Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2010, published 100th ILC session (2011)

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

The Committee notes with regret that the Government’s report has not been received. It must therefore repeat its previous observation, which read as follows:

The Committee notes that the Government has not sent the report requested by the Conference Committee on the Application of Standards concerning the measures taken to follow up its conclusions adopted at its session in May–June 2008. However, it notes the information received by the ILO on 11 November 2008 concerning the adoption in 2006 of Employment Act No. 6 and Occupational Safety and Health Act No. 9, and the views expressed by the Central Organization of Free Trade Unions (COFTU) and the National Organization of Trade Unions in Uganda (NOTU) at a tripartite workshop on the application of the Convention. The Committee also notes that, as recommended by the Conference Committee in 2001, 2003 and 2008, an ILO technical assistance mission was received from 13 to 17 July 2009 and that, together with the Government and the social partners and various public bodies, it examined the reasons for the deterioration in the labour inspection system since the 1990s, with a view to remedying it.

Need to establish a labour inspection system that meets
the requirements of the Convention

The ILO technical assistance mission noted that the dismantling of the labour inspection system that followed its decentralization observed by an earlier ILO mission in 1995, has progressively worsened. The many interviews it had with staff of the labour administration and other public departments and with the social partners provided the mission with information betraying a level of distress that demands the urgent re-establishment of a labour inspection system able to ensure the supervision of the legal provisions related to conditions of work and the protection of workers, in accordance with Article 3, paragraph 1(a), of the Convention and to provide both employers and workers in industrial and commercial workplaces with useful information for their implementation, as required by Article 3(1)(b).

The field visits proposed to the mission were limited to two very large foreign-owned agro-food companies located in areas of very intense industrial activity (Kampala and Jinja) and the mission regretted that it had not been in a position in which it could assess working conditions in small and medium-sized Ugandan establishments. However, the gradual deterioration in the labour inspection situation can be discerned from the information contained in the annual inspection reports received at the ILO in 1994 and 1996. According to the report covering 1994, the Labour Department had 83 employees, of whom 62 worked in the districts. Despite limited resources, the inspection staff managed to carry out 280 fully fledged visits, 292 visits to monitor implementation and 436 visits for other purposes. As prescribed by Article 3(1)(a) of the Convention, these inspections focused on application of the provisions on working conditions (general conditions and occupational safety and health) and the protection of workers. Of the many complaints from workers that had reached it, the labour inspectorate was able to deal with 1,252 and refer 32 to the courts. The annual inspection report for 1994, as well as providing detailed information on the work of the inspectorate, supplied statistical data together with relevant analyses and comments, including on occupational accidents, placing special emphasis on the lack of general safety and health standards in small and medium-sized establishments.

In 1995, an ILO technical assistance mission found that the labour administration was only represented in 20 of the country’s 39 districts and had lost over 75 per cent of its human resources. For example, of the 67 posts planned for the occupational safety and health department, only two existed, one in Jinja, the other in Mbala, notwithstanding the significant number of establishments covered by the 1964 Factories Act and the fact that they were located throughout the country.

The annual inspection report for 1996 referred to 17 collective labour disputes concerning trade union rights, the refusal by employers to pay wage arrears and retirement benefits, and unfair dismissals of unionized workers. With the restructuring of the country’s administration, unemployment was compounded by the dismissals of public employees. During the period covered, supervision of working conditions appears to have been marginalized in relation to employment policy and to no longer have been a matter of concern for the Government. The central labour administration’s resources had been so reduced that no vehicles were left for travel outside the capital to supervise the operation of district services, some of which were unattainable by telephone. During the year covered by the above report, only 13 of the 21 district labour services were able to communicate information on their work: in all, 1,151 inspection visits were carried out, for some of which transport was provided by the employers. In total, there were 19 occupational safety and health inspection staff. Out of the 104 occupational accidents notified, only eight were investigated. Records showed that 25 per cent of the accidents were in construction and 33 per cent in government services and private security bodies. The 26–30 age group accounted for 34.61 per cent of the accidents, but no legal proceedings had been initiated during the period covered. The industrial court nonetheless apparently played an important role in pacifying and harmonizing industrial relations and, in most of its decisions it found for the workers. Its impact was attributed to its functional and financial independence.

