Protection of Wages Convention, 1949 (No. 95) - Türkiye (Ratification: 1961)

Replies received to the issues raised in a direct request which do not give rise to further comments (CEACR) - adopted 2020, published 109th ILC session (2021)

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government, which answers the points raised in its previous direct request and has no further matters to raise in this regard.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2013, published 103rd ILC session (2014)

Article 2 of the Convention. Scope of application. Further to its previous comment, the Committee notes the Government’s explanations concerning the specific provisions on wages protection contained in the Maritime Labour Act No. 854 for those employed on board Turkish-flagged vessels of more than 100 tons. The Committee notes, however, that no information has been provided regarding other categories of workers which are currently excluded from the scope of application of the Labour Code, including domestic workers, apprentices and workers engaged in air transport activities. The Committee notes, in this regard, the communication of the Turkish Confederation of Employers’ Associations (TISK), dated 20 April 2012, in which reference is made to the new Code of Obligations No. 6098, entered into force on 1 July 2012, that covers domestic workers and air transport employees. According to TISK, the provisions of the new Code of Obligations on service agreements, and in particular section 407 on wage protection, offer a level of protection similar to that afforded by the Labour Code. TISK specifies, for instance, that the new Code of Obligations requires electronic payment to a bank account, and the issue of a pay slip at each pay period. The Committee accordingly requests the Government to provide more detailed information on how the Code of Obligations No. 6098 gives effect to the substantive requirements set out in Articles 3 to 15 of the Convention with respect to those workers currently excluded from the coverage of the Labour Code.

Article 8. Deductions from wages. The Committee notes the Government’s reference to sections 35 and 38 of the Labour Code as well as sections 32, 38 and 39 of the Maritime Labour Act which set out specific limits for certain forms of wage deductions, including deductions in the form of disciplinary fines, deductions for loss or damages and attachment of wages pursuant to a court decision. The Committee observes, however, that there still appears to exist no overall limit to authorized deductions so that wages are protected to the extent necessary for the safeguard of the maintenance of the workers and their families. The Committee wishes to refer, in this respect, to paragraphs 216–258 of its 2003 General Survey on the protection of wages, which highlight the various forms of wage deductions covered by this Article of the Convention including, for instance, wage deductions for taxes, insurance contributions and reimbursement of advance payments that are expressly referred to in section 37 of the Labour Code. In this connection, the Committee also notes that in its 2010 conclusions, the European Committee of Social Rights has concluded that the situation in Turkey is not in conformity with article 4(5) of the Revised European Social Charter on the ground that it has not been established that deductions from wages will not deprive workers and their dependants of their very means of subsistence. The Committee accordingly requests the Government to consider appropriate steps in order to ensure that the national legislation is brought into full conformity with the Convention on this point.

Articles 12 and 15. Non-payment or delayed payment of wages – Enforcement measures. The Committee recalls its previous comments in which it stressed the importance of preventing and punishing cases of non-payment or delayed payment of wages, especially in the light of earlier observations made by the Confederation of Turkish Trade Unions (TÜRK-IS), the Turkish Confederation of Public Workers’ Associations (KAMU-SEN) and TISK. In a new communication dated 17 April 2012, TÜRK-IS indicates that the legal remedies available in the event of non-payment of wages involve a lengthy and very expensive process that requires legal expertise – a situation all the more problematic as irregular employment stands at 42.5 per cent and labour inspection is practically non-existent in the informal sector. TÜRK-IS adds that despite this reality, thousands of cases for back wages are being brought before the labour courts and the Court of Cassation. The Committee notes that the Government’s report does not contain updated information on the number of workers and types of enterprises affected by wage arrears and any progress made in settling outstanding payments in both the public and private sectors. The Committee requests the Government to continue to monitor the situation of deferred payment of wages, its root causes and implications, and to provide detailed information on any measures taken in order to ensure that the legislation on wages protection is effectively enforced.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2012, published 102nd ILC session (2013)

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It hopes that a report will be supplied for examination by the Committee at its next session and that it will contain full information on the matters raised in its previous direct request, which read as follows:

Repetition

Article 2 of the Convention. Scope of application. The Committee notes that under section 113 of the Code, most of the provisions on wages protection, and the corresponding provisions on penal sanctions, now apply to two categories of workers which otherwise fall outside the coverage of the Labour Code, i.e. agricultural and forestry enterprises employing 50 employees or less, and small businesses of craftsmen employing three persons or less. Recalling that pursuant to Article 2 of the Convention, all persons to whom wages are paid or payable should be protected in respect of the matters dealt with in Articles 3 to 15 of the Convention, the Committee requests the Government to specify how effect is given in law and practice to all the substantive requirements of the Convention with respect to those workers who remain excluded from the scope of application of the Labour Code, such as for instance domestic workers, apprentices, and workers engaged in sea and air transport activities.

