Observación (CEACR) - Adopción: 2010, Publicación: 100ª reunión CIT (2011)

Article 2(1) of the Convention. Scope of application. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that, while section 73 of the Labour Code of 1996 prohibits the employment of minors under 16 years of age, this prohibition did not include persons who perform work outside the framework of an employment contract. It also observed that, by virtue of its section 3, the Labour Code did not apply to members of the family of the employer working in his/her enterprise without remuneration, domestic workers, gardeners, cooks and those of a similar capacity, in addition to agricultural workers, excluding those who shall be covered by the Labour Code pursuant to a decision taken by the Council of Ministers. However, the Committee noted the Government’s indication that draft amendments to the Labour Code, providing that workers in the domestic and agricultural sectors shall be governed by the provisions of the Labour Code, had been referred to the Council of Ministers.

The Committee notes the Government’s statement that section 3 of the Labour Code was amended by virtue of Act No. 48 of 2008 (published in the Official Gazette No. 4924 of 17 August 2008). The Committee notes with interest that section 3 of Act No. 48 of 2008 repeals and replaces section 3 of the Labour Code, broadening the scope of the Code’s application (pursuant to section 3(a)) to cover “all workers”, including certain previously excluded groups such as workers in family enterprises and those working outside the framework of an employment contract. Nonetheless, section 3(b) of the Labour Code (as amended in 2008) states that agricultural workers, domestic workers, cooks and gardeners will be governed by regulations issued on this subject, provided that these regulations address labour contracts, hours of work, rest periods, inspection and any other matters related to their employment. In this regard, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that Regulation No. 90 of 2009, (promulgated in the Official Gazette No. 4989 of 1 October 2009) regulates the work of domestic workers and cooks. However, the Committee observes that the Government does not indicate if the regulations issued pursuant to section 3(b) of the Labour Code (as amended in 2008) will prescribe a minimum age for those working in the agricultural and domestic sectors, or if the new section 3(a) of the Labour Code signifies that the general minimum age prescribed in the Labour Code now applies to this group of workers. The Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate whether the minimum age specified in the Labour Code (as amended in 2008) applies to agricultural workers, domestic workers, cooks and gardeners. If not, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that the regulations adopted pursuant to section 3(b) of the Labour Code (as amended in 2008) prescribe the minimum age of 16 for the admission to employment or work for these categories. It also requests the Government to provide a copy of Regulation No. 90 of 2009 governing domestic workers, in addition to any regulations adopted governing agricultural workers.

Article 9(1) and Part III of the report form. Penalties and labour inspection. The Committee previously noted that section 77 of the Labour Code provides for penalties between 100 and 500 dinars (JOD) for violations of the Code’s provisions, including section 73 on the minimum age for employment or work. However, the Committee noted the information in a 2006 ILO–IPEC rapid assessment study that official records suggested a very weak enforcement of the provisions of the Labour Code related to the illegal employment of children.

The Committee notes the Government’s statement that, pursuant to Act No. 48 of 2008, the minimum penalty for employing a young person was increased. Section 7 of Act No. 48 of 2008 amends section 77 of the Labour Code to raise the minimum fine for violations of its provisions from JOD100 (approximately US$140) to JOD300 (approximately US$422), and that courts may not reduce the fine below this minimum in any circumstance. The Committee also notes the Government’s indication that the child labour unit was provided with two more labour inspectors specializing in occupational safety and health and legal issues. The Government also indicates that the number of inspection visits have been increased through field visits made by inspectors to verify compliance with the Labour Code by private sector undertakings, particularly with respect to child labour. The Government further indicates that the necessary legal proceedings were initiated following these inspections. The Committee further notes the information in the Government’s report that labour inspectors will be trained on programmes related to the reduction of child labour. In addition, the Committee notes the information in the report on the worst forms of child labour in Jordan of 10 September 2009 (available on the website of the Office of the High Commissioner for Refugees (www.unhcr.org)) (WFCL report) that the Labour inspectorate set a target to remove 3,000 children from the labour market in 2008 as part of its long-term strategy to remove 38,000 children from work.

