Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2014, published 104th ILC session (2015)

Labour Inspection Convention, 1947 (No. 81) - Pakistan (Ratification: 1953)

Follow-up to the discussion in the Committee on the Application of Standards (International Labour Conference, 103rd Session, May–June 2014)

The Committee notes that, for the second year in a row, a discussion took place in the Conference Committee on the Application of Standards (CAS) concerning the application of the Convention by Pakistan. The Committee notes that the CAS discussion in 2014 concerned the effectiveness of labour inspections following the devolution of competence over labour matters to the provinces in 2008; the human resources and material means of the labour inspectorate; labour inspection and occupational safety and health (OSH), particularly in view of a fire in a garment factory in Karachi in 2012, in which nearly 300 workers lost their lives; restrictive policies for inspections; the status of the publication and communication to the ILO of annual inspection reports; and the broader issue of coordination.

Articles 4 and 5(b) of the Convention. Supervision and control by a central labour inspection authority and determination of inspection priorities in collaboration with the social partners. The Committee previously noted the conclusions adopted by the CAS in 2013 which emphasized the importance of an effective system of labour inspection in all provinces as well as the need to agree on the priorities of labour inspection and to adopt a strategic and flexible approach in consultation with the social partners. It noted in this regard the Government’s indication that the Ministry of Overseas Pakistanis and Human Resources Development (MOPHRD) was responsible for the coordination and supervision of labour legislation in the provinces and that the coordination mechanism at the federal level includes a coordination committee and a technical committee.

The Committee notes the written information provided by the Government to the CAS in 2014 that a new mechanism for coordination between the federal Government and the provinces was now in place, which would contribute towards resolving institutional problems. During the discussion in the CAS, the Government indicated that it had convened a round of detailed consultations with the four provincial governments to raise their awareness concerning the importance of the enforcement of international labour standards. The Committee also notes that several speakers during the discussion in the CAS raised significant concerns regarding the lack of coordination between the provinces. Moreover, several speakers emphasized the importance of an effective system of labour inspection in all provinces and agreement at the central level and between the social partners as to the priorities for labour inspection. It was also highlighted during the discussion that measures should be taken to ensure that all four provinces adopted and implemented legislation on labour inspection.

The Committee notes the Government’s statement in its report that a lack of coordination between labour departments and other stakeholders remains a challenge in the implementation of the Convention. The Government indicates that the provincial governments are taking measures to respond to new challenges, and that the labour inspection system is being revitalized. The Committee also notes from the information available to the Office that a national study to develop a labour inspection and OSH profile is being developed with ILO assistance, which will provide a background for future activities on strengthening labour inspection in the country. The Committee urges the Government to take concrete steps to ensure coordination and cooperation in the undertaking of labour inspection, under the supervision and control of a central authority. In this regard, the Committee requests that the Government provide further information on the coordination mechanism established, including the mandate, composition and activities of the coordination committee and the technical committee. It further asks the Government to provide information on the outcome of the national labour inspection profile, as well as other measures taken for the determination of the priorities of labour inspection, and to specify the role of the social partners in this process.

Articles 3(1)(a) and (b), 17, 18, 20 and 21. Effective enforcement and sufficiently dissuasive penalties. The Committee previously noted the indication of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) concerning insufficient penalties for violations of the labour legislation. It also noted the Government’s indication that labour inspectors were instructed to focus on persuasion, guidance and warning, and that prosecutions are only initiated as a last resort.

The Committee notes that several speakers, during the discussion in the CAS, expressed concern regarding the lack of dissuasive penalties for violations of labour laws. Several speakers indicated that the effectiveness of a preventative approach had not been evaluated.

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government concerning the amount of fines imposed for violations in the provinces of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Punjab and Balochistan, as well as the number of warnings issued and prosecutions undertaken in the province of Punjab. The Government indicates that the objectives of inspections are not to prosecute or punish, but to ensure security at the workplace through the implementation of laws and regulations with a focus on prevention and improvement. The Government indicates that it is committed to transitioning from the traditional approach of inspection towards a more modern approach based on objectivity. The Committee recalls that the provision of advice and information by labour inspectors (pursuant to Article 3(1)(b)) can encourage compliance with legal provisions, but that this should be accompanied by an enforcement mechanism enabling those guilty of violations to be penalized. The functions of enforcement and advice are inseparable in practice, and inspectors should have the discretion to give warnings and advice, and to institute or recommend proceedings (see paragraphs 279 and 282 of the 2006 General Survey on labour inspection). The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the number of violations detected, as well on the number of such violations which resulted in prosecution and the imposition of penalties. The Committee further asks the Government to provide information on any measures taken or envisaged to increase the fines and other penalties in legislation within the framework of the ongoing legislative reform in the provinces.

