Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 2014, Publication: 103rd ILC session (2014)



A Government representative expressed the strong belief that labour inspection was a critical instrument in ensuring better working conditions and a strong commitment to promoting labour rights, safety and welfare through an effective inspection framework. Referring to the observation of the Committee of Experts, he was pleased to inform the Committee that the Bangladesh Labour Act had been amended by the National Parliament in 2013. In the process of amendment, a wide range of comments from relevant stakeholders, including the ILO, had been consulted by the Tripartite Labour Law Review Committee. On the basis of tripartite consensus, most of the proposals had been incorporated into the amendment. The amended Act particularly focused on: (1) workers’ dignity, well-being, rights and safety; (2) transparency in trade union registration and the wage payment system; and (3) promoting trade unionism and collective bargaining. Effective implementation of the amended Act would require comprehensive rules after a wide consultation involving all relevant stakeholders. Consultations were under way with the relevant stakeholders.

With respect to the restructuring of the labour inspection system, the Government had completed, in an accelerated process, the restructuring of the Directorate of Inspection, which had become a department in mid-January 2014. The Directorate of Inspection had previously had only 314 staff members. After restructuring, the staff of the newly formed department had increased by more than threefold to 993 members. In the first phase, 679 new posts had already been approved for the department. Significantly, among these posts, 392 were exclusively for inspectors. Since May 2013, 67 inspectors had been appointed to fill the existing vacant posts complying with the existing procedures. The recruitment of additional inspectors was in progress. After restructuring, additional resources and logistics were being provided for the department. Regarding export processing zones (EPZs) and the Workers’ Welfare Association and Industrial Relations Act 2010, a high-level committee was actively working to prepare a separate and comprehensive EPZ Labour Act. A preliminary draft had been prepared and consultation on the draft with the relevant stakeholders was under way. The Bangladesh Export Processing Zones Authority (BEPZA) was responsible for ensuring the rights and privileges of the workers of enterprises operating in EPZs through constant supervision and monitoring by BEPZA officials and counsellors. All members of the elected Executive Committee of the Workers Welfare Associations (WWA) were actively performing their activities as Collective Bargaining Agents (CBAs). With respect to the measures to ensure effective inspection of the construction sector under the Bangladesh National Building Code (BNBC), responsibility for the enforcement of building codes lay with different administrative authorities all over the country. Those authorities were in the process of increasing their staff and providing modern equipment to ensure enforcement of the BNBC. Regular training was provided to building inspectors, fire inspectors and factory inspectors. Regarding labour inspection visits in Bangladesh, he stated that labour inspections were essentially carried out by labour inspectors and by special inspection teams. The labour inspectors also carried out confidential inspections. In case of non-compliance, appropriate measures were taken based on the observations from inspection under the Labour Act. Regarding occupational accidents and diseases, according to the Bangladesh Labour Act, registers were maintained by the factory owners for this purpose. Awareness-raising programmes were conducted for employers and directives were given to employers on a regular basis. In the recent restructuring process, the number of posts of inspectors had been increased to ensure occupational health and safety. He particularly wished to mention that the Government had already adopted a National Occupational Health and Safety Policy in 2013 to address issues related to the health and safety of workers.

He extended his sincere thanks to the ILO and other development partners for their technical support and assistance in improving working conditions in Bangladesh. The assessment of fire and electrical safety and the structural integrity of ready-made garment (RMG) factories was being carried out with the technical assistance of the ILO and other development partners, including brands and buyers. With the assistance of the ILO, a publicly accessible database system for labour inspection related issues had been launched recently. The development of another database system on trade union issues was under way with the Department of Labour. The ILO was also providing training and logistics for inspectors. Finally, a US$24.2 million project was being implemented to improve the working conditions in the RMG sector of Bangladesh. His Government deeply appreciated the constructive engagement of the ILO and other development partners for ensuring better working conditions in Bangladesh. In the past year, Bangladesh had done its best to mobilize its systems, resources and capacities to ensure labour rights, safety and security. Bangladesh would however need more time, understanding and support from all to achieve its objective.

The Employer members noted that this case had been double footnoted by the Committee of Experts, which had requested the Government to supply full particulars to the Committee on the Application of Standards. The context of this case was important for the Employer members. The shocking loss of life in the world’s second biggest clothing exporter had quite correctly forced private sector businesses around the globe to ask important questions about their supply chains and take more social and ethical responsibility. Given the context, the Employer members noted that the Bangladeshi employers, trade unions and the Government had quickly agreed on the steps that needed to be taken, including factory health and safety standards and details on how the reforms would be financed.

This was not a case in which there was a problem with cooperation with the ILO or requesting technical assistance. On 24 March 2013, the ILO had accepted a formal request to assist in the implementation and coordination of the National Tripartite Plan of Action on Fire Safety (NTPA). From 1 to 4 May 2013, a high-level ILO mission had visited Bangladesh to identify key areas for action which had resulted in the signing of a joint statement by the tripartite partners, which built on the NTPA. The Joint Statement identified key areas for action, such as strengthening labour inspection, worker and management training and awareness of occupational safety and health (OSH) and workers’ rights, rehabilitation and skills training of workers with disabilities. On 13 May 2013, two global unions (IndustriALL and UNI Global) and more than 150 international brands and retailers had signed the Accord on Fire and Building Safety in Bangladesh. This was a five-year programme under which companies committed to ensuring the implementation of health and safety measures. On 8 July 2013, the European Union (EU), the Government of Bangladesh and the ILO had issued the Global Sustainability Compact to promote improved labour standards, the structural integrity of buildings and OSH, and responsible business conduct in the RMG sector and knitwear industry in Bangladesh. The Compact built upon the NTPA and assigned an important coordination and monitoring role to the ILO. On 10 July 2013, the Alliance for Bangladesh Worker Safety had launched by 26 North American retailers and brands. It was a five-year programme under which the companies committed to ensuring the implementation of health and safety measures. On 15 July 2013, the Government had adopted amendments to the Labour Act to bolster OSH. The amendments gave special attention to the requirements of Articles 1, 4 and 23 of the Convention in order to enforce labour inspection with regard to health, safety and the protection of workers in the workplace. On 25 July 2013, the NTPA had been merged with the Joint Statement to form the National Tripartite Plan of Action on Fire Safety and Structural Integrity in the Ready-Made Garment Sector in Bangladesh. On 22 October 2013, the ILO had launched a $24 million programme aimed at making the Bangladeshi garment industry safer. The three-and-a-half year initiative focused on minimizing the threat of fire and building collapse in RMG factories and on ensuring the rights and safety of workers. On 22 November 2013, assessments of the structural integrity and fire safety of RMG factory buildings had officially commenced. On 15 January 2014, the Government of Bangladesh had upgraded the Chief Inspector of Factories and Establishments Office to a department, sanctioning 679 new staff positions in the Directorate, including 392 new inspectors. On 22 January 2014, training of the first batch of the newly recruited labour inspectors had started in Dhaka, focusing on capacity building.

The Employer members understood that steps had been taken to reorganize the Department of Inspection under a project, “Modernization and strengthening of the Department of Inspection for Factories and Establishments” (DIFE). Under the project, the Department had been enlarged, more inspectors had been appointed and the system of inspection improved. As required by Articles 9 and 14 of the Convention, they understood that the Government had appointed three categories of inspectors, namely medical, engineering and general. These inspectors provided technical expert services not only for the purpose of labour inspection, but also for the enforcement of legislation. The Employer members also understood that the Government had plans to work with the ILO to find ways of bringing EPZ areas under the purview of national labour law. More information in this regard would be welcomed. In supervising this case, it was necessary to consider the self-evident coordination problems that existed on the ground. The ILO had been working to achieve coordination between the National Tripartite Committee (Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology – BUET), Accord and Alliance in order to harmonize standards and methodologies and to avoid duplication of assessments. Indeed, when considering the request by the Committee of Experts for more information, it had been noted that, at the technical meeting of 15 May 2014 organized by the ILO, technical experts from the BUET, Accord and Alliance had agreed on a format for summary reports to be used by all three initiatives for publication of the reports to be published on the website of the Inspector General. The Employer members urged the Government to provide the requested full particulars, especially with regard to the technical assistance received from the ILO to date.

The Worker members recalled the unimaginable horror of the Rana Plaza disaster, which had claimed the lives of over 1,000 garment workers. This disaster had followed the Tazreen Fashions factory fire of 2012, in which more than 100 workers had been trapped inside the factory and had died in the fire or as they leapt from the windows in an attempt to escape. These preventable tragedies provoked soul-searching in government offices and corporate boardrooms around the world, as it became obvious that the status quo could no longer be tolerated, namely a global garment production system that placed workers, mostly young women, at a high risk of serious injury or death. The victims of those tragedies and their families were still waiting for respect and compensation. Those tragedies could easily have been prevented by an effective labour inspection system. In the aftermath of the Rana Plaza disaster, innovative initiatives such as the Bangladesh Accord on Fire and Building Safety, supported by global union federations and nearly 200 global apparel brands, had meant that garment factories were being inspected by competent and independent inspectors for the first time. Some foreign governments had also contributed resources to support a variety of new initiatives, some under the auspices of the ILO, including improving factory inspections. These were welcomed. However, efforts such as the Accord only became necessary because the Government of Bangladesh had failed and continued to fail to maintain an effective system of labour inspection as required by Convention No. 81. The Government had made some progress as it had upgraded the inspection unit to a “directorate” and had authorized new inspector posts and began to fill them. However, this progress had been frustratingly slow.