Article 8. Deductions from wages. The Committee notes the Government’s explanations concerning the recent income tax reduction for the low paid in reply to previous comments concerning the overall limits of authorized wage deductions. It also notes the reference to section 37 of the new Labour Code which requires all deductions to appear on the pay slip that the employer is obliged to give to the worker at the time of each payment. The Committee wishes to refer, in this connection, to Paragraph 1 of the Protection of Wages Recommendation, 1949 (No. 85), which suggests that an upper limit should be placed on deductions, so as to ensure that they are not so heavy as to deprive the workers of the basic minimum income needed for the maintenance of themselves and their families. As the Committee noted in paragraph 248 of the 2003 General Survey on protection of wages, Article 8 of the Convention imposes an obligation to set limits for permissible deductions which in itself reveals an underlying concern that deductions should not become arbitrary or unreasonably onerous. Recalling that apart from setting specific limits for each type of wage deduction (e.g. income tax or social security contributions), it is also important to establish an overall limit beyond which wages cannot be further reduced, the Committee requests the Government to indicate the manner in which the income of workers is protected in the case of multiple wage deductions or attachments.

Article 11. Privileged protection of wage claims in bankruptcy proceedings. The Committee notes that the new Labour Code in section 33 provides for the establishment of a Wage Guarantee Fund to protect employees’ entitlements in the case of the employer’s insolvency or bankruptcy. The Fund covers up to three months’ unpaid wages and is financed by 1 per cent of the annual employers’ contributions to the Unemployment Insurance Scheme. The Committee further notes the Ministerial Regulations for the operation of the Wage Guarantee Fund which have entered into force in October 2004. Noting that the national legislation has progressively adopted much higher standards of protection than those provided for in Article 11 of the Convention, both in terms of protection by means of a privilege and also protection through a wage guarantee institution, the Committee encourages the Government to give favourable consideration to the ratification of the Protection of Workers’ Claims (Employer’s Insolvency) Convention, 1992 (No. 173), which contains the most relevant standards in relation to the protection of workers’ claims in the event of the employer’s bankruptcy or insolvency. Convention No. 173 was designed as a dual thrust instrument proposing two distinct sets of standards, one dealing with protection by means of a privilege and another dealing with wage guarantee funds, which may be accepted together or separately. As explained in greater detail in paragraphs 331–353 of the abovementioned General Survey, Convention No. 173 offers solid and modern responses to current challenges of corporate insolvency, in that it strengthens the traditional privilege system while exploring new means of protection in the form of wage guarantee institutions and leaving a wide margin of discretion to ratifying countries for the implementation of the standards.

Part V of the report form. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide up to date information on the application of the Convention in practice, including inspection results, statistics on the number of workers covered by relevant legislation, copies of official documents or studies on wages issues, any difficulties encountered in the implementation of the Convention, etc.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2012, published 102nd ILC session (2013)

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

Repetition

The Committee notes the information contained in the Government’s detailed report and its attachments, in particular the comments made by the Turkish Confederation of Employer Associations (TISK) and the Confederation of Turkish Trade Unions (TÜRK-IŞ) on the application of the Convention. It also notes the comments made by the Confederation of Turkish Public Employees Trade Unions (KAMU-SEN), which were appended to the Government’s report received in October 2003. The Committee further notes the adoption of the new Labour Law No. 4857 of 22 May 2003 revising the old Labour Law No. 1475 of 25 August 1971.

Article 12, paragraph 1, of the Convention. Non-payment or delayed payment of wages. The Committee notes that employers’ and workers’ organizations have been commenting for a number of years on problems concerning the non-payment or delayed payment of wages. TÜRK-IŞ indicates that the amounts owed to workers in the form of unpaid or only partially paid wages and social benefits and bonuses are reaching high levels. The situation affects considerable numbers of workers in the private sector but also municipal workers. For KAMU-SEN, the dramatic drop in real wages, mainly because of inflation and increasing production costs, pushes workers to depression. TISK believes that excessive financial obligations, such as high tax and social insurance contributions imposed on registered workers and employers, increase the difference between gross and net wages, and diminish the country’s competitiveness. In fact, Turkey has been on top of the OECD list of countries with the highest labour employment costs: 42.8 per cent of average labour costs have consisted of payroll taxes since 2006, as compared to 27.5 per cent for other OECD countries and 11.7 per cent for EU countries. For TISK, the heavy tax and social insurance burden boost the informal sector and render the economy less competitive.

