Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2006, published 96th ILC session (2007)

Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1958 (No. 111) - Dominican Republic (Ratification: 1964)

1. The Committee takes note of the information supplied by the Government at the Conference Committee on the Application of Standards in June 2004 in response to matters raised by the Committee in earlier comments. It also notes the discussion that ensued. The Conference Committee concluded by asking the Government for detailed information on the practical effect given to the Convention, including statistics and information on the machinery for the prevention of sexual harassment and pregnancy testing in the maquila sector (export processing zones), the outcome of inquiries into complaints and all measures taken to deal with discrimination at work. The Committee also notes the observations of 31 August 2005 of the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) and the Government’s reply of 17 March 2006.

2. Discrimination on grounds of colour and race. In its previous observation the Committee noted that according to the ICFTU, although discrimination on the ground of race is prohibited by law, it exists in practice. The Committee noted in earlier comments that the Committee on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD) had expressed concern about reports of racial prejudice not only against Haitians but also against darker-skinned Dominicans (CERD/C/304/Add.74 of 12 April 2001, paragraph 7). The Committee also took note of the Declaration by the Dominican Republic and the Republic of Haiti for the prevention of discrimination in the hiring of migrant workers, both Dominican and Haitian. In its communication of 2005, the ICFTU stated that between the end of July and mid-August, 2,000 persons detained by the police, the Dominican army or migration officials were deported to Haiti because of their colour or their inability to speak Spanish and that they had no opportunity to demonstrate that they were legal immigrants, recover their documents or contact the diplomatic authorities of their country. Nor were they allowed to claim payment of wages due. Even some Dominican nationals were deported, having been taken for Haitians. The Committee notes that the Government once again states that there is no discrimination based on colour, since 80 per cent of Dominicans are dark-skinned, and that the policy to repatriate Haitians who are not lawfully in the country is applied in accordance with the agreement on repatriation mechanisms concluded by Haiti and the Dominican Republic in 1999 and the Memorandum of Understanding on Migration Matters. The Government states further that it gives preferential treatment to Haitian nationals allowing them to demonstrate that they are legal immigrants and, where applicable, to retrieve their families and recover their belongings and any work-related entitlements before being repatriated. It also indicates that the Haitian authorities have filed no complaints with the foreign service authorities for these human rights violations.

3. The Committee notes that the Government refers to the legislation but supplies no information on its application in practice or on any inquiries into the matters raised by the ICFTU. The Committee recalls that as early as 2004, the Conference Committee indicated that according to the information available, the problems were not with the legislation but with the way it was applied in practice and that having noted the Government’s determination to investigate the allegations made in the complaints and improve supervision of its laws against discrimination, it requested the Government to send to the Committee of Experts detailed information in writing, including statistics, on the practical effect given to the Convention, on the outcome of the investigations and on all measures taken to deal with discrimination at work.

4. The Committee notes with regret that the Government’s report does not contain the practical information requested by the Conference Committee or any information on the case referred to by the ICFTU. It therefore reiterates the request for information made by the Conference Committee in 2004 and asks the Government to provide information on the case referred to by the ICFTU and on any inquiries carried out in this connection.

5. Discrimination on ground of sex. In its previous observation, the Committee took note of a communication from the ICFTU reporting that although the law bans discrimination on the ground of sex, including pregnancy testing and sexual harassment, both exist and are allowed in practice. The Committee notes that according to the Government, the Labour Inspection Department has a policy on pregnancy testing, which it applies actively and consistently in all enterprises, particularly in the export processing zones and that it coordinates its work with the Labour and Gender Departments. The Committee also notes that the Government again states that there have been no complaints concerning pregnancy testing. The Committee again asks the Government to send information in its next report on the machinery for prevention and investigation in place to deal with practices that discriminate against women, particularly those alleged by the ICFTU, and on the application of the legislation in practice and, with regard to the cases cited, information on any investigations conducted and on their outcome.

6. HIV testing. The Committee notes the information supplied by the ICFTU to the effect that men and women workers are required as a matter of course to undergo HIV testing in order to be hired or to keep their jobs, often against their will and in breach of the principle of confidentiality, and that the problem mainly affects women workers in the export processing zones and the tourist industry; furthermore, the machinery set up by the Government to prevent HIV testing has produced no results, labour inspectors do not enforce the ban on such testing, safety and health committees lack the necessary training and the workers file no complaints because they are unaware of the complaints procedures set up by the Government or because they are afraid that their HIV-positive status will be disclosed. The Committee takes note of the Government’s statement that the legislation in force bans HIV testing as a condition for being hired or keeping one’s job and that there have been no complaints by either men or women workers of any breach of this provision in any of the 37 local offices of the Ministry of Labour (SET) located throughout the country, nor have there been any reports or complaints from inspectors in the course of their regular visits or from the SET’s AIDS Unit. The Committee also notes that the Health and Safety Department ran training and awareness-raising workshops on AIDS and labour rights, some of which were aimed at workers of both sexes and others for SET officials. The Committee takes note of Act No. 55-93 on AIDS which provides that the SET, in coordination with the trade union federations, are to promote information, education and communication campaigns intended for employees and employers in all public and private enterprises, on how sexually transmitted diseases and AIDS are transmitted, and on prevention. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the manner in which it ensures the confidentiality of complaints of breaches of the ban on HIV testing and on the adoption of other measures to protect workers filing complaints or reporting violations and on measures to ensure enforcement of the ban by labour inspectors. Please also continue to provide information on campaigns for information and awareness-raising, on training in subjects related to this problem, particularly for labour inspectorate officials and employees, and on the impact of such activities in practice. The Committee would also appreciate being kept informed of any reports or complaints of breaches of the ban and any action taken on them, including any administrative or judicial decisions.

The Committee is raising other matters in a request addressed directly to the Government.