Weekly Rest (Industry) Convention, 1921 (No. 14) - Türkiye (Ratification: 1946)

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 2014, published 104th ILC session (2015)

Article 5. Compensatory rest. In reply to the Committee’s comments on compensatory rest in lieu of extra pay, the Government indicates that, according to section 6 of the Regulations on overtime and extra hours pursuant to the Labour Act, the worker may get overtime wage in return for her/his overtime work or have a rest of one and half day within the next six months without any wage reduction. According to the Government, this applies to work performed on the weekly rest day. The Committee also takes note of the comments of the Turkish Confederation of Employers’ Associations (TİSK) and the Confederation of Turkish Trade Unions (TÜRK-IŞ), attached to the Government’s report. TÜRK IŞ indicates that, with regard to workers in the private sector, the hours actually worked may in many cases be above the statutory limit and they are not granted the respective rest periods. In view of the observations formulated by the social partners, the Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the practical application of the Convention.

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

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 1 of the Convention. Scope of application. Further to its previous comment, the Committee notes the adoption of the regulations on janitors (Official Gazette No. 25391 of 3 March 2004), which provide in section 9 that janitors’ weekly rest is regulated according to the relevant provisions of Labour Act No. 4857 of 2003.

Article 5. Compensatory rest. The Committee notes the Government’s reference to section 41(4) and (5) of the Labour Law No. 4857 of 2003 which provides for compensatory rest in lieu of extra pay, if the worker so wishes, in case of overtime at the rate of one-and-a-half hours of rest for each hour of overtime work. In this connection, the Committee observes that this provision refers to overtime in general and therefore does not necessarily relate to work performed on the day of weekly rest. It also observes that the Labour Law of 2003 does not contain a provision similar to section 43 of the previous Labour Law which expressly required enterprises exempt from the weekly rest day provisions to grant to their employees another rest day each week in compensation. The Committee understands that a provision along those terms is to be found in sections 4(e) and 6 of the Weekly Rest Act (No. 394) of 1925. It therefore requests the Government to clarify whether this latter instrument is still in force and, more generally, to explain how it is ensured that, whenever workers are required to perform work on the regular day of weekly rest, by reason of either a permanent or temporary exception, they are granted, as far as possible, compensatory rest of a minimum duration equivalent to 24 hours, as prescribed by this Article of the Convention.

The Committee wishes to recall, in this connection, that the Convention calls for compensatory rest irrespective of any extra pay which may be offered in addition. It considers that leaving it to the discretion of the worker concerned to choose between compensatory rest and cash compensation is perhaps not the best manner to ensure that workers enjoy every week the minimum of rest and leisure they need in order to preserve their health and well-being. Moreover, providing that compensatory rest is to be taken within six months risks to unduly postpone the period of weekly rest and therefore render difficult the worker’s recovery from the accumulated fatigue due to work performed on the rest day. The Committee therefore requests the Government to review the manner in which compensatory rest is regulated in law and practice and to provide in its next report more detailed particulars as to how it is given effect to the requirements of the Convention, particularly as regards the regularity and continuity of compensatory rest.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2009, published 99th ILC session (2010)

Article 1 of the Convention. Scope of application. Further to its previous comment, the Committee notes the adoption of the regulations on janitors (Official Gazette No. 25391 of 3 March 2004), which provide in section 9 that janitors’ weekly rest is regulated according to the relevant provisions of Labour Act No. 4857 of 2003.

Article 5. Compensatory rest. The Committee notes the Government’s reference to section 41(4) and (5) of the new Labour Law No. 4857 of 2003 which provides for compensatory rest in lieu of extra pay, if the worker so wishes, in case of overtime at the rate of one-and-a-half hours of rest for each hour of overtime work. In this connection, the Committee observes that this provision refers to overtime in general and therefore does not necessarily relate to work performed on the day of weekly rest. It also observes that the Labour Law of 2003 does not contain a provision similar to section 43 of the previous Labour Law which expressly required enterprises exempt from the weekly rest day provisions to grant to their employees another rest day each week in compensation. The Committee understands that a provision along those terms is to be found in sections 4(e) and 6 of the Weekly Rest Act (No. 394) of 1925. It therefore requests the Government to clarify whether this latter instrument is still in force and, more generally, to explain how it is ensured that, whenever workers are required to perform work on the regular day of weekly rest, by reason of either a permanent or temporary exception, they are granted, as far as possible, compensatory rest of a minimum duration equivalent to 24 hours, as prescribed by this Article of the Convention.

The Committee wishes to recall, in this connection, that the Convention calls for compensatory rest irrespective of any extra pay which may be offered in addition. It considers that leaving it to the discretion of the worker concerned to choose between compensatory rest and cash compensation is perhaps not the best manner to ensure that workers enjoy every week the minimum of rest and leisure they need in order to preserve their health and well-being. Moreover, providing that compensatory rest is to be taken within six months risks to unduly postpone the period of weekly rest and therefore render difficult the worker’s recovery from the accumulated fatigue due to work performed on the rest day. The Committee therefore requests the Government to review the manner in which compensatory rest is regulated in law and practice and to provide in its next report more detailed particulars as to how it is given effect to the requirements of the Convention, particularly as regards the regularity and continuity of compensatory rest.

