National Legislation on Labour and Social Rights
Global database on occupational safety and health legislation
Employment protection legislation database
DISPLAYINEnglish - French - Spanish
A Government representative described the progress made by the Government in relation to the observations of the Committee of Experts. Regarding the function of inspectors in labour disputes, he said that they no longer carried out conciliation or mediation duties, which were now undertaken by a specialized service. On the adequacy of human, financial and material resources, the Government was implementing an action plan to strengthen inspection, which included a strategy, instruments and logistics to reinforce the inspection plan in line with the requirements of the Convention. A further 94 inspectors would be added by 2016 to the current number of 141. Concerning vehicles, although they were not for the exclusive use of the inspectorate, they were utilized on a priority basis to carry out these actions, and the action plan provided for the strengthening of this logistical aspect. With regard to the need to ensure appropriate conditions of service, employment stability and independence of inspectors, the job security of inspectors had been guaranteed, with over 50 per cent having worked for the inspectorate for between ten and 25 years. Moreover, a system was in place which divided inspectors into three categories, new inspectors, senior inspectors and inspection supervisors, and the provisional draft of the new legislation provided for selection criteria including competitive examinations, educational qualifications and seniority. Regarding independence from improper influences, several instruments were applicable, such as inspection protocols and the Civil Service Act. With respect to adequate and effectively enforced penalties, the planned legislative reform provided for the strengthening of enforcement capacities to prevent violations of labour laws. The obstruction of labour inspection was considered very serious, and the offending enterprise was penalized on the basis of the minimum wage and of the number of workers affected. Violations of labour legislation recorded by inspectors had totalled 3,082 in 2014, and exceeded 5,357 in the first quarter of 2015 alone. As labour inspection was an essential component of the Government’s efforts to ensure compliance with labour law, it had requested ILO technical assistance in 2014 to conduct an audit of the performance of the labour inspectorate, and the first meeting had been held with the consultant appointed by the Office in May 2015, which had led to the start of a general planning phase. The audit, which was scheduled to begin in the last week of June 2015 and for which a technical support committee had been established, would be based on the rigorous work of a group of ILO experts. He reiterated the Government’s commitment to reinforce the labour inspectorate through an action plan introduced within the framework of the tripartite monitoring and follow-up commission, within a time frame of 2015–16 and budget already approved by the Office of the President. The action plan, which took into account the observations of the Committee of Experts and the need to strengthen the inspectorate, comprised seven main areas and over 15 activities to be carried out in 12 months. The outcomes and progress achieved would be included in the 2016 report on the application of the Convention.
The Worker members considered that Honduras had failed at all levels to guarantee compliance with the Convention owing to a series of problems in law and practice, which had left workers with no protection and without any effective remedy for the violation of their rights. This had been confirmed in February 2015 by a report of the United States Department of Labor in response to a complaint submitted by 26 Honduran trade unions and civil society organizations. The report revealed that for some years the Government had been failing to enforce labour legislation through labour inspection and the justice system. The Worker members therefore concluded that the Government had little political will to ensure the effective implementation of labour laws. There were several key areas of non-compliance with the Convention. The number of inspectors (119 full-time employees) was insufficient and was concentrated in the capital and the country’s main business centre. Inspectors were frequently prevented from entering factories, they rarely sought the assistance of the police, and the Ministry of Labour did not resort to the tribunals to oblige employers to authorize their entry. Penalties were not adequate (employers who prevented inspectors from carrying out their tasks were subject to a fine of only between US$2.40 and $240), fines were rarely imposed and the penalties had not been reviewed since 1980 (for example, the fine for not paying the minimum wage was between $4.80 and $48, and the figure was not multiplied by the number of workers concerned), and where fines were imposed and paid, the file was closed without investigating whether the cause had been rectified (for example, an agricultural undertaking, due to not paying the minimum wage, owed a total of $129,818, a fine of $240 had been assessed and following payment the file had been closed regardless of the fact that salaries were still being paid below the minimum wage). When inspections were conducted, the follow-up through second inspections was very weak, and there was no review of the violations identified in the initial inspection. Moreover, inspectors did not have the necessary material resources, such as vehicles and petrol, and the performance of inspections even depended on whether workers paid the transport and costs, which constituted a major obstacle to the performance of inspections in a country where 60 per cent of the population lived below the poverty threshold, with the situation in rural areas being even worse. In conclusion, the labour inspection system did not guarantee the fulfilment of the legal provisions relating to working conditions and the protection of workers when carrying out their work. This was not because of a lack of resources, as the Government had benefited from various international cooperation projects, particularly two regional projects financed by the United States, for which several million US dollars had been spent. It appeared that the Government had taken a clear decision not to establish an adequate labour inspection system to protect workers with the aim of creating a favourable climate for trade and investment based on the exploitation of a cheap workforce. The case was particularly serious. Effective measures needed be taken to ensure that Honduras achieved compliance with the Convention as soon as possible.
The Employer members expressed their deep concern at the inadequate application of the Convention in Honduras and emphasized the importance of maintaining an effective system of inspection. They took note of the observations of the Committee of Experts and the Government’s replies concerning in particular: measures taken to ensure that inspectors did not find themselves acting as both judge and interested party; inadequate human and financial resources that limited the capacity for routine inspections or might give rise to improper influence; difficulties regarding the imposition of adequate penalties; and problems relating to transport and the conduct of inspections in commercial and industrial workplaces. The labour inspectorate had been established in 1959, and no changes had been made to it since then. There were deficiencies in the selection and training of inspectors. Inspectors were exposed to acts of corruption and did not act with due independence. Routine inspections were very rare. Since transport for inspectors had to be paid for by the parties concerned, workers who lacked such means had no access to the inspection services. Inspectors’ salaries were the lowest in the public administration, and their categories had not been reviewed for years. The number of inspectors was insufficient for the needs of the country, most of them were located in major cities and there was no thematic specialization. In addition, with regard to occupational safety and health, the function of labour inspection was confused with the work of the officials of the Honduran Social Security Institute. The country’s private sector agreed with the need to reform the Labour Code and modernize labour inspection to make it efficient and adapt it to current needs. Following the example of a recent tripartite meeting in Honduras, the Employer members emphasized the need to make progress in improving labour inspection in consultation with the social partners, including the representative business sectors, with a view to ensuring the relevance of the reform and due compliance with the aims of the Convention. Finally, the Employer members recalled the importance of conducting labour inspection in both the formal and informal sectors, with a view to creating the appropriate conditions for formalizing the latter.
The Worker member of Honduras said that labour inspection was a fundamental means of guaranteeing the free exercise of the rights enshrined in international Conventions and domestic labour law, and that the Government should take the appropriate steps to ensure compliance with the law by employers. With regard to the authority of inspection services to impose penalties, the Ministry of Labour and Social Security was failing to exercise the power to impose administrative penalties for violations of labour legislation provided for in section 625 of the Labour Code. When levied, fines were not commensurate with the offence committed. The maximum fine was 5,000 lempiras, equivalent to US$228. He emphasized that penalties should serve as an example. The total number of inspectors was too low, as there was only one inspector for approximately 24,000 workers. Furthermore, inspection activities focused mainly on complaints, and much less on routine inspection. In general, inspection activities were confined to carrying out poor investigations without imposing penalties on employers. No priority was given to full inspections at workplaces that would give the State a real overview and allow it to address labour violations that workers were usually afraid to report for fear of losing their jobs. For example, in maquila enterprises, export processing zones did not allow labour inspection by threatening to close down and lay off thousands of workers. Notwithstanding section 624 of the Labour Code, which provided that an inspector could not abandon an investigation without higher level authorization, workers were frequently left with their labour disputes unresolved. Moreover, inspectors would request workers to pay inspection costs, including transport, as a condition for dealing with their complaints. Workers were also charged for receiving any official record of the action taken by inspectors in relation to their complaints, in violation of the principle that labour inspection should be free. There were allegations that inspectors encouraged workers to drop their complaints and that they received incentives from employers to be lax in carrying out effective investigations, although such conduct was prohibited by law. Nevertheless, the competent authorities did not bring disciplinary proceedings against inspectors. Employers frequently denied access to workplaces, as had been done in the case of a large sugar enterprise. Inspectors almost never made use of their authority to request the police to provide them with access to the workplace, and in many cases even the police declined to use their powers of enforcement. The Ministry of Labour rarely fined employers who refused inspections, and when attempts were made to bring criminal charges, the Office of the Public Prosecutor did not accept them, as it did not know how to proceed. The Government must comply with the Convention and with domestic law.