Concerning these points, the Government states that the delays in the payment of wages are caused mainly by the economic crisis affecting all enterprises or organizations, private or public. The Government also refers to sections 33 and 34 of the new Labour Law as measures to address this situation through legislation. Section 33 establishes a Wages Guarantee Fund within the Unemployment Insurance Fund, which is financed by 1 per cent of the contributions to the unemployment insurance by the employers. Section 34 provides that workers may at their discretion decide not to work if the employer does not pay the wage due within 20 days of the pay day, which must not be construed as a strike or be considered as a ground for termination of the worker’s employment contract, and that an interest at the highest commercial rate must be applied to the sum of wages due to the worker. As regards the situation of wage payment in the public sector, the Government makes reference to the results of a survey by the Ministry of Interior showing that there are nearly 5,500 public officers affected across 188 municipalities involving an amount of approximately 5,781,147 new Turkish liras (approximately US$4.6 million). In this connection, the Government indicates that the legislation regulating the finance and personnel affairs in public administration, such as Act No. 5018 concerning the administration of public finance and audit, and Act No. 5620 on the transfer to permanent posts or contractual personnel status of workers temporarily employed in the public administration, ensures that wages of public officers are paid regularly and in full. The Committee recalls in this connection paragraphs 358 and 366 of its General Survey of 2003 on the protection of wages, in which it pointed out that whatever the intricate causes of the problem of wage arrears, the deferred payment of wages is part of a vicious circle that inexorably affects the entire national economy. The Committee hopes that the Government will continue its efforts for devising appropriate solutions to the problem of delayed or non-payment of wages through social dialogue and better implementation of the labour legislation. The Committee accordingly requests the Government to closely monitor the situation and continue to provide up to date information on the number of workers and types of enterprises affected by accumulated wage arrears and any progress made in settling outstanding payments in both the public and private sector. Finally, the Committee requests the Government to transmit any comments it may wish to make in reply to the latest observations of TISK and TÜRK-IŞ.

Article 15. Enforcement and legal remedies. According to TÜRK-IŞ the difficulties experienced in the protection of workers’ wages are mainly due to the considerable difference between the legal provisions in place and their practical application, or in other words to the lack of effective penalties. In contrast, TISK considers that legal provisions on penalties are sufficient. It also states that the increase of administrative fines would not safeguard the full respect of the wage legislation, as long as the employers are deprived of their financial strength to secure resources for the payment of wages. In this regard, the Government refers to section 102 of the new Labour Law prescribing an administrative fine of 100 Turkish New Lira (TRY) (approximately US$83), to be annually readjusted under section 17 of Act No. 5326 of 30 March 2005, for failure to pay the wages in full. The Government explains that based on these provisions, an employer would currently be liable to a fine of TRY167 (approximately US$138) for each month of non-payment or underpayment of the worker’s wage. It also refers to the possibility to file a complaint with the labour courts under section 61 of Act No. 2822 on collective labour agreements which provides for a lawsuit for payment that carries payment of interest at the highest commercial rate. The Committee would be thankful to the Government for providing statistical information on the number of wage-related cases heard by labour courts and the amounts of wages recovered.

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

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

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

The Committee notes the detailed information provided in the Government’s report, in particular the adoption of the new Labour Code (Act No. 4857 of 22 May 2003).

Article 2 of the Convention. Scope of application. The Committee notes with interest that under section 113 of the Code, most of the provisions on wages protection, and the corresponding provisions on penal sanctions, now apply to two categories of workers which otherwise fall outside the coverage of the Labour Code, i.e. agricultural and forestry enterprises employing 50 employees or less, and small businesses of craftsmen employing three persons or less. Recalling that pursuant to Article 2 of the Convention, all persons to whom wages are paid or payable should be protected in respect of the matters dealt with in Articles 3 to 15 of the Convention, the Committee requests the Government to specify how effect is given in law and practice to all the substantive requirements of the Convention with respect to those workers who remain excluded from the scope of application of the Labour Code, such as for instance domestic workers, apprentices, and workers engaged in sea and air transport activities.

Article 8. Deductions from wages. The Committee notes the Government’s explanations concerning the recent income tax reduction for the low paid in reply to previous comments concerning the overall limits of authorized wage deductions. It also notes the reference to section 37 of the new Labour Code which requires all deductions to appear on the pay slip that the employer is obliged to give to the worker at the time of each payment. The Committee wishes to refer, in this connection, to Paragraph 1 of the Protection of Wages Recommendation, 1949 (No. 85) which suggests that an upper limit should be placed on deductions, so as to ensure that they are not so heavy as to deprive the workers of the basic minimum income needed for the maintenance of themselves and their families. As the Committee noted in paragraph 248 of the 2003 General Survey on protection of wages, Article 8 of the Convention imposes an obligation to set limits for permissible deductions which in itself reveals an underlying concern that deductions should not become arbitrary or unreasonably onerous. Recalling that apart from setting specific limits for each type of wage deduction (e.g. income tax or social security contributions), it is also important to establish an overall limit beyond which wages cannot be further reduced, the Committee requests the Government to indicate the manner in which the income of workers is protected in the case of multiple wage deductions or attachments.

