CMNT_TITLE

Labour Inspection Convention, 1947 (No. 81) - Pakistan (RATIFICATION: 1953)

Other comments on C081

Observation

Direct Request

DISPLAYINEnglish - French - SpanishAlle anzeigen

The Committee notes the observations of the Pakistan Workers’ Federation (PWF), received in 2016, reiterating in detail its previous concerns that there is no effective labour inspection system in the country.

Articles 4 and 5(b) of the Convention. Supervision by a central labour inspection authority and determination of inspection priorities in collaboration with the social partners. The Committee previously noted the Government’s indication that the lack of coordination between the labour departments in the provinces remained a significant challenge. In this respect, it noted the envisaged institutionalization of tripartite committees in the provinces to oversee labour inspection activities.

The Committee welcomes the Government’s indication, in reply to its previous request, that the provincial labour departments are now working as central authorities and that coordination is currently undertaken through bimonthly meetings of the Federal Tripartite Consultative Committee (FTCC), and that priorities for labour inspection are determined in the quarterly meetings of the Provincial Tripartite Consultative Committees (PTCC). The Committee also welcomes the Government’s information that the provincial governments have been provided with material on the subject of labour inspection and explanations on the information to be provided under the Convention. In this context, the Committee notes that one of the recommendations in the 2016 national OSH profile published by the Ministry of Overseas Pakistanis and Human Resources Development and attached to the Government’s report concerns the creation of independent labour inspection authorities (separate from the labour departments) at the provincial levels with sufficient human and financial resources. Noting the detailed minutes of the tripartite meetings of the FTCC and the PTCCs already transmitted with the Government’s report under the Tripartite Consultation (International Labour Standards) Convention, 1976 (No. 144), the Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the labour inspection issues discussed in the FTCC and the PTCCs, and the impact of these meetings on improved coordination and cooperation in the undertaking of labour inspection, under the supervision and control of a central authority. The Committee also requests the Government to provide information on whether any follow-up has been given to the recommendation in the OSH profile to provide for the creation of independent labour inspection authorities at the provincial levels.

Articles 10 and 16. Coverage of workplaces by labour inspections. Private auditing firms. Human resources of the labour inspection services. The Committee previously noted that during the discussion in the Conference Committee on the Application of Standards (CAS) in 2014, some speakers expressed concern with regard to the carrying out of third-party inspections by private auditing firms and the inadequate number of labour inspectors in the context of the 2012 factory fire in the Sindh province that resulted in the death of 300 workers. In this respect, the Committee noted in its previous comment the Government’s statement that the outsourcing of responsibilities towards those firms had to change and that there were plans to regulate them. The Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that the Pakistan National Accreditation Council (PNAC) is responsible for accrediting private auditing firms, that it has accredited seven firms so far (primarily firms specializing in compliance with OSH, but also other labour issues), and that compliance assessments may for example be carried out through gap analyses against labour standards, as well as by engaging in consultations with NGOs and trade unions, on the situation in certain workplaces.

While the Committee had noted in 2016 an increase in the number of labour inspectors in three provinces, it notes with concern from the 2016 OSH profile submitted by the Government, that there continues to be a serious shortage of labour inspectors in relation to the number of workplaces liable to inspection. According to the OSH profile, the number of inspectors (labour inspectors and mine inspectors) appears to be lower in each province than indicated in the Government’s 2014 report. In this context, the Committee also notes the observations made by the PWF that the number of labour inspectors and the number of labour inspections are insufficient to achieve sufficient coverage of workplaces by labour inspection. The Committee would like to emphasize that while private auditing may contribute to addressing compliance gaps, such initiatives may only be complementary to, but not replace, public labour inspection. The Committee urges the Government to pursue its efforts to increase the number of labour inspectors, to provide information on the concrete measures taken in this respect, and to continue to provide information on the number of labour inspectors in each province. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on whether enterprises that have been subject to compliance assessments by private auditing firms continue to be liable to labour inspection in law and practice. It further requests the Government to indicate how the PNAC supervises private auditing firms, how independent compliance assessments by these firms are guaranteed, and where applicable, how the Government promotes cooperation between the labour inspection services and the private auditing firms.