The Employer member of Honduras said that national labour legislation dated back to 1959 and there had been no substantial reform of the provisions respecting labour inspection since then, even though the country had ratified the Convention in 1983. However, it was a governance Convention that was being examined by the three social partners in Honduras, which had asked for ILO collaboration for an audit of its labour inspection system. The findings of the audit would be communicated to the social partners through the Economic and Social Council. The employers of Honduras were committed to a complete overhaul of the Labour Code and were in favour of the revision and adoption of a new Labour Inspection Act, that should guarantee the professionalism of labour inspectors, their multi-tasking and their specialization according to the economic areas or activities, as well as the creation of a career in labour inspection. The reform would have to clarify inspection procedures and ensure that the penalties imposed on those who violated the labour legislation were commensurate with the type of infraction committed and were established objectively and with due regard for the right to legal defence and protection for all the parties concerned. Even taking into account Honduras’ economic problems, the number of labour inspectors, of approximately 112 for a population of 8 million, was still low. A graduated budget should therefore be introduced as from 2015 that guaranteed not just the payment of salaries, but also the necessary logistical support for inspectors to travel in official vehicles, instead of private vehicles belonging to those who requested their services. Honduran employers were determined to work with their tripartite partners to bring about a legal instrument that could guarantee their objectives in compliance with the roadmap that had been approved. The new instrument would be adopted in Honduras’ Economic and Social Council, before being submitted to the National Congress.
The Government member of Mexico, speaking on behalf of the Group of Latin American and Caribbean countries (GRULAC), noted the technical assistance that Honduras was receiving from the ILO for an audit of the national labour inspectorate, as well as the action plan for the consolidation of the inspectorate, the legislative reforms and the effective cooperation and efforts of all the sectors concerned. The action plan was a joint undertaking by the Government and the social partners, with ILO assistance, with the objective of achieving the targets that had been set for 2016. The action plan had the financial support of the Office of the President for the 2016 budget. GRULAC emphasized its commitment to the consolidation of the labour inspectorate and trusted that the Government would continue creating, improving and implementing policies to improve the effectiveness of labour inspection.
The Worker member of Guatemala said that the proper functioning of labour inspection was key to the enforcement of labour standards. The inspection service was part of the state system of law enforcement and the mode of operation of the inspectorate reflected how much attention was given to labour rights by the State. There were serious problems in the operation of labour inspection in Honduras, as emphasized by the Committee of Experts. Even though it was necessary to strengthen the inspectorate with material resources and an increased number of inspectors, it was not sufficient to improve the service. Other aspects had to be taken into consideration, some of which were covered by the report of the Committee of Experts. For example, it was prejudicial for the functions of mediation and conciliation to be combined with those of supervision and inspection, since that could result in the negotiation of minimum conditions of work for the workers. It was also necessary for the labour inspection system to have adequate powers to impose penalties for non-compliance with labour standards and for such penalties to be applied effectively. Accordingly, it was unacceptable that inspectors asked the workers to pay their expenses for tasks that inspectors were required to perform by law. Moreover, employers frequently denied inspectors entry into workplaces and, even though such conduct was illegal, it was not penalized. Consequently, it was essential for the labour inspection service to be reformed and for effective and dissuasive penalties to be established. For that reason, it was important that the Government take full account of the observations of the Committee of Experts.
The Government member of Nicaragua endorsed the statement by GRULAC and called on Nicaragua to give high priority to the international standards that it had ratified. For those standards to be properly implemented, account nevertheless needed to be taken, not only of the resources required, but also of specific national circumstances. Honduras’ commitment to respect workers’ rights and the positive steps taken relating to labour inspection, such as the action plan for its consolidation, were encouraging. She also emphasized the technical assistance provided by the ILO for an audit of the functioning of the labour inspectorate, which she hoped would have a positive effect. Although the State was primarily responsible for protecting workers’ rights, the spirit of the Organization was tripartite participation. Honduras should be encouraged to continue its efforts on behalf of the people, and the Conference Committee should take a favourable view of the steps that were being taken to give effect to the Convention.
The Worker member of the United States said that it was not possible to comply with the commitments under a trade agreement to protect workers’ rights without a functioning labour inspectorate. Yet, this was what Honduras and the United States had done since the Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA) had entered into force in 2006. He recalled that unions in Honduras and the United States had filed a complaint in 2012 concerning the failure of Honduras to enforce its labour laws and ILO commitments under CAFTA. The United States had not formally responded to the complaint for three years, despite ongoing documentation of violations and failures relating to inspection. The Government of the United States had finally responded to the complaint, found “serious concerns” and announced a series of technical cooperation programmes to increase the labour inspectorate’s capacity, but no unions had been consulted in designing the programmes. After years of inaction, the Government of Honduras had made a series of announcements concerning its intentions to comply, with descriptions of programmes and legislative proposals that were being launched. Those announcements were welcome, but had been made before. As in the Guatemalan case, it seemed that three years of complete inaction was acceptable. Meanwhile, mechanisms to defend the interests of investors and multinational corporations adopted decisions that included remedies in dozens of cases each year. The Conference Committee should note with concern the Government’s ineffectiveness in defending workers’ rights through the use of ILO Conventions in trade agreements. He recalled that the Committee had heard the case of Honduras two years ago, and his organization’s remarks at that time had focused on the same employer violations that continued today. The Government had failed to take note of the documented intransigence and had failed to enforce laws or ensure the compliance of the trade agreement with the ILO Conventions that it had ratified. And yet Honduras, and the company in question, continued to enjoy trade benefits. There were also employers in the country which complied with obligations regarding labour inspection and, in the same way as those in violation, such companies should be recognized. Many workplaces in Honduras, especially in the agricultural sector, were privately inspected and certified. That presented a conflict of interest, as the auditor profited by providing services to suppliers, and wanted more business opportunities. In a country such as Honduras, these private compliance initiatives further perpetuated the governance gap.
The Government member of El Salvador endorsed the statement of GRULAC and recognized the Government’s efforts and its momentum in strengthening the labour inspection, including through the action plan. She emphasized that the inspection was one of the fundamental pillars of the State and trusted that the Government of Honduras would continue its efforts to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the inspection system.
The Worker member of Spain said that in Honduras melon production represented 11 per cent of agricultural exports, and this work was carried out mainly by women, representing two-thirds of the workforce in the country. They were mainly young women without family support, with four or five children, and employed in temporary jobs. Women workers were paid 70 per cent less than the national minimum wage, were not paid overtime and had long working hours. Although accidents at work and health problems caused by the intensive use of agrochemicals were common, most workers lacked access to social security protection, including health services, and there was no response to the numerous requests to inspect these violations. The critical situation in the field of labour inspection in Honduras directly affected the human rights of workers and their families. The Government was not responding to the needs of inspecting compliance with labour legislation, particularly in the agricultural sector.
The Government member of the United States said that the Government of the United States had been working closely with the Government of Honduras under the labour chapter of CAFTA to strengthen the protection of internationally recognized workers’ rights in the country. In February 2015, they had jointly pledged to work together to address issues of labour law enforcement, including the establishment and implementation of a monitoring and action plan. Her Government was encouraged by the political will of the Government of Honduras, and encouraged it to fully implement the planned reforms, including through the allocation of sufficient resources to the inspectorate to conduct regular and thorough inspections of workplaces and apply effectively dissuasive penalties for non-compliance with the labour legislation, in accordance with the Convention. Her Government was committed to continued collaboration with the Government of Honduras, particularly for the implementation of the planned reforms on labour law enforcement.
The Worker member of Brazil said that the situation in Honduras was urgent. Although the Convention was technical, its importance was immeasurable and it was closely related to other Conventions. If a country violated the present Convention, there was a danger that it would fail to observe all of the others. The report of the Committee of Experts described the seriousness of the situation: the number of inspectors was insufficient; inspectors lacked the material resources to perform their duties; and penalties were inadequate and inefficiently applied. In addition to a very limited number of inspectors, other obstacles hampered the performance of their functions, as was evident in the report of the Committee of Experts. Workers had to pay for inspectors’ transport in order for them to perform their assigned duties. That illustrated the level of negligence, indifference and fragility of the labour inspection system in Honduras. There were many more complaint-based inspections than routine inspections. That implied that labour inspection was adopting a reactive rather than a preventive approach. Lastly, employers who denied entry to labour inspectors were not effectively penalized.