Article 11. Privileged protection of wage claims in bankruptcy proceedings. The Committee notes with interest that the new Labour Code in section 33 provides for the establishment of a Wage Guarantee Fund to protect employees’ entitlements in the case of the employer’s insolvency or bankruptcy. The Fund covers up to three months’ unpaid wages and is financed by 1 per cent of the annual employers’ contributions to the Unemployment Insurance Scheme. The Committee further notes the Ministerial Regulations for the operation of the Wage Guarantee Fund which have entered into force in October 2004. Noting that the national legislation has progressively adopted much higher standards of protection than those provided for in Article 11 of the Convention, both in terms of protection by means of a privilege and also protection through a wage guarantee institution, the Committee encourages the Government to give favourable consideration to the ratification of the Protection of Workers’ Claims (Employer’s Insolvency) Convention, 1992 (No. 173) which contains the most relevant standards in relation to the protection of workers’ claims in the event of the employer’s bankruptcy or insolvency. Convention No. 173 was designed as a dual thrust instrument proposing two distinct sets of standards, one dealing with protection by means of a privilege and another dealing with wage guarantee funds, which may be accepted together or separately. As explained in greater detail in paragraphs 331–353 of the abovementioned General Survey, Convention No. 173 offers solid and modern responses to current challenges of corporate insolvency, in that it strengthens the traditional privilege system while exploring new means of protection in the form of wage guarantee institutions and leaving a wide margin of discretion to ratifying countries for the implementation of the standards.

Part V of the report form. The Committee notes that according to the statistical information provided by the Government, in 2002, out of a total number of 34,580 inspections conducted, approximately 75 per cent were related to complaints or inquiries about the non-payment or deferred payment of wages. It also notes that, in 2006, 30.5 million new Turkish liras (approximately US$24.5 million) worth of administrative fines were imposed for violations of the labour legislation. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide up to date information on the application of the Convention in practice, including inspection results, statistics on the number of workers covered by relevant legislation, copies of official documents or studies on wages issues, any difficulties encountered in the implementation of the Convention, etc.

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

The Committee notes the information contained in the Government’s detailed report and its attachments, in particular the comments made by the Turkish Confederation of Employer Associations (TISK) and the Confederation of Turkish Trade Unions (TÜRK-IŞ) on the application of the Convention. It also notes the comments made by the Confederation of Turkish Public Employees Trade Unions (KAMU-SEN), which were appended to the Government’s report received in October 2003. The Committee further notes the adoption of the new Labour Law No. 4857 of 22 May 2003 revising the old Labour Law No. 1475 of 25 August 1971.

Article 12, paragraph 1, of the Convention. Non-payment or delayed payment of wages. The Committee notes that employers’ and workers’ organizations have been commenting for a number of years on problems concerning the non-payment or delayed payment of wages. TÜRK-IŞ indicates that the amounts owed to workers in the form of unpaid or only partially paid wages and social benefits and bonuses are reaching high levels. The situation affects considerable numbers of workers in the private sector but also municipal workers. For KAMU-SEN, the dramatic drop in real wages, mainly because of inflation and increasing production costs, pushes workers to depression. TISK believes that excessive financial obligations, such as high tax and social insurance contributions imposed on registered workers and employers, increase the difference between gross and net wages, and diminish the country’s competitiveness. In fact, Turkey has been on top of the OECD list of countries with the highest labour employment costs: 42.8 per cent of average labour costs have consisted of payroll taxes since 2006, as compared to 27.5 per cent for other OECD countries and 11.7 per cent for EU countries. For TISK, the heavy tax and social insurance burden boost the informal sector and render the economy less competitive.

Concerning these points, the Government states that the delays in the payment of wages are caused mainly by the economic crisis affecting all enterprises or organizations, private or public. The Government also refers to sections 33 and 34 of the new Labour Law as measures to address this situation through legislation. Section 33 establishes a Wages Guarantee Fund within the Unemployment Insurance Fund, which is financed by 1 per cent of the contributions to the unemployment insurance by the employers. Section 34 provides that workers may at their discretion decide not to work if the employer does not pay the wage due within 20 days of the pay day, which must not be construed as a strike or be considered as a ground for termination of the worker’s employment contract, and that an interest at the highest commercial rate must be applied to the sum of wages due to the worker. As regards the situation of wage payment in the public sector, the Government makes reference to the results of a survey by the Ministry of Interior showing that there are nearly 5,500 public officers affected across 188 municipalities involving an amount of approximately 5,781,147 new Turkish liras (approximately US$4.6 million). In this connection, the Government indicates that the legislation regulating the finance and personnel affairs in public administration, such as Act No. 5018 concerning the administration of public finance and audit, and Act No. 5620 on the transfer to permanent posts or contractual personnel status of workers temporarily employed in the public administration, ensures that wages of public officers are paid regularly and in full. The Committee recalls in this connection paragraphs 358 and 366 of its General Survey of 2003 on the protection of wages, in which it pointed out that whatever the intricate causes of the problem of wage arrears, the deferred payment of wages is part of a vicious circle that inexorably affects the entire national economy. The Committee hopes that the Government will continue its efforts for devising appropriate solutions to the problem of delayed or non-payment of wages through social dialogue and better implementation of the labour legislation. The Committee accordingly requests the Government to closely monitor the situation and continue to provide up to date information on the number of workers and types of enterprises affected by accumulated wage arrears and any progress made in settling outstanding payments in both the public and private sector. Finally, the Committee requests the Government to transmit any comments it may wish to make in reply to the latest observations of TISK and TÜRK-IŞ.

