Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2008, published 98th ILC session (2009)

Labour Inspection Convention, 1947 (No. 81) - Argentina (Ratification: 1955)

Further to its previous observation, in which it asked the Government for information on the legislative and practical measures taken to reinforce the labour inspection system and to give full effect to Articles 20 and 21 of the Convention, the Committee notes the Government’s detailed report. It also notes the attached documents concerning the MERCOSUR Regional Labour Inspection Plan (PRIT), and its revision and implementation during the period covered by the report.

Regional economic cooperation and developments in the labour inspection system. The Committee notes that according to the Government, the PRIT has been revised to take account of member States’ comments and remarks, but that the decisions on the minimum requirements for inspection visits and for the profiles of labour inspectors have been maintained. The Government also indicates that Brazil should shortly submit a proposal for the development of labour inspectors’ training in the context of MERCOSUR.

The Committee notes the report of a joint pilot inspection operation carried out in September 2007 for three days in the common border area of Argentina, Brazil and Paraguay, pursuant to MERCOSUR decision No. 32/06 on minimum requirements regarding labour inspection procedure. The operation began with a meeting for an exchange of information between the three delegations on the technical aspects of labour inspection in each country and the relevant labour legislation. For the practical action, the inspectors formed two groups, one of which was responsible for the supervision of general conditions of work and the other for occupational safety and health conditions. The workplaces involved were a building materials establishment in Brazil; a commercial establishment in Paraguay; and a hotel establishment in Argentina. In each workplace inspected, verification focused on the documentation pertaining to general conditions of work, social security, equipment and premises and the application of specific standards. The members of the delegations participated in each inspection as observers and had the opportunity to make recommendations relating to their respective national procedures. According to the Government, following this pilot activity, Brazil proposed a broad outline for the training plan for labour inspectors within MERCOSUR.

The Committee also notes that the Ministry of Labour took part in a tripartite regional meeting on labour relations, employment and social security in MERCOSUR, which was held at Montevideo (Uruguay) in November 2007. In the course of the meeting, the Government referred to its difficulties in obtaining funds to finance the Regional Plan for the Eradication of Child Labour, and of the possibility of seeking support from the ILO and other international organizations. With regard to labour inspection in general, the meeting decided that each State party would in future propose holding joint operations for a specific economic activity and one border area per country. The Committee notes with interest that the participants agreed to exchange statistical information on labour inspection that has to be communicated to the ILO under this Convention.

In May 2008, another tripartite meeting on labour relations, employment and social security was held in Buenos Aires, which the ILO attended as an observer. The Committee notes, however, that according to the report of the meeting, employers were represented only by a Brazilian delegation. On that occasion, the Government delegation of Argentina proposed the establishment of a PRIT operations coordination committee consisting of the government bodies responsible for labour inspection, a new common regional inspection methodology, including the organization of an evaluation day with the participation of the social partners. It also proposed that each country should prepare a document setting out proposals to improve technical training for labour inspectors in the context of the MERCOSUR training system (STIT). With regard more specifically to child labour, the Government delegation of Argentina suggested that child labour issues should be dealt with in conjunction with other competent MERCOSUR bodies, such as the Niño Sur initiative, and that one of the member States should be responsible for establishing contacts with the Government representatives of the countries participating in the initiative. It also reported that the Government had taken measures to seek funding through the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB). The Committee would be grateful if the Government would continue to provide information on the impact of the PRIT on improving the professional qualifications of labour inspectors (Article 7 of the Convention), and to indicate the action taken on the proposals regarding the procedure for workplace inspection (Articles 12 and 13). Noting that, according to the Government, labour inspectors and local inspection offices enter information on their activities in the computer system, the Committee would be grateful if the Government would ensure that the central authority discharges its duty to publish and communicate an annual report on the work of the labour inspectorate (Articles 20 and 21).