In the observations it made in the years that followed, the Committee repeatedly noted that the Convention was not applied and reminded the Government of the obligations arising out of ratification, asking it to take the necessary steps to remedy the situation of the labour inspection services. Such measures involve, in particular, placing the inspection services under the supervision and control of a central authority and recruiting qualified and properly trained personnel. Financial, material and logistical resources are also essential for the control of the industrial and commercial establishments covered by the Convention and of the relevant national legislation (suitably equipped offices, provision of appropriate technical equipment for inspections and transport facilities and repayment of duty travel expenses). The diversity and complexity of the labour inspection functions defined in the Convention also require labour inspectors to devote most of their time to these duties, in their capacity as public officials who are assured of stability of employment and are independent of improper external influences.

Nevertheless, due to the decentralization of the labour administration as a whole, the Ministry of Labour as such soon disappeared and its component parts were absorbed by a succession of ministries. The labour administration is now a department in the Ministry of Gender, Labour and Social Development (MGLSD). Its resources have been significantly reduced, as has its authority over the decentralized services. While decentralization was designed as a response to the demands of a policy to encourage investment, both national and international, in the interests of developing the national economy and creating jobs, its implementation has become increasingly detrimental to workers because it has overlooked issues relating to conditions of work, which is in violation of the Convention.

The Local Governments Act, No. 1 of 1997, transferred labour issues to the districts, together with services and activities for social rehabilitation, probation and well-being of street children and orphans, the role of women in development, community development, youth, culture and information services. With this transfer of authority, the districts are now exercising powers formerly held by central government, such as formulating development plans on the basis of priorities defined at the local level including raising, levying, managing and assigning resources through separate budgets, and establishing or abolishing public service bodies. As labour administration issues were no longer given priority, district labour departments were consequently reduced to rudimentary structures, and in some instances disappeared altogether. Furthermore, the number of districts increased from 56 to 75 in 2005 and to 80 in 2009, and is likely to increase further in the near future. Only the district of Kampala, which has a special status, is administered by the country’s central authorities. COFTU and NOTU have expressed concern at the fragmentation of the country’s administration at a time of drastic reductions in labour administration personnel and have called for amendment of the Constitution so that labour inspection can be placed back under the control and supervision of a central authority in a fully fledged ministry of labour endowed with the necessary capacities to fulfil its functions effectively. Although a similar view was expressed by nearly all the political and administrative officials and other stakeholders it met, the mission concluded that there is no such prospect on the agenda.

On 15 September 2008, the Local Governments Act was again amended with a view to the further decentralization of the administration taking account of a distinction between rural and urban entities. In accordance with section 77 of the Act, local governments will have the right and duty to formulate, approve and execute their budgets and plans subject to compulsory budgetary equilibrium (paragraph 1). Subject to the obligation to give priority to the objectives set out in national programmes (paragraph 2), urban governments are given financial independence, provided that their plan is incorporated into the district plan (section 79). The Committee notes that, according to section 83 (paragraph 2), central Government allocates to local governments to finance the operation of decentralized services, an unconditional minimum amount calculated in accordance with Chapter 7 of the Constitution, equal in value to the amount of the previous tax year for the same item.