Article 15. Enforcement and legal remedies. According to TÜRK-IŞ the difficulties experienced in the protection of workers’ wages are mainly due to the considerable difference between the legal provisions in place and their practical application, or in other words to the lack of effective penalties. In contrast, TISK considers that legal provisions on penalties are sufficient. It also states that the increase of administrative fines would not safeguard the full respect of the wage legislation, as long as the employers are deprived of their financial strength to secure resources for the payment of wages. In this regard, the Government refers to section 102 of the new Labour Law prescribing an administrative fine of 100 Turkish New Lira (TRY) (approximately US$83), to be annually readjusted under section 17 of Act No. 5326 of 30 March 2005, for failure to pay the wages in full. The Government explains that based on these provisions, an employer would currently be liable to a fine of TRY167 (approximately US$138) for each month of non-payment or underpayment of the worker’s wage. It also refers to the possibility to file a complaint with the labour courts under section 61 of Act No. 2822 on collective labour agreements which provides for a lawsuit for payment that carries payment of interest at the highest commercial rate. The Committee would be thankful to the Government for providing statistical information on the number of wage-related cases heard by labour courts and the amounts of wages recovered.

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

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2003, published 92nd ILC session (2004)

The Committee takes note of the information contained in the Government’s report, received in October 2003, which included comments supplied by the Turkish Confederation of Employers’ Associations (TISK) and the Confederation of Turkish Public Employees Trade Unions (KAMU-SEN). The Committee will examine the Government’s report and the comments of the organizations in detail at its next session and welcomes any additional information that the Government may wish to provide.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2002, published 91st ILC session (2003)

The Committee notes the Government’s report and the appended submissions from the Turkish Confederation of Employer Associations (TISK), the Confederation of Progressive Trade Unions of Turkey (DISK) and the Confederation of Turkish Trade Unions (TÜRK-IŞ) containing observations on the application of this Convention. The Committee notes with satisfaction the adoption of Act No. 4773 on 9 August 2002 to amend the Labour Code by extending its scope to agricultural and forestry workers. It requests the Government to provide the Office with a copy of the above Act. It also asks the Government to send information in future reports on progress made in applying the Convention to workers in craft trades and small businesses who are not yet covered by the legislation and to all categories of persons to which it plans to extend the wage protection afforded by the Convention, in accordance with Article 2, paragraph 4, of the Convention.

I.  Non-payment or delayed payment of wages

1. In its comments, appended to the Government’s report, the workers’ organization, TÜRK-IŞ, raised the same objections to the application of the Convention as in its previous observations, in which it pointed out that employers frequently defer payment of workers’ wages and fringe benefits due to financial problems, while in local governments it is widespread practice to delay for months the payment of wages, overtime pay, bonus and other benefits.

2. The workers’ organization, DISK, repeats the observations it made last year which the Committee was unable to examine not having received the Government’s comments on them. DISK also reports practices such as failure to pay wages and late payment of wages, particularly in the public sector as well as in other sectors. The result is a drop in the value of the wages of those concerned in view of the high inflation rate in Turkey due to the effect of the economic crisis in the country. Furthermore, according to DISK, even the Government, which is supposed to monitor implementation of the Convention and control infringements, is using the economic crisis to gain acceptance of the late payment of the wage increases laid down in public sector collective agreements.

3. The Committee notes with concern that the Government provides no response in its report to either the previous or the latest observations by TÜRK-IŞ and DISK. The Committee recalls that, pursuant to Article 12 of the Convention, wages must be paid at regular intervals. In the Committee’s view, the right to be paid one’s wages on time is an essential right arising from the labour relationship, particularly in periods of crisis when workers and the members of their families rely entirely on income from their wages. The Committee therefore expresses the hope that the Government will take all appropriate steps to solve the problems of non-payment or late payment of wages as soon as possible. The Committee also asks the Government to provide in its next report up-to-date, precise and detailed information on the number of workers affected in the public service and the number and nature of the enterprises in which there are delays in the payment of wages.

II.  Deductions from wages for the payment of   social contributions and other taxes

4. In the observations it sent in 2000 and 2002 on the application of this Convention, TISK considers that the main factor hindering wage protection in Turkey is the excessive income tax burden, 50 per cent of gross wages being deducted for social contributions and other taxes. In TISK’s view, such a system is not compatible with the Convention’s objective of protecting wages creating, consequently, a need to reduce permanently - not just temporarily as prescribed by the Employment Promotion Act of April 2002 - the amount deducted from wages for social contributions and income tax.

5. The Government indicates in its report that with the tax legislation reform enacted on 22 July 1998, income tax rates which apply to wages and salaries have been lowered. It further indicates that the Employment Promotion Act grants temporary and partial tax deferment to employers as an incentive to employment.

6. The Committee understands that, under Act No. 4369, income tax rates range from 15 to 40 per cent depending on the level of earnings. It requests the Government to give particulars of the limits placed by the national legislation on all authorized deductions from wages, including sickness and unemployment insurance contributions, and to specify how workers are informed of the conditions under which and the extent to which deductions may be made from their wages, in accordance with Article 8  of the Convention.

