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

Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 2014, Publication: 103rd ILC session (2014)



A Government representative expressed the strong belief that labour inspection was a critical instrument in ensuring better working conditions and a strong commitment to promoting labour rights, safety and welfare through an effective inspection framework. Referring to the observation of the Committee of Experts, he was pleased to inform the Committee that the Bangladesh Labour Act had been amended by the National Parliament in 2013. In the process of amendment, a wide range of comments from relevant stakeholders, including the ILO, had been consulted by the Tripartite Labour Law Review Committee. On the basis of tripartite consensus, most of the proposals had been incorporated into the amendment. The amended Act particularly focused on: (1) workers’ dignity, well-being, rights and safety; (2) transparency in trade union registration and the wage payment system; and (3) promoting trade unionism and collective bargaining. Effective implementation of the amended Act would require comprehensive rules after a wide consultation involving all relevant stakeholders. Consultations were under way with the relevant stakeholders.

With respect to the restructuring of the labour inspection system, the Government had completed, in an accelerated process, the restructuring of the Directorate of Inspection, which had become a department in mid-January 2014. The Directorate of Inspection had previously had only 314 staff members. After restructuring, the staff of the newly formed department had increased by more than threefold to 993 members. In the first phase, 679 new posts had already been approved for the department. Significantly, among these posts, 392 were exclusively for inspectors. Since May 2013, 67 inspectors had been appointed to fill the existing vacant posts complying with the existing procedures. The recruitment of additional inspectors was in progress. After restructuring, additional resources and logistics were being provided for the department. Regarding export processing zones (EPZs) and the Workers’ Welfare Association and Industrial Relations Act 2010, a high-level committee was actively working to prepare a separate and comprehensive EPZ Labour Act. A preliminary draft had been prepared and consultation on the draft with the relevant stakeholders was under way. The Bangladesh Export Processing Zones Authority (BEPZA) was responsible for ensuring the rights and privileges of the workers of enterprises operating in EPZs through constant supervision and monitoring by BEPZA officials and counsellors. All members of the elected Executive Committee of the Workers Welfare Associations (WWA) were actively performing their activities as Collective Bargaining Agents (CBAs). With respect to the measures to ensure effective inspection of the construction sector under the Bangladesh National Building Code (BNBC), responsibility for the enforcement of building codes lay with different administrative authorities all over the country. Those authorities were in the process of increasing their staff and providing modern equipment to ensure enforcement of the BNBC. Regular training was provided to building inspectors, fire inspectors and factory inspectors. Regarding labour inspection visits in Bangladesh, he stated that labour inspections were essentially carried out by labour inspectors and by special inspection teams. The labour inspectors also carried out confidential inspections. In case of non-compliance, appropriate measures were taken based on the observations from inspection under the Labour Act. Regarding occupational accidents and diseases, according to the Bangladesh Labour Act, registers were maintained by the factory owners for this purpose. Awareness-raising programmes were conducted for employers and directives were given to employers on a regular basis. In the recent restructuring process, the number of posts of inspectors had been increased to ensure occupational health and safety. He particularly wished to mention that the Government had already adopted a National Occupational Health and Safety Policy in 2013 to address issues related to the health and safety of workers.

He extended his sincere thanks to the ILO and other development partners for their technical support and assistance in improving working conditions in Bangladesh. The assessment of fire and electrical safety and the structural integrity of ready-made garment (RMG) factories was being carried out with the technical assistance of the ILO and other development partners, including brands and buyers. With the assistance of the ILO, a publicly accessible database system for labour inspection related issues had been launched recently. The development of another database system on trade union issues was under way with the Department of Labour. The ILO was also providing training and logistics for inspectors. Finally, a US$24.2 million project was being implemented to improve the working conditions in the RMG sector of Bangladesh. His Government deeply appreciated the constructive engagement of the ILO and other development partners for ensuring better working conditions in Bangladesh. In the past year, Bangladesh had done its best to mobilize its systems, resources and capacities to ensure labour rights, safety and security. Bangladesh would however need more time, understanding and support from all to achieve its objective.