Part V of the report form. Application in practice. The Committee notes the explanations provided by the Government concerning the decrease in labour inspection visits carried out in the period 2000–03 due to the economic conjuncture. It also notes the statistical data concerning the number of different types of inspections conducted and administrative fines imposed from 2003 to 2007 in the areas of working conditions and occupational safety and health. It would appreciate if the Government would continue providing up to date information on the practical application of the Convention, including, for instance, statistics on the approximate number of workers covered by the relevant legislation, labour inspection results showing the number of infringements of the weekly rest legislation observed and sanctions imposed, copies of collective agreements containing clauses on weekly rest, etc.

Finally, the Committee takes this opportunity to recall that, based on the conclusions and proposals of the Working Party on Policy regarding the Revision of Standards, the ILO Governing Body has decided that the ratification of up to date Conventions, including the Weekly Rest (Industry) Convention, 1921 (No. 14), and the Weekly Rest (Commerce and Offices) Convention, 1957 (No. 106), should be encouraged because these instruments continue to respond to current needs (see GB.283/LILS/WP/PRS/1/2, paragraphs 17–18). The Committee accordingly invites the Government to contemplate ratifying Convention No. 106 and to keep the Office informed of any decision taken or envisaged in this respect.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2004, published 93rd ILC session (2005)

The Committee refers to its observation under the same Convention and requests further clarification on the following points.

Article 1 of the Convention. Scope of application. Section 110 of the Labour Act of 2003 states that the scope and nature of janitors’ work as well as their weekly rest will be laid down in a regulation to be prepared by the Ministry of Labour and Social Security. The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether such a regulation has been adopted as well as to indicate what provisions guarantee the weekly rest for those workers falling under section 110 of the Labour Act. If a regulation has been adopted, please provide a copy together with the Government’s next report.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2004, published 93rd ILC session (2005)

The Committee notes the observations communicated by the Turkish Confederation of Employers Associations (TISK) and the Turkish Confederation of Public Worker Associations (Kamu-Sen Turkey). The Government has not, as yet, commented on these observations.

The Committee has repeatedly noted, in its previous observations, comments received from workers’ organizations alleging inadequate monitoring of the application of the Convention due to the low number of inspections. Furthermore, these inspections do not cover all categories of workers. The same allegations have been raised again by Kamu-Sen. The Committee requests the Government to respond to the observations made and to provide information on how it aims to ensure that adequate numbers of inspections are carried out annually and to all workers covered under the present Convention.

The Committee also notes the statistics provided in the Government’s report of 2003. The number of general inspections and "control" inspections carried out significantly decreased in the years 2001 and 2002 in comparison to the year 2000. It requests the Government to clarify why there was a decrease in the number of inspections carried out in 2001 and 2002 and requests the Government to provide, in accordance with Part V of the report form, available extracts from the reports of the inspection services and to provide information, in particular, on the number and nature of contraventions reported on issues concerning the weekly rest.

The Committee further notes the comments made by TISK that no disputes have arisen out of the implementation of the weekly rest in workplaces and that collective agreements generally envisage that workers who work on the weekly rest day are paid three times the daily wage. The Government may want to draw the attention of the social partners to Article 5 of the Convention, which states that, as far as possible, provisions shall be made for compensatory periods of rest for suspensions or diminutions to the weekly rest.

In addition, requests regarding certain points are being addressed directly to the Government.

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

The Committee invites the Government to comment on the observations communicated by the Turkish Confederation of Employer Associations (TISK) and the Turkish Confederation of Trade Unions (TÜRK-IS).

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

The Committee notes the Government’s report for the period ending July 2000. It has also noted the observations made by the Turkish Confederation of Employers’ Associations (TISK) and the Turkish Confederation of Trade Unions (TÜRK-IŞ).

The Committee notes that TÜRK-IŞ once again alleges inadequate monitoring of the application of the Convention because of the low number of inspections which, furthermore, do not always cover certain categories of workers such as domestic workers and illegal workers. It notes that the Government merely indicates that the inspection services take appropriate measures when a contravention is noted.

The Committee again requests the Government to supply more detailed information on the practical application of the Convention and to provide, in accordance with Part V of the report form, available extracts from the reports of the inspection services and, if such statistics are available, information on the number of employed persons covered by the relevant legislation, and the number and nature of contraventions reported.

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

The Committee takes note of the information contained in the Government's last report and the observations made by the Confederation of Turkish Employers' Associations (TISK) and the Confederation of Turkish Trade Unions (TURK-IS).

The Committee notes the information, provided by the Government in reply to its previous observation, on the working of the inspection services and the number of contraventions reported. The Committee also takes note of the allegations made by the TURK-IS of inadequate monitoring of the application of the Convention in terms of the number and nature of the inspections, which do not cover certain categories of workers, in particular domestic workers and illegal workers. The Government is asked to provide its own comments on the allegations made by the TURK-IS.

To help it assess the manner in which effect is given to the provisions of the Convention, the Committee requests the Government to provide detailed information on the practical application of the Convention, in accordance with points III and V of the report form, and to indicate, where appropriate, whether courts of law or other tribunals have given decisions involving questions of principle relating to the application of the Convention, in accordance with point IV.

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

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its report for the period ending 30 June 1994, as well as the observations made by the Turkish Confederation of Employer Associations and by the Confederation of Turkish Workers' Trade Unions (TURK-IS), furnished by the Government as attached documentation to its report. The TURK-IS alleges that in recent years, due to economic reasons, many workers are not benefiting from their right to weekly rest. The Committee requests the Government to provide a response to these comments made by the TURK-IS.

The Government is asked to report in detail by 1 September 1995, at the latest.