With regard to capacity, Article 10 of the Convention provided that the number of labour inspectors must be sufficient to secure the effective discharge of the duties of the inspectorate. Last year, the Government of Bangladesh committed to hire 200 additional labour inspectors by 31 December 2013, with a longer term goal of 800 inspectors in total. However, the deadline had not been met to reach this goal. There were numerous vacancies in existing posts which needed to be backfilled. The Worker members understood that there was a plan to hire the remainder of the newly authorized inspectors this year. The need for additional inspectors was extremely critical and the numerous delays called into question the Government’s sense of urgency, and ultimately, its commitment to setting up a proper labour inspection service. There were several additional limitations that would threaten the functioning of even a well-staffed inspectorate: (i) transportation for inspectors was extremely limited or non-existent and workers were aware that some employers were in fact paying for transportation costs, which could jeopardize the impartiality of inspections and any element of surprise; and (ii) neither the Directorate of Labour nor the Department of Inspection for Factories and Establishments had legal staff, and factories often hired experienced lawyers to fight charges, quickly overwhelming the under-resourced inspectors and investigators and causing violations not to be pursued. With respect to coordination, Article 5 of the Convention called for effective cooperation between the inspection services and other government services engaged in similar activities. Despite plans regarding building and fire safety, there appeared to remain a serious lack of coordination and cooperation among relevant government agencies and private institutions on this issue, or indeed any issues related to the matters subject to labour inspection. Officials of the labour inspectorate were supposed to collaborate with both employers’ and workers’ organizations. In this regard, the Worker members did not see the same dedication to collaborating with trade unions as with employers.

With respect to EPZs, Convention No. 81 should apply to all workplaces, with limited exceptions. However, the EPZs, in which over 400,000 workers worked, remained outside the purview of the Ministry of Labour. Thus, the Ministry did not carry out any inspections in the zones. Instead, BEPZA relied on roughly 60 “counsellors” which they claimed were akin to labour inspectors. However, workers had reported that these “counsellors” had not carried out inspections and at best handled grievances. Workers also found that they were not independent and were primarily concerned with protecting investors. Though the Government had promised to bring the EPZs under the Labour Act, rather than the much criticized EPZ Workers’ Welfare Association and Industrial Relations Act, it had failed to do so to date. The Government must immediately work to ensure that EPZ workers were covered by the Labour Act and that the Ministry of Labour could conduct inspections in the EPZs. This was particularly important given the ban on trade unions in EPZs and would empower workers to monitor and enforce the application of the labour law. With regard to enforcement, the inspectors did not have the power to penalize violators; they only could report the case to the courts. The fines available under the Labour Act remained negligible, for example fines for obstructing a labour inspector from carrying out his or her duties had risen from 5,000 to 25,000 taka (BDT), a mere $325. Penal sanctions were available in some cases, including for obstruction of inspectors, which was now up to six months of imprisonment. Fines for labour law violations generally still remained far too low to be dissuasive. Moreover, due to lengthy legal processes and corruption at all levels, the penalties for violations of the Labour Act were not adequately enforced. With the exception of the Rana Plaza case, the Worker members were unaware of any criminal proceedings pending for any violation of the Labour Act. The extent to which any penalties were imposed and collected was unknown, as the data was not available. The Inspection Department did not currently have any procedure to investigate complaints by workers or unions concerning violations by employers. Mandatory procedures for the Inspection Department should therefore be included in the Labour Act or proposed rules, with specific time frames. Investigations should be open and workers or unions be allowed to participate and to present evidence in support of their complaints.

Of particular concern to the Worker members was the wave of anti-union dismissals perpetrated by employers in the RMG sector which the inspectorate had failed to address. There had been much attention given to the fact that many new trade unions had been registered in the RMG sector after the Government reversed its policy of keeping the RMG sector free of independent trade unions. However, what had received less attention was the wave of dismissals. The leaders of many of these newly registered unions had suffered retribution, sometimes violent, by management or their agents. Some union leaders had been brutally beaten and hospitalized as a result. Entire executive boards had been sacked and up to now there had been no adequate response from the labour inspectorate.

With respect to transparency, Articles 20 and 21 of the Convention provided that the Government must issue public reports, at least annually, on the results of their inspection activities. However, reporting on inspection was infrequent and incomplete. In the RMG sector, where factories were being inspected by a combination of public and private initiatives, transparency on factory inspections left much to be desired. To date, the BUET, under the supervision of the National Tripartite Committee, had failed to publicly disclose any inspection reports. DIFE had established an RMG sector database which included factory names, addresses, owner names, number of workers, and the number of inspections completed. However, the database included no more substantive content, such as violations identified, fines and sanctions administered, factories closed or relocated or violations remediated. Only the private initiatives had published factory reports, and only the Accord had published them in English and Bengali. The Worker members were appalled that some factory owners were threatening lawsuits against the Accord for doing the job that the Government should be doing. Finally, with regard to health and safety, it was noted that, while the amended Labour Act provided for the creation of occupational health and safety committees, the rules and regulations had not been adopted. There was no further time for delay. While modest steps had been made, the Government of Bangladesh must act with a much greater sense of urgency and purpose than had been seen to date. Systemic reforms were necessary. If it did not commit itself to the construction of an effective labour inspection system now and take the steps to realize that commitment, labour violations of all kinds would continue. It would be only a matter of time before the next disaster claimed the lives of more Bangladeshi workers.

The Employer member of Bangladesh recalled that the focus of the 2013 amendment to the Bangladesh Labour Act, 2006, was to ensure workers’ welfare and safety, industrial safety as well as transparency in trade union registration and wage payment systems. In concrete terms, following the amendments: workers no longer needed to submit to employers the lists of workers intending to form a trade union; workers were entitled to form a participation committee through direct elections; employers and workers had the possibility of referring to external expert support in collective bargaining matters at the enterprise level; employers had the possibility to opt for the payment of wages through an electronic payment system; and mandatory safety committees were introduced in enterprises with more than 50 workers. It was also expected that the amendment would improve working conditions at the enterprise level through social dialogue. In this respect, there had been over 100 per cent growth in trade union registration in the first five months of 2014. Regarding the restructuring of the labour inspection system, the Office of the Chief Inspector of Factories and Establishments had been upgraded to a Department with offices in 23 districts and 575 inspectors. The post of the Chief Inspector had been upgraded to Inspector General. A total of 39 inspectors had since been recruited and the Public Service Commission had recommended the recruitment of 25 more inspectors. In addition, after the tragedy of Rana Plaza, and in response to technical assistance requested by the Government, the social partners, global buyers and development partners in Bangladesh, the Ready-Made Garment Programme had been developed with the objective of achieving immediate results through rapid action on building and fire capacity, as well as support to survivors. Long-term results were expected through the implementation of improved legislation on working conditions. The Programme was also designed to support interventions identified by the National Tripartite Plan of Action on Fire Safety and Structural Integrity of Buildings in the Ready-Made Garment Industry, as updated in July 2013, as well as to support the commitments of the Government formulated in the Global Compact for Continuous Improvements in Labour Rights and Factory Safety in the Ready-Made Garment and Knitwear Industry, which had been signed on 23 July 2013 with the EU and the ILO. The Programme, as well as the Better Work Programme had five components: (i) building and fire safety assessment to complete a fire and building safety assessment of all RMG factories; (ii) strengthen labour inspection and support fire and building inspection, which included the improvement of legislative and policy frameworks, the improvement of the structure and processes of both services; (iii) awareness raising on OSH through training of employers’ and workers’ organizations, as well as multimedia and education campaigns; (iv) rehabilitation and skills training for survivors of the Rana Plaza and the Tazreen tragedies without discrimination; and (v) implementation of the Better Work Programme. Referring to the concrete actions undertaken in the implementation of each of the above components, he provided detailed information on the assessments carried out by national technical committees and review panels, whose reports were published on the Internet, and the difficulties encountered with regard to communication. In light of the action described, statements indicating that very little had been done were incorrect. However, a lot of work still needed to be done. In particular, capacity building was a complex issue that required time, resources and good coordination.

The Worker member of Bangladesh indicated that labour inspection had been neglected. DIFE and the Bangladesh Fire Service and Civil Defence had been operating with inadequate staff and logistics. Moreover, the lack of effective coordination between the concerned departments prevented efforts to ensure industrial safety and the recent disasters could have been avoided if an effective labour inspection system had been in place. However, the Government’s immediate response and rehabilitation programme following these incidents was appreciated. While the Government had upgraded the Department of Inspection with additional staff, it needed to take measures without delay to complete the process of recruiting new inspectors. Without sufficient resources, logistics and proper training, the new inspectors would not be able to perform their duties effectively. The Global Compact for Continuous Improvements in Labour Rights should also provide inspectors with logistical support. The initiatives by the ILO as well as international buyers were welcome, and the Government would be taking immediate action based on the safety risks identified. It was necessary for the Government to ensure the establishment of factory-level safety committees, with the participation of workers and factory management. The new minimum wage in the RMG sector needed effective monitoring. While the revised Labour Act no longer required workers intending to form a trade union to inform the factory owner, this required further implementation. In addition, there remained provisions in the revised Labour Act that were not in line with ILO Conventions, and the Government needed to initiate consultations for further amendments. Effective measures should also be taken to bring work performed in the informal economy under the purview of the Labour Act, in consultation with the tripartite constituents. She expressed concern regarding labour rights in EPZs. While the Government had allowed the Labour Courts and Labour Appellate Tribunal to resolve grievances in EPZs, the Labour Act was not applicable in these zones. The Government should finalize the draft EPZs labour act without delay. Moreover, the online trade union registration process, the workers’ complaint hotline and the publicly accessible database should be made functional as soon as possible. In addition, the proper implementation of the Better Work Programme would assist in establishing a unique inspection modality in the RMG sector, and its implementation should be expedited. Lastly, it was essential for the Government to identify any violations of the national legislation and ensure that adequate sanctions were applied.

