Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1994, published 81st ILC session (1994)

The Committee notes with interest the entry into force on 1 May 1992 of a new Organic Labour Act, and the information supplied by the Government in relation to its previous comments.

1. The Committee refers to paragraph 90(c)(iii) of the report of the Committee set up by the Governing Body to examine the representation made by the International Organization of Employers (IOE) and the Venezuelan Federation of Chambers and Associations of Commerce and Production (FEDECAMARAS), under article 24 of the Constitution, alleging non-observance by Venezuela of certain international labour Conventions. In the report the Committee of Experts is asked to examine section 387 (10 weeks maternity leave for adoptive mothers) of the new Organic Labour Act in the light of the present Convention.

In this connection, the Committee refers to its 1993 General Survey on Workers with Family Responsibilities, in which it refers to the objectives of the instruments as being to promote equality of opportunity and treatment in employment for men and women workers with family responsibilities as well as between workers with family responsibilities and those without such responsibilities. The General Survey explains that the inclusion in Article 1, paragraphs 1 and 2, of the Convention of the phrase "where such responsibilities restrict their possibilities of preparing for, entering, participating in or advancing in economic activity" introduces a condition to prevent making workers with family responsibilities a privileged group in relation to other workers, thereby giving rise to discrimination against other members of the workforce.

With regard to the question of whether the granting of leave only to adoptive mothers and not to adoptive fathers is contrary to the Convention, the Committee considers that discrimination against male workers cannot be inferred from section 387 of the Organic Labour Act on the grounds that it does not grant maternity leave for adoptive fathers. The Committee is of this opinion because the Act itself refers to the leave as "maternity leave" and because this provision should be considered in the context of the Act as a whole, and the Act makes no provision for male workers to have leave for the birth of a child in the family. In this connection the Committee refers to paragraph 124 of its General Survey. Furthermore, Article 3, paragraph 2 of Convention No. 156 defines "discrimination" in exactly the same terms as Article 5 of Convention No. 111 which allows special measures of protection or assistance provided for in other Conventions adopted by the International Labour Conference. The maternity leave for adoptive mothers in the new Venezuelan Labour Act comes under the measures of protection provided for in Convention No. 103 which Venezuela has also ratified.

2. The Committee refers to other aspects of the Convention in a direct request addressed to the Government.