Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2020, published 109th ILC session (2021)

Labour Inspection Convention, 1947 (No. 81) - Bangladesh (Ratification: 1972)

The Committee takes note of the supplementary information provided by the Government on 15 September 2020 in response to a complaint pending under article 26 of the ILO Constitution. In light of the decision adopted by the Governing Body at its 338th Session (June 2020), the Committee proceeded with the examination of the application of the Convention on the basis of this supplementary information received from the Government (see Articles 2, 4, 7, 10, 11, 12, 16 and 23 below), as well as on the basis of the information at its disposal in 2019.

The Committee notes that the above-mentioned complaint under article 26 of the ILO Constitution – alleging non-compliance by Bangladesh with this Convention, as well as the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), and the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98) – is pending before the Governing Body. At its 340th Session (October–November 2020), the Governing Body, in view of the information communicated by the Government on the situation of freedom of association in the country and taking due note both of the Government’s commitment to continue to further improve the overall situation and to address the outstanding issues before the supervisory bodies: (i) requested the Government to develop, with the support of the Office and of the secretariat of the Workers’ and Employers’ groups, and in full consultation with the social partners concerned, a time-bound road map of actions with tangible outcomes to address all the outstanding issues mentioned in the complaint submitted under article 26 to the 108th Session of the International Labour Conference (2019); (ii) requested the Government to report on progress made in that regard to the Governing Body at its next session; and (iii) deferred the decision on further action in respect of the complaint until its 341st Session (March 2021).

Articles 2, 4, 12 and 23 of the Convention. Labour inspection in export processing zones (EPZs) and special economic zones (SEZs). In its previous comments, the Committee requested that EPZs and SEZs be brought under the purview of the labour inspectorate.

The Committee notes the Government’s reference in its report to the EPZ Labour Act, which was adopted in February 2019. It welcomes that Chapter XIV of that Act now provides for labour inspection by labour inspectors appointed under the Bangladesh Labour Act (BLA) and that the Government indicates that labour inspectors of the Directorate of Inspection for Factories and Establishments (DIFE) have already undertaken labour inspections in five factories in EPZs. The Committee also notes the Government’s indications that consultations are ongoing with workers, investors and relevant stakeholders to see how labour inspections undertaken by the DIFE can best be integrated with the existing supervision exercised by the Bangladesh Export Processing Zones Authority (BEPZA). The Government states in the supplementary information provided that an inspection framework is being developed, which will be shared when completed. The Committee notes, in particular, that section 168 of the EPZ Labour Act allows the Chief Inspector and other Inspectors appointed under the BLA to undertake inspections but observes that an approval of the Executive Chairman of the BEPZA is required. In this respect, the Committee recalls that, pursuant to section 4(3) of the Bangladesh Export Processing Zones Authority Act, the objectives of the BEPZA include encouraging and promoting foreign investment in the zone. The Committee recalls that Article 12 of the Convention provides that labour inspectors provided with proper credentials shall be empowered to enter freely and without previous notice at any hour of the day or night any workplace liable to inspection. While the Committee welcomes the progress made in opening EPZs and SEZs for labour inspections by the DIFE, it requests the Government to provide information on the outcome of the above-mentioned discussions and consultations, including the inspection framework under development. Further, the Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that labour inspectors are empowered to enter freely and without previous notice establishments in EPZs and SEZs, without any restrictions. In this respect, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the nature and the modalities of the approval required from the BEPZA for the undertaking of inspections, including if a separate request is required before each inspection, and if so, the number of requests made, the number approved, the time elapsed between each request and approval, and the reasons given for each failure to approve. Lastly, it requests the Government to provide statistical information on the labour inspections undertaken in EPZs and SEZs, disaggregated into inspections by the DIFE and inspections under the BEPZA, including the overall number of inspections undertaken, the violations detected and the measures taken as a result.

Article 6. Status and conditions of service of labour inspectors. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that retention of labour inspectors was a problem and that a number of recently recruited labour inspectors had left the DIFE after having been trained, to take up work with other government services. The Committee noted that a study on the reasons for the high attrition rate of the DIFE recommended, among other things, the creation of more senior positions and the further development of staff competencies. In this respect, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that following the recommendations in that study, a new proposal providing for the recruitment of a significant number of labour inspectors was made, including the creation of senior positions. The Committee notes that the amendments to the BLA, adopted in November 2018, provide for the creation of an additional labour inspection position, bringing the number of career positions with the labour inspectorate to six (previously five). The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the measures taken to implement the recommendations in the study on the reasons for the high attrition rate, and to provide information on the implementation of the new career structure adopted in 2018, including the number of appointments made at each position, as well as information on the attrition rate among inspectors at different professional levels.

Articles 7, 10, 11 and 16. Human resources and material resources of the labour inspectorate. Frequency and thoroughness of labour inspections. In its past comments, the Committee noted that 575 labour inspection positions had been approved in 2014 but not filled, and that the number of labour inspectors decreased from 345 to 320 between 2017 and 2018.