The Government member of Greece, speaking on behalf of the European Union (EU) and its Member States, as well as Albania, Iceland, Montenegro, Norway, Serbia, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Turkey and Ukraine, said that the Global Compact launched by the EU, the Government of Bangladesh and the ILO in July 2013 outlined commitments mainly related to the issues discussed by the Committee, including with regard to the Convention. The progress of Bangladesh in implementing several commitments under the Compact was to be welcomed, while sustained efforts were needed to ensure its full implementation. Amendments to the Labour Act were also to be welcomed and it was now important to implement legislation to follow suit. The Government needed to continue the modernization and strengthening of DIFE by restructuring and expanding it, increasing its staff and the training for labour inspectors. The Government should be encouraged to keep the ILO informed of any further progress in relation to those issues, as well as with respect to the proposed Labour Act 2014 for EPZs. The Government needed to address the remaining shortcomings identified by the Committee of Experts regarding the labour law reform, and to continue implementing the remaining outstanding commitments under the Compact. Commitments made to support and protect trade unions were also important as they had a positive impact on the work of the labour inspectorate. It was necessary to continue to support the Government in improving labour rights and factory safety, and to meet international labour standards, in collaboration with all stakeholders involved in the supply chain, including initiatives of global buyers. The decisive efforts of the Office to bring together the various relevant stakeholders to promote labour rights and safe workplaces should be welcomed and the Government was encouraged to avail itself of ILO technical assistance.

The Worker member of Canada referred to the campaign of the Canadian Labour Congress to push Canadian companies to join the Bangladesh Accord on Fire and Building Safety. He considered that a robust national inspection system was essential to prevent events like Rana Plaza. However, according to the statement from a trade unionist from the Bangladesh Free Trade Union Congress (BFTUC), limited progress had been achieved in labour legislation since the Rana Plaza tragedy. There was a wide gap between the promises made by the Government and the reality on the ground, in particular with respect to labour inspections. Although promises had been made concerning the appointment of 200 new inspectors, only 50 posts had already been filled. Besides, even if promises were fulfilled, the additional 200 inspectors would not be enough to cover adequately the high number of existing factories and the wide range of safety and health issues. It was urgent to increase the labour inspectorate’s human, material and financial capacity and to improve labour inspection reporting. Moreover, labour inspectors should be able to perform their work free from any pressure from employers. The labour inspectorate should also take adequate measures to compile independent data, evaluate its activities, address violations and prevent further deaths and injuries. He emphasized that in order to fully address the existing problems, it was essential for the workforce to be adequately informed, for trade unions to participate in capacity building and for labour inspectors to guide workers and employers in the implementation of the Convention. Furthermore, the recent establishment of the Tripartite National Health and Safety Council, as well as health and safety committees in factories, should help to inform workers and allow them to participate actively in the construction of a strong labour inspectorate. Workers and inspectors who reported violations should also be ensured adequate protection. The Government should give the highest priority to workers’ safety and health, which would enable the ILO to provide adequate technical assistance.

The Government member of Switzerland stated that his country endorsed the statement made by the EU, with the exception of the specific reference to the Compact between the EU, the ILO and Bangladesh. Switzerland supported the ILO’s action in Bangladesh, in particular its work under the Better Work Programme, and encouraged the Government to continue working towards strengthening labour inspection, OSH and the effective implementation of legislation with the support of all the partners to improve working conditions, particularly in the garment sector.

The Government member of the United States observed that the Rana Plaza disaster, which had occurred in April 2013, had highlighted the human costs of poor safety and unacceptable working conditions in Bangladesh’s RMG sector. In this respect, the Committee had stressed in 2013 that a climate of full respect for freedom of association could make a significant contribution towards the effective protection of workers’ safety. Indeed, at the Committee’s request, the Director-General of the ILO had submitted a detailed report to the Governing Body on the situation of trade union rights in Bangladesh which the Governing Body had discussed at its March 2014 session. The Committee was now considering the critical role of high-quality labour inspection in ensuring the effective implementation and enforcement of labour laws in making all workplaces safer in Bangladesh. To that end, a core element of the engagement of her Government and of the ILO with the Government of Bangladesh had been on the specific steps needed to strengthen the labour inspection system. She added that her Government had also provided funds to support workers’ ability to advocate for their rights and safety. She underlined the long-standing and serious concerns of the United States with respect to workers’ rights and working conditions in Bangladesh. To this effect and within the framework of the June 2013 Action Plan for the reinstatement of the Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) benefits and the July 2013 Global Compact for Continuous Improvements in Labour Rights between the EU, the ILO and the Government of Bangladesh, with which the United States was associated, her Government was engaged in ongoing dialogue with the Government of Bangladesh. In the discussions, which were focused on the RMG sector and EPZs, emphasis was put on the need to increase the number of labour inspectors, the improvement of the training of the inspectors, the establishment of clear procedures for independent and credible inspections, the increase of the resources at the disposal of inspectors to conduct effective inspections and the transparent publication online of inspection results. Furthermore, her Government had provided resources to the ILO technical assistance activities aiming to strengthen the labour inspection system in Bangladesh and supported programmes on workers’ awareness raising and training to improve their ability to organize and hence to provide input into safety and inspection processes. While acknowledging the Government’s commitment to improving compliance with international labour standards and welcoming the significant increase in the Government’s budget for labour law enforcement and its continued recruitment of additional inspectors, she considered that more action needed to be taken to ensure that the newly recruited inspectors received training, resources and full support from senior government officials. To this effect, it was also important that the private sector fulfilled its critical responsibility. In conclusion, the Government needed to continue to work with the ILO in the implementation of its commitments to comply with its obligations under the Convention, as well as to implement the reforms to the Labour Act. Moreover, it was also important to extend the authority of the Ministry of Labour and Employment to EPZs in order to secure improvements with regard to workers’ safety and the respect for their labour rights, particularly in the RMG sector.

The Worker member of Germany emphasized the importance of the implementation of the Convention by the Government. Despite initial progress, there was still an urgent need for action, and international enterprises, consumers and governments had to assume their responsibility. Many German enterprises produced in Bangladesh and had benefited from an underpaid labour force and poor working conditions. German enterprises producing in Bangladesh should be reminded of their corporate responsibility. Referring to the transparency requirement for carrying out labour inspections, he emphasized that labour inspections were not to be carried out for their own sake and that it was important that the results of the inspections were published and followed by appropriate steps, which was currently not the case in Bangladesh. Information and statistics had to be published with regard to the inspectors, the number of workers and enterprises, the inspections carried out, the violations reported and the sanctions imposed, and the number of accidents and occupational diseases. Finally, the transparency requirement was also important in the context of corruption as inspectors were accused of being open to bribery. Turning to the responsibility for labour inspections, he stated that the Convention clearly put the responsibility on the Government. While welcoming complementary inspections carried out in the framework of the Bangladesh Accord on Fire and Building Safety by actors other than the Government, it was important for the Government to fulfil its obligation to carry out inspections and not to shift its responsibility for carrying out inspections on a permanent basis. Finally, he considered that the Government should involve trade unions in its actions, as strong trade unions could make a significant contribution to effective and successful labour inspections and to preventing accidents in the workplace.

The Government member of Cuba expressed her appreciation for the information provided by the Government regarding the adoption of additional legislative provisions to enhance the protection of workers in the workplace and the improved efficiency of the labour inspection system, including by increasing the number of labour inspectors and inspections. The acceptance of ILO technical assistance and the express wish to work with the ILO, other international organizations and other countries to improve OSH demonstrated the Government’s will to prevent a repetition of serious accidents like those which had occurred in the past. She called for technical assistance to be continued, in particular to improve data management systems and training of labour inspectors.

The Government member of Sri Lanka stressed the importance of labour inspection to improve working conditions. With a view to strengthening labour inspection, the Government had to amend the labour legislation, restructure the labour inspection system and reinforce its human resources, enact separate legislation on EPZs, effectively implement the National Building Code and raise employers’ awareness on OSH issues. The Government had already taken certain measures in those respects with ILO technical assistance and needed to pursue its efforts in the future.

The Worker member of Japan, reiterating the important relationship between safe workplaces and respect for workers’ rights, recalled that the disasters of Rana Plaza and Tazreen demonstrated the vulnerability of those workers without the protection of strong unions. Some progress had been made in the country, including factory inspections under the Bangladesh Accord on Fire and Building Safety, but more needed to be done. Many new unions had been registered in the garment industry, but the Government was failing in its duty to protect the right of freedom of association and collective bargaining through efficient labour inspection. Therefore, many employers were refusing to sit at the bargaining table to negotiate with registered trade unions. Moreover, the minor improvements to the labour legislation had fallen well short of international standards. Hundreds of thousands of workers, the majority of whom were women, were still prohibited from establishing trade unions. For example, workers in a factory seeking to register their union in February 2014, had faced a strong anti-union campaign by the management. These workers, including trade union leaders, had been subject to intimidation and physical assault. He concluded by emphasizing that, without the protection of workers’ rights, there would be no guarantee of a safer workplace.

The Government member of Canada indicated that as a result of the tragedies which had occurred in late 2012 and early 2013, many efforts had been made in the area of labour inspection. Canada remained concerned at the dangerous working conditions in the garment sector, and expected that trading partners would ensure safe working conditions consistent with international standards. He noted the adoption of additional legislative provisions related to OSH, as well as the different initiatives undertaken, many of which were coordinated by the ILO. The Government was encouraged to continue to implement its National Tripartite Action Plan in a timely manner. While welcoming the recruitment and appropriate training of additional labour inspectors, he encouraged the Government to increase its efforts in this regard. Canada was committed to working with all stakeholders and was pleased to be one of the three principal supporters of “improving working conditions in the Bangladesh RMG sector”, an ILO project which stood ready to provide technical assistance and comprehensive training for labour inspectors. A skilled, competent and productive cadre of labour inspectors was essential for the Government to fulfil its regulatory role in an efficient and credible manner. The Government should collaborate with the social partners and the ILO for the effective implementation of the Convention by providing adequate protection for workers through safer workplaces as well as relevant statistical data on labour inspection activities.