Article 12(1). Free access of labour inspectors to workplaces. The Committee previously noted with concern the Government’s indication that since 2001, under administrative order, a letter is issued by the Chief Inspector of Factories (Director of Labour) to a factory prior to an inspection in the province of Sindh, which contains the date and time of the visit. The Committee notes that the Government indicates that the system of prior notices was introduced to respond to the concern of employers to curb the multiplicity of inspections. The Government further indicates that the PTCC in Sindh has established a subcommittee to make recommendations on bringing the inspection regime in line with the provisions of the Convention and, at the same time, allay the concerns of employers. In this context, the Committee also notes the observations made by the PWF that labour inspections have practically been discontinued in the province of Sindh and that 2.3 million workers in that province suffer from occupational accidents every year. Having previously noted the Government’s indication that labour inspectors do not generally face hindrances while carrying out inspections in the province of Punjab, the Committee also notes from the OSH profile transmitted by the Government, that restrictions in the form of prior notice appear to continue to be a problem in some areas in Punjab. The Committee once again requests the Government to take the necessary measures, in accordance with Article 12(1)(a) and (b), to remove the restriction in the province of Sindh in the form of the requirement of prior notice concerning inspection visits. It requests the Government to provide information on the concrete measures taken to discontinue this practice. Noting the information in the OSH profile that there appear to continue to exist issues with regard to restrictions of labour inspectors in Punjab, the Committee also requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that labour inspectors in the province of Punjab are empowered to enter any workplace liable to inspection freely and without previous notice at any hour of the day or night. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the number of inspections conducted without prior notice in each of these two provinces, including any violations detected, sanctions assessed, and corrective measures taken as a result of said inspections.

Articles 17 and 18. Effective enforcement and sufficiently dissuasive penalties. The Committee notes that the Government refers, in reply to the Committee’s request to provide for adequate penalties for labour law violations in the Provinces of Sindh and Balochistan, to the increased amount of penalties in some labour laws in Sindh, including in the Sindh Factories Act, 2015 (in which fines have been increased to a maximum of 75,000 Pakistani rupees (PKR), that is, approximately US$706 and which also provides for penalties of imprisonment with regard to certain violations). The Government also indicates that draft legislation currently before the provincial parliament in Balochistan provides for an increased level of penalties.

The Committee notes that the Government has not provided the requested statistical information on the number of violations detected, the number of violations which resulted in prosecution and the subsequent number and level of fines imposed. In this context, the Committee also notes the observations made by the PWF, according to which statistics published by the Ministry of Overseas Pakistanis and Human Resources Development show that in Sindh, only 12 penalties were imposed in 2014, although there are 8,572 factories registered in that province. The Committee also notes the observations made by the PWF that the enforcement activities of the labour inspectorate are trivial, in that no significant actions are taken concerning attempts to bribe labour inspectors, and the refusal to comply with the legal obligations to pay for medical treatment or provide financial compensation to workers who have suffered occupational accidents. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the progress made with the increase of fines and other penalties in the legislation of the Province of Balochistan, and to provide information on the penalties for labour law violations provided for in the Mines Acts of the provinces. The Committee further requests the Government to provide its comments in relation to the observations made by the PWF including information on measures taken or envisaged to promote transparency in law enforcement, and once again requests the Government to provide information in relation to each of the provinces on the number of violations detected, the corresponding number of violations which resulted in prosecution, and the number and level of fines imposed.

Article 18. Penalties for obstructing labour inspectors in the performance of their duties. The Committee previously noted that during the CAS discussion in 2014, several speakers indicated that penalties for the obstruction of labour inspectors in their duties were insufficient. In this respect, it noted the Government’s indication that two provinces (Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa) had revised their respective Factories Acts to establish a fine of PKR20,000 (approximately US$195) for obstructing the work of an inspector, and that draft Factories Acts had been prepared in this respect in the provinces of Sindh and Balochistan. The Committee also noted that under the Mines Act, 1923, a person who obstructs an inspection in a mine may be liable for imprisonment for up to three months and a fine of up to PKR1,000 (approximately US$10).

The Committee takes due note of the Government’s indication that the penalties for obstruction of labour inspectors in their duties in the Factories Act of Sindh have been raised (to up to PKR10,000 (approximately US$95)). The Government adds that it is proposed to also increase the penalties for obstruction in the Factories Act of Balochistan (to penalties amounting up to PKR60,000 (approximately US$570)) or imprisonment of up to one month. The Committee notes that the Government has not provided the requested information on the application of the legislative provisions relating to the obstruction of labour inspectors in practice and the measures taken in this respect. In this context, the Committee also notes the observations made by the PWF that no significant actions are taken concerning the exerting of influence to restrict or ban inspections. Noting the legislative measures already taken, the Committee urges the Government to continue to take measures to ensure that legislation is adopted that provides for sufficiently dissuasive sanctions for the obstruction of labour inspectors in their duties with respect to premises covered by the Factories Act in Balochistan. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the applicable penalties provided for in the Mines Acts in the provinces. The Committee also once again requests the Government to provide information on cases relating to the obstruction of labour inspectors in their duties in practice, disaggregated by province, including not only the number of prosecutions undertaken, but also their outcome and the specific penalties applied (including the amount of fines imposed).

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

[The Government is asked to reply in full to the present comments in 2018.]