The Committee notes with concern, from the statistics provided by the Government responding to the Committee’s request that the number of labour inspectors further decreased to 308 labour inspectors by August 2019. However, it also notes the Government’s supplementary information that as of 2020, the DIFE has been upgraded with an additional 993 manpower. The Committee also notes the information provided, on the number of labour inspections carried out, the training provided to labour inspectors, and that the Government reiterates the information from July 2017 with respect to the equipment and transport facilities available to the DIFE. Finally, it welcomes the information concerning the increase in the budget of the DIFE from 351.20 million Bangladesh taka to 418.5 million taka.

The Committee notes that in the supplementary information provided, the Government once again refers to proposals to increase the manpower of the DIFE, indicating that it has been proposed to create an additional 1,698 positions, including senior positions. Welcoming the proposed increase in the number of labour inspectors, the Committee requests the Government to continue to make every effort to recruit an adequate number of qualified labour inspectors, including by taking measures to fill all of the 575 labour inspection posts already approved in 2014, and to continue to provide information on the proposal to further increase the number of labour inspectors. In this respect, it requests the Government to clarify whether the additional 993 positions referred to by the Government have been filled or only approved. It requests the Government to strengthen its efforts to ensure that workplaces are inspected as often and as thoroughly as is necessary to ensure the effective application of the relevant legal provisions, and to provide information on the current number of labour inspectors working at the DIFE (not only on the number of positions approved or proposed), as well as on the number of labour inspection visits carried out, and to disaggregate this information by sector. Noting the information provided by the Government in this respect, the Committee also requests the Government to provide up-to-date information on the budget, equipment and transport facilities available to the DIFE, and the training provided to labour inspectors.

Articles 12(1), 15(c) and 16. Inspections without previous notice. Duty of confidentiality in relation to complaints. In its previous comments, the Committee noted an increase in the number of inspections that were unannounced (random or complaints-driven), from 2.5 per cent of all inspections in 2014 to 20 per cent in 2016–17, compared with those undertaken with prior notice (regular inspections).

The Committee notes the indication of the Government that the BLA permits labour inspectors to deal with complaints confidentially. The Committee also notes with concern that the Government indicates that inspections in factories are normally announced, while inspections in shops and establishments are normally unannounced, and it notes the information provided concerning the number of inspections in each. The Committee recalls the importance of undertaking a sufficient number of inspections that are unannounced, including at factories as well as shops and establishments, to ensure that when inspections are conducted as a result of a complaint without prior notice, the fact of the complaint is kept confidential. The Committee requests the Government to provide further information on the specific measures taken or envisaged to ensure that labour inspectors treat as absolutely confidential the source of any complaint and give no intimation to the employer that an inspection visit was made in consequence of the receipt of such a complaint, including measures taken with respect to inspections of factories. It also requests the Government to provide more specific information on the number of inspection visits that were unannounced and those that were undertaken with prior notice, disaggregated by RMG factory, shop, establishment, and other factories, as well as statistical information on the outcome of those visits disaggregated in the same manner.

Articles 17 and 18. Legal proceedings, effective enforcement and sufficiently dissuasive penalties. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government, in reply to the Committee’s request for statistics on enforcement in relation to violations of the legal provisions. In 2018, 42,866 labour inspections were undertaken and 116,618 violations detected (compared with 40,386 inspections and 100,336 violations in 2017), 1,531 cases submitted to the labour courts (1,583 in 2017) and 798 resolved cases (574 in 2017). The Committee notes that the outcome of cases referred to the courts were limited to the imposition of fines, and that the amount of penalties imposed in 2018 was 3.55 million taka (approximately US$41,268, an average of approximately US$52 per resolution). The Committee also notes that the Government reiterates that there is one legal officer at the DIFE responsible for the follow-up of labour law violations detected by labour inspectors, that a legal advisory firm is affiliated with the DIFE, and that there is a plan to establish a legal unit at the DIFE. The Government indicates that this unit is proposed to be composed of 17 legal officers. The Committee notes with regret that the Government does not provide a reply in response to the Committee’s request for information on any measures taken or envisaged to ensure that penalties for labour law violations are sufficiently dissuasive, including penalties other than fines. The Committee, once again, requests the Government to provide information on any measures introduced or envisaged to ensure that penalties for labour law violations are sufficiently dissuasive and to improve the proceedings for the effective enforcement of the legal provisions. In this respect, it also requests the Government to provide information on the progress made to establish a legal unit at the DIFE, including on the number of staff and their functions. Lastly, it requests the Government to continue to provide information on the specific outcome of the cases referred to the labour courts (such as the imposition of fines and also sentences of imprisonment) and to specify the legal provisions to which they relate.

The Committee previously noted that labour officials of the Department of Labour (DOL) address cases of alleged violations of freedom of association through conciliation and requested information on the measures taken to secure the enforcement of legal provisions related to freedom of association. In this respect, the Committee notes the Governments’ indication that pursuant to the BLA, the DOL does not intervene in the conciliation concerning violations of freedom of association. The Committee takes due note of this information and refers to its comments under Conventions Nos 87 and 98.

The Committee is raising other matters in a request addressed directly to the Government, which reiterates the content of its previous request adopted in 2019.

[The Government is asked to reply in full to the present comments in 2021.]