The Government member of China noted that the Government of Bangladesh had revised the Labour Act and was developing a labour law to cover EPZs, in consultation with the relevant parties. The Government had adopted a national OSH policy, and was working to improve labour inspection in the construction sector. The labour inspectorate had been restructured and the number of labour inspectors had been increased. The Government was collaborating with the ILO to improve working conditions and labour inspection. This cooperation should be recognized, and it could be further improved in the future.

The Worker member of the United States, also speaking on behalf of the Worker members of France and Italy, said that Bangladesh suffered from a governance gap with regard to labour inspections, as the Government had failed to exercise political will, develop technical capacity and dedicate the necessary resources. Article 6 of the Convention provided that labour inspection was a state obligation, and nascent efforts to create such a labour inspectorate should be supported. This would take time to build, especially if labour inspections were not prioritized. While a force of 3,000 “industrial police” had been established in 2010 to investigate security and maintain law and order in industrial zones, there had not been a similar investment in labour inspection. Multinational brands and retailers had knowingly chosen to extend their supply chains into places where inexpensive labour, weak regulation and few workplace-based unions were central to the business model. In this regard, the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights provided that corporate responsibility to respect human rights existed independently of a State’s ability or willingness to fulfil its own human rights obligations. Labour inspection was the duty of the State, but where it did not fulfil that role, corporations and others might temporarily fill that governance gap. In Bangladesh, such monitoring was primarily carried out by private, voluntary, confidential and non-binding systems with little state presence, and the country had experienced workplace disasters resulting in the deaths of hundreds of workers. The multi-stakeholder initiatives being implemented would help in a transition towards a governmental labour inspection system that was tripartite, mandatory and binding, instead of unilateral, voluntary and unenforceable. Such private and voluntary inspection schemes weakened efforts to build a culture of mandatory government inspection and compliance. However, the Bangladesh Accord on Fire and Building Safety was an initiative that was moving in the right direction. It included workers, unions and employers and it held both brands and local suppliers throughout the supply chain financially responsible for conditions and remedies. Moreover, the arbitration process of the initiative meant that corporations at the top of the supply chain could be held accountable. Until the country enforced its national legislation, the Accord represented a rigorous, transparent inspection and enforcement mechanism to remedy violations. Corporate due diligence had a place in facilitating labour inspection, and broader representation by unions at the local, national and global levels should also guarantee that inspections included workers at all stages to address the root causes of workplace violations. Nonetheless, the Government needed to claim leadership of the regulatory system. It could not outsource regulatory functions to corporations and others indefinitely.

The Government member of India noted with satisfaction the 2013 amendments to the Labour Act of 2006, which focused on workers’ dignity, well-being, rights and safety, as well as the wage payment system, and on transparency in trade union registration, thereby promoting trade unionism and collective bargaining. Her Government also welcomed the upgrading of the Bangladesh Labour Inspectorate, which constituted a milestone in addressing working conditions and workers’ rights and safety. She valued the role of the ILO in providing extensive assistance to the Government of Bangladesh, and to employers’ and workers’ organizations in addressing issues related to workers’ rights and safety. She underlined the obligation of all member States to respect workers’ rights and to create a climate of trust for carrying out constructive consultations on these matters. She recalled that it was a privilege of member States to formulate and promulgate policies on these subjects which were implemented with technical assistance provided by the ILO. In conclusion, her Government supported the actions taken by the Government of Bangladesh to ensure better rights for workers and welcomed any tripartite agreement in this regard.

The Worker member of Pakistan indicated that although it had been revised in 2006, the national labour legislation remained largely based on outdated legislation dating from the period of British India. The implementation of the current legislation therefore needed to be assessed with respect to the health centres, the safety committees and the inspections undertaken and sanctions imposed by the labour inspectorate. It also contained numerous gaps, especially regarding the impossibility of forming unions in EPZs, as these had been replaced by ineffective Workers’ Welfare Associations, which was unacceptable. The Government should therefore not be exclusively concerned about foreign investment in the country, but should undertake comprehensive reforms so as to ensure the compliance of its legislation with international labour standards, so that EPZs were not beyond the scope of labour legislation, but effectively contributed to the economic development of the country in compliance with workers’ fundamental rights, and not to the enrichment of a minority who took the opportunity to pay reduced wages to EPZ workers.

The Government member of the Islamic Republic of Iran welcomed the progress achieved with regard to the restructuring of the labour inspection system, as well as the recruitment of new labour inspectors to increase the quantity and the quality of labour inspections. He also welcomed the adoption of a policy on OSH. He finally supported the measures to be taken to further improve the labour inspection system. In this regard, the continued technical assistance of the ILO was important.

The Government representative indicated that due note had been taken of the discussion, and reiterated a commitment to extending the inspection architecture of the country. Following the tragic Rana Plaza incident, various steps had been taken to address the remaining challenges, and steps would continue to be taken to meet the commitments made to the international community. This included the implementation of the Global Compact for continuous improvements in labour rights. The components of this programme consisted of: undertaking building and fire safety assessments; strengthening labour inspection and supporting fire and building inspection; building OSH awareness, capacity and systems; providing rehabilitation and skills training for victims of accidents; and implementing the Better Work Programme in Bangladesh. The Office of the Chief Inspector of Factories and Establishments had been upgraded to a Department, and the post of labour inspector had been classified as a Class 1 gazetted post. The recruitment for these positions was the responsibility of a public service commission, which was working very seriously on filling the vacant posts for inspectors. With the technical assistance of the ILO, basic training had been provided to the newly recruited inspectors. Moreover, the Government was organizing on a regular basis a four-week training course under the Department of Labour, and 143 tripartite training courses had been conducted. Labour inspectors had also received training on joint problem-solving techniques, compliance with fire safety and OSH standards, and the prevention of occupational diseases. Twenty-three special inspection teams had been formed to ensure safe working conditions in factories, and a publicly accessible database had been established. Through effective social dialogue, at both the national and international levels, efforts to improve working conditions for workers in Bangladesh would continue. In conclusion, he expressed appreciation of the constructive engagement of the ILO and development partners with regard to awareness raising, capacity building and the improvement of working conditions.

The Worker members indicated that there remained serious concerns with regard to labour inspection and the enforcement of labour law in Bangladesh. Workers still had little confidence that their rights at work would be fully respected and that an effective, independent labour inspectorate would work to effectively remedy violations of these rights. Bangladesh now received substantial donor funds and benefited from technical assistance programmes, and it appeared that one of the biggest obstacles to progress remained the lack of political will to address fundamental issues, as evidenced by the failure of the Government to address most of the points of the EU Sustainability Compact or the United States roadmap. In light of the numerous problems still remaining with regard to labour inspection and of the overall environment in which workers’ rights were violated with impunity, the Worker members called on the ILO to urge the Government to meet its short-term target immediately of 200 additional inspectors and to hire and train a labour inspection force of sufficient size in relation to the workforce. The ILO should also urge the Government to: amend immediately the law governing EPZs and provide any additional technical assistance if necessary; to amend immediately the Bangladesh Labour Act in conformity with the Convention, including enhancing the enforcement powers of inspectors and increasing fines for violations; issue the regulations giving effect to the 2013 amendments to the Labour Act; and ensure that inspectors had the resources necessary to carry out their work effectively. The Worker members also asked the ILO to provide technical assistance to improve the functioning of the judiciary, so that alleged labour law violations could be addressed fairly and quickly, and to send a direct contacts mission, undertaken in time to report to the Committee of Experts in 2014, to verify that the issues raised by the Worker members and the Committee of Experts were fully addressed.

The Employer members observed that the rich discussion showed that this was an important and serious case. The discussion had emphasized the importance of labour inspection, and particularly the need to improve the capacity of labour inspection services, as well as the importance of reporting. The case was of great significance for private sector supply chains in the RMG sector. It was important to note that much progress had been made, although much remained to be done. The Employer members emphasized that the establishment of a high-level committee to develop legislation for EPZs should be a priority and that the Government should avail itself of ILO technical assistance for this purpose. They noted that the staff of the labour inspection services had been increased with the appointment of additional inspectors. However, in view of the measures that were still needed, they urged the Government to continue availing itself of ILO technical assistance, and called on the Office to provide such assistance. It was also important to acknowledge that the Government had had to ask for more time, which was perfectly understandable in the context. The Employer members acknowledge that the Government was moving in the right direction with outside help. They urged the Government to continue to request technical and financial assistance to address the many capacity and political issues to improve the application of the Convention.

Conclusions

The Committee noted the oral information provided by the Government representative and the discussion that followed concerning the need to strengthen the labour inspection system, particularly taking into account recent serious events, such as the Rana Plaza building collapse.

The Committee observed that the outstanding issues in this case concerned: the strengthening of the human capital and resources available to the labour inspectorate, including transport facilities; sufficiently dissuasive sanctions and effective enforcement mechanisms; the adoption of regulations implementing the revised Labour Act; the protection of workers in export processing zones (EPZs); the promulgation of additional amendments to the Labour Act; and the publication and communication to the ILO of an annual labour inspection report.

The Committee noted the information provided by the Government on the progress made with respect to the strengthening and restructuring of the labour inspection system, including the approval of 392 additional labour inspection posts, the recruitment of 67 additional labour inspectors, and the conduct of a number of training activities. It also noted the Government’s reference to amendments to the Labour Act in 2013, following ILO technical assistance and tripartite consultation. The Government indicated that the regulations for implementing these amendments were currently being discussed and would soon be issued. The Committee further noted the Government’s indications that a separate and comprehensive Labour Act for EPZs was currently under preparation. Furthermore, a publicly accessible database for labour inspection had recently been launched with ILO assistance.

The Committee noted the reference to the various activities and programmes being undertaken by the Government and the social partners with ILO support, as well as those being implemented with other actors, such as: a major ILO initiative (including a Better Work Programme) aimed at improving working conditions in the ready-made garment (RMG) sector; the European Union Global Sustainability Compact for Continuous Improvements in Labour Rights; the National Tripartite Plan of Action on Fire Safety and Structural Integrity; the National Technical Committee; the Accord on Fire and Building Safety; and the Alliance for Bangladesh Worker Safety.