The Employer members noted that this case had been double footnoted by the Committee of Experts, which had requested the Government to supply full particulars to the Committee on the Application of Standards. The context of this case was important for the Employer members. The shocking loss of life in the world’s second biggest clothing exporter had quite correctly forced private sector businesses around the globe to ask important questions about their supply chains and take more social and ethical responsibility. Given the context, the Employer members noted that the Bangladeshi employers, trade unions and the Government had quickly agreed on the steps that needed to be taken, including factory health and safety standards and details on how the reforms would be financed.

This was not a case in which there was a problem with cooperation with the ILO or requesting technical assistance. On 24 March 2013, the ILO had accepted a formal request to assist in the implementation and coordination of the National Tripartite Plan of Action on Fire Safety (NTPA). From 1 to 4 May 2013, a high-level ILO mission had visited Bangladesh to identify key areas for action which had resulted in the signing of a joint statement by the tripartite partners, which built on the NTPA. The Joint Statement identified key areas for action, such as strengthening labour inspection, worker and management training and awareness of occupational safety and health (OSH) and workers’ rights, rehabilitation and skills training of workers with disabilities. On 13 May 2013, two global unions (IndustriALL and UNI Global) and more than 150 international brands and retailers had signed the Accord on Fire and Building Safety in Bangladesh. This was a five-year programme under which companies committed to ensuring the implementation of health and safety measures. On 8 July 2013, the European Union (EU), the Government of Bangladesh and the ILO had issued the Global Sustainability Compact to promote improved labour standards, the structural integrity of buildings and OSH, and responsible business conduct in the RMG sector and knitwear industry in Bangladesh. The Compact built upon the NTPA and assigned an important coordination and monitoring role to the ILO. On 10 July 2013, the Alliance for Bangladesh Worker Safety had launched by 26 North American retailers and brands. It was a five-year programme under which the companies committed to ensuring the implementation of health and safety measures. On 15 July 2013, the Government had adopted amendments to the Labour Act to bolster OSH. The amendments gave special attention to the requirements of Articles 1, 4 and 23 of the Convention in order to enforce labour inspection with regard to health, safety and the protection of workers in the workplace. On 25 July 2013, the NTPA had been merged with the Joint Statement to form the National Tripartite Plan of Action on Fire Safety and Structural Integrity in the Ready-Made Garment Sector in Bangladesh. On 22 October 2013, the ILO had launched a $24 million programme aimed at making the Bangladeshi garment industry safer. The three-and-a-half year initiative focused on minimizing the threat of fire and building collapse in RMG factories and on ensuring the rights and safety of workers. On 22 November 2013, assessments of the structural integrity and fire safety of RMG factory buildings had officially commenced. On 15 January 2014, the Government of Bangladesh had upgraded the Chief Inspector of Factories and Establishments Office to a department, sanctioning 679 new staff positions in the Directorate, including 392 new inspectors. On 22 January 2014, training of the first batch of the newly recruited labour inspectors had started in Dhaka, focusing on capacity building.

The Employer members understood that steps had been taken to reorganize the Department of Inspection under a project, “Modernization and strengthening of the Department of Inspection for Factories and Establishments” (DIFE). Under the project, the Department had been enlarged, more inspectors had been appointed and the system of inspection improved. As required by Articles 9 and 14 of the Convention, they understood that the Government had appointed three categories of inspectors, namely medical, engineering and general. These inspectors provided technical expert services not only for the purpose of labour inspection, but also for the enforcement of legislation. The Employer members also understood that the Government had plans to work with the ILO to find ways of bringing EPZ areas under the purview of national labour law. More information in this regard would be welcomed. In supervising this case, it was necessary to consider the self-evident coordination problems that existed on the ground. The ILO had been working to achieve coordination between the National Tripartite Committee (Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology – BUET), Accord and Alliance in order to harmonize standards and methodologies and to avoid duplication of assessments. Indeed, when considering the request by the Committee of Experts for more information, it had been noted that, at the technical meeting of 15 May 2014 organized by the ILO, technical experts from the BUET, Accord and Alliance had agreed on a format for summary reports to be used by all three initiatives for publication of the reports to be published on the website of the Inspector General. The Employer members urged the Government to provide the requested full particulars, especially with regard to the technical assistance received from the ILO to date.