Article 18. Penalties for obstructing labour inspectors in the performance of their duties. The Committee previously noted the ITUC’s indication that employers often refuse labour inspectors access to company records, and though labour inspectors can apply to the courts for access to these records, the relevant proceedings can take several months and lead only to insignificant fines.

The Committee notes that several speakers, during the discussion in the CAS, indicated that there were not sufficient penalties for the obstruction of labour inspectors in their duties.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication that, with respect to factories, obstructing the work of an inspector is punishable with a fine of 20,000 Pakistani rupees (PKR) (approximately US$195), in the provinces of Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, and that the other provinces are revising the applicable fines in this regard. With respect to mining, under the Mines Act, 1923, a person who obstructs an inspection in a mine may be liable for imprisonment for up to three months and a fine of up to PKR1,000 (approximately US$10). The Government indicates that there have been 128 cases where the inspecting officer was denied access to records, and 357 cases in which access to a factory was denied by the employer. These instances have been reported to the courts for prosecution. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on cases relating to the obstruction of labour inspectors, disaggregated by province, including the prosecutions undertaken and their outcome and the specific penalties applied (in particular in relation to the abovementioned cases). It also requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that legislation is adopted in each province providing for sufficiently dissuasive sanctions for the obstruction of labour inspectors in their duties in all sectors, in conformity with Article 18. It requests the Government to provide information on measures taken in this regard.

Articles 3(1)(a)–(b), 5(b), 9 and 13. Labour inspection activities in the area of OSH, including in industrial undertakings in the province of Sindh. The Committee previously noted that a joint action plan had been developed in the province of Sindh to address issues of labour inspection and OSH in view of the serious accidents that have taken place in the country, in particular the factory fire in Karachi, Sindh, in September 2012 that had resulted in the death of 300 workers. The Committee also noted the indications by the ITUC that the province of Sindh had no functioning labour inspection system, that there were no regular inspections of industrial workplaces and that measures to eliminate or minimize workplace hazards are completely absent; since employers are aware of this, they know that they will not be held accountable for their failures in this regard. The ITUC also indicated that the factory in which there was the fire had previously received a deeply flawed certificate by a private auditing firm attesting compliance with international standards, among others, in the area of OSH.

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government to the CAS outlining the main features of the joint action plan, adopted following tripartite consultation, in the province in Sindh, which included the adoption and periodical review of a labour inspection policy; the organization of thematic training courses for all labour inspectors; and the development and adoption of a recruitment system in the Labour Department of Sindh that ensures staff recruitment, staff retention and career growth of OSH staff. The Committee also notes that several speakers, during the CAS discussion, indicated that such measures were commendable, but that information on both the funding and the implementation of these measures was lacking. Concern was also expressed with regard to the factory fire in Karachi and, in particular, the carrying out of third-party inspections by private auditing firms.

The Committee notes the Government’s statement that directions have been issued to provincial governments to take appropriate measures to supervise private auditing firms, and that it has requested information from the provinces regarding the certification process for these firms. The Government also states that the province of Sindh has formed an effective inspection team to check compliance of health and safety standards by factory owners, and that a new survey of factories in the province to assess health and safety has been conducted. Pursuant to the recommendations of the joint action plan, the Government of Sindh is in the process of developing an OSH policy, in consultation with the tripartite constituents, and new legislation is also under review.

The Committee requests the Government to continue to take measures to implement the joint action plan in Sindh, with a view to improving labour inspection as well as the level of compliance with OSH. It requests information on the impact of these measures, including the outcome of the survey of factories and the development of an OSH policy. It also asks the Government to provide information on any similar plans adopted in the other three provinces as well as information on the funding provided for such initiatives. It also asks the Government to provide detailed information on the labour inspection activities in the area of OSH, in particular in the province of Sindh (number of inspection visits, violations reported, legal provisions concerned, types of sanctions imposed and measures adopted with immediate executory force in the event of an imminent danger to the health or safety of workers), as well as on the number of industrial accidents and cases of occupational diseases reported. The Committee further requests the Government to provide information on the supervision of private auditing firms in the country, as well as information on the operation and activities of these firms including the scope of their activities, the number of such firms and the number of enterprises covered by their certification.

Articles 3(1)(a)–(b), 13, 17, 18, 20 and 21. Labour inspection and OSH in the mining sector in the province of Balochistan. The Committee previously noted the ITUC’s indication concerning a high number of deaths and injuries in the coal mines operating in the province of Balochistan. The ITUC indicated that workers engaged in this sector worked with little protective equipment and that mine owners took very few safety precautions.

