Demande directe (CEACR) - adoptée 2013, publiée 103ème session CIT (2014)

Convention (n° 81) sur l'inspection du travail, 1947 - République-Unie de Tanzanie.Tanganyika (Ratification: 1962)

Autre commentaire sur C081

Observation

Demande directe

Afficher en : Francais - EspagnolTout voir

Tanganyika (ratification: 1962)

Referring to its observation, the Committee would like to raise the following additional points.

Articles 1, 4, 5(a), 16 and 19 of the Convention. Labour inspection system. Supervision and control by a central authority. Effective cooperation between inspection services. The Committee notes from the audit referred to in its observation (2009 needs assessment), that the Ministry of Labour and Employment encompasses two distinct inspection branches, the Occupational Safety and Health Authority (OSHA), a semi-autonomous body responsible for supervision of occupational safety and health (OSH) legislation in the field of OSH, and the Labour Administration and Inspection Section (LAIS) within the Labour Department, responsible for supervision of legislation in the field of general working conditions. Both branches dispose of a separate field structure. The Committee observes from the same assessment, that the LAIS within the Labour Department operates as a central authority on behalf of its decentralized structures. However, as it appears from the information in the 2009 needs assessment, communication between the central authority and the staff in the regions and districts is rare and no joint meetings are held at the central or regional level. Furthermore, the LAIS does not provide guidance for the planning of inspections, nor do the regional offices regularly report back to the central level, which would allow for data to be analysed and compiled at the central level to improve coordination and planning of inspection activities.

The Committee also notes from the 2009 needs assessment, that there is little communication between the central level and regional offices of the OSHA and no meetings are held. However, according to the audit, cooperation exists in the regional structures of the LAIS and the OSHA, in the form of joint inspections and exchange of information, where labour inspectors of these services share the same premises. The Committee has highlighted, in paragraph 140 of its 2006 General Survey on labour inspection that attaching the labour inspectorate to a central authority facilitates the establishment and application of a single policy throughout the country and makes it possible to use available resources in a rational way. Regarding cooperation between inspection services, the Committee also underlines the need to encourage cooperation between different inspection services by the competent authority (General Survey on labour inspection, paragraph 152), and highlights the designation of a central labour inspection authority as a prerequisite for coordination with a view to achieving clearly defined objectives and increased cohesion between mechanisms for cooperation and collaboration with other public and private bodies and institutions, and with the employers and workers and their organizations. Emphasizing once again the importance of placing the labour inspection services under the supervision and control of a central authority, the Committee requests the Government to elaborate on the manner in which the labour inspection services in the area of OSH and general working conditions are coordinated, so as to ensure a degree of cohesion and the application of a single inspection policy. It also asks the Government to provide a general appreciation of the operation of the central authority in the abovementioned sense and to provide information on measures taken with a view to strengthening the central labour inspection authority and to provide for the collaboration between the OSHA and the LAIS at the central and regional level.

Article 5(b). Collaboration between labour inspectors and employers and workers or their organizations. The Committee notes the copies of the 2003 OSH Act and of the 2004 Employment and Labour Relations Act, provided by the Government in response to the Committee’s previous request. It notes from the OSH Act that OSH representatives have the right to accompany inspectors on any inspection (section 12, al. (9)) and that labour inspectors have to disclose relevant information to OSH representatives and committees, inasmuch as they are entitled to obtain this information (section 5, paragraph 4, al. (c)). It also notes that labour inspectors may request the holding of an OSH committee (section 13, paragraph 5). The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the application of the abovementioned provisions of the OSH Act in practice, and to elaborate on their impact on both, the application of labour and social security legislation and risk prevention in the workplace.

Articles 6, 7 and 10. Recruitment, conditions of service and training of inspection staff. The Committee notes from the Government’s report that there are currently 71 labour officers working within the labour inspection services, that seven labour officers were recruited for 2011–12, and that in 2009 and 2010, a number of labour officers were promoted to higher grades. It also notes from the Government’s report that labour officers were trained within the USDOL–ILO project on strengthening the institutional capacity for labour administration and inspection in the country and on the ILO global modules in that area, thus better equipping them with skills, competencies and modern ways of organization techniques for conducting inspections and reporting issues in relation to labour inspection. The Committee notes the recommendation in the needs assessment that the recruitment system of labour officers needs to be strengthened by including technical criteria in job descriptions. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the number of labour inspectors working within the structures of the labour inspection services and to provide more detailed information on status, conditions of service and recruitment of labour inspectors, as well as on initial and continuous training provided to them. It also asks the Government to specify how it ensures that job descriptions for labour inspectors’ posts reflect the specific requirements of the position.

Articles 11 and 16. Labour inspection resources. The Committee notes form the Government’s report in response to its previous request, that the provision of motor vehicles to field labour offices had enabled them to improve quantitative and qualitative aspects of inspections in terms of coverage and efficiency. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide in its next report statistics on inspections conducted. It asks the Government to provide detailed information on the material and logistical resource situation throughout the territorial structures of the LAIS and OSHA.

Articles 17 and 18. Legal proceedings and effective enforcement of penalties. The Committee observes from the 2009 needs assessment that in the event of repeated non-compliance with an order to stop work or prohibit the use of certain hazardous equipment, the labour inspectorate has the option of levying an administrative fine, which can however only be issued on the condition that employers sign a document admitting the infraction. Other than that, there are no intermediate administrative sanctions that can be applied directly by labour inspectors in the case of observed infringements of labour law provisions. While in practice the Labour Commissioner is ultimately responsible for ensuring compliance with an inspection order, labour law violations have to be brought to the courts in accordance with the relevant procedure in case of infractions, and labour inspectors must receive special certification from the Directorate of Public Prosecutions in order to prosecute a violation before the courts. The Committee further observes from the assessment that, upon the expiry of the deadlines set in a compliance order, in many cases no further action is taken to enforce the order. The Committee wishes to recall that the credibility of any inspectorate depends on its ability to advise, but also on the existence and implementation of a sufficiently dissuasive enforcement mechanism (2006 General Survey on labour inspection, paragraph 280). Penalties should be prescribed to punish violations of legal provisions relating to conditions of work and protection of workers, and they must also be effectively enforced (paragraph 303). The Committee asks the Government to provide the Office with statistics of violations reported, compliance orders issued and the penalties imposed.

It asks the Government to provide information on any measures taken or envisaged with a view to enhancing the effectiveness of the labour law enforcement mechanisms, including improved cooperation with the courts, and the introduction of administrative sanctions to be directly applied by labour inspectors.