However, the Committee notes the statement in the report of the International Trade Union Confederation, for the World Trade Organization General Council, on the trade policies of Jordan of 10 and 12 November 2008, entitled “Internationally recognized core labour standards in Jordan” (ITUC report) that, with regard to child labour, enforcement and penalties remain insufficient. Moreover, the Committee notes the statement in the WFCL report that inspectors often handle child labour cases informally rather than issuing citations and fines. In this regard, the Committee notes the information in the Government’s report, submitted under the Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention, 1999 (No. 182), that between 1 July 2009 and 30 June 2010, 1,459 working children were detected through labour inspections. However, the Government indicates that in only 81 of these cases were measures taken pursuant to section 77 of the Labour Code. The Government indicates that warnings were issued in 147 cases and that, in the remaining 1,092 cases, advice and guidance was given. While noting that several cases of violations of child employment were detected by the labour inspectorate, the Committee observes with concern that persons who employ children in breach of the provisions giving effect to the Convention are not prosecuted as a rule. In this regard, the Committee recalls that, by virtue of Article 9(1), of the Convention, all necessary measures shall be taken by the competent authority, including the provision of appropriate penalties, to ensure the effective enforcement of the provisions of the Convention, and accordingly requests the Government to redouble its efforts to ensure that persons found to be in breach of the provisions giving effect to the Convention are prosecuted and that adequate penalties are imposed. In this regard, it requests the Government to continue to provide information on the types of violations detected by the labour inspectorate, the number of persons prosecuted and the penalties imposed. Lastly, it encourages the Government to pursue its efforts, through the labour inspectorate, to remove children from the labour market, and to provide information on the number of children removed through this initiative.

Part V of the report form. Application of the Convention in practice. The Committee previously noted the indication in the Committee of the Rights of the Child’s concluding observations of 29 September 2006 that “the employment of children has steadily grown in recent years, especially in agriculture” (CRC/C/JOR/CO/3, paragraph 88). The Committee also noted a 2006 rapid assessment survey on child labour (published by the University of Jordan, in collaboration with ILO–IPEC) which indicated that the average age of working children is 15 years. The study also indicated that the working hours of children appeared to be very long (90 per cent of working children work eight to 12 hours a day), and that child workers must often carry heavy objects and can be exposed to dangerous chemicals, heavy shaking or noise. The Committee urged the Government to take measures to improve the situation.

The Committee notes the Government’s statement that the Ministry of Labour is engaged in awareness-raising measures such as newsletters and lectures at schools on the risk of working at an early age. The Government also indicates that 16 liaison officers (within the labour inspectorate) were certified, for the purpose of carrying out activities related to the rehabilitation of children who had dropped out of school to enter the labour market. The Committee also notes the Government’s statement (in its report submitted under Convention No. 182) that a national framework to reduce child labour is currently being prepared by the National Council for Family Affairs.

However, the Committee notes the information in a study entitled “Working Children in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan”, issued by the Jordanian Department of Statistics in collaboration with ILO–IPEC in March 2009, which indicates that there are approximately 29,225 child labourers in Jordan (defined as children under the minimum age for light work, children under 16 years not performing light work, and children under 18 engaged in hazardous work). The study indicates that 88.1 per cent of children who are engaged in some form of economic activity are performing work not permitted under the Convention, mostly due to the number of hours during which, and the conditions in which, these children work. The Committee also notes the study’s indication that children put in substantial hours of work and that the average work week among all children is 38.6 hours per week. Most of these children combine school work with economic activities. However, the study indicates that children in employment start school later and drop out earlier than non-working children. The Committee further notes the statement in the ITUC report that child labour is prevalent in Jordan and that, despite efforts to reduce child labour including work with the ILO, the number of child workers has increased (pages 9–10). The Committee therefore expresses its concern at reports of the growing number of children working under the minimum age, as well as in hazardous conditions, in Jordan, and requests the Government to redouble its efforts, within the forthcoming national framework to reduce child labour, to ensure the progressive elimination of child labour. It requests the Government to provide information on the impact of measures taken in this regard, particularly with respect to reducing the number of children working under the minimum age and in hazardous work.