Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2005, published 95th ILC session (2006)

Labour Inspection Convention, 1947 (No. 81) - Uganda (Ratification: 1963)

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It is therefore bound to repeat its previous observation which read as follows:

The information supplied by the Government in its report again brings to light the following two facts:

(1)  The labour inspection system, already seriously affected by the country’s economic difficulties before decentralization, continues to deteriorate owing to the persistence of the economic downturn and to the manner in which decentralization is being implemented.

(2)  Being based on the principle of a labour inspectorate placed under the control of a central supervisory authority, the existing legal framework governing the powers, organization and working of the labour inspection service is no longer practicable and cannot be applied because, with decentralization and the transfer of powers to the districts, the central authority has yielded control to the districts over their budgetary resources.

1. Decentralization and labour inspection. With reference to its previous comments and the discussions in the Conference Committee at the 2001 and 2003 sessions of the International Labour Conference, the Committee of Experts notes that the country is currently engaged in an in-depth reform of its institutions which appears to aim ultimately at decentralizing many state functions. However, as the Government itself observes, decentralization does not comply with Article 4 of the Convention and a central authority is needed to supervise and control the labour inspection system.

The information provided by the Government shows that the central labour inspection authority is now devoid of all substance: the little authority that the Ministry retains in law cannot be exercised for want of the necessary structure and resources and some heads of districts take the attitude that to maintain or establish local labour inspection services serves little purpose.

All this is particularly worrying in terms of the Convention’s social and economic objectives, to which the Government subscribed formally through the solemn act of ratification. The Committee accordingly urges the Government to reconsider, if not the principle of a decentralized labour inspectorate which now appears firmly to be a part of the overall national project, at least the methods and means of implementing decentralization. One necessary principle is that the labour inspection system should come under a central authority, within the meaning of Article 4 of the Convention taken as a whole - the restructuring in Uganda seems to be moving towards a kind of "federalism", in which the districts are like the "federated units" referred to in paragraph 2 of this Article. The Committee points out that the obligations laid down under article 2 of the ILO Constitution that the Government assumed on ratifying the Convention must in any event remain the responsibility of the State. It is a duty of the State to ensure that the conditions needed to apply the Convention exist nationwide. National laws and regulations must ensure that authority for labour inspection is shared between the central bodies of the labour administration and the decentralized authorities, and there must be uniform legislation governing the status, conditions of service and training of inspection staff (Articles 6 and 7). Furthermore, there must be scrupulous observance of the need to ensure the establishment either of a labour inspection system in each district or, possibly, a system in which authority would be determined on a broader, regional basis if such an option is deemed better suited to the more rational use of available resources. In any event, resources must be assigned on a legal basis to labour inspection in order to make available to labour inspection services the staff, material and logistic resources necessary to perform their duties (Articles 6, 7, 9, 10 and 11).

2. Establishment of an inspection system suited to economic and social needs: urgent preliminary measures. The fact that it has been impossible for many years to produce an annual report on the work of the inspection services (Articles 20 and 21) not only reflects the extent to which the labour system has been dismantled but, even more regrettably, prevents any assessment of needs either at the national or regional level. As a result, it is impossible to determine any priorities for action and evaluate the resources needed. The effects of globalization on working conditions and workers’ rights need to be studied and anticipated on a tripartite basis to secure the social partners’ attachment to the principle that an effective labour inspection service needs to be established in the twofold interest of social protection and improved productivity. The Committee notes that the ILO is endeavouring, through technical assistance under the SLAREA project, to draw the Government’s attention to the importance of the tripartite dimension of labour administration. It hopes that measures will be taken in this area, particularly in the context of the application of this Convention.

The Committee urges the Government, in the light of the foregoing and its earlier and repeated comments, to take all the preliminary steps necessary for the establishment of an inspection system that meets the requirements of the Convention; to keep the Office informed of any developments; to provide copies of relevant legislative, regulations and administrative texts; and to report any difficulties encountered.