Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2009, published 99th ILC session (2010)

The Committee notes the Government’s report covering the period ending in September 2006, and received on 16 September 2008. It would like to stress that reports due under article 22 of the Constitution of the ILO should cover the immediate previous two-year period.

The Committee also notes the “report form for the Labour Inspection Convention, 1947 (No. 81)” for 2006 and the email sent on 27 November 2008 by the Government containing corrections to the statistics on inspection visits. The Committee would like to draw the Government’s attention to the obligation contained in Articles 20 and 21 of the Convention to ensure that an annual report on the work of the labour inspection services is published and a copy thereof communicated to the ILO and asks the Government to take the necessary measures to give full effect to these provisions. It would also like to refer the Government to Paragraph 9(e) of Recommendation No. 81 for an appropriate breakdown of such information.

Article 3, paragraph 1(b), of the Convention. Preventive activities in the field of occupational safety and health. The Committee notes with interest the Government’s information regarding different activities and projects of the labour inspection division in order to prevent future accidents, such as investigations and analyses of accidents and, concerning the field of research, the conduct of a feasibility study of the codes of practice system in the field of safety and health at work (a comparative legal analysis of the codes of practice in several leading countries such as the United States, United Kingdom, Germany, Australia, New Zealand and the Common European Market) in order to examine the possibility of establishing and assimilating a code of practice system in the overall system of laws, ordinances and as part of the safety and health legislation in Israel. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would keep the ILO informed of the follow-up of the investigations and analyses of accidents, in practice, as well as of the feasibility study of the code of practice system.

Article 3, paragraph 1(c). Participation of the labour inspectorate in the improvement in labour legislation. According to the Government, the labour inspection division is constantly involved in updating, correcting and legislating laws, ordinances and procedures in the field of safety and health. It indicates a number of legal provisions that have been amended as a result of such involvement (provisions in relation to escalators, working conditions at heights; conditions when working with hazardous chemical substances in general as well as in medical, chemical and biological laboratories; conditions when working in a noisy environment and with ionizing radiation; conditions in construction work, and when using mechanized scaffoldings and tower cranes) as well as inspection organization ordinances (provisions concerning environmental monitoring and biological monitoring of employees using damaging materials and a safety plan). The Committee notes however that the laws and regulations referred to in the labour inspection report for 2006 have all been adopted or issued between 1945 and 1999. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would give details on the content of the amendments to the labour legislation adopted in 2006 and referred to in its report, and send copy of the consolidated texts in force.

Article 5(a). Cooperation with other governmental bodies and institutions. Cooperation with the justice system. The Committee notes that the information communicated by the Government in reply to its 2007 general observation calling for effective cooperation between the labour inspection services and the justice system rather reflects the structure and work of the labour inspectorate in the area of enforcement of law. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide particulars illustrating the manner in which the labour inspection services, on the one hand, and public prosecutors and courts, on the other hand, are encouraged to cooperate with a view to strengthening the credibility of labour inspectors among the employers and workers (meetings and seminars or courses aimed at mutual sensitizing for the common objectives, exchange of information, number of cases referred to justice, number and type of judicial penalties imposed, delay in the treatment and execution of decisions, etc.).

Cooperation with the legal department personnel of the Ministry of labour. The Committee notes with interest that legal consultants at the Ministry accompany the labour inspection division in its current activities and provide consultancy on administrative and criminal aspects for the purpose of securing the enforcement of the legal provisions relating to the protection of the health and safety of workers while engaged in their work and of investigating the effects of processes, materials and methods of work on the health and safety of workers. It holds the view that these consultants could indeed contribute to a better understanding and efficiency in the discharge of functions of the labour inspectorate (they could for instance analyse relevant judicial decisions in cases where they are published and consequently advise labour inspectors in assessing the extent to which the relevant legal provisions are applied in workplaces liable to inspection). The Committee would be grateful, if the Government would indicate the number of legal consultants at the Ministry and describe their function in the consultation of the labour inspection division as well as the content, frequency and extent of these consultations.

Also noting that, according to the Government, the legal department staff is always welcome to take part in conferences and seminars organized by the labour inspection and preventive action division, the Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide details on the manner, frequency and content as well as on the participants of conferences and seminars organized by the labour inspection division.

Article 16. Frequency of labour inspection visits in establishments. The Committee notes that in 2006 labour inspectors conducted 21,216 workplace inspections which represent an average of 342 visits per inspector. The Committee would be grateful, if the Government would indicate the reason for the decrease in the number of inspection visits compared to 2003 and 2004 and provide explanations for the discrepancy between the total number of inspection visits (50,426) mentioned in the report form for 2006 and the number of mere inspection visits indicated by electronic mail (21,216).

It again requests the Government to provide a detailed breakdown by type of workplace and by legislative field covered (for example, occupational safety and health, child labour, etc.) and indicate the ratio of workplaces covered in relation to the number of workplaces liable to inspection.

Articles 17 and 18. Legal proceedings and incentives aimed at ensuring observance of the legal provisions on occupational safety and health. Incentive measures. The Committee notes with interest that a “friendly enforcement”, based on an award system as opposed to an approach of heavy punishment has been launched and has shown a significant improvement in employee safety behaviour. The Government indicates that, for instance, the use of protective gear has increased and management of all factories has expressed great satisfaction as regards the project. The employee reward system was defined so that each employee receives good points. Any safety error committed by the employee will cause a deduction of a point. At the end of a defined period, a graph is composed, containing those employees who are still left with points, whereas any employee that loses points reduces his chances of winning. The shift manager who receives the least amount of remarks from the project management will receive a prize. A shift manager with many remarks will be documented and a report submitted to the factory management.

Legal proceedings. The Committee notes the information in reply to its direct request supplied by the Government according to which the prosecution department at the Ministry of Industry, Trade and Labour filed 18 indictments against occupational safety and health lawbreakers, and is involved in 21 criminal suits still in advanced legal processing. In relation to the number of convictions, it indicates that 13 administrative fines were issued, which amount in total to 330,000 new Israeli shekels (ILS) (US$88,880). In addition, it results from the annual inspection report form for 2006 that fines imposed by labour inspectors, amount to ILS31,400.

The Committee would be grateful if the Government would complement such information by also indicating the number of convictions and the ratio of convictions compared to the number of infringements reported by labour inspectors.

Referring to the abovementioned “friendly enforcement” system as an alternative to deterrent punishment of workers, the Committee asks the Government to indicate whether the expression “lawbreakers” used in its report is only aimed at employers or if also workers can be held accountable for not complying with safety and health provisions at the workplace and to provide related detailed statistics in this regard. It would be grateful, if the Government would also indicate the number and types of enterprises which have been taken part in the “friendly enforcement” project as well as the type of rewards offered to “good employees” in this context.