Demande directe (CEACR) - adoptée 2016, publiée 106ème session CIT (2017)

Convention (n° 81) sur l'inspection du travail, 1947 - Barbade (Ratification: 1967)

Autre commentaire sur C081

Observation

Demande directe

Afficher en : Francais - EspagnolTout voir

Articles 3(1)(b) and 13 of the Convention. Preventive activities in the area of occupational safety and health (OSH). The Committee notes with interest the information provided by the Government in response to its previous request concerning the various preventive activities undertaken in the area of OSH. In this context, the Committee also recalls its previous comments concerning the introduction of powers under the Safety and Health at Work Act (SHAW), allowing OSH inspectors to issue “improvement notices” requiring alterations to secure compliance with the provisions of the SHAW (section 112 of the SHAW) and “prohibition notices” requiring alterations to remedy risks to the safety and health of workers, which take immediate effect if the inspector is of the opinion that there is an imminent danger to the health or safety of workers (section 113 of the SHAW). The Committee notes the Government’s indication that forms and procedures for the issuing of improvement and prohibition notices have been developed, and that inspectors are no longer required to submit a request to the judicial authorities for the issuing of such notices. The Committee also notes the Government’s indication that currently no situations warranting the issuing of such notices have been encountered since employers continue to cooperate with inspectors. The Committee requests that the Government provide statistical information, where applicable, on preventive measures adopted in the event that labour inspectors had reasonable cause to believe that defects in workplaces constituted a threat to the health or safety of workers (Article 13(1)). Where applicable, the Committee also requests the Government to provide information on preventive measures adopted with immediate executory force in the event of imminent danger to the health or safety of workers (Article 13(2)).

Articles 3(2), 10 and 16. Human resources of the labour inspectorate and additional duties entrusted to inspection officers. The Committee previously noted that the Executive Council of the Barbados Workers’ Union (BWU) welcomed the increase in the number of labour inspectors, but indicated that their number was still inadequate in view of the increased responsibilities of labour inspectors under the SHAW. The Committee also observed that the terms “labour/OSH officer” and “labour inspector” are used interchangeably, but that it is not clear whether all labour and OSH officers have the status of labour inspectors and how much of their time is devoted to other functions, to the detriment of their inspection functions. In this regard, the Committee noted that labour inspectors or labour/OSH officers are also responsible for the conciliation of individual labour disputes including the resolution of issues relating to the recommendations of workplace-based OSH committees. The Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that there are currently eight OSH inspectors and eight labour inspectors working at the Labour Department. However, the Government does not provide the information requested in its previous request. The Committee therefore once again requests that the Government provide clarifications as to whether all labour and OSH officers have the status of labour inspectors, and provide information on the tasks assigned to them. The Committee also once again requests that the Government provide an estimate of the time spent on activities focusing on primary labour inspection duties as compared to any other duties that might be entrusted to them (such as conciliation, mediation, administration, etc.). In addition, it requests that the Government take the necessary measures, in accordance with Article 3(2) of the Convention, to ensure that any other functions entrusted to inspection officers do not interfere with the effective discharge of their primary duties.

Articles 5(a), 17 and 18. Adequacy and enforcement of penalties. Cooperation between the labour inspectorate and the justice system. The Committee previously noted the Government’s indications that, in addition to the increased level of penalties for the violation of several provisions of the SHAW, further attempts were made to increase the penalties under other Acts’ provisions relating to labour law; these penalties having been considered too low by the Government to be dissuasive. The Committee notes that the Government has not provided the requested information in relation to the measures taken to ensure that penalties are dissuasive, and the progress made with the announced plans to strengthen cooperation between the inspectorate and the justice system within the framework of legislative reform. However, it notes the Government’s indication that the Labour Department primarily uses moral persuasion to encourage compliance with labour law, and that therefore no penalties were applied in relation to the violations observed. The Committee further notes that, according to the Government, inspectors normally give instructions to employers to correct infringements detected and undertake follow-up visits to assess the progress made and any remedial steps undertaken.