In its report received in November 2008, the Government stated that it was seeking funds within the framework of the Decent Work Country Programme adopted in May 2007, while pointing out that the enhancement of labour inspection is a key element of a strategy for improvement of industrial relations through the promotion of rights at work. It undertakes to address all the issues raised by the Committee in the report due in 2009, taking into account the conclusions of the Conference Committee on the Application of Standards in June 2008. However, the Government has not sent the report as announced, but documented information gathered by the ILO mission of July 2009 shows that, while the MGLSD received an additional budgetary allocation in the course of the year, the labour inspectorate had no place in the MGLSD’s budgetary allocations for the current fiscal year and that, moreover, labour administration issues in general are not included in any of the projects or strategies developed for the short and medium term by the Ministry in charge of local governments.

The Committee nevertheless hopes that, as soon as possible, the labour inspectorate will be given a key role in the country’s social and economic development strategy, in particular through the process for revising the Decent Work Country Programme adopted in 2007, through the enactment of the above new legislation on employment and occupational safety and health, and to ILO technical assistance in fulfilling the objectives of the Convention. The Committee recalls that labour inspection is a function of the public administration that needs its own operating budget allowing the recruitment of suitable personnel and adequate resources to be made available. It is for the ministry responsible for labour to define requirements for this purpose and to raise awareness among governmental authorities and the social partners, particularly employers, of the positive impact of efficient labour inspection on a country’s economic development and enterprise financial results.

The Committee notes the re-establishment of an Industrial Court financed by the state budget. In accordance with Act No. 8 of 2006 on labour disputes (arbitration and settlement), the court hears disputes that the labour inspector has been unable to settle or appeals by one of the parties where there has been no decision within 90 days. However, if the Industrial Court is to play its role fully, it would be advisable for the legislation on the functioning and powers of the labour inspectorate to be revised so as to adapt it to developments in the world of work, and for the legislation on conditions of work to be supplemented by regulations to give it practical effect under the supervision of the labour inspectorate. The Committee notes the indication to the technical assistance mission that a parliamentary process is under way for this purpose. The Committee notes that the Employment Act, No. 6 of 2006, and the Occupational Safety and Health Act, No. 9 of 2006, contain provisions that are largely consistent with the Convention, and requests the Government to take measures promptly to give effect to them in practice. In particular, it requests it to ensure that effect is given in the near future to section 3(1) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act (No. 9) and section 9 of the Employment Act (No. 6), concerning the recruitment of the necessary inspection staff to ensure the implementation of these Acts, and that the number of inspectors will be determined in each district on the basis of the technical and geographical criteria referred to in Article 10 of the Convention. The Committee therefore urges the Government to ensure that the necessary conditions are created to establish effective cooperation between the labour administration and the other public services and private institutions that possess useful data (such as the ministries of finance, justice, tourism, commerce and industry, the Bureau of Statistics, the Investment Authority and the National Social Security Fund (NSSF)) for the establishment of a companies register providing the labour inspectorate with the necessary information to develop an inspection programme that takes into account the branches of activity in which workers are the most vulnerable in view of the general conditions of work and the risks for their safety and health.

The Committee notes that, in accordance with section 20 of the Employment Act (No. 6), an annual report containing information on labour inspection must be published by the labour commissioner at the ministry responsible for labour, which seems at least to suggest a return to the idea of a central labour inspection authority within the meaning of Article 4 of the Convention to supervise and control the work done by the district inspection services. An annual report, prepared in accordance with Articles 20 and 21 of the Convention, will also enable the national authorities concerned, as well as the social partners and the ILO’s supervisory bodies, to gain a sufficiently clear idea of the way the labour inspection system functions and hence to envisage or propose, as the case may be, the necessary means of improving it.

The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any measures taken in pursuit of the above objectives, together with any relevant documents. It would be grateful in particular for information on the manner in which it plans to give effect to Article 4 of the Convention in terms of organizing and running the labour inspection system in practice in the context of the application of the current version of the Local Governments Act. The Committee finally requests the Government to ensure that an annual inspection report, containing the information available on the subjects listed at Article 21 of the Convention and reflecting both progress made and the shortcomings of the labour inspection system, will be published and that a copy will be sent to the ILO.

The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the near future.