III.  Application of the Convention in practice

7. In comments on the application of the Convention, DISK observes that breaches of the law on collective agreements go unpunished as there are no means of redress under which complaints may be filed in such cases. The TÜRK-IŞ, for its part, is of the view that the lack of effective penalties for non-payment or late payment of wages can only encourage practices of this kind.

8. In its observations of 2001 and 2002, TISK asks the Government to provide information on the operation of the inspection machinery, the nature and number of infringements recorded and the penalties imposed.

9. On this last point, the Government indicates that the inspections carried out with a view to ensuring regular payment of wages were continued during the period covered by the report; the number of enterprises fined for non-compliance, inter alia, for non-payment or late payment of wages, was 97 and the total amount of fines charged was approximately TRL300 million in the public sector and TRL5.3 billion in the private sector; and fines for breaches of the Labour Act rose by 56 per cent in 2001 as compared to the previous year.

10. The Committee notes the statistical information supplied by the Government. It points out, however, that according to the DISK, breaches of the obligation to pay wages on time occurred largely in the public sector. According to the information sent by the Government on the practical effect given to the Convention, however, only a small portion of the penalties imposed were in the public sector. The Committee recalls that under Article 2, paragraph 1, of the Convention, the latter applies to all persons to whom wages are paid or payable regardless of whether they are employed in the public sector or the private sector. It accordingly asks the Government to indicate the measures taken to give full effect to the Convention both in law and in practice, inter alia, through effective supervision by the labour inspectorate in sectors where problems are noted. In this connection, the Committee observes that the Government’s report does not respond to the observation made by DISK to the effect that breaches of the law and collective agreements go unpunished because there are no means of redress allowing complaints to be filed in such circumstances. It requests the Government to send its comments on this point and recalls that the Convention intends that, where rights arising from the Convention are disregarded, the worker should have access to a court or other body established by law in order to secure their enforcement. The Committee trusts that the Government’s next report will contain precise and detailed information on the manner in which workers are enabled to assert their rights regarding the protection of their wages.

[The Government is asked to reply in detail to the present comments in 2003.]

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2001, published 90th ILC session (2002)

The Committee notes the Government’s report as well as the comments made by the Turkish Confederation of Employers’ Associations (TISK) and the Confederation of Progressive Trade Unions of Turkey (DISK). The Committee will analyse in detail at its next session the comments of the aforementioned employers’ and workers’ organizations together with the response of the Government.

In its comments dated 5 June 2000, which were attached to the Government’s previous report, the Confederation of Turkish Employers’ Associations (TISK) expressed the view that reforms should be undertaken to reduce the amounts of compulsory contributions deducted from wages. According to TISK, the sums currently deducted from workers’ wages amount to over 50 per cent due to considerable social security contributions and increasing taxation. Moreover, TISK is of the opinion that calculating the social security contributions on the basis of the worker’s basic earnings, and thus requiring employers to pay contributions for wages that are not actually paid to workers, is not compatible with the objective of the Convention which is to protect wages. In its reply, the Government states that new legislation on taxation reform was enacted on 22 July 1998. The Committee asks the Government to provide in its next report full particulars on the new legislation and its repercussions on the overall amount of authorized wage deductions.

The Committee recalls the comments of the Confederation of Turkish Trade Unions (TÜRK-IS), received in October 2000, in which it was pointed out that wage-earners in the agricultural sector and small commercial enterprises are not covered by protective legislation. The TÜRK-IS alleges that employers frequently defer the payment of workers’ wages and other fringe benefits due to financial problems while in local governments it is widespread practice to delay the payment of wages, overtime pay, bonuses and other benefits for months. The TÜRK-IS further considers that the absence of effective sanctions in the case of non-payment or delayed payment of wages may only encourage such practices. On this last point, the Committee also notes the observation of TISK which expressed the view that the Ministry should supply information on the functioning of the inspection machinery, the nature and number of infringements observed and the sanctions imposed. In its response, the Government indicates that a draft bill extending the application of the Labour Act, including the provisions on wage protection, to the agricultural sector has been submitted to the Parliament. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any further developments in this respect and to transmit a copy of the new legislation once it is adopted. The Committee also notes the Government’s reference to the draft bill concerning job security which was submitted to the Parliament on 19 September 2000, and to new legislation on bankruptcy currently under preparation, both of which are expected to enhance protection of workers’ wages. The Committee asks the Government to indicate in its next report any progress made with respect to the adoption of the above draft laws.

With regard to sanctions for violations of sections 26 and 99 of the Labour Act on the regular payment of wages, the Committee notes the information supplied by the Government according to which, in the course of 2000, 66 enterprises were fined by labour inspection services for non-payment or delayed payment of wages, and the total amount of fines charged reached TL 113.7 million for public undertakings and TL 2.8 billion for private undertakings. In this connection, the Committee recalls that the Government referred in its previous report to the possibility of increasing the monetary penalties imposed on employers for non-compliance with the legislation on wage protection. The Committee asks the Government to supply information on any further developments in this regard.