The Committee observed that while progress had been made, much remained to be done to strengthen the implementation mechanisms for ensuring the protection of workers. It urged the Government to recruit and train, without delay, a sufficient number of labour inspectors in relation to the workforce in the country, and to proceed without further delay to the recruitment of the 200 labour inspectors as the Government had undertaken to do in 2013. It also requested the Government to: provide for necessary resources for labour inspection; bring national legislation into compliance with the requirements of the Convention, in particular with regard to labour inspection powers and dissuasive sanctions for labour law violations; and improve the relevant enforcement mechanisms.

It expressed the firm hope that the regulations implementing the Labour Act would soon be issued so as to give effect to the amendments to the Act. The Government should prioritize the amendments to the legislation governing EPZs, so as to bring the EPZs within the purview of the labour inspectorate. The Committee also emphasized the need to coordinate with ILO support the various activities and programmes undertaken by the Government, the social partners, and those being implemented with other actors.

Highlighting the need for the availability of comprehensive inspection data, the Committee requested the Government to continue its efforts to collect such data, and to ensure that annual reports on the work of labour inspection services were published and regularly communicated to the ILO. These reports should include information on all the items listed in Article 21 of the Convention, in particular on workplaces liable to inspection, the number of workers employed therein, statistics on inspection visits, industrial accidents and diseases, violations recorded and penalties imposed.

The Committee urged the Government to continue to avail itself of ILO technical assistance for the purpose of implementing the above measures and expressed the hope that this assistance would strengthen the labour inspection system and enable the Government to give full effect to the Convention in the near future. In addition, it called on the Government to take urgent measures to ensure the effective implementation, in law and in practice, of labour inspection, with emphasis on EPZs. In this regard, the Committee invited the Government to accept a direct contacts mission that should report in time for the next meeting of the Committee of Experts. The Committee further requested the Government to report to the Committee of Experts at its next meeting on the measures taken to comply with the Convention.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2023, published 112nd ILC session (2024)

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2023, published 112nd ILC session (2024)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2022, published 111st ILC session (2023)

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2022, published 111st ILC session (2023)

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

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

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2020, published 109th ILC session (2021)

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2020, published 109th ILC session (2021)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2019, published 109th ILC session (2021)

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2019, published 109th ILC session (2021)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2018, published 108th ILC session (2019)

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2018, published 108th ILC session (2019)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2017, published 107th ILC session (2018)

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2017, published 107th ILC session (2018)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2016, published 106th ILC session (2017)

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2016, published 106th ILC session (2017)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2015, published 105th ILC session (2016)

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2015, published 105th ILC session (2016)

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

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

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2013, published 103rd ILC session (2014)

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2013, published 103rd ILC session (2014)

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2010, published 100th ILC session (2011)

The Committee notes the Government’s reports for 2008 and 2010. According to the Government, the latest report incorporates the comments of the Bangladesh Employers’ Federation (BEF). The Committee also notes the observations of the National Coordination Committee for Workers’ Education (NCCWE) transmitted with the Government’s report, as well as the communications of the Bangladesh Free Trade Union Congress (BFTUC) dated 31 August 2008 and 26 August 2010, which are based on the 2010 report of the Bangladesh Occupational Safety, Health and Environment Foundation (OSHE).

Further to its previous comments, the Committee notes with satisfaction that the level of penalties to be imposed for violations of labour legislation has significantly increased (see below, Article 18): The Bangladesh Labour Act (BLA) now provides for a maximum fine of 25,000 taka (approximately US$356) whereas the repealed 1965 Factories Act only provided for a maximum fine of 1,000 taka (approximately US$14).

Articles 1, 2 and 4 of the Convention. Safety and health legislation and functioning of the system of labour inspection. The Committee notes with interest that the BLA came into force in October 2006 and replaced 26 Acts, 14 Ordinances and about 35 rules and regulations, repealing among others, the 1965 Factories Act. The Act has considerably enlarged the scope of the Factories Act 1965, which applied only to factories. The new Act applies to all “establishments” defined very widely to include “shops, commercial establishments, industrial establishments or premises in which workers are employed for the purpose of carrying on any industry” (section 2(31)); “industry” is defined as meaning “[a]ny business, trade, manufacturer, calling service employment or occupation” (section 2(69)); the Act also applies to the construction industry (section 6(61)(i)). In particular, the Committee notes with interest that section 2(7) extends the scope of labour inspection to factories employing more than five workers (in contrast with the previous Act, which only covered factories employing more than ten workers).

According to the BFTUC’s comments in 2008 and 2010, while the wider scope of application of the BLA, which is currently under revision, has considerable additional impact in terms of other obligations relating to payment of wages and trade union rights, it does not represent a reform in terms of safety and health obligations. In the view of the BFTUC, the safety and health obligations in the BLA are not relevant to the conditions of workplaces other than factories (construction sites, shops, offices, etc.), due to the fact that these obligations are worded in terms almost identical to those of the Factories Act and no additional provisions which take into account the specific safety and health requirements in the various sectors now covered by the BLA have been included in the Act. The Committee requests the Government to make any observations it considers relevant in relation to the comments of the BFTUC and NCCWE and to indicate the impact of the BLA in terms of the labour inspection activities by economic sector, in particular, numbers of visits and their outcomes, as well as statistics of the violations detected, sanctions imposed and occupational accidents and diseases recorded. The Committee also requests the Government to forward any legal text adopted in the process of reviewing the BLA.

Construction sector. According to the 2010 communication of the BFTUC, at the same time as the BLA was enacted, the Government also “gazetted” the Bangladesh National Building Code (BNBC), which was drafted as early as 1993. The BNBC became law in November 2006. It contains specific health and safety provisions for the construction sector and provides for the establishment of an agency responsible for the enforcement of the code, which does not come under the responsibility of the Department of Inspection for Factories and Establishments at the Ministry for Labour and Employment (DIFE). However, the BFTUC indicates that such an inspectorate or agency has not been established so far despite the high number of fatal casualties in the sector (106 registered deaths in 2009). The Committee requests the Government to make any comments it deems appropriate in relation to the allegations of the BFTUC. It also requests the Government to furnish a copy of the BNBC and to specify its relationship to the BLA. Please also indicate the measures taken or envisaged to ensure that the construction sector is effectively inspected, and provide relevant statistical data regarding inspection visits and their outcomes, as well as occupational accidents and diseases in this sector.

Labour inspection in export processing zones (EPZs). The Committee notes that, according to the NCCWE, EPZs are totally excluded from the labour law and there is a separate Act for workers in EPZs, which includes limitations for inspection. The Committee requests the Government to make any observations it considers relevant to the comments of the BFTUC and NCCWE, to specify the body responsible for inspection in EPZs, to give an overview of its activities (inspection visits, violations reported, legal provisions concerned, types of sanctions imposed) and to provide relevant statistical data.

Article 3(1)(b) and (c). Provision of technical advice to workers and employers. The Committee notes that the BFTUC continues to deplore that labour inspectors fail to provide sufficient advice and guidance to employers and indicates that no advice or guidance literature for workers and employers has been produced by the Government. It points out that the BLA – in the same way as the repealed Factories Act 1965 – does not explicitly entrust labour inspectors with the function of providing advice and guidance to employers and workers. However, the Committee notes from an annotated version of the BLA available at the ILO that, as a result of case law, inspectors are expected to give advice and guidance in the course of the discharge of their enforcement duties. Recalling that enforcement and the provision of information and advice are two inseparable functions of a labour inspection system, the Committee requests the Government to provide detailed information on the activities of the labour inspectorate in relation to the provision of information and advice and to indicate the legislative and practical measures taken or envisaged to promote a more active role of labour inspectors in guiding and advising workers and employers, especially on the recently adopted labour legislation.

In this context, and further to its previous comments (in 2006), the Committee once again asks the Government to provide copies of the basic texts of the project “Improvement of the working environment, health and safety in factories” carried out in collaboration with the World Health Organization, together with information on the progress made in the framework of this project in terms of cooperation with the social partners to improve health and safety conditions at work and in terms of reducing the number of industrial accidents and cases of occupational disease.

Article 3(2). Additional functions entrusted to labour inspectors. The Committee notes that, according to Chapter XX, section 317(3)(e) of the BLA, labour inspectors are entrusted with the function of conciliation in industrial disputes. As indicated in paragraphs 72–74 of the General Survey of 2006 on labour inspection, the Committee would like to stress that conciliation is not among the duties of the labour inspectorate as defined in Article 3(1) of the Convention. It recalls the importance of avoiding overburdening inspectorates with tasks which by their nature may be understood as incompatible with their primary function of enforcing legal provisions, as provided for in Article 3(2). The assignment of the conciliation of industrial disputes to any other body or officials would enable labour inspectors to carry out their supervisory function more consistently, resulting in better enforcement of labour legislation and hence a lower incidence of labour disputes. In this regard, the Committee draws the Government’s attention to Paragraph 8 of the Labour Inspection Recommendation, 1947 (No. 81), according to which “the functions of labour inspectors should not include that of acting as conciliator or arbitrator in proceedings concerning labour disputes”. The Committee thus requests the Government to take all the necessary legislative and practical measures to relieve labour inspection staff of all conciliation duties and to enable labour inspectors to devote themselves more fully to supervising the legislation on working conditions and the protection of workers, in conformity with Article 3(2).

Article 5(b) Collaboration with workers’ and employers’ organizations. The Committee notes that section 323 of the BLA provides for the establishment of a tripartite national council for industrial health and safety and that section 323(2)(j) provides that the current labour chief inspector will be a member and secretary of this council. It further notes with interest that, according to the communication of the BFTUC in 2010, the Tripartite National Industrial Health and Safety Council has been set up and has elaborated a national policy for occupational safety and health in industrial establishments. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide a copy of any document relating to the national policy for occupational safety and health, together with information on its application in practice. It asks the Government to provide information on any other activities of the Council in relation to labour inspection and a copy of any relevant documentation.