The Government member of Guatemala endorsed the statement made by GRULAC and recognized that Honduras attached significance to the aim of strengthening labour inspection as a fundamental pillar of the State, to be realized through activities with ILO support, of which the technical assistance was essential. She praised the action plan to strengthen inspection, which had been adopted on a tripartite basis and with ILO assistance and had already received budgetary support for its implementation. She encouraged the Government to continue working on strengthening its labour institutions and, under tripartite leadership, to continue building an effective labour inspection.
An observer representing the World Federation of Trade Unions (WFTU) noted with deep concern the violation of the Convention by Honduras, its inability to cope with the situation and the lack of budgetary resources. He called on the ILO to supervise rigorously the implementation of the Convention and expressed solidarity with Honduran workers.
The Government representative indicated that the Ministry of Labour and Social Security had prepared an action plan for inspection which aimed to substantially improve labour inspection. This plan had established priorities, including increased assistance for workers and employers regarding the consultations and requests submitted; powers of the inspectors to enter workplaces; prompt processing of inspection requests, in accordance with procedural protocols by sector relating both to the working conditions and to occupational safety and health; monitoring and conclusion of the inspection administrative procedure with enforcement measures and the imposition of penalties for offences; and monitoring of the safety and confidentiality networks relating to inspectors’ activities. The action plan had the technical and political support of the highest Governmental bodies and a draft budget was being prepared for 2016. The social partners actively participated in the plan by means of a tripartite committee for follow-up and monitoring. Furthermore, the Ministry of Labour and Social Security was finalizing the bill on the General Inspection Act, which proposed substantial changes to inspection procedures and provided, inter alia, for the strengthening of inspectors’ powers, a new penalty system for socio-labour offences and a review of the profile and working conditions for labour inspectors in the civil service. In this context, ILO technical services would conduct an audit of labour inspection to determine and analyse the current situation of inspection in all areas and in different regional offices with a view to identifying priorities and formulating recommendations within an action plan which the Ministry of Labour and Social Security was resolutely determined to implement in the short, medium and long term. The audit would encompass the legislative, procedural and administrative aspects of labour inspection, as well as technological development, administrative organization, organic structure and links with public and private institutions. The focus of the audit was based on the notion of an inspection system in conformity with the Convention which should integrate in a coordinated manner all of its elements, including human resources, and material, legislative, administrative and logistic resources, with the participation of workers and employers in order to provide an effective inspection service. The audit was due to commence at the end of the month, and its detailed results would be provided in a special report and would be included in the detailed report on the Convention for 2016. He thanked the ILO for the technical assistance provided and recognized the efforts of the Worker and Employer members, and their commitment to the action plan to achieve these ambitious objectives, which corresponded with the observations of the Committee of Experts. Lastly, he reiterated his Government’s commitment to continue complying with the Convention by developing, improving and implementing policies to ensure the full effectiveness of labour inspection.
The Worker members welcomed the fact that, in the light of the recent report of the United States Department of Labor, the Government of Honduras had developed an action plan and accepted technical assistance of the United States, which would be overseen by a tripartite committee. They also welcomed the fact that the Government was planning to draft a new general labour inspection act. They hoped that those initiatives would succeed in overhauling the labour inspection services, which had failed to implement labour legislation effectively due to corruption and indifference. While endorsing the need for technical assistance, the Worker members emphasized that it must be supported by political will and that the Government must give the labour inspection services a sense of a mission to be undertaken with professionalism and respect for the rule of law. In order to ensure that workplaces were inspected as regularly and thoroughly as necessary to ensure the effective application of legislation, the Worker members urged the Government to substantially increase the number of labour inspectors, particularly in areas that were currently grossly neglected, and to ensure that they had the material resources needed to carry out their work, including vehicles; to formulate a proactive labour inspection plan targeting sectors where there were serious and systematic labour legislation violations, including the maquila, agricultural and other sectors; to ensure that labour inspectors received the relevant training and take all necessary steps to guarantee their independence; to increase fines for violations of the law immediately and review the method used to calculate them to ensure that they were sufficiently dissuasive; and to introduce procedures for labour inspectors to carry out repeat inspections in order to verify that orders were complied with and enforce their implementation. The ILO should offer, and the Government of Honduras should accept a direct contacts mission to assess the current situation, verify technical capacity needs and help in coordinating the various initiatives.
The Employer members noted that the Government of Honduras was not complying with the Convention principally due to its lack of political will. They recognized that labour inspection was important to ensure compliance with labour legislation and to protect workers’ rights. An adequate inspection system that complied with the Convention would have the additional positive effect of combating informality in Honduras. The reform of the Labour Code was therefore essential, as was the adoption of a new Act on inspection. Any legislative reform on inspection should unfold in consultation with the most representative workers’ and employers’ organizations, in line with the Tripartite Consultation (International Labour Standards) Convention, 1976 (No. 144). Further to consultation with those organizations, the draft text should be analysed by the Committee or by the International Labour Standards Department in order to guarantee its conformity with the Convention. The legislative reform should ensure the progressive professionalization, specialization and multi-tasking of the labour inspectorate. The number of inspectors and the frequency of routine inspections should also be increased. These reforms would require budgetary and logistical solutions. Furthermore, penalties should be more dissuasive, progressive and objective in order to ensure the right of defence. The Employer members requested the Government to present detailed information to the Committee of Experts and to accept the technical assistance of the Office.
Conclusions
The Committee noted the oral information provided by the Government representative on the issues raised by the Committee of Experts and the discussion that ensued relating to the strengthening of the labour inspection system, including through: the legal reform; the availability of sufficient financial, human and material resources, including transport facilities; the conduct of a sufficient number of routine inspection visits throughout the country; the establishment of targeted inspection plans; the capacity building and training of labour inspectors; the need to grant labour inspectors adequate conditions of service, including sufficient remuneration to ensure their impartiality and independence from any improper external influences; the need to give effect in practice to the principle of free access of labour inspectors to workplaces; and the need to increase the penalties for labour law violations, including the obstruction of labour inspectors, and ensure their application through effective enforcement mechanisms.
The Committee noted the information provided by the Government relating to a plan of action to strengthen the labour inspection system. The plan had been approved in a tripartite forum and included several initiatives, such as increasing the number of labour inspectors to 200 by 2016, and improving the financial and material resources of the regional labour inspection services. The Committee further noted the proposed reform of the Labour Code and the proposed adoption of a new general labour inspection law governing the career structure and recruitment of labour inspectors, and providing for increased fines for labour law violations, including the obstruction of labour inspectors in their duties. The Committee also noted the information on the initiation of ILO technical assistance in late June 2015 in the form of an audit of the functioning of the labour inspection system further to a request by the Government.
The Committee noted the Government’s intention, in consultation with the most representative workers’ and employers’ organizations, to reform the Labour Code, to enact a general labour inspection law, and to undertake an audit of the labour inspection system which would be carried out by the ILO. Taking into account the discussion, the Committee requested the Government to:
Repetition International cooperation. The Committee notes the information available in the ILO on the launch on 1 April 2011 of a pilot project under the framework of international cooperation and the Decent Work Country Programme focusing on strengthening labour inspection and which will be extended until 30 September 2012. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the development of the pilot project and its impact.Article 3 of the Convention. Main functions of the system of labour inspection and duties in the area of labour relations. The Committee refers to its comments of 2008 in which it had noted that from the tables showing the activities carried out in 2005 by the regional labour inspection services, these mainly concerned interventions to settle labour disputes and various operations involving the calculation of social benefits due to the workers. From reading the Labour Inspection Handbook, it can be deduced that the situation has not progressed significantly in this respect. The Committee once again requests the Government to indicate the measures taken to guarantee that the conciliation or mediation duties undertaken by the labour inspectors in the event of labour disputes do not interfere with the discharge of their primary duties and to provide information on any progress made in that regard, as well as any relevant documents.Article 8. Gender mix of inspection personnel. The Committee asks the Government once again to indicate how the distribution of duties between men and women labour inspectors is organized in practice when the personnel of a workplace comprises men, women and young workers.Article 13. Exercise of the right to issue orders on matters relating to occupational safety and health. The Committee had noted in its comments of 2008 that, pursuant to section 617(c) of the Labour Code, labour inspectors may examine the health and safety conditions of workplaces and must ensure that the legislation in force on the prevention of industrial accidents and occupational diseases is applied. The Committee requests the Government once again to specify the division of work between the occupational safety and health technical experts and labour inspectors covered by this provision. It would be grateful if it would also indicate the practical arrangements of their collaboration, as well as the authority to which reports on occupational safety and health and occupational accidents are addressed.The Committee asks the Government once again to specify the legal provisions in force applying the provisions of Article 13 of the Convention concerning the right to issue orders to employers, with or without a specified time limit, in the event of danger to the health and safety of workers, and to provide the Office with a copy of the Decree No. 49-84 in force.
