ILO-en-strap
NORMLEX
Information System on International Labour Standards
NORMLEX Home > Country profiles >  > Comments

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

Mauritius

Workmen's Compensation (Agriculture) Convention, 1921 (No. 12) (Ratification: 1969)
Workmen's Compensation (Accidents) Convention, 1925 (No. 17) (Ratification: 1969)
Equality of Treatment (Accident Compensation) Convention, 1925 (No. 19) (Ratification: 1969)

Other comments on C012

Observation
  1. 2021
  2. 2016

Other comments on C017

Direct Request
  1. 1990

Other comments on C019

Direct Request
  1. 2011
  2. 1992
  3. 1988
Replies received to the issues raised in a direct request which do not give rise to further comments
  1. 2012

Display in: French - SpanishView all

In order to provide a comprehensive view of the issues relating to the application of the ratified Conventions on social security, the Committee considers it appropriate to examine Conventions Nos 12 (workers’ compensation, agriculture), 17 (workers’ compensation, accidents), and 19 (equality of treatment, accident compensation) together.
Article 1 of Convention No 12, and Article 2 of Convention No. 17, in conjunction with Articles 5, 7, 9, 10 and 11 of Convention No. 17. Scope of application of legislation on workers’ compensation. For more than 40 years, the Committee has been drawing the Government’s attention to the lack of compliance of the Workmen’s Compensation Act (Chapter 220), 1931, applicable to certain categories of workers excluded from the National Pensions Act, 1976, with the following provisions of Convention No. 17: Article 5 (compensation in the form of periodical payments in cases of permanent incapacity or death of the injured worker); Article 7 (additional compensation for injured workers who must have the constant help of another person); Article 9 (entitlement to the necessary medical and surgical aid, free of charge); Article 10 (supply and renewal of artificial limbs and surgical appliances); and Article 11 (guarantees in the event of the insolvency of the employer or insurer).
The Committee pointed, in particular, to the unequal treatment in coverage for work accident compensation that ensued for certain categories of workers, and notably for employees of the central government and of parastatal bodies and local authorities earning less than a prescribed amount and workers in the sugar industry. On this basis, the Committee requested the Government to conclude the merger of the Workmen’s Compensation Act (Chapter 220), 1931 and the National Pensions Act, 1976, indicated by the Government as a means to give effect to the above-mentioned provisions of Convention No. 17 since 1999, and to take other measures to bring the national legislation fully in line with Conventions Nos 12, 17 and 19 for all the categories of workers protected by the Conventions.
The Committee notes with interest the indication by the Government, in its report, that the National Pensions Act, 1976, has been amended by the Social Contribution and Social Benefit Act, No. 14 of 2021 (SCSB Act), which covers all industrial injuries and all workers who draw an income, without exceptions (sub-part III of Part III, SCSB Act). In this context, the Government points out that a merger between the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1931, and the SCSB Act, which has amended the National Pensions Act, 1976, is now being considered.
While taking due note of the adoption of the SCSB Act, the Committee observes, that, pursuant to its section 2, public sector employees are excluded from the definition of employees for the purpose of sub-part III of Part III of the SCSB Act, which regulates industrial injury benefits, and that apprentices under a contract of apprenticeship regulated by the Mauritius Institute of Training and Development Act are also excluded from coverage under sub-part III of Part III. The Committee further observes that the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1931, is still in force, which suggests that certain categories of workers continue to be subjected to an unequal treatment in case of industrial injury, and granted a lesser protection than that set out in the Conventions. In this respect, the Committee recalls that, pursuant to Article 2 of Convention No. 17, all workers, employees and apprentices employed by any enterprise, undertaking or establishment of whatsoever nature, whether public or private who suffer personal injury due to an industrial accident, shall be granted compensation, on terms at least equal to those provided by the Convention. As for Convention No. 12, it requires, under its Article 1, the extension to all agricultural wage-earners of laws and regulations making provision for the compensation of workers for personal injury by accident arising out of or in the course of their employment.
In light of the above, the Committee requests the Government to provide clarifications as to the provisions of its national legislation regulating the compensation of workers excluded from the scope of protection of sub-part III of Part III (Industrial Injury Benefits) of the SCSB Act, 2021, for work-related injury. The Committee requests the Government to specify, in particular, the provisions applicable to employees of the central government, parastatal bodies and local authorities, and workers in the sugar industry.
In the event that some workers are still covered by the Workmen’s Compensation Act, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that these workers and their dependents are duly compensated in cases of work-related injury, on terms at least equal to those provided by Conventions Nos 12 and 17.
Article 1(1) of Convention No. 19. Equality of treatment for non-national workers and their dependants. For many years, the Committee has been noting that non-citizen workers employed in export processing zones and who have resided less than two years in Mauritius were not considered as insured persons under the National Pensions Act, and were only entitled to work injury benefits under the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1931, which provided a lesser protection.
The Committee notes the Government’s indication that non-citizen employees residing in Mauritius are covered by the SCSB Act in case of an industrial accident. The Committee notes, however, that non-citizen employees, employed by an export manufacturing enterprise who have resided in Mauritius for a continuous period of less than 2 years, are still excluded from participation in the social insurance system which ensures protection against industrial injuries, pursuant to section 2 of the SCSB Act. The Committee recalls that Article 1(1) of the Convention requires that a ratifying member State must grant to injured workers who are nationals of any other member State that has ratified the Convention, or to their dependants, the same treatment in respect of workmen’s compensation as it grants to its own nationals.
The Committee urges the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that non-citizen workers employed in export processing zones who have resided less than two years in the country are granted the same treatment in industrial injury compensation as nationals and other foreign workers under the SCSB Act, 2021, in application of Article 1 of Convention No. 19.
Conclusions and recommendations of the Standards Review Mechanism. With respect to its previous comment, the Committee recalls the recommendations of the Standards Review Mechanism (SRM) Tripartite Working Group, based on which the Governing Body has decided that Member States for which Convention No. 17 is in force should be encouraged to ratify the more recent Employment Injury Benefits Convention, 1964 [Schedule I amended in 1980] (No. 121), or the Social Security (Minimum Standards) Convention, 1952 (No. 102), and accept the obligations in its Part VI (see GB.328/LILS/2/1). Taking note of the Government’s indication that due consideration would be given to ratification of most up-to-date relevant instruments, the Committee encourages the Government to follow up the Governing Body’s decision at its 328th Session (October–November 2016) approving the recommendations of the SRM Tripartite Working Group, and to consider ratifying Conventions Nos 121 or 102 (Part VI) as the most up-to-date instruments in the area of employment injury benefit, and reminds the Government of the possibility to avail itself of the technical assistance of the Office in this regard.
© Copyright and permissions 1996-2024 International Labour Organization (ILO) | Privacy policy | Disclaimer