Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2014, published 104th ILC session (2015)

Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 (No. 105) - Uzbekistan (Ratification: 1997)

Other comments on C105

Observation

Direct Request

Display in: French - SpanishView all

The Committee notes the Government’s report received on 1 September 2014. It also notes the observations of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), received on 31 August 2014, and the International Organisation of Employers (IOE), received on 1 September 2014, as well as the Government’s reply to both communications, received on 29 October 2014. The Committee further notes the observations of the Council of the Federation of Trade Unions of Uzbekistan (CFTUU), received on 24 October 2014. These observations were transmitted to the Government for its comments.

Article 1(b) of the Convention. Mobilization and use of labour for purposes of economic development in agriculture (cotton production). The Committee previously noted the allegations made by the IOE and the ITUC regarding the persistent use of state-sponsored forced labour of adults for purposes of economic development in cotton production. The Committee also noted that the Government refuted the allegations, indicating that workers called upon to participate in agricultural work are engaged through individual employment contracts, being paid for the work performed, in addition to receiving the wage for their usual jobs. The Committee noted further the information in the high-level mission report on the monitoring of child labour during the 2013 cotton harvest, of November 2013. The mission report emphasized that, since the monitoring exercise was limited to the scope of the Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention, 1999 (No. 182), the results obtained could not establish or deny reported practices of forced labour of adults. Nonetheless, the report states that monitors were in a position to note other issues relevant to the mandate of the ILO, for example with regard to the recruitment of the labour force to harvest cotton, the potential and consequences of mechanization on the labour market, and the realization of fundamental rights of workers, including the respect for the effective implementation of the present Convention. Against this background, the Committee urged the Government to continue to engage in cooperation with the ILO and the social partners, within the framework of a country programme, so as to ensure the full application of the Convention and the complete elimination of the use of compulsory labour in cotton production.

In this connection, the Committee welcomes the development and adoption of a Decent Work Country Programme (DWCP) in April 2014. The DWCP identifies concrete priorities, objectives, outcomes and performance indicators for the cooperation between the Office, the social partners and the Government during the period 2014–16. The Committee notes, in particular, the measures proposed in the context of the DWCP with a view to assuring that conditions of work and employment in agriculture, including in cotton farming, are in conformity with fundamental standards. To this end, the component of the DWCP on the application of Convention No. 105 establishes four indicators of performance, namely:

– a survey on working conditions in agriculture, including in the cotton-growing industry, contains recommendations to improve labour recruitment and retention practices;
– national law and practice is reviewed and monitored;
– number of labour inspectors that demonstrate improved knowledge and skills to recognize forced labour practices; and
– number of roundtables held on forced labour both for the business community and for representatives of local government and administration, educational institutions, trade unions and the media.

The Committee also notes that a round-table discussion was held in Tashkent on 6–7 August 2014 in order to discuss and elaborate practical measures to implement the agreed components of the DWCP, in particular with regard to ILO assistance to child labour monitoring during the 2014 cotton harvest and the implementation of the survey on recruitment practices and working conditions in agriculture and in cotton growing to be carried out in the near future. The Committee welcomes the above developments, which demonstrate the Government’s readiness to collaborate with the ILO and the social partners.

The Committee notes that, in its observations received in August 2014, the ITUC states that, in spite of certain measures taken by the Government, such as the adoption of the DWCP, the systematic use of forced labour in cotton production continued to affect farmers; public and private sector workers, including teachers, doctors and nurses; unemployed citizens; and recipients of public welfare benefits. According to the ITUC, the root causes of forced labour in the cotton industry lie in the system of total government control of the sector, which has a detrimental impact on farmers and the labour force mobilised by the State. The ITUC further alleges that, during the 2013 harvest, the Government once again assigned cotton production quotas, which, at the local level, were enforced on individuals according to the amount of cotton in the fields. Workers and farmers failing to meet the assigned quotas were faced with threats of dismissal from their usual jobs, loss of land and extraordinary investigations. For example, according to the ITUC, hospital administrations instructed doctors, nurses and other staff to pick cotton or contribute with approximately half their salaries to the cotton harvest, under threats of dismissal. Community inhabitants were coerced to pick cotton under threats of having their access to electricity and social benefits restricted.

In its observations submitted in September 2014, the IOE highlights that, through the acceptance of ILO technical assistance in 2013 and the adoption of the DWCP in 2014, the Government and social partners in Uzbekistan have demonstrated their commitment to enhancing cooperation with the ILO and other relevant organizations in order to adopt measures for the full application of the Conventions. In this regard, the IOE states that it expects the Government and social partners to continue to cooperate with the ILO in order to eradicate forced labour. The IOE also welcomes the preparation of a survey on working conditions in agriculture and emphasizes its view that the exaction of forced labour goes beyond the compulsory employment of civil servants and private sector workers during the cotton harvest, and includes farmers’ obligations to follow directives on land management, agricultural technology and farming systems. The IOE expresses its hope that the Government will provide the international social partners and the ILO with information on the results of the aforementioned survey, including statistics on the number of adults working in agriculture, the level of wages, whether cases of established forced labour practices were identified, and the penalties applied thereto.