Article 14. Notification of industrial accidents and occupational diseases. Further to its previous comments, in which it asked the Government to take steps to secure the adoption of legal provisions setting forth the instances and the manner in which the labour inspectorate must be informed of cases of occupational diseases, the Committee notes with interest that the BLA contains, in sections 80 and 82, a reporting obligation for employers with regard to both occupational accidents and occupational diseases and provides in section 290 for a penalty for the failure of employers to give notice of an occupational accident. It further notes that, whereas section 80 provides for the period in which the labour inspectorate must be informed of industrial accidents, as far as the reporting of occupational diseases is concerned, section 82 provides that the form and time limits for the notification of occupational diseases shall be regulated by rules. The Committee notes, however that, according to information communicated by the BFTUC in 2008, the reporting of occupational accidents does not function well in practice and that the registered numbers do not seem to correspond with actual fatalities. The Committee requests the Government to make any comment it considers relevant on the points raised by the BFTUC. It asks the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged, including the rules to be issued under section 82 of the BLA, for the notification of occupational diseases, and to provide information on any progress in the development of a relevant system and its implementation in practice. The Committee would like to draw the Government’s attention in this regard to the ILO code of practice on the recording and notification of occupational accidents and diseases, published in 1996, which contains useful recommendations intended for those responsible for the reporting, recording and notification of occupational accidents and diseases and which can be found at: www.ilo.org/safework/normative/codes/lang--en/docName--WCMS_
107800/index.htm.

Articles 6 and 15(c). Probity of labour inspectors and duty of confidentiality in relation to complaints. Further to their previous comments, the BFTUC and the NCCWE continue to question the probity of inspectors who, after the reform of the BLA, are still under no legal obligation to refrain from disclosing the identity of the author of a complaint or from indicating that an inspection took place as a result of a complaint. While the Government states that, in practice, inspectors do not disclose the identity of the complainant, the trade unions indicate that workers prefer not to report breaches of the law by employers for fear of reprisals. The Committee recalls that the granting of the appropriate status and conditions of service to labour inspectors, including appropriate wages and career prospects, in accordance with Article 6, and the obligation for labour inspectors to comply with the duty of confidentiality, under Article 15(c), are essential safeguards against improper behaviour. It notes that, although under the terms of section 334 of the BLA inspectors shall be deemed to be public servants, there has been no apparent progress with regard to the issues raised previously by the BFTUC concerning the level of their salary and the absence of career prospects. The Committee asks the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to ensure that the conditions of service of inspectors are such that they are assured of stability of employment and independence from any improper external influence, especially through appropriate wage levels and career prospects. Furthermore, the Committee requests the Government to take, without delay, appropriate steps aimed at supplementing the law to ensure that the duty of confidentiality regarding the existence of a complaint and its source is duly respected by labour inspectors. It asks the Government to keep the ILO informed of the progress made and to provide any text governing the conditions of service of labour inspectors.

Articles 7, 10, 11 and 16. Human and material resources of the labour inspectorate. Training of labour inspectors. According to the BFTUC, while the budget allocation to labour inspection has further increased, it represents a mere 0.004 per cent of total government expenditure. The BFTUC is of the view that the lack of financing of the labour inspectorate has less to do with the lack of resources and more with the lack of interest and commitment over the years to improving workers’ safety. The NCCWE also refers to the lack of authority and accountability of the labour inspection department. While a table included in the observations made by the BTFUC shows that the number of labour inspectors has risen from 78 in 2006 to 93 in 2010, the trade union regrets the absence of significant progress in giving effect to the repeated commitments of the Government to increase labour inspection staff, and especially the staff of the occupational safety and health inspectorate where numbers have remained the same over the last 26 years. The Committee notes that the Government, in its 2010 report, acknowledges that the number of labour inspectors is insufficient in relation to the number of workplaces liable to inspection which, according to the 2010 communication by the BTFUC, has further increased, without providing information concerning its indication in its 2008 report that 48 new labour inspectors would be recruited.

Moreover, according to the comments made by the BFTUC and the NCCWE in 2010, the Government has failed to take any visible steps to modernize the infrastructure of the labour inspectorate. Despite the acquisition of some new sound and light equipment through an international donor, there continues to be a lack of logistical support (transport facilities, training materials, necessary equipments for examinations or testing). With regard to the allegations previously made by the BFTUC, the Government acknowledges the lack of proper vehicles, but refers, in a general manner, to the provision of travelling allowances to labour inspectors and denies that employers cover any travelling expenses of labour inspectors.

Finally, the Committee notes that the BFTUC again refers to the inadequacy of training in the light of the rapid changes in technology and methods of work in all sectors of the economy. It notes in this regard the information provided by the Government in 2008 and 2010 that, in addition to the initial one-month training at the Industrial Relations Institute (IRI) and the 15 days’ in-house training offered by the senior officials of the DIFE, labour inspectors are provided with regular training courses by the IRI and other government training institutions, as well as training financed by organizations such as the German Society for Technical Cooperation (GTZ) or the ILO. It, however, acknowledges that inspectors are not sufficiently trained for the discharge of their duties. The Committee encourages the Government to do its utmost to furnish the labour inspectorate with the resources that it needs to operate effectively, if necessary within the framework of international financial cooperation, in order to ensure that the number of labour inspectors is adequate in relation to the number of workplaces liable for inspection (Article 10 of the Convention), that they are provided with the material means and transport facilities necessary for the performance of their duties (Article 11) and that they receive adequate training for the performance of their duties (Article 7(3)). The Government is requested to provide information on:

–           the total number of labour inspectors and their distribution at headquarters and in the various field, regional and branch offices, in relation to the number of workplaces liable to inspection and the workers employed therein, as provided for in Article 10(a)(i) and (ii);

–           the amounts and conditions for the reimbursement of travel costs and allowances to labour inspectors, including a copy of a reimbursement form; and

–           the frequency, content and duration of training, as well as the number of participants and the practical impact of such training.

Article 12(1). Right of inspectors to enter workplaces freely. The Committee notes the repeated indications by the BFTUC that employers are informed of the date of intended inspection visits. The Committee would like to draw the Government’s attention to the fact that it is important that there should be no prior notification of inspection visits to the employer or her or his representative, unless the labour inspector deems such notification necessary for the effectiveness of the control to be performed. The Committee asks the Government to take the necessary steps to secure the full effect in law and in practice of Article 12(1) of the Convention and to provide a copy of any relevant legal or administrative text adopted to this end.

Article 17. Prompt legal proceedings. Modifications in the procedure for the prosecution of violations of national labour provisions. The Committee notes that there have been some modifications in the procedure for the prosecution of violations of national labour provisions. Whereas, under section 107(2) of the 1965 Factories Act, only the magistrate’s court had jurisdiction over an offence under this Act or any rules or orders made thereunder, section 313(1) of the BLA now establishes the jurisdiction of labour courts for offences under the BLA. Further, whereas under section 107(1) of the Factories Act, prosecutions could only be initiated by labour inspectors, under section 313(2) of the BLA, aggrieved workers and trade unions can now also initiate court proceedings. The Committee notes the suggestions made by the BFTUC with regard to the prosecution of breaches of labour law, namely: (i) the creation of more labour courts, in addition to the seven labour courts already existing in the country, which might be far away from the main office; and (ii) the recruitment of lawyers to represent inspectors in the filing and prosecuting of cases which, according to the BFTUC, is a function that is extremely time consuming. The Committee further notes that the trade union regrets that no prosecutions involving breaches of health and safety duties have been filed under the BLA in three of the seven labour courts. The Committee asks the Government to provide information on the total number of cases filed by labour inspectors, and to provide particulars of the classification of such infringements according to the legal provisions to which they relate, and to ensure that this information is included in the annual report sent to the ILO. Further, the Committee would be grateful if the Government would send any information or comments in reply to the suggestions made by the BFTUC.

Article 18. Adequate penalties. With regard to the increase of the level of penalties noted at the beginning of this comment, the Committee further notes that the BLA also introduces new offences for violations, for example as regards the causing of fatalities and serious bodily injuries by employers through the breach of an obligation under the BLA, or the failure by employers to report an occupational accident. The Committee asks the Government once again to provide available information on the number and level of the penalties imposed for offences reported by labour inspectors and to ensure that this information is included in the annual report sent to the ILO. Please also indicate the impact of the increased penalties on the observance of labour law.

Articles 20 and 21. Publication of an annual report. According to the Government, the collection of comprehensive data for the publication of regular annual reports is hampered by the low number of labour inspectors and inspection visits. Noting, however, that the Government is aware of the importance of keeping registers containing useful data, the Committee would like to stress that one of the aims of Articles 20 and 21 is to allow the central inspection authority to gather the information needed to determine, in the light of the social and economic objectives of labour inspection, the resources required to operate the services efficiently and to submit appropriate budgetary proposals for the attainment of these objectives. Referring to its comment under Articles 7, 10, 11 and 16, the Committee once again emphasizes the importance of increasing the budget allocated to the labour inspectorate. It again asks the Government to take the necessary measures for the establishment of a register of workplaces liable to inspection and of the workers employed therein (particularly through inter-institutional cooperation as recommended in its 2009 general observation), and to provide information on any measures taken for this purpose, with a view to the fulfilment by the central inspection authority of its obligation to publish and transmit to the International Labour Office an annual report in accordance with Articles 20 and 21 of the Convention.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2008, published 98th ILC session (2009)

The Committee notes the Government’s report received by the ILO on 29 September 2008 in reply to its comments of 2006. It also notes that the Bangladesh Free Trade Union Congress (BFTUC) issued a comment on 30 August 2008 concerning the application of this Convention, which the ILO sent to the Government on 17 September. The Committee will examine the Government’s report together with the comment from the trade union organization, as well as any comment which the Government may wish to make on the matters raised by it, at its next session.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2006, published 96th ILC session (2007)

The Committee refers the Government to its observation and requests it to provide information on the following matters.