The Committee notes that the information supplied by the Government in its report is much the same as that in the report covering the previous period. The Committee nonetheless notes with interest the document published by the Ministry of Labour and Social Security on the system for electronic follow-up of inspection visits implemented in the context of the Centroamérica Cumple y Gana cooperation project, and the operational inspection plan for 2009.
The Committee notes that on 4 October 2010 the Office received a communication from the Honduran National Business Council (COHEP) on the application of the Convention and that the communication was forwarded to the Government on 18 October 2010.
The Committee notes with regret that, contrary to the intention stated in its report, the Government has provided neither the copies of periodical reports by the regional inspection units (Article 19 of the Convention), nor the annual inspection report for 2009 (Articles 20 and 21). The Committee points out that information on the practical application of the Convention is essential to an assessment of the running of the inspection system and hence the extent to which the Convention is applied, and requests the Government to ensure that the abovementioned reports are sent as soon as possible so that they can be examined together with the report received on 27 August 2010, the points raised by COHEP in its comments on the application of the Convention, and any observations the Government may wish to submit in reply.
[The Government is asked to reply in detail to the present comments in 2011.]
Referring also to its observation, the Committee notes that the Government has still not replied to its previous direct request under Articles 3 and 8 of the Convention. It therefore feels bound to reiterate the corresponding paragraphs in the request, on the following points:
Article 3. Main functions of the labour inspection system, duties in the area of labour relations and incidental administrative tasks. With reference to its previous comments, the Committee notes from the tables showing the activities carried out in 2005 by the regional labour inspection services, that most of the inspectors’ work concerned the settlement of labour disputes and various operations involving the calculation of social benefits due to workers. It notes that there are plans for 2007 to strengthen the inspectorate staff by further recruitment and training, depending on available budgetary resources. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would shortly take measures to ensure that the labour inspectors’ main duties consist of supervision and the provision of information and advice, as prescribed by Article 3, paragraph 1, and to ensure the enforcement of legal provisions and working conditions and the protection of workers. It requests the Government to provide information on any developments in this respect and in respect of the strengthening of the labour inspectorate’s human resources.
Article 8. Eligibility of both men and women for appointment to the inspection staff; special duties assigned to men and women inspectors. According to the Government, from preference, women labour inspectors are placed in charge of matters pertaining to the working conditions of women and children, male inspectors responsible for the supervision of occupational safety and health and minimum wages. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would indicate how the distribution of duties between men and women labour inspectors is organized in practice when the personnel of a workplace comprises men, women and young workers.
Furthermore, the Committee requests the Government to provide additional information on the following point.
Articles 9 and 13. Collaboration between technical experts and specialists in the work of the labour inspection services and the exercise of the right to issue orders on matters relating to occupational safety and health. According to the Government, the responsibility for applying the relevant legislation lies with specialists from the Occupational Safety and Health Department of the Ministry of Labour and Social Security with the support and advice from the Medical Department. Under Executive Decree No. 49-84, these officials are also responsible for directly supervising the application and strict observation of provisions under collective agreements and arbitration decisions that are relative in this area. The Government specifies that they are able, if they consider it necessary, to investigate the cause of certain types of occupational accidents. Furthermore, the Committee notes that, pursuant to section 617(c) of the Labour Code, labour inspectors may examine the safety and health conditions of workplaces and must ensure that the legislation in force on the prevention of occupational accidents and diseases is applied. The Government is requested to specify the division of work between the occupational safety and health officials and labour inspectors covered by this provision. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would indicate the practical arrangements of their collaboration, as well as the authority to which reports on occupational safety and health and occupational accidents are addressed.
The Committee requests the Government to specify the legal provisions in force applying the provisions of Article 13 of the Convention concerning the right to issue orders to employers, with or without a specified time limit, in the event of danger to the health or safety of workers, and to provide the Office with a copy of the abovementioned Decree No. 49-84 in force in its actual form.
The Committee notes the Government’s report, as well as the statistical tables on the activities carried out by the labour inspection services in the capital and regions in 2007 (number of inspection visits, number of workers disaggregated by gender, number of proceedings, including conciliations, calculations of workers’ social benefits, consultations held, etc).
Noting that the Government has only replied very partially to the questions raised in its previous observation and direct request, the Committee draws its attention to the following points.
International cooperation. The Committee had previously requested the Government to provide information on any progress made in the implementation of the project for reinforcing workers’ rights in Central America (Centroamérica cumple y gana), and to send a copy of any relevant texts. It observes that the Government has failed to do this.
According to information available to the ILO and posted on the Internet, new resources have been allocated to the project, which was due to be completed in 2007, but was therefore extended until September 2008. These resources were aimed at broadening the distribution of information on the rights and obligations deriving from employment, and incorporating a “component” on discrimination against working women. Under this programme, it was planned to undertake training activities and actions to support staff responsible for gender matters in the ministries of labour of the countries concerned, as well as to carry out awareness-raising and training sessions for labour inspectors and mediators in this area. These resources were also earmarked for institution building, by providing equipment to labour inspection services and the Bureau for Working Women. It was also intended to allocate funds to improve planning, the computer system and public relations.
According to information available to the ILO, an assessment of labour inspection services was carried out this year by the ILO Subregional Office for Central America, in the context of the project RLA/07/04M/USA, with a view to strengthening the public administration in the Ministries of Labour in Honduras and El Salvador. The Committee notes that recommendations were made which included: setting up an integrated labour inspection service that is both specialized and multipurpose; overhauling labour inspection procedures; assessing and reviewing posts in the inspection services; exchanging information on enterprises with the Honduran Institute of Social Security; and setting up a national information network. The Committee hopes that the Government will not fail to inform the ILO of any progress achieved with the project “Centroamérica cumple y gana”, as well as of any follow up action to the recommendations made in the context of this survey.
Legislation. The Committee requests the Government once again to provide information on the progress made in adopting the Organic Act on the Secretariat of Labour and Occupational Safety, and in revising the Labour Code as announced by the Government in 2002.
Articles 6 and 15(a) of the Convention. Conditions of service of labour inspectors and prohibition on having any direct or indirect interest in undertakings under their supervision. According to the Government, labour inspectors come under the Public Service Act. They have no specific status and their contracts are not affected by changes of government. The Committee requests the Government once again to adopt, as soon as possible, legal provisions which ensure that the conditions of service of inspection staff are such as to guarantee that they are independent of all improper external influences (Article 6) and to prohibit labour inspectors from having any direct or indirect interest in the undertakings under their supervision (Article 15(a)). It also asks the Government to keep it informed of any developments or any difficulties encountered in this respect.
Article 11. Financial resources and transport facilities for inspection services. In its observation of 2006, the Committee had expressed the hope that the Government would do its utmost to ensure that, in determining the budget allocated to the working of the labour inspectorate, account would be taken of the obvious needs of the inspectorate and the requirements of the Convention. The Committee requested the Government to take tangible measures to this end and to provide information on them and on their results.
According to the Government, the regional offices of Chuloteca, San Pedro Sula, Danlí, El Progreso and Santa Rosa de Copán have been renovated and equipped so that the inspectors can carry out their functions more easily; in addition, the Central Labour Inspectorate and a number of regional offices have been provided with means of transport (bus and minibus). The Government nevertheless pointed out once again that the Central Labour Inspectorate does not have a budget to cover travel expenses for labour inspectors. The Committee hopes that measures will rapidly be taken to this end to encourage labour inspectors to travel further afield to cover establishments covered by the Convention, that appropriate resources will be allocated in the next budget of the labour inspection services and that the Government will inform the Office of any measures taken in this respect.
The Government is also asked to describe the procedures determining how the inspectors may use the bus and minibus provided to the labour inspection services for their professional visits.