The Worker members recalled the unimaginable horror of the Rana Plaza disaster, which had claimed the lives of over 1,000 garment workers. This disaster had followed the Tazreen Fashions factory fire of 2012, in which more than 100 workers had been trapped inside the factory and had died in the fire or as they leapt from the windows in an attempt to escape. These preventable tragedies provoked soul-searching in government offices and corporate boardrooms around the world, as it became obvious that the status quo could no longer be tolerated, namely a global garment production system that placed workers, mostly young women, at a high risk of serious injury or death. The victims of those tragedies and their families were still waiting for respect and compensation. Those tragedies could easily have been prevented by an effective labour inspection system. In the aftermath of the Rana Plaza disaster, innovative initiatives such as the Bangladesh Accord on Fire and Building Safety, supported by global union federations and nearly 200 global apparel brands, had meant that garment factories were being inspected by competent and independent inspectors for the first time. Some foreign governments had also contributed resources to support a variety of new initiatives, some under the auspices of the ILO, including improving factory inspections. These were welcomed. However, efforts such as the Accord only became necessary because the Government of Bangladesh had failed and continued to fail to maintain an effective system of labour inspection as required by Convention No. 81. The Government had made some progress as it had upgraded the inspection unit to a “directorate” and had authorized new inspector posts and began to fill them. However, this progress had been frustratingly slow.

With regard to capacity, Article 10 of the Convention provided that the number of labour inspectors must be sufficient to secure the effective discharge of the duties of the inspectorate. Last year, the Government of Bangladesh committed to hire 200 additional labour inspectors by 31 December 2013, with a longer term goal of 800 inspectors in total. However, the deadline had not been met to reach this goal. There were numerous vacancies in existing posts which needed to be backfilled. The Worker members understood that there was a plan to hire the remainder of the newly authorized inspectors this year. The need for additional inspectors was extremely critical and the numerous delays called into question the Government’s sense of urgency, and ultimately, its commitment to setting up a proper labour inspection service. There were several additional limitations that would threaten the functioning of even a well-staffed inspectorate: (i) transportation for inspectors was extremely limited or non-existent and workers were aware that some employers were in fact paying for transportation costs, which could jeopardize the impartiality of inspections and any element of surprise; and (ii) neither the Directorate of Labour nor the Department of Inspection for Factories and Establishments had legal staff, and factories often hired experienced lawyers to fight charges, quickly overwhelming the under-resourced inspectors and investigators and causing violations not to be pursued. With respect to coordination, Article 5 of the Convention called for effective cooperation between the inspection services and other government services engaged in similar activities. Despite plans regarding building and fire safety, there appeared to remain a serious lack of coordination and cooperation among relevant government agencies and private institutions on this issue, or indeed any issues related to the matters subject to labour inspection. Officials of the labour inspectorate were supposed to collaborate with both employers’ and workers’ organizations. In this regard, the Worker members did not see the same dedication to collaborating with trade unions as with employers.

