Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2011, published 101st ILC session (2012)

Fee-Charging Employment Agencies Convention (Revised), 1949 (No. 96) - Pakistan (Ratification: 1952)

The Committee notes the short statement submitted by the Government in June 2011 indicating that it is complying with the provisions of the Convention through the application of the Fee-Charging Employment Agencies (Regulation) Act, 1976. The Government further reports that the Act regulates employment agencies and licensing, and provides sanctions which may lead to imprisonment of up to one year. In its previous observations, the Committee recalled that in 1977 it noted the enactment of the Fee-Charging Employment Agencies (Regulation) Act, 1976, which provided for the licensing of fee-charging employment agencies and empowered public authorities to prohibit the establishment of fee-charging employment agencies in any area where the public employment service was operating. According to section 1(3), the Act would enter into force when the federal Government made an official notification in the Official Gazette. The Committee recalls the comments made by the All Pakistan Federation of Trade Unions (APFTU) in June 2005. The APFTU stated that agencies are allowed to charge fees for recruitment abroad and that some of them were involved in human trafficking. The Committee also noted the Pakistan Workers Federation’s (PWF) observations, forwarded to the Government in August 2010, indicating that recruiting agencies have been exploiting prospective migrant workers. The PWF urged the Government to ensure that the Fee-Charging Employment Agencies (Regulation) Act, 1976, enters into force in order to protect prospective migrant workers against exploitation and to set up free public employment exchange facilities for jobseekers. The Committee requests a copy of the Official Gazette indicating the enactment of the Fee-Charging Employment Agencies (Regulation) Act, 1976. The Committee also requests the Government to reply in detail to the following points raised in the previous observations.

Progressive abolition of fee-charging employment agencies conducted with a view to profit. Part II of the Convention. In its 2006 observation, the Committee noted that in relation to the abolition of fee-charging employment agencies, as required by Part II of the Convention, the Government reiterated that draft rules have been framed to regulate the operation of fee-charging employment agencies. The Government also confirmed that the licences for overseas employment promoters were granted for a period of one, two or three years. In relation to Article 9 of the Convention, the Government indicated that, due to the economic conditions of Pakistan, levies have been established for migrant workers. Therefore, the Government was not in a position to adopt a policy for abolishing fee-charging employment services for migrant workers. It also added that punitive action was taken against those overseas employment promoters that were involved in violations of the Emigration Ordinance, 1979, and the Emigration Rules, 1979. The Committee refers to its previous comments, noting again the lack of progress in achieving the abolition of fee-charging employment agencies. The Committee asks the Government to report on the following issues:

• -the measures taken to abolish fee-charging employment agencies;
• -the numbers of public employment offices and the geographical areas they serve (Article 3(1) and (2));
• -the consultations of employers’ and workers’ organizations on the supervision of all fee-charging employment agencies (Article 4(1)(a), (2) and (3));
• -with regard to overseas employment promoters, the measures taken to ensure that these agents may only benefit from a yearly licence renewable at the discretion of the competent authority (Article 5(2)(b)) and charge fees and expenses on a scale submitted to, and approved by, the competent authority (Article 5(2)(c));
• -with regard to placing and recruiting workers abroad, the conditions established by the laws and regulations in force for the operation of fee charging employment agencies (Article 5(2)(d)).

Revision of Convention No. 96. The Committee refers to its 2010 General Survey concerning employment instruments in which it recalled that public employment services and private agencies are both actors in the labour market. They should therefore mutually benefit from cooperation as their common aim is to ensure a well-functioning labour market and the achievement of full employment (paragraph 728). In Chapter III of the General Survey, the Committee noted that if private employment agencies operate in a particular labour market, this operation has to be regulated. Therefore, governmental action is required, either directly through a system of legislation, licensing or certification or, indirectly, by authorizing an existing national practice or one that is to be established (paragraph 237 et seq.). In its previous observations on Convention No. 96, the Committee has already highlighted the role that the Private Employment Agencies Convention, 1997 (No. 181), and the Private Employment Agencies Recommendation, 1997 (No. 188), play in the licensing and supervision of placement services for migrant workers and the role that Convention No. 181 attributes to private employment agencies for the functioning of the labour market (see paragraph 730 of the 2010 General Survey). Taking into account that the present situation is not in conformity with the provisions of Part II of Convention No. 96, the Committee hopes that the Government and the social partners will contemplate adhering to the obligations of the Private Employment Agencies Convention, 1997 (No. 181), the ratification of which involves the immediate denunciation of Convention No. 96. It invites the Government to report on steps taken, in consultation with the social partners, to ratify Convention No. 181.

[The Government is asked to reply in detail to the present comments in 2012.]