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

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

Forty-Hour Week Convention, 1935 (No. 47) - Belarus (Ratification: 1956)

Other comments on C047

Direct Request
  1. 2014
  2. 2009
  3. 2004

Display in: French - SpanishView all

Article 1 of the Convention. Forty-hour week. Averaging of hours of work. Further to its previous comment concerning the averaging of hours of work, the Committee notes that, while section 112 of the Labour Code limits normal hours of work in the week to 40 hours, section 126 of the Labour Code allows the averaging of hours of work in establishments that have to operate without interruption or in which it is not possible, for operational reasons, or it is not economically advantageous to comply with the normal working time arrangements for a specific category of workers. It notes that, in these cases, the average weekly hours of work over the selected reference period may not exceed 40 hours. However, the Committee notes that the Labour Code does not establish any absolute limit to daily or weekly hours of work in the context of such working time arrangements and that it does not establish a maximum limit for the duration of the reference period. It draws the Government’s attention to the negative effects that excessive daily or weekly hours of work may have on the health of workers and on the balance between private and working life. In this respect, it once again refers to the Reduction of Hours of Work Recommendation, 1962 (No. 116), which is intended to supplement and facilitate the application of the Convention. Under the terms of Paragraph 12 of this Recommendation, the calculation of normal hours of work as an average over a period longer that one week may be permitted “when special conditions in certain branches of activity or technical needs justify it”. Furthermore, Paragraph 12(2) provides that the competent authority or body in each country should fix the maximum length of the period over which the hours of work may be averaged. The Committee therefore requests the Government to provide detailed information on the working time arrangements introduced under section 126 of the Labour Code, including particulars on the number of workers and the type of enterprises concerned. The Government is also requested to indicate the measures adopted or envisaged to limit daily and weekly hours of work, and the reference period, in the context of these schemes.

Overtime hours. The Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that the performance of overtime hours is exceptional and only occurs in case of need related to the production process or for reasons of economic efficiency. However, it notes that section 121 of the Labour Code enumerates the cases in which workers may be required to perform overtime hours, but that there is no provision regulating situations in which the performance of overtime hours is permitted with the agreement of the worker concerned (for example, to enable the employer to cope with exceptional cases of pressure of work). In this respect, the Committee refers to Paragraph 14 of Recommendation No. 116, under which the competent national authorities should determine the circumstances and limits in which exceptions to the normal hours of work may be permitted permanently, temporarily or periodically. Furthermore, it notes that, by virtue of section 119 of the Labour Code, the hours of work performed by a worker engaged in more than one job with the same employer, or also engaged in employment with another employer, as well as hours performed by workers at home, are not considered to be overtime hours. The Committee refers, in this respect, to paragraph 79 of its General Survey of 1984 on working time in which it emphasized that “undue facilitation of overtime, for example, by not limiting the circumstances in which it may be permitted or by allowing relatively high maximums, could in the most egregious cases tend to defeat the Recommendation’s objective of a social standard of a 40-hour week and make irrelevant the provisions as to normal working hours”. The Committee therefore requests the Government to provide further information on the implementation of the provisions of the Labour Code regulating overtime hours, and particularly on the measures adopted or envisaged to limit the cases in which they are permitted. The Government is also requested to provide information on the daily, monthly and/or annual limits applicable to the performance of overtime hours.

Part V of the report form. Application in practice. The Committee requests the Government to provide up to date information in its next report on the application of the Convention in practice including, for instance, extracts from reports of the inspection services containing indications of the number and nature of the contraventions reported with regard to hours worked in excess of the 40-hour week; statistical information concerning the categories and numbers of workers to whom the principle of the 40-hour week has been applied; the categories and numbers of workers to whom the principle of the 40‑hour week has not as yet been applied, and the normal hours of work of these workers, and the number of overtime hours worked; copies of studies or official reports on questions relating to hours of work, particularly with regard to the reduction of working time in connection with new technologies or as an instrument of employment policy, especially in the context of the current global economic crisis; and, finally, information on working time arrangements envisaged in recent collective agreements.

© Copyright and permissions 1996-2024 International Labour Organization (ILO) | Privacy policy | Disclaimer