With respect to EPZs, Convention No. 81 should apply to all workplaces, with limited exceptions. However, the EPZs, in which over 400,000 workers worked, remained outside the purview of the Ministry of Labour. Thus, the Ministry did not carry out any inspections in the zones. Instead, BEPZA relied on roughly 60 “counsellors” which they claimed were akin to labour inspectors. However, workers had reported that these “counsellors” had not carried out inspections and at best handled grievances. Workers also found that they were not independent and were primarily concerned with protecting investors. Though the Government had promised to bring the EPZs under the Labour Act, rather than the much criticized EPZ Workers’ Welfare Association and Industrial Relations Act, it had failed to do so to date. The Government must immediately work to ensure that EPZ workers were covered by the Labour Act and that the Ministry of Labour could conduct inspections in the EPZs. This was particularly important given the ban on trade unions in EPZs and would empower workers to monitor and enforce the application of the labour law. With regard to enforcement, the inspectors did not have the power to penalize violators; they only could report the case to the courts. The fines available under the Labour Act remained negligible, for example fines for obstructing a labour inspector from carrying out his or her duties had risen from 5,000 to 25,000 taka (BDT), a mere $325. Penal sanctions were available in some cases, including for obstruction of inspectors, which was now up to six months of imprisonment. Fines for labour law violations generally still remained far too low to be dissuasive. Moreover, due to lengthy legal processes and corruption at all levels, the penalties for violations of the Labour Act were not adequately enforced. With the exception of the Rana Plaza case, the Worker members were unaware of any criminal proceedings pending for any violation of the Labour Act. The extent to which any penalties were imposed and collected was unknown, as the data was not available. The Inspection Department did not currently have any procedure to investigate complaints by workers or unions concerning violations by employers. Mandatory procedures for the Inspection Department should therefore be included in the Labour Act or proposed rules, with specific time frames. Investigations should be open and workers or unions be allowed to participate and to present evidence in support of their complaints.

Of particular concern to the Worker members was the wave of anti-union dismissals perpetrated by employers in the RMG sector which the inspectorate had failed to address. There had been much attention given to the fact that many new trade unions had been registered in the RMG sector after the Government reversed its policy of keeping the RMG sector free of independent trade unions. However, what had received less attention was the wave of dismissals. The leaders of many of these newly registered unions had suffered retribution, sometimes violent, by management or their agents. Some union leaders had been brutally beaten and hospitalized as a result. Entire executive boards had been sacked and up to now there had been no adequate response from the labour inspectorate.

With respect to transparency, Articles 20 and 21 of the Convention provided that the Government must issue public reports, at least annually, on the results of their inspection activities. However, reporting on inspection was infrequent and incomplete. In the RMG sector, where factories were being inspected by a combination of public and private initiatives, transparency on factory inspections left much to be desired. To date, the BUET, under the supervision of the National Tripartite Committee, had failed to publicly disclose any inspection reports. DIFE had established an RMG sector database which included factory names, addresses, owner names, number of workers, and the number of inspections completed. However, the database included no more substantive content, such as violations identified, fines and sanctions administered, factories closed or relocated or violations remediated. Only the private initiatives had published factory reports, and only the Accord had published them in English and Bengali. The Worker members were appalled that some factory owners were threatening lawsuits against the Accord for doing the job that the Government should be doing. Finally, with regard to health and safety, it was noted that, while the amended Labour Act provided for the creation of occupational health and safety committees, the rules and regulations had not been adopted. There was no further time for delay. While modest steps had been made, the Government of Bangladesh must act with a much greater sense of urgency and purpose than had been seen to date. Systemic reforms were necessary. If it did not commit itself to the construction of an effective labour inspection system now and take the steps to realize that commitment, labour violations of all kinds would continue. It would be only a matter of time before the next disaster claimed the lives of more Bangladeshi workers.