The Committee hopes that the Government will respond specifically to the observations made by the employers’ and workers’ organizations with respect to the application of the Convention in practice. It again requests the Government to continue to supply, in accordance with Article 16 of the Convention and Part V of the report form, all available information on the practical fulfilment of the requirements of the Convention, with particular reference to the agricultural sector, including information on inspection results, infringements observed and sanctions imposed as well as any statistics on the amounts of wages due, the length of delay in payment and the number of workers affected.

[The Government is asked to report in detail in 2002.]

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2000, published 89th ILC session (2001)

The Committee takes note of the information contained in the Government’s report as well as the comments made by the Confederation of Turkish Trade Unions (TÜRK-IŞ) and the Confederation of Turkish Employers’ Associations (TISK). The Committee will analyse in detail at its next session the comments of the abovementioned employers’ and workers’ organizations, together with the response of the Government.

The Committee states, however, that the Government’s report does not reply to the questions raised in its previous comments. The Committee, therefore, is bound to reiterate its previous observation, which reads as follows:

The Committee has been commenting on the application in practice of the provisions, and in particular Article 12 of the Convention. It notes that the Government’s report was received on 4 November 1998 with comments made by the Confederation of Turkish Trade Unions (TÜRK-IŞ), and by the Confederation of Turkish Employers’ Associations (TISK). The comments from TISK dated 24 June 1998 are in Turkish and would seem to mention the need for tax reform so as to protect wages. The Committee may come back to them at its next session when the complete translation has been available.

The Committee notes that TÜRK-IŞ is of the opinion (i) that wage earners in agriculture, homeworking and in small establishments of artisans and petty tradesmen are not covered by the protective legislation, and (ii) that it has been a widespread practice to delay the payment of wages and other benefits for months, due to the absence of effective sanctions and the reluctance of the victims to take action against the employer because of job insecurity.

Regarding the first point, the Committee recalls that it earlier noted the adoption of Act No. 3528 of 12 April 1989, which extended the scope of the provisions of Labour Act No. 1475, concerning the protection of wages to workers in the agricultural sector and to those in small commercial and artisanal enterprises. It asks the Government to include particular reference to workers in these sectors when supplying information on the application in practice of the Convention.

On the second point concerning the delayed payment of wages, the Committee notes the Government’s indications that wage arrears observed from time to time in some municipalities irrespective of region are the results of imbalance between municipal revenues and expenditure. The Government further refers to the provisions of sections 26 and 99 of the Labour Act on the regular payment of wages and sanctions in case of violation. According to the report, during the calendar year 1997, 134 undertakings were fined by the labour inspectorate under section 26 of the Labour Act, and the total of fines charged amounted to TL208,900,000 for public undertakings, and TL659,200,000 for private undertakings.

The Committee requests the Government to continue to supply, in accordance with Article 16 of the Convention and Part V of the report form, information on the application of the Convention in practice, including information on the numbers of inspections made, infringements of the relevant provisions observed and penalties imposed, as well as any statistics of the amounts of wages due, the length of the delay in payment and the workers affected.

[The Government is asked to report in detail in 2001.]

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1998, published 87th ILC session (1999)

The Committee has been commenting on the application in practice of the provisions, and in particular Article 12 of the Convention. It notes that the Government's report was received on 4 November 1998 with comments made by the Confederation of Turkish Trade Unions (TURK-IS), and by the Confederation of Turkish Employers' Associations (TISK). The comments from TISK dated 24 June 1998 are in Turkish and would seem to mention the need for tax reform so as to protect wages. The Committee may come back to them at its next session when the complete translation has been available.

The Committee notes that TURK-IS is of the opinion (i) that wage-earners in agriculture, home working and in small establishments of artisans and petty tradesmen are not covered by the protective legislation, and (ii) that it has been a widespread practice to delay the payment of wages and other benefits for months, due to the absence of effective sanctions and the reluctance of the victims to take action against the employer because of job insecurity.

Regarding the first point, the Committee recalls that it earlier noted the adoption of Act No. 3528 of 12 April 1989, which extended the scope of the provisions of the Labour Act No. 1475, concerning the protection of wages to workers in the agricultural sector and to those in small commercial and artisanal enterprises. It asks the Government to include particular reference to workers in these sectors when supplying information on the application in practice of the Convention.

On the second point concerning the delayed payment of wages, the Committee notes the Government's indications that wage arrears observed from time to time in some municipalities irrespective of region are the results of imbalance between municipal revenues and expenditure. The Government further refers to the provisions of sections 26 and 99 of the Labour Act on the regular payment of wages and sanctions in case of violation. According to the report, during the calender year 1997, 134 undertakings were fined by the labour inspectorate under section 26 of the Labour Act, and the total of fines charged amounted to TL208,900,000 for public undertakings, and TL659,200,000 for private undertakings.