Article 5(a) and (b). Cooperation between the inspection services and other institutions, and collaboration with employers and workers. The Government states that, pursuant to the provisions of Act No. 25.877 of 2004, the Ministry of Labour has concluded agreements with other ministries, the Federal Public Revenue Department (AFIP) and the Social Security Administration (ANSES), as well as agreements with the trade unions. The Committee would appreciate receiving copies of the texts implementing the above Act and of such agreements.

With reference to its general observation of 2007, the Committee notes with interest the information and documents provided by the Government on the measures taken to encourage effective cooperation between the labour inspectorate and the justice system in achieving common objectives for the protection of workers. It states that a meeting was held between the Minister of Labour, the Secretary of State for Labour, the Secretary of State for Social Security, the Chief Social Security Advisor, the Director of Legal Affairs and all the magistrates of the Social Security Chamber on the complementarity of the powers conferred by Act No. 25.877 on the Ministry of Labour and the AFIP as they relate to compliance by employers with social security obligations. Furthermore, an electronic data entry system on social security cases is available to the courts and a new fines recovery procedure has been set up for the labour courts of the federal capital. The Government adds that the Directorate for Legal Affairs has launched a survey among judges on the possibility of more expeditious proceedings. In addition, various computer systems have been developed jointly by the Directorate of Legal Affairs and the Directorate of Computer Systems and Resources so as to speed up recovery procedures and make the treatment of cases easier to supervise countrywide. It is also planned to establish a computerized register of repeat offenders for the imposition of more severe penalties and the compilation of  statistics. According to the Government, these measures are aimed at making magistrates aware of the rationale of inspection. In support, it provides a list of more than 8,000 cases of employers prosecuted for offences. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would indicate whether the measures to encourage cooperation between the Ministry of Labour and the judicial authorities are confirmed to breaches of social security legislation or whether they also target violations of the rules on general conditions of work and occupational safety and health. Please continue to provide information on all measures taken or envisaged to step up cooperation between the labour inspectorate and the judicial authorities.

Article 6. Conditions of service of labour inspectors. Further to its observation of 2004 on the conditions of service of labour inspectors, which were criticized in 2002 by the Latin American Confederation of Labour Inspectors (CIIT), the Committee notes that under this provision of the Convention the Government refers to Framework Act No. 25.164 of 1999 on public employment at national level. It would be grateful if the Government would provide details of the remuneration and prospects for career advancement of labour inspectors as compared to those of other public servants with similar duties.

Article 9. Collaboration of technical experts and specialists in some of the inspections falling within the remit of labour inspectors. According to the Government, inspectors receive appropriate training enabling them to deal adequately with the various technical issues that they will encounter during inspections. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would specify the composition of the inspection staff by area of expertise and by grade and would indicate how occupational safety and health inspections are undertaken which require specialization (medical, technical, chemical).

Article 14. Information on industrial accidents and cases of occupational disease. The Committee notes that the Government refers in this respect to information supplied in the report on the application of the Safety and Health in Agriculture Convention, 2001 (No. 184), concerning Act No. 24.557 of 1995 on occupational hazards, and particularly to section 31(2)(c). It notes that, according to this provision, employers are required to notify to occupational hazard insurance companies (ART) and the Supervisory Authority for Occupational Risks (SRT) any accidents and cases of occupational disease occurring in their establishments. However, the CIIT reported in its comments of 2002 the failure to give effect to Article 14 of the Convention. The Committee reminds the Government that according to this provision, the labour inspectorate shall be informed of such occurrences and asks the Government to provide details of the manner in which effect is given to this provision in practice.

Articles 11 and 16. Frequency and scope of inspections. According to the Government, inspection visits are conducted either ex officio or as a result of a complaint, and their frequency depends on the number of workplaces liable to inspection and the number of labour inspectors reporting to the ministry or to provisional labour departments. Under Article 11, the Government states that in purchasing vehicles for the inspection services, account is taken of the characteristics of the terrain and that all travel and other related expenses are refunded to labour inspectors immediately. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would indicate whether all the provinces have a labour inspection service and to provide an assessment of the extent to which the effect given in practice to Article 16 is commensurate with the protection needs of the workers concerned.

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