Articles 19 and 21. Periodical reports and publication of an annual inspection report. According to the Government, the regional labour inspectors submit monthly reports on the activities carried out in the various offices to the central labour inspection authorities. The Committee notes that the statistics provided indicate the proportion of planned activities carried out. It would be grateful if the Government would inform the Office of any progress made in collecting the data required by the central labour inspection authority to publish an annual report on the labour inspection services under its supervision, containing the information required in clauses (a) to (g) of Article 21.
It would be grateful if the Government would specify the manner in which the programmed objectives of the labour inspection services are determined.
Labour inspection and child labour. The Committee requests the Government once again to explain why it was decided to appoint inspectors specializing in child labour in Tegucigalpa et San Pedro Sula and to provide information on the results of their activities in terms of inspections, penalties imposed and the provision of advice and information to employers and workers. It would be grateful if the Government would indicate whether it is planned to appoint specialized labour inspectors in other areas and, in any event, to take immediate measures to ensure that inspections targeting breaches of the legislation on child labour are also carried out by non-specialized labour inspectors.
Furthermore, noting that the Government has not made any progress in the application of certain provisions under the Convention, the Committee is bound to reiterate the previous requests that it made directly in this respect:
Articles 12, paragraphs 1(a) and 18. Free access for labour inspectors to workplaces subject to inspection. According to the Government, the Ministry of Labour and Social Security has taken firm measures to ensure that labour inspectors are in general allowed to enter workplaces. Several joint inspections have been carried out by the Ministry of Labour and Social Security, the Minister for Security and the Procurator General, and further joint visits are to take place with assistance from a special procurator. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would specify the purpose of each of the above authorities in participating in these inspections, indicating the extent of the inspections and describing the measures implemented to give safety and health inspectors greater freedom to enter workplaces covered by the Convention, as requested by the Committee in its previous comments.
Article 14. Notification of occupational diseases to the inspectorate. With reference to comments it has made many times, the Committee again requests the Government to take steps to give full effect to this provision of the Convention and to provide copies of any relevant text governing the instances in which the inspectorate must be informed of cases of occupational disease and the manner of such notification.
Article 18. Appropriate penalties. With reference to its previous comments, the Committee notes that the draft revision of the Labour Code is being discussed by the Government and the social partners. It draws the Government’s attention to the relevance of this draft legislation to the establishment of a system for setting penalties that remain dissuasive regardless of any monetary fluctuations, and would be grateful if the Government would send the ILO information on any progress in this respect together with copies of any relevant texts.
The Committee is also addressing a request directly to the Government concerning other matters.
The Committee refers the Government to its observation, and draws attention to the following points.
Article 3 of the Convention. Main functions of the labour inspection system, duties in the area of labour relations and incidental administrative tasks. With reference to its previous comments, the Committee notes from the tables showing the activities carried out in 2005 by the regional labour inspection services, that most of the inspectors’ work concerned the settlement of labour disputes and various operations involving the calculation of social benefits due to workers. It notes that there are plans for 2007 to strengthen the inspectorate staff by further recruitment and training, depending on available budgetary resources. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would shortly take measures to ensure that the labour inspectors’ main duties consist of supervision and the provision of information and advice, as prescribed by Article 3, paragraph 1, and to ensure the enforcement of legal provisions on working conditions and the protection of workers. It requests the Government to provide information on any developments in this respect and in respect of the strengthening of the labour inspectorate’s human resources.
Article 8. Eligibility of both men and women for appointment to the inspection staff; special duties assigned to men and women inspectors. According to the Government, from preference, women labour inspectors are placed in charge of matters pertaining to the working conditions of women and children, male inspectors being responsible for the supervision of occupational safety and health and minimum wages. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would indicate how the distribution of duties between men and women labour inspectors is organized in practice when the personnel of a workplace comprises men, women and young workers.
Articles 12, paragraph 1(a), and 18. Free access for labour inspectors to workplaces subject to inspection. According to the Government, the Ministry of Labour and Social Security has taken firm measures to ensure that labour inspectors are in general allowed to enter workplaces. Several joint inspections have been carried out by the Ministry of Labour and Social Security, the Ministry for Security and the Procurator General, and further joint visits are to take place with assistance from a special procurator. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would specify the purpose of each of the above authorities in participating in these inspections, indicating the extent of the inspections and describing the measures implemented to give safety and health inspectors greater freedom to enter workplaces covered by the Convention, as requested by the Committee in its previous comments.
Article 14. Notification of occupational diseases to the inspectorate. With reference to comments it has made many times, the Committee again requests the Government to take steps to give full effect to this provision of the Convention and to provide copies of any relevant texts governing the instances in which the inspectorate must be informed of cases of occupational disease and the manner of such notification.
The Committee notes the Government’s report containing replies to its previous comments, the documents attached thereto and the observation by the Private Enterprise Council of Honduras (COHEP).
While endorsing the information sent by the Government, COHEP indicates with reference to the direct request of 2004 that, pursuant to article 16(2) of the national Constitution, international agreements ratified by Honduras form part of domestic law as soon as they enter into force, and prevail in the event of inconsistency with domestic law.
1. Articles 7, 10 and 11 of the Convention. Strengthening of the labour inspection system; financial resources and transport facilities for the labour inspectorate. Further to its previous comments, the Committee notes that the draft Basic Act of the Ministry of Labour and Social Security has not been adopted. It notes with interest the actions implemented as part of the project to strengthen labour rights in Central America (“Centroamérica cumple y gana” 2004-06), and particularly the establishment of an electronic system for processing information on labour inspections, shortly to be extended to several regional offices, the provision of computers and other equipment for the inspection services, training for inspection staff, surveys of employers and workers on the role and credibility of the labour inspectorate, the creation of a mobile inspection unit in San Pedro de Sula, and the preparation of a handbook on inspection procedures. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would continue to provide information on progress made in implementing the abovementioned project, and to provide copies of any relevant texts and, if appropriate, the amended Labour Code and the Basic Act of the Ministry of Labour and Social Security as soon as they are adopted.
The Committee notes with concern that neither the central nor the regional offices of the labour inspectorate have the financial resources to cover duty travel for labour inspectors. The Committee cannot overemphasize the social and economic role played by the labour inspectorate and the need for inspectors to be given the necessary means to carry out their duties, particularly transport facilities to enable them to visit workplaces with sufficient frequency. It hopes that the Government will do its utmost to ensure that, in determining the share of the budget allocated to the working of the labour inspectorate, account is taken of what are obvious needs of the inspectorate, and the requirements of the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to take concrete measures to this end and to provide information on them and on their results.
2. Articles 6 and 15(a). Conditions of service for labour inspectors and prohibition from any interest in undertakings under their supervision. With reference to its previous comments on the need to ensure that the conditions of service of inspection staff are such as to ensure that they are independent of all improper external influences (Article 6) and to prohibit labour inspectors from having any direct or indirect interest in undertakings under their supervision (Article 15(a)), the Committee again asks the Government to ensure that relevant legal provisions are shortly adopted and to keep the Office informed of any progress in this regard.
3. Articles 20 and 21. Publication and communication of an annual inspection report. The Committee hopes that the implementation of the electronic system for processing the labour inspectorate’s cases will facilitate the publication and communication to the ILO by the central inspection authority of an annual report on the work of the inspection services under its control, in the form and within the time limits prescribed by Article 20, and containing the information required at items (a) to (g) of Article 21.
4. Labour inspection and child labour. The Committee notes that inspectors specializing in child labour operate in Tegucigalpa and San Pedro de Sula. However, according to the Government, owing to budgetary limitations there will not be specialized staff in the other offices. The Committee requests the Government to explain why it was decided to appoint inspectors to these locations, and to provide information on the results of their activities in terms of inspections, penalties imposed, and the provision of advice and information on the matter to employers and workers. Until financial circumstances enable labour inspectors to be appointed to the other offices, it requests the Government to ensure that inspections targeting breaches of the relevant legislation are also carried out by non-specialized labour inspectors, in order to contain child labour as far as possible.
The Committee is addressing a request concerning other matters directly to the Government.
With reference to its observation, the Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide additional information on the following points.
