Demande directe (CEACR) - adoptée 2015, publiée 105ème session CIT (2016)

Convention (n° 81) sur l'inspection du travail, 1947 - Honduras (Ratification: 1983)

Autre commentaire sur C081

Observation

Demande directe

Afficher en : Francais - EspagnolTout voir

The Committee notes the joint observations of the International Organisation of Employers (IOE) and the Honduran National Business Council (COHEP), received on 28 August 2015. It also notes the observations of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), received on 1 September 2015.

The Committee notes the Government’s indications in response to its previous request concerning the legal basis in relation to the powers of labour inspectors to order or have ordered measures with immediate executive force in the event of a threat to the safety or health of workers (Article 13).

Article 3(1), 5(a), 12(1)(a) and (b), and 18 of the Convention. Obstruction of labour inspectors in their duties. The Committee notes from the observations made by the ITUC that labour inspectors are frequently prevented from entering factories, that they rarely seek the assistance of the police, and that the Ministry of Labour does not resort to the tribunals to oblige employers to authorize their entry. The ITUC indicates that in most cases, inspectors are rejected multiple times and finally abandon any attempt to undertake an inspection. The Committee recalls that it previously noted the Government’s indications that while it is true that certain employers do not allow labour inspectors to enter enterprises, section 625 of the Labour Code provides for penalties in this regard. The Committee also previously noted the Government’s indications that under section 617(b) of the Labour Code, inspectors may request police assistance in special cases to avoid the obstruction in their duties.

In this context, the Committee notes the observations made by the IOE and the COHEP, according to which no cases are known where labour inspectors are accompanied by the police to private workplaces. The Committee also notes that the Government provides copies of two inspection records, in which labour inspectors were assisted by members of the police to detect instances of child labour, but that it does not provide the information requested concerning cases in which labour inspectors were assisted by the police in order to guarantee their safety and free access to workplaces.

It also notes the Government’s reference in its report to a recent meeting with the Ministry of Labour and Social Security (MTSS) and representatives of the justice to seek solutions with regard the obstruction of labour inspectors. The Committee notes that the Government indicates that a further meeting is planned to discuss the implementation of section 617(b) of the Labour Code through the possibility of labour inspectors to ask for judicial orders on an expedite basis. The Committee also notes that the Government attached copies of infraction reports imposing fines for the obstruction of labour inspectors of up to 5,000 Honduran Lempira (approximately US$226). The Committee once again requests the Government to provide information on labour inspections in which inspectors were assisted by members of the police in order to ensure the integrity, safety and free access of labour inspectors to workplaces. Please also continue to provide information on number of cases in which penalties were imposed on employers in the case of obstruction of labour inspectors in their duties.

Articles 12(1)(a) and (2). Free access for labour inspectors to workplaces liable to inspection. In its comments that it has reiterated since 2006, the Committee requested the Government to provide information on the measures adopted or envisaged to ensure that the law be brought into line with the requirements of Articles 12(1)(a) and (2) of the Convention. Noting the Government’s reiterated reference to section 618 of the Labour Code as well as its indications that labour inspectors may enter upon the production of their credentials, the Committee notes, however, that the legislation mentioned does not explicitly provide for the right to enter workplaces freely and without prior notification. In this regard, it also recalls that Article 12(2) provides that on the occasion of an inspection visit, labour inspectors shall notify the employer or his representative, unless they consider that such a notification may be prejudicial to the performance of their duties. The Committee requests the Government to ensure that, in the current legislative reforms, the law is brought into line with the requirements of the Convention, so that the right of labour inspectors to freely enter workplaces liable to inspection is guaranteed in law.

Article 14. Notification of occupational diseases to the labour inspectorate. In the comments that the Committee has reiterated for a number of years, it requested the Government to ensure the establishment of a mechanism for the communication to the labour inspection services of cases of occupational diseases.

In this regard, it notes the Government’s indications that such a mechanism still does not exist but that the new Labour Inspection Act, the draft of which is currently being discussed with the social partners, provides a favourable occasion for its codification. It also notes the observations made by the IOE and the COHEP, according to which there is no adequate register of industrial accidents and cases of occupational diseases at the MTSS or the Honduran Institute of Social Security, and that a new law on the insurance of accidents, which is supposed to be implemented within the next 18 months, would also govern occupational accidents. The Committee requests the Government to describe the measures taken for the establishment of a mechanism for the notification of cases of occupational diseases to the labour inspection services, including in the current legislative reform. The Committee also requests the Government to provide its comments in relation to the observations of the IOE and COHEP.

Articles 20 and 21. Publication and communication to the ILO of an annual report on the activities of the labour inspection services. The Committee welcomes the information provided by the Government, which contains information on most of the subjects listed in Article 21 of the Convention, that is, the number of labour inspectors (Article 21(b)), the number of workplaces liable to inspection and the number of workers employed therein (Article 21(c)), statistics of inspection visits (Article 21(d)), statistics of penalties imposed (Article 21(e)), statistics of industrial accidents (Article 21(f)) and statistics of occupational diseases (Article 21(f)). It understands from the information provided by the Government that it is envisaged to develop a new information system that would enable the collection of data and facilitate the establishment of an annual report with detailed information. In this regard, it also notes the Government’s indications that it is working on systematizing the labour inspection data, and that data on the workplaces liable to inspection and the workers employed therein is being actualized through the coordination with other public entities.

It also notes the Government’s reference to progress made with the establishment of a register of enterprises in five municipalities. In this regard, it notes that the Government requests ILO technical assistance for the establishment of a national register of enterprises, as well as for the establishment of the annual report on the work of the labour inspection services. The Committee hopes that the Office will provide the technical assistance requested for the establishment of a national register of enterprises and the establishment of the annual report on the work of the labour inspection services. It requests the Government to publish and communicate to the ILO annual reports on the work of the labour inspection services, containing information on all the subjects covered by Article 21(a)–(g).