the Government, it is proposed to set up this tripartite body established by Decree No. 83-135 of 24 February 1983. Placed under the minister responsible for labour, the CNIT is competent for labour inspection under the authority of the minister responsible for labour, labour inspection in agriculture, labour inspection in transport, maritime labour inspection and labour inspection in areas under the competence of the minister responsible for industry. The Council would issue opinions, and transmit them to the Government and to Parliament, on the state of the application of labour law, on the training programme of the National Labour, Employment and Vocational Training Institute and on the annual reports prepared by ministers under whose authority the various labour inspection services are placed. Noting that a body at this level has been awaited by the social partners since its creation was announced in 1983, and that its establishment is regularly referred to by the Government in its reports, the Committee hopes that practical measures will soon be taken for this purpose and that the relevant information will be provided to the ILO forthwith.

The Government also refers to the current reflection on whether to set up a committee of experts responsible for issuing opinions in all appeals concerning the independence of decisions by officials and to ensure that their protection is effectively secured in the exercise of their duties. This committee would be responsible for addressing matters relating to the professional rules applicable to labour inspection. Emphasizing the value of the creation of such a body in order to ensure observance of Article 6 of the Convention, the Committee hopes that the Government will not fail to provide information on the development and results of the reflection carried out on this issue.

With reference to its previous comments, the Committee notes with interest the proportion of women in the staff of the labour inspectorate. However, it notes that, according to the Government, while the number of women is increasing among inspectors, this is not yet the case for managerial posts and that a multi-year plan to improve the access of women to higher managerial posts throughout the Ministry of Employment and Solidarity was approved by Order of the Minister of 7 March 2001.

The Committee is addressing a request directly to the Government on certain points.