Article 3, paragraph 2, of the Convention. With reference to its previous comments, the Committee notes with interest the information that, in the cases of Tegucigalpa and San Pedro de Sula, the function of conciliation is entrusted to the Individual Disputes Office of the General Labour Directorate. Nevertheless, noting that at the level of the regional directorates, in view of the budgetary restrictions, this function is entrusted to labour inspectors. The Committee once again requests the Government to indicate, with supporting data, the manner in which it is ensured that the organization of the working time of inspectors gives priority to the discharge of their duties of inspection, advice and information rather than functions related to the resolution of collective disputes.
Article 8. The Committee notes that matters related to the specific working conditions of women and to child labour are preferably entrusted to women inspectors, while matters relating to the inspection of occupational health and safety conditions and compliance with the minimum wage are attributed in particular to male inspectors. The Government is requested to indicate the manner in which this distribution of duties is organized in practice in the workplaces inspected.
Articles 10 and 11. The Committee notes with concern the information concerning the successive reductions in the budget allocated to the Secretariat of State for Labour and Social Security in 2002, 2003 and 2004 in the context of the austerity policy and the rationalization of resources advocated by the Government and implemented through Decree No. PCM 005-2002 of May 2002 and it requests the Government to indicate the effects on the human, material and logistical resources of the labour inspection services. With reference to its previous comments, and while noting Decree No. 1775 of 22 August 2002 issuing rules respecting the per diem and other travel expenses of public officials and employees of the executive authorities. The Committee once again requests the Government to provide detailed information on the quality and arrangement of the inspection offices at the central and local levels, and on the resources and transport facilities available to labour inspectors for their official travel.
Article 12, paragraph 1(a). Noting that under section 2(a) of Decree No. 39 of 10 May 1982, occupational safety and health inspectors are authorized to enter workplaces during working hours with the prior consent of the employer or her or his representative, the Committee would be grateful if the Government would take the necessary measures to bring the legislation into conformity with the Convention so that labour inspectors are duly empowered to enter freely and without previous notice at any hour of the day or night any workplace liable to inspection.
Article 12, paragraphs 1(c)(iii) and 2. The Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to give effect to these provisions of the Convention.
Article 14. According to the information provided by the Government, an occupational safety and health manual has been published and general regulations on preventative measures for accidents at work and occupational diseases were adopted in 2002 and revised in 2004. Furthermore, a notification form for cases of occupational diseases is reported to have been prepared and the technical assistance of the ILO requested to determine the manner in which cases of occupational disease should be notified to the labour inspectorate. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any development in this respect and copies of any relevant texts.
Article 18. The Committee notes that it is envisaged, in the context of the amendment of the Labour Code, to establish a new system of penalties based on minimum wages. The Committee hopes that such a system will make it possible to ensure that financial penalties are and remain of a sufficiently dissuasive nature and it requests the Government to provide any relevant information or documents available.
The Committee notes the information provided in reply to its previous comments, and the attached documentation.
1. Modernization and strengthening of the inspection system. The Committee notes with interest that, following the finalization in June 2003 of the technical assistance for the modernization and strengthening of the labour administration system in the context of the ILO/MATAC project, technical assistance focusing on the formulation and establishment of a polyvalent and unified inspection service was obtained from the Department of Labour of the United States (USDOL). This assistance is intended to improve the inspection system by extending its coverage, particularly through staff training and the development of material resources. The Government adds that a preliminary framework Bill of the Secretariat of State for Labour and Social Security, containing provisions respecting the structure and operation of the polyvalent inspection system, has been submitted for adoption to the National Congress.
The Committee also notes with interest the action taken under the auspices of the Inter-American Agency for Cooperation and Development (IACD) and the Organization of American States (OAS) with a view to strengthening inspection through the training of labour inspectors.
Further referring to the information provided previously concerning the actions planned in the context of the project for the reinforcement of labour rights in Central America (Centroamérica cumple y gana, 1998-2002), one of the objectives of which was to improve the effectiveness of inspection systems and the training of labour inspectors and to establish a system for the organization of data to accelerate the processing of inspection files, the Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide detailed information on the results achieved in the above fields. The Committee hopes that the Government will be in a position to provide information in its next report on the expected impact of the various measures referred to above on the improvement of the labour inspection system and the progress achieved in terms of effectiveness.
2. Conditions of service of labour inspectors and guarantees that they have no direct or indirect interest in the enterprises under their supervision (Articles 6 and 15(a) of the Convention). Taking the opportunity of the announcement by the Government of a draft revision of the Labour Code, the Committee once again emphasizes the need to take measures with a view to the adoption of legal provisions to secure for inspection staff status and conditions of service such as to assure them of independence of any improper external influences (Article 6) and prohibiting inspectors from having any direct or indirect interest in the enterprises under their supervision (Article 15(a)). The Government is requested to keep the Office informed of the progress in relation to the adoption of the new Labour Code and the progress achieved with a view to giving effect to these provisions, the objective of which is to guarantee the impartiality and integrity that are indissociable from the inspection function.
3. Publication, communication and content of the annual inspection report (Articles 20 and 21). With reference to its previous comments, the Committee draws the Government’s attention to paragraphs 272 et seq. of its General Survey of 1985 on the subject of the value at both the national and international levels of the annual inspection report and it once again hopes that the Government will soon be in a position, in the light of the clarifications offered by the General Survey, to ensure the publication and communication to the ILO by the central inspection authority of an annual report on the work of the services under its control in the form and within the time limits set out in Article 20, containing the information required in Article 21(a) to (g) and formulated insofar as possible in accordance with the guidance provided by Part IV of Recommendation No. 81, which supplements the Convention.
The Committee notes with interest that a number of labour inspectors participated in a training workshop on the subject of combating child labour. It notes the tables of inspections carried out in 2003 and 2004 with a view to identifying cases of child labour and the report on the cases identified in the various enterprises. The Government is requested to ensure that relevant data are regularly included in the annual inspection report.
The Committee is addressing a request directly to the Government on certain matters.
With reference also to its observation, the Committee draws the Government’s attention to the following points.
Modification of the Labour Code. With reference to its previous comments, the Committee once again requests detailed information on the impact of the ILO/MATAC programme on the structure, operation and results of the labour inspection system and indications on the progress made in the procedure announced for the adoption of the new Labour Code.
Labour inspection and work by children and young persons. According to the Government, the inspection services carry out many actions to ensure the enforcement of the legal provisions respecting working conditions and the protection of child workers, as well as providing information and advice to employers and young workers on the most effective manner of complying with the legal provisions. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the nature of these activities and their impact. Noting also the information concerning the inspections carried out either in the normal course of duty or at the request of those affected to ascertain the presence of children in enterprises or following a complaint made by a child, the Committee requests the Government to ensure that information and statistics on the results of the work of the inspection services relating to child labour are compiled and provided to the Office and that they are regularly included separately in future annual inspection reports.
Article 3, paragraph 2, of the Convention. Noting that, according to the Government, the conciliation duties carried out by labour inspectors do not interfere with the discharge of their inspection duties, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the distribution of the working time of labour inspectors between these two duties. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would also indicate the manner in which it is ensured that the further duties entrusted to labour inspectors do not prejudice the authority and impartiality which are necessary to them in their relations with employers and workers.
Article 8. Noting that one-third of the staff of the inspectorate is composed of women and that special duties are assigned in specific cases to men and women inspectors, the Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide further information in this respect.
Article 9. According to the Government, in the context of the ILO/MATAC programme for the modernization and strengthening of labour administration, draft organic legislation on the labour secretariat envisaging inspections of a polyvalent nature is currently being adopted. The Committee requests information on the progress made with this draft legislation and, where appropriate, a copy of the text that is adopted.
Articles 10 and 16. Noting that the inspection services are currently composed, according to the organigramme provided, of 94 labour inspectors at the national level, but referring to the information provided by the Government in its previous report that, in 2001, there were 17 technical inspectors in occupational safety and health and 116 labour inspectors, the Committee would be grateful for clarifications on the reasons for this reduction in personnel.
Article 11. Noting the absence of a reply to its previous comments under this Article, the Committee once again requests the Government to provide detailed information on the number, quality and arrangement of the premises made available to the inspection services at the central and regional levels, and on the transport facilities enabling inspectors to undertake professional travel. It would be grateful if the Government would also provide a copy of the text serving as a legal basis for the travel allowance granted to inspectors, to which the Government referred in a previous report.
Article 14. The Committee once again requests the Government to take measures to determine the cases and the manner in which labour inspectors are to be systematically, and no longer occasionally, notified of cases of occupational disease.
