Observation (CEACR) - adoptée 1994, publiée 81ème session CIT (1994)

Further to its previous comments, the Committee has taken note of the Government's reply and the Report of the Labour Department as regards inspection activities in 1989-90. It recalls also the earlier observations made by the Malaysian Trades Union Congress (MTUC).

Article 3(2) of the Convention. The Committee notes from the report that, as the workload on labour officers in other areas of activity than inspection is increasing, visits for the detection of non-compliance with the law cannot be increased to a desired level. It hopes the Government will nevertheless endeavour to ensure that the further duties given to inspectors do not interfere with the effective discharge of their primary inspection duties and that it will provide full information in the next report on the Convention.

Article 5. (a) The Committee notes the recommendations in the Annual Report for 1989/90 of the Factories and Machinery Deparment (FMD). It would be glad to know what cooperation exists between the FMD and the Labour Department in the implementation of the Convention.

(b) The Committee recalls the view of the MTUC that not much had been done to increase collaboration between the labour inspectorate and workers or their organizations. It notes also the statement in the report as to the need for self-auditing by employers to ensure the law is complied with and for employees to know their obligations and rights. Further, the report states that the percentage of organized labour is small, so that the vast majority of employees in the private sector are wholly dependent on the Labour Department for the establishment and enforcement of labour standards and conditions of employment. At the same time, the FMD has pointed to a misconception among employers and workers that responsibility for occupational safety and health lies solely with the Government. The Committee hopes the Government will indicate the measures taken to ensure the necessary collaboration with both employers and workers or their organizations, as required by this Article.

Articles 9, 10 and 16. The Committee notes from the Government's reply and the tables for 1990 and 1991 and the 1989-90 report that numbers of inspectors have not grown to match numbers of places of employment, so that the frequency of inspections has deteriorated to the point where places of employment are visited only once every six years. The MTUC especially drew attention to the lack of specialists and technical experts carrying out inspections, and to the general lack of thoroughness of inspections. The Committee hopes the next report on the Convention will include details of the effect of the new strategy mentioned in the report, involving listing of priorities for inspection so that, as required by the Convention, workplaces may be inspected as often and as thoroughly as necessary to ensure the effective application of legislation.

Articles 17 and 18. The Committee recalls the MTUC view that penalties for violation of enforceable provisions and for obstruction of inspectors are inadequate. It notes too the 1989-90 report's statement that the Labour Department has adopted a "facilitative" approach to enforcement, as manifested by the decline in numbers of prosecutions. The Committee hopes the next report on the Convention will include the Government's present views in this respect, as well as information on any revision of levels of penalties.

Articles 20 and 21. The Committee hopes annual labour inspection reports will be published and transmitted to the Office within the periods prescribed and will contain all the required information, particularly statistics of workplaces liable to inspection and numbers of workers employed in them (Article 21(c)), as well as statistics of violations and penalties imposed (Article 21(e)).