The Committee notes further that, in its observations submitted in September 2014, the CFTUU provides information on a number of measures taken by the Government, in cooperation with the social partners, with a view to effectively implementing ILO Conventions with regard to forced and child labour, including through social dialogue, development of awareness raising campaigns, establishment of telephone hotlines, and technical cooperation with the ILO. The CFTUU also provides information on measures taken by trade unions in the lead up to the 2014 cotton harvest in order to improve working and living conditions of cotton pickers, and to ensure that no children under 18 years of age are involved in the cotton harvest. In this connection, the CFTUU indicates that trade unions held workshops in all provinces and districts with a view to informing civil servants, government officials, farmers’ councils, educational establishments, financial institutions and public associations on the requirements of ILO Conventions on forced and child labour, as well as on issues such as payment of wages and access to food, medical services and leisure activities for cotton pickers.

The Committee notes the Government’s statement, referring also to the definition of forced labour in Article 2 of the Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29), that the recruitment of workers on a voluntary basis for work in the cotton harvest cannot be considered as forced labour, since workers are free to terminate their employment at any time, may a situation of coercion arise. Moreover, in its reply to the observations made by the IOE, of 29 October 2014, the Government reiterates its view that individuals engaged in cotton picking are usually motivated by the possibility of supplementing their income. The Government also provides information on a number of measures taken to enhance cooperation with the social partners in the country, including with regard to the implementation of the ILO Conventions on forced and child labour. These include, for example, the undertaking of seminars on the implementation of international labour standards, dissemination of information on activities carried out to address forced and child labour, and campaigns to raise the awareness of both the population in general, as well as farmers and the business community on these issues.

Additionally, the Committee notes the Government’s statement in its reply to the observations of the ITUC that it has issued an official instruction to all concerned organizations on the prohibition of the forced mobilization of workers, without their voluntary agreement, for engagement in cotton picking. According to the Government, violations of this instruction are punishable with severe sanctions. The Government also indicates that steps are being taken for the institutionalization of voluntary recruitment of cotton pickers through labour market institutions. With regard to the reiterated allegations presented by the ITUC according to which public sector employees were required to sign new contracts containing a conditional clause on their voluntary participation in agriculture and farming work, the Government refutes the existence of an order or regulation providing for such condition. The Government also states that the current labour legislation allows for the temporary transfer of a worker to other activities, without the agreement of the individual concerned.

While noting the above considerations, the Committee observes that, for the purposes of Conventions Nos 29 and 105, the term “forced or compulsory labour” is defined as “all work or service which is exacted from any person under the menace of any penalty and for which the said person has not offered himself voluntarily”. In this context, “voluntary offer” refers to the freely given and informed consent of workers to enter into an employment relationship, as well as to their freedom to leave their employment at any time, without fear of retaliation or loss of any privilege. In this regard, the Committee recalls, referring also to paragraph 271 of its 2012 General Survey on the fundamental Conventions, that, even in cases where employment is originally the result of a freely concluded agreement, the right of workers to free choice of employment, without being subject to the menace of any penalty, remains inalienable. Accordingly, while temporary transfers of employment might be inherent to certain professions and activities, the Committee considers that the application in practice of provisions, orders or regulations allowing for the systematic transfer of workers for the performance of activities which are unrelated to their ordinary occupations (e.g. the transfer of a health-care professional to perform agricultural work) should be carefully examined in order to ensure that such practice would not result in a contractual relationship based on the will of the parties turning into work by compulsion of law. The Committee also points out that, although certain forms of compulsory work or service (such as work that is part of the normal civic obligations of citizens and minor communal services) are expressly excluded from the scope of the forced labour conventions, these exceptions are limited to minor works or services performed in the direct interest of the population, and do not include work intended to benefit a wider group or work for purposes of economic development, which is explicitly prohibited by the present Convention.

In light of the above, and in order to allow the Committee to ascertain that the recruitment and engagement of individuals in cotton picking is carried out in a manner compatible with the Convention, the Committee strongly encourages the Government to continue to cooperate with the ILO and the social partners, so as to ensure that the survey on recruitment practices and working conditions in agriculture, in particular in cotton growing, is effectively undertaken and its results subsequently disseminated. With regard to the Government’s reference to an official instruction on the prohibition of forced mobilization of workers for engagement in cotton picking, the Committee requests the Government to indicate how this instruction is enforced, whether any violations have been detected and, in the affirmative, to provide information on the sanctions imposed. The Committee once again urges the Government to pursue its efforts to ensure the complete elimination of the use of compulsory labour of public and private sector workers, as well as students, in cotton farming, and requests it to provide information on the measures taken to this end and the concrete results achieved.

The Committee is raising other matters in a request addressed directly to the Government.

[The Government is asked to reply in detail to the present comments in 2015.]