Article 18. Noting that, according to the Government, the penalties envisaged in accordance with this Article of the Convention, which were adopted in 1959, are no longer adequate in relation to the current situation of the country, the Committee requests it to take measures to ensure that penalties for violations of the legal provisions enforceable by labour inspectors and for obstructing labour inspectors in the performance of their duties are henceforth provided for in such a manner that they retain a dissuasive nature despite any monetary fluctuations and are effectively enforced.
Articles 20 and 21. The Committee notes the tables on the inspections carried out in 2001, the number of workers covered by inspections and on the industrial accidents which occurred in 2001. Nevertheless, noting that no annual inspection report, as envisaged in these Articles of the Convention, has yet been provided to the ILO, the Committee recalls that the publication and transmission to the ILO by the central inspection authority of such a report are essential obligations and that, where necessary, the technical assistance of the ILO may be requested to facilitate compliance therewith. The Committee therefore hopes that the Government will rapidly take measures in this respect and requests it to keep the ILO informed of any progress.
The Committee notes the Government’s report, the partial replies to its previous comments and the attached documentation. It draws the Government’s attention to the following point.
Article 15(a) of the Convention. With reference to its previous comments, the Committee notes that, under the terms of section 626 of the Labour Code, inspectors who accept presents from employers, workers or trade unions or who exceed the limits of their powers shall be liable to dismissal. In this respect, the Committee wishes to emphasize that, although the obligation of impartiality, set out in Article 15(a) of the Convention, includes offers of presents or services from employers or workers, the national legislation should be supplemented so that it also prohibits, in accordance with this provision of the Convention, inspectors from having any direct or indirect interest in the enterprises under their supervision. The Committee hopes that the necessary measures will be adopted rapidly for this purpose and that the Government will soon be able to provide a copy of any text adopted in this respect.
The Committee is addressing a request directly to the Government on other matters.
With reference to its observation, the Committee notes the Government’s partial responses to its previous comments, and requests it to provide additional information on the following points.
Modernization and strengthening of the labour inspection system. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide details of the impact of the implementation of the subregional ILO/MATAC programme for the modernization and reinforcement of labour administration in Central American countries on the structure and operation of the labour inspection system and on the procedure for the adoption of a new draft Labour Code.
Labour inspection and child labour. The Committee notes with interest the information provided in reply to its general observation of 1999 to the effect that, firstly, during the first half of 2001, seven seminars on the elimination of child labour were organized by the Secretariat of State for Labour and Social Security and, secondly, that private institutions, such as NGOs, including the National Institute for Childhood and the Family (INHFA), the National Institute for Women (INAM) and the inspection services are collaborating in finding appropriate solutions to the problem. The Government is asked to provide detailed information on the precise role assigned to labour inspectors in the diagnosis and supervision of the application of the relevant legislation, as well as statistics on the results of their activities in this field.
Article 3, paragraph 2. With reference to the information provided by the Government in a previous report indicating that labour inspectors only perform conciliation functions in the event of labour disputes in so far as this activity does not impede the activity of inspection, the Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide detailed explanations on this issue, with an indication of whether the conciliation function is entrusted in other cases to other bodies or services in the labour administration system.
Article 6. The Government is requested to provide a copy of the Act respecting the public service and of the regulations issued under the Act, which it indicates contain provisions guaranteeing the stability of public officials.
Articles 8 and 16. The Government is requested to indicate the distribution by sex of the staff of the inspection services, to indicate whether, as envisaged in Article 8, special duties are assigned to men and women inspectors, respectively, and to provide full information on the measures which have been taken or are envisaged to strengthen the staff of the inspection services in general in order to ensure that workplaces are inspected as often and as thoroughly as necessary, as envisaged in Article 16.
Article 11. Material means and conditions of work of labour inspectors. The Committee notes a significant improvement in the infrastructure and logistical resources of the Secretariat of State for Labour and Social Security, including the inspection services. With reference to the information contained in the Government’s previous report concerning the clearly prejudicial situation of inspectors working in Tegucigalpa and San Pedro Sula in terms of their volume of work, the Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide detailed information on the premises of the inspection services, their layout and computer equipment, as well as the means and transport facilities made available to labour inspectors at the central and local levels, and if it would provide a copy of the text serving as the legal basis for the travel allowance for inspectors referred to in the report.
Article 14. The Committee notes that, while section 435 of the Labour Code obliges employers to inform the general labour inspectorate of industrial accidents, information concerning cases of occupational disease is only provided to inspectors at their request during inspection visits or in the event of a complaint. Emphasizing that the notification of labour inspectors of industrial accidents, as well as cases of occupational disease, is of great value for the policy of occupational risk prevention, the Committee would be grateful if the Government would take the appropriate measures to determine the cases and manner in which labour inspectors are to be informed systematically, and no longer occasionally, of cases of occupational disease.
Articles 20 and 21. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would take measures, particularly in the context of the ILO/MATAC programme, to ensure the publication by the central inspection authority, within the time limits set out in Article 20, of an annual report on the work of the inspection services under its control, containing information on the subjects set out in Article 21(a) to (g). The Committee recalls in this respect that the central authority may find it useful to refer to the guidance provided in Paragraph 9 of the Labour Inspection Recommendation, 1947 (No. 81), on the nature of the information required.
Communication of the Government’s reports to employers’ and workers’ organizations. Noting that the Government does not indicate whether a copy of the report has been communicated, in accordance with article 23, paragraph 2, of the Constitution of the ILO, to the most representative organizations of employers and workers, the Committee requests the Government to provide this information in future, as required by Part V of the report form for the Convention and to report, as appropriate, any comments made by these organizations.
The Committee notes the Government’s report and draws its attention to the following point.
Prohibition on labour inspectors having any direct or indirect interest in the undertakings under their supervision. Referring to its previous comments, the Committee notes once again that the Government provides no reply as to how effect is given to Article 15(a) of the Convention under which labour inspectors, subject to such exceptions made by national laws, shall be prohibited "from having any direct or indirect interest in the undertakings under their supervision". The Committee cannot emphasize too strongly the need to envisage such a prohibition on a legal basis to ensure that labour inspectors have the necessary impartiality and authority required by their functions. Referring to a previous report from the Government indicating that a relevant provision had been provided in a draft decree but was not adopted, the Committee requests the Government to take appropriate measures forthwith, with a view to introducing into legislation a provision to this effect, and would be grateful if it would keep the ILO informed of the matter.
The Committee notes the Government's report for the period up to June 1999. The Committee also notes the comments made by the United Confederation of Workers of Honduras (CUTH) and the Government's response. It requests the Government to provide information and clarification on the application of the following provisions of the Convention.
Article 1 of the Convention. System of labour inspection. The Committee notes with interest the publication "New role of the General Labour Inspection in the process of integration and globalization", describing the project of modernization of the Labour Administration of the Central America region and the participation of Honduras in this project. The Committee notes that the Ministry of Labour has identified as a priority area in the process of modernization the strengthening of labour inspection (training, improvement of labour legislation, basic programme of information and social-labour statistics, elaboration of manuals of administrative procedures, general plan for the computerization of the labour statistics database). The Committee asks the Government to supply information on improvements in labour inspection activities due to the implementation of this project and on further developments in this area.
Article 3, paragraph 2. Duties entrusted to labour inspectors. The Committee notes, that in accordance with article 617(d) of the Labour Code, labour inspectors are obliged by duty to intervene in all difficulties and labour conflicts between workers and employers, so as to prevent their worsening and attaining conciliation. The Committee asks the Government to indicate the measures which have been taken to ensure that such duties of labour inspectors do not interfere with the effective discharge of their primary duties listed in Article 3, paragraph 1, and do not prejudice in any way the authority and impartiality which are necessary to inspectors in their relations with employers and workers.
Articles 4 and 5. Supervision and control by a central authority; cooperation. The Committee notes that the Secretariat of Labour and Social Security is composed of two inspection services, i.e. the General Labour Inspection and the Labour Inspection in the area of Hygiene and Occupational Safety. The Committee asks the Government to indicate how cooperation is organized between these two inspection services.