The Committee requests the Government to continue to supply, in accordance with Article 16 of the Convention and point V of the report form, information on the application of the Convention in practice, including information on the numbers of inspections made, infringements of the relevant provisions observed and penalties imposed, as well as any statistics of the amounts of wages due, the length of the delay in payment and the workers affected.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1997, published 86th ILC session (1998)

The Committee notes the observation made by the Turkish Municipal and General Workers' Union (BELEDIYE-IS, Diyarbakir Department) concerning the application of the Convention in their region, especially in towns which Kurds live in great numbers, where workers of municipalities have not received regular payments for a period of up to three to four years.

The Committee notes the comments of the Government on this issue received during its session. The Government underlines that in the above observation, neither any concrete example of alleged violation is given nor any specific municipality, workplace or trade union member whose rights are violated is referred to, making it impossible for the Government to comment on the matter. It adds that for the same reason, it is impracticable for the competent authorities to initiate an inspection to verify the issue and to react accordingly. According to the Government, the competent authorities nevertheless requested, upon the receipt of the above observation through the ILO, Diyarbakir branch office, to supply particulars in order to make a thorough examination of the case. The Government stresses that, while six inspections were carried out in southern and eastern regions since 1 January 1997 upon complaints of BELEDIYE-IS, none of them was from the Diyarbakir branch. The Government considers that the national legislation concerning the wages and the frequency of its payment is in conformity with the Convention, and that the labour inspectorate acts promptly on any complaints of violations of labour laws.

Regarding the application of Article 12 of the Convention, the Committee noted in the previous observation, in relation to the observation made by the Confederation of Turkish Trade Unions (TURK-IS), the importance, for the effective application of the Convention, of the supervision of the compliance in practice with the national provisions giving effect to it, including appropriate provision and imposition of penalties for infringements. It again requests the Government to supply, in accordance with Article 16 of the Convention and point V of the report form, information on the application of the Convention in practice, with particular reference to the municipalities, the agricultural sector and the small commercial and artisanal enterprises. The Committee asks the Government to provide, in particular, information on the numbers of inspections made, infringements of the relevant provisions observed and penalties imposed.

[The Government is asked to report in detail in 1998.]

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1995, published 82nd ILC session (1995)

The Committee notes the Government's report as well as the copies of two court decisions concerning wages, and the comments made by the Confederation of Turkish Trade Unions (TURK-IS).

Regarding the application of Article 12 of the Convention, TURK-IS alleges that, in municipalities and other public sector establishments, wages are not paid regularly, with the amount of wages owed to workers reaching trillions of liras, and that such payments, as those of bonuses and of overtime, among others, are delayed considerably. It refers, in particular, to the inadequacy of the sanctions prescribed for such infringements of the right. TURK-IS also points out the non-application of the Convention to the agricultural sector and small commercial or artisanal enterprises who are not covered by relevant legislation.

As to the first point, the Government admits the existence of some cases in which wages are not paid in time by some municipalities. Regarding the second point, the Government refers to the amendment made to the scope of Labour Act No. 1475 (its extension to the agricultural sector and the small commercial and artisanal enterprises), which the Committee noted in its observation in 1990.

The Committee would emphasize the importance, for the effective application of the Convention, of the supervision of the compliance in practice with the national provisions giving effect to it, including appropriate provision and imposition of penalties for infringements. It requests the Government to supply, in accordance with point V of the report form, information on the application of the Convention in practice, with particular reference to the municipalities mentioned above, and to the agricultural sector and the small commercial and artisanal enterprises. The Committee asks the Government to provide, in particular, information on the numbers of inspections made, infringements of the relevant provisions observed and penalties imposed.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1991, published 78th ILC session (1991)

With reference to its previous comments concerning Article 4 of the Convention in relation to section 26 of the Labour Act No. 1475, the Committee notes the information supplied by the Government.

Furthermore, the Committee notes the comments made by the Turkish Confederation of Employers' Associations (TISK) on 30 July 1990, which were transmitted with the Government's report, indicating that the provisions of the Convention are applied by the national legislation and that the problems that had been raised have been resolved.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1990, published 77th ILC session (1990)

The Committee notes from the information provided by the Government concerning Convention No. 100 that article 26 of the Labour Act, No. 1475 provides that wages shall be paid in cash, whatever the nature of work, and that payment of wages in kind or "trucking" is prohibited, in conformity with Article 4 of the Convention. The Government adds that payment of wages in kind does not constitute a problem.

The Committee hopes that the Government will indicate in future reports any problems which may arise from the payment of wages in kind.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1990, published 77th ILC session (1990)

With reference to its previous comments, the Committee notes with satisfaction the adoption of Act No. 3528, of 12 April 1989, which extends the scope of the provisions of Labour Act No. 1475, respecting the protection of wages to workers in the agricultural sector and to those in small commercial and artisanal enterprises, and prohibiting the payment of wages in taverns or other similar establishments, and in shops or stores for the retail sale of merchandise, thereby giving effect to the provisions of Articles 2 and 13, paragraph 2, of the Convention.