The Committee notes the Government’s statement that there are ten inspecting officers in the province of Balochistan to conduct inspections related to the Mines Act. Each inspector conducts ten inspections in mines per month, including routine and surprise visits. The Government also indicates that in 2011, the provincial government of Balochistan amended the Mines Act to enhance the penalties, as previous fines had been too low to act as a deterrent. The Committee requests that the Government provide further statistical information on the labour inspection activities carried out in the area of OSH in the province of Balochistan, in particular in the coal mines operating in this province, including the number of mines inspected, the number of violations detected, and the penalties applied.

Articles 7, 10 and 11. Human resources and material means of the labour inspectorate and training of labour inspectors. The Committee previously noted that the CAS, in its conclusions adopted in 2013, emphasized the importance of providing adequate human resources and material means and appropriate training to labour inspectors. It also noted the indications of the ITUC that there was a critical shortage of labour inspectors in the country and that these inspectors received only rudimentary training. The ITUC also stated that inspectors are usually required to use their own vehicles to carry out inspections and are rarely reimbursed for their travelling expenses.

The Committee notes that during the CAS discussion in 2014, several speakers indicated that there was a lack of human resources and material means for labour inspectors, stating that inspectors were under-equipped and received insufficient training. Moreover, several speakers raised concerns with regard to funding, indicating that there was a lack of coordination between the provinces and the federal Government to ensure sufficient funding for labour inspection.

The Committee notes the Government’s statement that resource constraints continue to curtail the capacity of the federal and provincial governments to apply the Convention. However, the Government indicates that motorbikes have been provided to labour inspectors at the district and local levels for inspection purposes and that allocations have been made in the annual budget for the payment of travel allowances and daily allowances for lodging expenses. The Government indicates that availability of transport facilities remains a challenge for mining inspectors, which are often located in remote areas with limited public transportation. The Committee also notes that the provincial Department of Labour in Sindh organized, with ILO support, a training course for all 120 of the province’s labour inspectors in 2014. Moreover, the provincial government of Punjab has developed, with ILO assistance, a training manual and toolkit on labour inspection, and a series of training courses for labour inspectors in all four provinces on using this toolkit has been rolled out. Noting the efforts made to provide means of transportation for inspections, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that sufficient human resources and material means are allocated to the labour inspection services to secure the effective discharge of their duties, and to ensure coordination between the provincial and federal governments in this regard. It requests that the Government provide up-to-date information on the number of labour inspectors in each province and details of the material means available to the labour inspection services in each province, such as office facilities and means of transport for inspection. The Committee further asks the Government to provide detailed information on the training provided to labour inspectors in each province, including the subjects covered, the number of participants and the duration of the training, and to evaluate the impact of such training.

Article 12(1). Restrictive policies for labour inspection. The Committee previously noted the ITUC’s observations that while the long-standing restrictive policy barring labour inspectors from entering factory premises had been overturned in the Punjab Province, inspectors were still required to provide prior notice to employers concerned well in advance of inspections in the province of Sindh. However, the Government indicated that labour inspections are not banned in any province and that regular inspections had been reinstated in the province of Punjab.

The Committee notes the Government’s statement before the CAS that there are no legal or administrative impediments to the undertaking of inspections. However, information provided during the CAS discussions also indicated that this was not always the situation in practice. The Committee asks the Government to provide further information on the measures taken in law and practice to ensure that labour inspectors are empowered to enter freely and without previous notice at any hour of the day or night any workplace liable to inspection, so that labour inspectors can perform their duties in all provinces of the country, in accordance with the provisions of the Convention.

Articles 20 and 21. Publication of an annual inspection report. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that it has implemented the first phase of the labour inspection computerization system in the Punjab province in 16 districts. Inspectors of factories send online inspection reports, and data is maintained on the number of factories, number of inspections carried out, the violations detected and the penalties imposed. This will facilitate the timely submission of inspection reports. Other provinces are also working in this regard to develop a comprehensive inspection and reporting system. The Government states that the provinces have been asked to prepare an annual report on inspection activities. The Committee also notes the statistical information provided by the Government with its report, concerning the number of labour inspectors in each province and the number of inspections undertaken, as well as certain information concerning the number of enterprises liable to inspection and the workers employed therein, the number of violations detected and the number of occupational accidents. The Committee requests the Government to pursue its efforts to ensure that the central labour authority publishes and communicates to the ILO an annual labour inspection report, pursuant to Article 20. It expresses the firm hope that, due to the ongoing computerization of the labour inspections system, the report will contain full information on the subjects set forth in Article 21(a)–(g), with respect to each province.

Technical assistance. Noting the Government’s indication during the CAS discussion in 2014 with regard to the technical assistance received as well as the further assistance requested, the Committee invites the Government to provide information on any follow-up in this respect.

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

[The Government is asked to reply in detail to the present comments in 2015.]