1. Legislation enforceable by labour inspectors. The Committee notes with interest the adoption of a new Labour Code. It would be grateful if the Government would indicate whether the new Code is now in force, and to provide a copy of it.

2. Articles 10 and 16 of the Convention. Appropriate numbers of labour inspectors. The Committee notes that in reply to its previous comments, the Government states its firm intention of increasing the labour inspectorate both in quality and in quantity, and that a concrete proposal of the Inspection Directorate is under consideration by the Government. It also states that ILO technical assistance could make an important contribution to improving the effectiveness of the labour inspection system, inter alia, through appropriate training for human resource development and the provision of modern technology for the Inspection Directorate. The Committee hopes that the Government will not fail to indicate the measures taken to put its intentions into effect and that it will report on them to the ILO. It asks the Government also to provide all useful information on any progress made and on difficulties encountered. Please also provide particulars of the strength of the labour inspectorate, its geographical distribution and, if appropriate, the distribution of duties.

With reference to its previous comments, the Committee again asks the Government to supply information on the effect given to the proposal by the Bangladesh Employers’ Federation regarding its involvement in inspection activities, referred to by the Government in its report for 2001, and to provide details on the purpose, extent and implications of such involvement if it already exists.

3. Articles 3(b), 13 and 14. Health and safety protection. The Committee notes that the Government is committed to ensuring decent working conditions at workplaces, which should be free from all hazards, including occupational accidents and diseases. Noting the information that the relevant legal provisions are being amended accordingly and that the number of medical inspectors is being increased, it requests the Government to provide copies of the relevant legal provisions in the versions currently in force.

The Committee notes with interest that the Inspection Directorate of the Government is conducting a series of training programmes under a project entitled “Improvement of the working environment, health and safety in the factories”, in collaboration with the World Health Organization (WHO) and that a project on occupational safety and health is being implemented by the Health Directorate of the Government in which the Department of Labour and the Inspection Directorate are participating regularly. The Committee asks the Government to provide copies of the basic texts of the abovementioned projects, together with information on progress made since the launch of these projects in terms of cooperation with the social partners to improve health and safety conditions at work and in terms of reducing the number of industrial accidents and the cases of occupational disease. Please also provide particulars of the content and duration of the training set up by the Inspection Directorate, and the number and functions of the persons attending the training.

4. Article 14. Notification of industrial accidents. The Committee notes with concern that unlike industrial accidents, cases of occupational disease are not normally notified, which is contrary to the Convention. The Committee cannot overemphasize the social and economic interest of developing a system for informing and sensitizing employers and workers about such matters, and of enabling labour inspectors to carry out health and safety supervision in such a way as to contribute to reducing occupational risks liable to cause specific diseases. It would be grateful if the Government would take steps to secure the adoption of legal provisions setting forth the instances and the manner in which the labour inspectorate must be informed of cases of occupational disease and to make inspectors responsible for providing information and technical advice to employers and workers in order to heighten their awareness of such matters.

5. Article 18. Effective enforcement of appropriate penalties. According to the Government, the level of penalties and fines has been raised sufficiently in the new Labour Code, on the basis of a tripartite consensus, keeping in view the severity of the violations. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide copies of the relevant laws and regulations. Please also provide any available regional or national statistics on the number and seriousness of the penalties actually applied for offences reported by labour inspectors, and to indicate progress made in terms of better observance of the law thanks to the updating of penalties.

6. Article 21. Annual labour inspection report. The Committee hopes that the Government will shortly publish and send to the ILO, as it said it would, an annual report on the work of the inspection services containing the information required by Article 21(a) to (g). It would be grateful if the Government would present this information, as far as possible, in the manner proposed in Recommendation No. 81.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2006, published 96th ILC session (2007)

The Committee notes the Government’s report for the period ending on 30 October 2006. It also notes the observations on the application of the Convention received on 28 August 2006 from the Jatiya Sramik League, the Bangladesh Trade Union Kendra, the Jatiya Sramik Federation Bangladesh, the Jatiyo Sramik Jote, the Bangladesh Free Trade Union Congress, the Bangladesh Labour Federation and the Bangladesh Jatiya Sramik Federation. The Committee notes that the report sent by the above organizations is based on research carried out from May to August 2006 by the Bangladesh Occupational Safety, Health and Environment Foundation (OSHE) and the Centre for Corporate Accountability. It addresses matters raised by the Government in its report and draws, inter alia, on interviews with inspectors and workers and on available literature.

1. Article 10 of the Convention. Budget and number of inspectors. According to the abovementioned organizations, the budget for labour inspection is clearly insufficient despite a recent increase. Furthermore, there are not enough inspectors in charge of enforcement to meet requirements, as many posts remain vacant and inspectors specialized in particular issues. In terms of human and material resources for the inspection of occupational safety and health, there has been no change in the last 20 years, whereas the number of registered premises has increased by 67 per cent and the number of workers in the same period by 140 per cent. Ever since a major industrial accident caused 58 deaths in a garment factory, inspectors, including dock inspectors, now inspect only garment factories.

2. Article 7. Training of labour inspectors. According to the abovementioned organizations, inspectors receive one month’s induction training at the Industrial Relations Institute, which may be the only training they receive in the course of their career; this is inadequate in view of the great variety of industries and the production technologies used in them.

3. Article 11. Availability of material resources and refunding of transport costs. According to the above organizations, inspectors’ offices are not well equipped, inspectors do not have access to vehicles in order to undertake inspections, expenses are paid only if the factory is within 5 kilometres of the divisional office and the process for repayment of expenses can be very long-winded. More often than not, inspectors are unable to take with them certain types of equipment for technical inspections. In some regions, where inspectors have to travel up to 200 kilometres to visit a factory, they expect employers to pay their expenses.

4. Article 3, paragraph 1(b) and (c). Provision of technical advice to workers and employers, and improvement of labour legislation. The above organizations regret that the technical advice provided to workers and employers is limited and there is no mechanism to ensure that such guidance, particularly on occupational safety and health, where there has been no new legislation since 1979 is presented clearly.

5. Article 6 and Article 15(c). Probity and observance of confidentiality regarding the source of complaints. There appears to be a climate of suspicion regarding the probity of inspectors, who are under no legal obligation to refrain from disclosing the identity of the author of a complaint or indicating that the inspection took place as a result of a complaint. Consequently, workers prefer not to report breaches of the law by the employer for fear of reprisals.

6. Article 17. Prompt legal proceedings. Although, under the legislation, employers who break the law may be prosecuted immediately and without previous warning, in practice it would appear that inspectors systematically give employers an opportunity to remedy matters before prosecuting. Inspectors prosecute cases themselves without any help from lawyers. However, they seldom do so because of constraints such as these and in particular when cases are adjourned time and again and courts are far away from the main office.

7. Article 18. Adequate penalties. According to the abovementioned report, the law provides for a maximum fine which is negligible in amount and thus too small to provide the appropriate deterrent effect required by the Convention.

The Committee trusts that the Government will not fail to send any information or comments it deems useful in reply to each of the points raised by the abovementioned organizations, together with such relevant documentation as it is able to provide.

The Committee is addressing a request directly to the Government on the application of certain provisions of the Convention.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2004, published 93rd ILC session (2005)

The Committee notes that the Government’s report only replies in part to its previous comments.

Articles 10 and 16 of the Convention. Appropriate numbers of labour inspectors. The Committee notes once again that financial restrictions are continuing to have a severe impact on the availability of human resources in the field of labour inspection. Drawing the Government’s attention to the possibility of seeking international financial cooperation with a view to fulfilling the material requirements of the Convention, the Committee would also like to emphasize that technical assistance from the ILO could make an important contribution to improving the effectiveness of the labour inspection system. It therefore urges the Government to take all the necessary measures to this end and to inform the Office of the results achieved. Furthermore, it would be grateful if the Government would provide details as to the meaning and the scope of the involvement, referred to in a previous report, of the Bangladesh Employers’ Federation in inspection activities.

Articles 9, 13 and 14. Health and safety protection. The Committee notes with interest that there are between ten and 12 medical inspectors, in accordance with the provisions of the Factories Act, 1965, and to help with casualties of industrial accidents and occupational diseases. With reference to its 2002 observation, the Committee once again asks the Government to provide information on any further legal and practical measures taken to decrease the number of occupational accidents and diseases.

Articles 17 and 18. Effectiveness of legal proceedings and appropriate penalties. The Committee notes that, under section 96 of the Factories Act, 1965, any person who obstructs a labour inspector in the discharge of her or his duties shall be liable to a fine of up to 500 Taka or three months of imprisonment. The Committee recalls that, as indicated in paragraph 263 of its General Survey of 1985 on labour inspection, it is essential for the effectiveness of inspection services that penalties should be fixed at a sufficiently high level to have a dissuasive effect and for the rates of fines to be periodically reviewed so as to meet this objective. In this regard, the Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide information and clarifications on how effect is given to the above provisions of the Convention and indicate any measures taken or envisaged to ensure that the amounts of fines are periodically reviewed so that they meet the objectives described above, despite monetary inflation.

Article 21. Annual labour inspection report. Noting the statement by the Government that appropriate measures have been taken to publish an annual general labour inspection report, the Committee expresses the firm hope that such a report will soon be sent to the ILO and that it will include as many data as possible as required under points (a) to (g) of Article 21.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2002, published 91st ILC session (2003)

The Committee notes the Government’s report. It requests the Government to provide further information on the following points.