The Committee recalls that, under the terms of Article 17(1) of the Convention, persons who violate or neglect to observe legal provisions shall be liable to prompt legal proceedings without previous warning. The Committee also recalls paragraph 282 of the 2006 General Survey on labour inspection which notes that violations may be the result of failure to understand the terms or scope of the applicable laws or regulations, and that therefore, labour inspectors must always have the discretion to choose not to impose penalties for the purposes of enforcing legal provisions. The Committee further explained in this paragraph of the General Survey that the discretion provided for in Article 17(1) implies that inspection staff have the necessary capacity for judgment so as to distinguish between serious or repeated wilful non compliance, culpable negligence or flagrant ill will (which all call for a penalty) and an involuntary or minor violation, which may lead to a mere warning. In the light of the above, the Committee requests that the Government take the necessary measures to ensure that labour inspectors are granted the discretion to warn and advise as well as to institute or recommend proceedings in cases of violation of the law, as is provided for in Article 17 of the Convention. In addition, the Committee once again requests that the Government provide information on any measures taken to ensure that penalties are dissuasive and effectively enforced, and to provide information, where applicable, on the number of legal proceedings commenced for labour law infringements and their outcome. The Committee also once again requests that the Government indicate the arrangements made or envisaged to enhance effective cooperation between labour inspection services and the justice system.

Article 7. Training of labour inspectors. The Committee notes that the Government has not provided the requested information on the training of labour inspectors. The Committee therefore once again requests that the Government provide information on the training provided to labour inspectors (subjects covered, number of participants, duration, etc.).

Article 11. Material means and transport facilities available to labour inspectors. The Committee previously noted that labour inspectors have access to an interest-free loan of 25,000 Barbadian dollars (BBD) (US$12,500) repayable over seven years for the purchase of a vehicle, and that a travelling allowance is currently paid at the rate of BBD1.09 ($1.54) per kilometre. In reply to its previous request in this regard, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that adequate office accommodation is available. In terms of mobility, the Government indicates that inspectors have access to public transportation and that there is a mechanism for the payment of a travelling allowance based on the travel undertaken. Moreover, the department has at its disposal a vehicle. However, this vehicle is not a four-wheel drive, which is sometimes required for rough terrain. The Committee once again requests that the Government provide details of the office equipment available to labour inspectors (number of offices, computers, printers, paper, inspection forms, etc.).

Article 14. Notification of industrial accidents and cases of occupational disease to the labour inspectorate. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that, while the system for notification of industrial accidents to the Labour Department functions relatively well and has improved through enhanced collaboration with the National Insurance Department; historically cases of occupational disease have not been reported. The Government indicates that this might be due to the fact that: (i) the occupational diseases as defined in the law are unlikely to occur because of the type of economic activity in the country; (ii) persons at risk or affected may not make an association between the disease and work activities; (iii) there are no guidelines indicating the criteria for determining a case of “suspected” occupational disease when employers and medical practitioners are required to report cases of occupational disease; (iv) anecdotal evidence suggests that limited medical examination is carried out. The Committee requests that the Government provide information on any measures taken or envisaged to improve the system for the notification of cases of occupational disease. In this regard, it also invites the Government to take into account the guidance provided in the ILO code of practice on the recording and notification of occupational accidents and diseases.

Articles 20 and 21. Publication and communication of an annual report on the work of labour inspection services. The Committee notes the information in the annual reports of the Labour Department for the years 2005–08 which were received at the ILO in December 2013 and which also contain labour inspection statistics. While the Committee notes that no labour inspections reports for the years 2009–15 were received by the Office, it however notes that some labour inspection statistics were communicated by the Government in its report (including information on the number of labour inspections in the manufacturing sector and the non-manufacturing sector, the violations detected, and the number of industrial accidents reported). This information does however not include the number of workplaces liable to inspection. The Committee trusts that the Government will ensure that annual labour inspection reports are regularly published and communicated to the ILO (Article 20 of the Convention), and that they contain information on all the subjects covered by Article 21(a)–(g). It requests the Government in any event to continue to provide statistical information that is as detailed as possible on the activities of the labour inspection services (including, in particular, workplaces liable to inspection).