Article 6. Stability of employment; independence of changes of government and improper external influences. The Committee notes the indication of the Government that labour inspectors lack stability of employment since they can be removed from their posts as a result of a change of government. The Committee also notes the comments by CUTH stressing that labour inspectors should benefit from stability of employment. Recalling that stability of employment and independence of changes of government and improper external influences is an essential principle on which the efficacy of inspection systems rests and that inspectors cannot act in full independence if their service or their career prospects depend on political considerations, the Committee asks the Government to indicate the measures envisaged in order to give effect to this Article of the Convention.
Article 10. Number of labour inspectors. According to the CUTH, since the number of inspectors in Honduras is insufficient, the Government should increase it. In its report the Government states that the General Labour Inspection comprises 80 labour inspectors. The previous report indicated that there were 85 labour inspectors in the General Labour Inspection. The publication "New role of the General Labour Inspection in the process of integration and globalization" states that in 1997 in the Ministry of Labour there were approximately 125 labour inspectors. The Committee asks the Government to provide information on the current number of labour inspectors in both the General Labour Inspection and the Labour Inspection in the area of Hygiene and Occupational Safety and to indicate whether any measures have been envisaged to increase their number.
Article 11. Local offices, transport facilities, reimbursement of expenses. The Committee notes the Government's indication that the budget of the Secretariat of Labour and Social Security is scanty and does not permit compliance with the provisions of this article. The Government's report refers to the inadequacy, inter alia, of office equipment and transportation facilities. Referring in addition to the comments of the CUTH, pointing also to the lack of transport facilities, the Committee asks the Government whether any measures have been envisaged to improve the situation in respect of offices, the transport facilities furnished to labour inspectors and the reimbursement to labour inspectors of any travelling and incidental expenses which may be necessary for the performance of their duties. The Committee recalls that labour inspection is of fundamental importance in ensuring the application of labour standards and that it should be given the necessary priority in budgetary decisions. The Committee requests the Government to inform it of any progress made in this respect.
Article 12, paragraph 1(c)(iv). Powers of labour inspectors. The Committee asks the Government to indicate the specific provisions of the national legislation empowering labour inspectors to take or remove for purposes of analysis samples of materials and substances used or handled, subject to the employer or his representative being notified thereof.
Article 14. Notification of cases of occupational disease. The Committee asks the Government to indicate whether the labour inspection is notified of cases of occupational disease and, if so, to indicate the specific provisions of the national legislation determining the cases and the procedure of such notification.
Article 15(a). Prohibition from having any direct or indirect interest in the undertakings under supervision. The Committee asks the Government to indicate whether any rules have been adopted to give effect to this Article of the Convention and, if so, to provide the copy of the adopted rules.
Articles 20 and 21. Annual reports. The Committee notes that an annual report on the work of the inspection services in Honduras has not been transmitted to the ILO. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to give effect to these Articles of the Convention.
The Committee notes with regret that the Government's report has not been received. It hopes that a report will be supplied for examination by the Committee at its next session and that it will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous direct request, which read as follows:
Article 3(2) of the Convention. The Committee notes that section 8(e) of the draft Rules of the General Labour Inspectorate forwarded by the Government would give inspectors powers to intervene in labour disputes. It trusts that such duties would not -- if this provision is adopted -- interfere with inspectors' primary duties under the Convention. The Government might wish to consider the matter further in this light.
Article 12(1)(c)(iv). The Committee notes with interest that the draft Decree provided by the Government would give inspectors the necessary power to take samples of substances for analysis. It hopes the Decree will be issued soon and that the next report will include details.
Articles 10 and 16. The Committee notes that the Government has decided, instead of opening new regional offices of the labour inspectorate, to raise the remuneration of the labour inspectors. The Government reports that currently 14 of the 18 departments of the country are covered by the labour inspectorate. The Committee asks the Government to indicate in its next report what further steps are being taken to ensure that the labour inspectorate is able to discharge its functions throughout the territory.
Articles 11(2) and 13. Please supply a copy of the Manual de Viáticos referred to in an earlier report and requested in the Committee's previous comments.
Article 14. The Committee recalls that section 435 of the Labour Code and section 6 of the Legislative Decree No. 39 provide for the notification of industrial accidents but makes no reference to industrial diseases. Please supply a copy of any amending legislation or, if none exists, indicate what measures are being considered to give effect to this Article.
Article 15(a). The Committee notes that section 13 of the draft Rules of the General Labour Inspectorate would give effect to this Article of the Convention. It hopes that the Government will soon report that the draft has been adopted and asks that a copy of the adopted provisions be sent.
Article 17(2). The Committee notes that section 8(d) and (s) of the draft appears to give a discretion to labour inspectors to give advice as foreseen in the Convention. It hopes the Government will provide further details.
Articles 20 and 21. The Committee notes the data supplied in terms of Article 21 (except for (a) laws and regulations relevant to the work of the inspection service and (g) statistics of occupational diseases) for the years 1983-87. The Committee recalls that such data should be published annually and forwarded to the Office within three months of their publication. It hopes the Government will ensure that the requirements of these Articles are met in future.
The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the very near future.
The Committee notes the Government's report indicating that there have been no changes in the legislation. It notes that the report contains no information on the questions raised and requests made previously by the Committee. The Committee therefore repeats its previous direct request on application of the following provisions of the Convention:
Article 3(2) of the Convention. The Committee notes that section 8(e) of the draft Rules of the General Labour Inspectorate forwarded by the Government would give inspectors powers to intervene in labour disputes. It trusts that such duties would not - if this provision is adopted - interfere with inspectors' primary duties under the Convention. The Government might wish to consider the matter further in this light.
The Committee notes with regret that the Government's report has not been received. It hopes that a report will be supplied for examination by the Committee at its next session and that it will contain full information on the following matter raised in its previous direct request, which read as follows:
Article 14. The Committee recalls that section 435 of the Labour Code and section 6 of Legislative Decree No. 39 provide for the notification of industrial accidents but makes no reference to industrial diseases. Please supply a copy of any amending legislation or, if none exists, indicate what measures are being considered to give effect to this Article.
The Committee notes the information supplied in reply to its earlier comments.
The Committee notes that the Government's report has not been received. It hopes that a report will be supplied for examination by the Committee at its next session and that it will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous direct request, which read as follows:
Articles 10 and 16 of the Convention. With reference to its previous comments, the Committee notes from the Government's report that it is planned to open several regional labour inspection offices in order to extend inspection activities over the 16 Departments covering 89 per cent of the national territory. It requests the Government to supply in its future reports information on any progress achieved in this respect and expresses the hope that in the near future, it will be possible to regularly inspect all workplaces liable to inspection.
Article 12, paragraph 1(c)(iv). The Committee notes that section 2(b) of Decree No. 39 of 10 May 1982, to which the Government refers in its report, does not expressly authorise inspectors to take or remove for purposes of analysis samples of materials and substances used or handled. It would be grateful if the Government would indicate the measures that have been taken to give formal effect to this provision of the Convention.
Article 14. The Committee notes that section 435 of the Labour Code and section 6 of Legislative Decree No. 39, to which the Government refers in its report, only provide for the notification of industrial accidents, whereas, in accordance with this Article of the Convention, cases of occupational disease shall also be notified. It hopes that the Government will take the necessary measures in order to complete the national legislation so as to give full effect to this Article of the Convention.
Article 15(a). The Committee hopes that the Government will not fail to take the appropriate measures for the adoption of provisions prohibiting labour inspectors from having any direct or indirect interest in the enterprises under their supervision.
Article 17, paragraph 2. The Committee notes the Government's reply to its previous direct request and requests the Government to indicate whether it is left to the discretion of labour inspectors to give warnings and advice, instead of instituting or recommending proceedings, to persons who violate or neglect to observe the legal provisions that are enforceable by labour inspectors.
Articles 20 and 21. The Committee, noting that section 614(e) of the Labour Code provides for reports by the general inspection service on the results of its inspections, asks the Government to indicate whether these are general annual reports containing information on the subjects listed in Article 21 of the Convention. Moreover, the Committee draws the Government's attention to the fact that annual reports on the activities of inspection services should be published within a 12-month period after the end of the year to which they relate and be forwarded to the ILO. It hopes that the reports for the years 1983-86 will be forwarded in the near future.
With reference to its previous comments concerning the application of Articles 11, paragraph 2, 12, paragraph 1(c)(iv), 13 and 14 and the Government's replies in this connection, the Committee requests the Government to supply with its next report the Manuel de Viaticos and copies of Decrees No. 39 of 10 May 1982 and No. 49-84.