Articles 10 and 16 of the Convention. Further to its previous comments, the Committee notes that due to the financial constraints, the Government could not strengthen the staff of the inspection service, but that it intends to consider the proposal made by the Bangladesh Employers’ Federation (BEF) to involve itself in inspection activities. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide details concerning this proposition of the BEF.

Article 14. The Committee notes that, even though according to the annual inspection report for 1999 there were no occupational diseases reported, it did not, however, signify that there were none but indicated that employers were not sufficiently informed and advised about the pertinent procedures. The Committee therefore requests the new Government to keep the Office informed of all progress made in tracking down occupational diseases.

Article 20. The Committee notes the information contained in the annual inspection report. It requests the Government to indicate the manner in which this report, which expresses in its preface the hope that it will be useful to employers, workers and people in charge of labour administration, is made accessible to them.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2000, published 89th ILC session (2001)

The Committee notes the information contained in the Government’s reports. It requests the Government to provide detailed information on the points raised below.

Labour inspection and child labour.  The Committee notes with interest the information in the Government’s most recent report on the inspection activities tending to the elimination of child labour. Referring also to its 1999 general observation under the Convention, the Committee requests the Government to continue to provide in its next reports detailed information on this matter.

Articles 10, 11 and 16.  The Committee notes the information in the Government’s reports in reply to its previous comments. It notes that the number of registered factories, shops and establishments, which are liable to inspection, has been continuously increased, while the number of inspectors has remained unchanged since 1992 (103 inspectors). Noting that the Government’s most recent report supplies no information on measures taken or envisaged with regard to the increase of inspection staff to which the Government referred in previous reports, the Committee requests the Government to provide full particulars in this regard.

Article 13.  Further to its previous comments, the Committee notes the information supplied by the Government concerning the powers of labour inspectors related to this Article. It would appreciate if the Government would indicate whether, according to Article 13(2)(b), inspectors have the power to make or have made orders requiring measures with immediate executory force in the event of imminent danger to the health or safety of the workers. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would also supply copy of the relevant legislation.

Noting in the Government’s reports that a tripartite committee has been set up to review all existing labour laws in the light of the ratified Conventions and of Recommendations, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on any progress made in this regard.

Article 14.  The Committee notes the information that the Government is making efforts to improve the process of detecting occupational diseases through special inspection programmes by the medical part of the inspection authority. It requests the Government to supply information on any progress made in this regard.

Articles 20 and 21.  In accordance with the provisions of these Articles, the central authority should publish an annual general report on the work of the inspection services under its control (Article 20) and transmit a copy to the ILO. The annual reports should also include the information required on the subjects enumerated under Article 21. Noting that no annual report has been transmitted to the ILO since the one for 1993 and that the Government’s recent reports contain only limited information on the subjects listed under Article 21, the Committee requests the Government to take appropriate measures for annual reports containing information on each of the subjects listed in points (a) to (g) of Article 21 be published and submitted to the ILO on a regular basis.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1997, published 86th ILC session (1998)

The Committee notes that the Government's report has not been received. It hopes that a report will be supplied for examination by the Committee at its next session and that it will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous direct request, which read as follows:

Articles 10, 11 and 16 of the Convention. Further to its previous comments, the Committee notes with interest the indication in the Government's most recent report that due to the increase in the workload of the labour inspectorate, a proposal to expand the inspection services is under active consideration by a committee set up by the Government. The Committee hopes these developments will result in permitting the Government to take the necessary measures to expand the staff of the inspectorate and thus increase the number and frequency of inspections. Please provide full particulars with the next report.

Article 13. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in reply to its previous comments. It would like to refer to the general nature of the powers given to inspectors under section 26 of the Shops and Establishment Act, 1965, and further notes that any expanded powers they may have under section 14(3) of the Payment of Wages Act, 1936, are limited to questions of wages. The Committee hopes that the Government will consider taking measures to provide inspectors with all necessary powers to make or to have made orders including for measures with immediate executory force regarding matters other than wages. Please provide full particulars in this respect in the next report.

Article 14. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in reply to its previous comments, and in particular the fact that while industrial accidents are reported, reports on occupational diseases are seldom available, possibly due to inadequate diagnosis and the general attitude of not reporting such cases. The Committee notes with interest the information that the Government expects the situation to improve considerably with the implementation of its small-scale project on occupational health analysis and accident prevention training. Please supply information on any progress made in this regard.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1995, published 83rd ILC session (1996)

Articles 10, 11 and 16 of the Convention. Further to its previous comments, the Committee notes with interest the indication in the Government's most recent report that due to the increase in the workload of the labour inspectorate, a proposal to expand the inspection services is under active consideration by a committee set up by the Government. The Committee hopes these developments will result in permitting the Government to take the necessary measures to expand the staff of the inspectorate and thus increase the number and frequency of inspections. Please provide full particulars with the next report.

Article 13. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in reply to its previous comments. It would like to refer to the general nature of the powers given to inspectors under section 26 of the Shops and Establishment Act, 1965, and further notes that any expanded powers they may have under section 14(3) of the Payment of Wages Act, 1936, are limited to questions of wages. The Committee hopes that the Government will consider taking measures to provide inspectors with all necessary powers to make or to have made orders including for measures with immediate executory force regarding matters other than wages. Please provide full particulars in this respect in the next report.

Article 14. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in reply to its previous comments, and in particular the fact that while industrial accidents are reported, reports on occupational diseases are seldom available, possibly due to inadequate diagnosis and the general attitude of not reporting such cases. The Committee notes with interest the information that the Government expects the situation to improve considerably with the implementation of its small-scale project on occupational health analysis and accident prevention training. Please supply information on any progress made in this regard.

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

Articles 10, 11 and 16 of the Convention. Further to its previous comments, the Committee notes from the Government's report that it is currently studying two schemes for the expansion of the labour inspectorate by strengthening the Department of Inspection for Factories and Establishments, and by instituting a training programme on health analysis and prevention. It notes from the 1992 annual inspection report that the number of inspectors has remained unchanged while there has been a steady growth in the number of new shops liable to inspection. While the Committee notes the improvements in the efficiency of inspection and the growth in the number of cases brought to courts, it hopes the Government will still increase the number of inspectors to ensure that inspections of workplaces are as often and as thorough as is necessary. Please provide all details with the next report.

Article 13. The Committee notes the information provided in reply to its previous comments. It hopes the Government will continue to supply data as to the operation of the Shops and Establishments Act, and that it will give further consideration to the need to ensure inspectors have all necessary powers to make or have made orders to remedy defects.

Article 14. Please provide particulars on the measures taken or envisaged to ensure that the inspectorate is notified of all industrial accidents and cases of occupational disease as required by this Article.

Article 15. The Committee has noted the provisions of the Government Servants (Conduct) Rules, 1979.

Article 21. The Committee notes with interest the information provided by the Government in reply to its previous comments. It hopes future inspection reports will include, as promised by the Government, all available information and in particular statistics of occupational diseases (Article 21(g)). Please supply information on any measures taken to ensure that legal provisions relating to health and occupational diseases are duly enforced.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1992, published 79th ILC session (1992)

Articles 10, 11 and 16 of the Convention. Further to its previous comments, the Committee notes the information provided in the Annual Report for the Year 1988 of the Department of Inspection for Factories and Establishments. In addition, the Government states that, although it is keen to expand the labour inspectorate, this has not been possible because of financial constraints. The Committee hopes the Government will continue to provide information on developments, bearing in mind the Convention's requirements.

Article 13. In its earlier comments, the Committee observed that the Shops and Establishments Act does not empower inspectors to make or have made orders to remedy defects. In its report, the Government states that it is not felt necessary to supplement the Act in this respect. The Committee hopes the Government will consider the matter further, with a view to taking the measures necessary to ensure inspectors have all the powers required by the Convention in respect of commercial workplaces. Meanwhile, the Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide available information on the practical application of this Article in workplaces covered by the Shops and Establishments Act.

Article 15. The Committee notes that the text of the Government Servants' Conduct Rules, to which the Government refers, was not enclosed with the report. It once again requests the Government to furnish this text with its next report.

Articles 3(1)(a) and 21. Further to its observation, the Committee notes that no statistics of occupational diseases are included in the annual report for 1988 (Article 21(g)). It hopes the Government will supply information on any measures taken to ensure that legal provisions relating to health and occupational diseases are duly enforced. It hopes future inspection reports will include all available information in this respect.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1992, published 79th ILC session (1992)

Articles 20 and 21 of the Convention. The Committee notes with interest the useful information provided by the Government in the Annual Report for the Year 1988 of the Department of Inspection for Factories and Establishments, the first received for some time, and that the report for 1989 has been under compilation. It hopes that reports of this kind will be published and sent within the time-limits required by the Convention.

The Committee is also addressing comments on the application of the Convention directly to the Government.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1990, published 77th ILC session (1990)

Articles 10, 11 and 16 of the Convention. With reference to its previous comments, the Committee notes from the Government's report that, owing to financial constraints, it has not been possible to take measures to strengthen the Department of Inspection. It trusts that, in its next report, the Government will be able to provide information on the progress made in this connection.

Article 13. The Committee notes that, despite repeated assurances by the Government that the Shops and Establishments Act would be supplemented by provisions conferring on labour inspectors the powers provided for in this Article of the Convention, no measures have yet been taken. It hopes that the Government will take appropriate measures in the near future.

Article 15. The Committee notes that the text of the Government Servants' Conduct Rules to which the Government refers, was not enclosed with the report. It requests the Government to furnish this text with its next report.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1990, published 77th ILC session (1990)

Articles 20 and 21 of the Convention. The Committee notes with regret that no progress has been made with regard to publication of the annual reports on the work of the labour inspection services. It trusts that the Government will not delay in taking the necessary measures to ensure that these reports containing, in particular, statistical data on the points listed at Article 21 are published, placed at the disposal of the persons concerned and transmitted to the International Labour Office within the period laid down by Article 20.