The Employer member of Bangladesh recalled that the focus of the 2013 amendment to the Bangladesh Labour Act, 2006, was to ensure workers’ welfare and safety, industrial safety as well as transparency in trade union registration and wage payment systems. In concrete terms, following the amendments: workers no longer needed to submit to employers the lists of workers intending to form a trade union; workers were entitled to form a participation committee through direct elections; employers and workers had the possibility of referring to external expert support in collective bargaining matters at the enterprise level; employers had the possibility to opt for the payment of wages through an electronic payment system; and mandatory safety committees were introduced in enterprises with more than 50 workers. It was also expected that the amendment would improve working conditions at the enterprise level through social dialogue. In this respect, there had been over 100 per cent growth in trade union registration in the first five months of 2014. Regarding the restructuring of the labour inspection system, the Office of the Chief Inspector of Factories and Establishments had been upgraded to a Department with offices in 23 districts and 575 inspectors. The post of the Chief Inspector had been upgraded to Inspector General. A total of 39 inspectors had since been recruited and the Public Service Commission had recommended the recruitment of 25 more inspectors. In addition, after the tragedy of Rana Plaza, and in response to technical assistance requested by the Government, the social partners, global buyers and development partners in Bangladesh, the Ready-Made Garment Programme had been developed with the objective of achieving immediate results through rapid action on building and fire capacity, as well as support to survivors. Long-term results were expected through the implementation of improved legislation on working conditions. The Programme was also designed to support interventions identified by the National Tripartite Plan of Action on Fire Safety and Structural Integrity of Buildings in the Ready-Made Garment Industry, as updated in July 2013, as well as to support the commitments of the Government formulated in the Global Compact for Continuous Improvements in Labour Rights and Factory Safety in the Ready-Made Garment and Knitwear Industry, which had been signed on 23 July 2013 with the EU and the ILO. The Programme, as well as the Better Work Programme had five components: (i) building and fire safety assessment to complete a fire and building safety assessment of all RMG factories; (ii) strengthen labour inspection and support fire and building inspection, which included the improvement of legislative and policy frameworks, the improvement of the structure and processes of both services; (iii) awareness raising on OSH through training of employers’ and workers’ organizations, as well as multimedia and education campaigns; (iv) rehabilitation and skills training for survivors of the Rana Plaza and the Tazreen tragedies without discrimination; and (v) implementation of the Better Work Programme. Referring to the concrete actions undertaken in the implementation of each of the above components, he provided detailed information on the assessments carried out by national technical committees and review panels, whose reports were published on the Internet, and the difficulties encountered with regard to communication. In light of the action described, statements indicating that very little had been done were incorrect. However, a lot of work still needed to be done. In particular, capacity building was a complex issue that required time, resources and good coordination.

The Worker member of Bangladesh indicated that labour inspection had been neglected. DIFE and the Bangladesh Fire Service and Civil Defence had been operating with inadequate staff and logistics. Moreover, the lack of effective coordination between the concerned departments prevented efforts to ensure industrial safety and the recent disasters could have been avoided if an effective labour inspection system had been in place. However, the Government’s immediate response and rehabilitation programme following these incidents was appreciated. While the Government had upgraded the Department of Inspection with additional staff, it needed to take measures without delay to complete the process of recruiting new inspectors. Without sufficient resources, logistics and proper training, the new inspectors would not be able to perform their duties effectively. The Global Compact for Continuous Improvements in Labour Rights should also provide inspectors with logistical support. The initiatives by the ILO as well as international buyers were welcome, and the Government would be taking immediate action based on the safety risks identified. It was necessary for the Government to ensure the establishment of factory-level safety committees, with the participation of workers and factory management. The new minimum wage in the RMG sector needed effective monitoring. While the revised Labour Act no longer required workers intending to form a trade union to inform the factory owner, this required further implementation. In addition, there remained provisions in the revised Labour Act that were not in line with ILO Conventions, and the Government needed to initiate consultations for further amendments. Effective measures should also be taken to bring work performed in the informal economy under the purview of the Labour Act, in consultation with the tripartite constituents. She expressed concern regarding labour rights in EPZs. While the Government had allowed the Labour Courts and Labour Appellate Tribunal to resolve grievances in EPZs, the Labour Act was not applicable in these zones. The Government should finalize the draft EPZs labour act without delay. Moreover, the online trade union registration process, the workers’ complaint hotline and the publicly accessible database should be made functional as soon as possible. In addition, the proper implementation of the Better Work Programme would assist in establishing a unique inspection modality in the RMG sector, and its implementation should be expedited. Lastly, it was essential for the Government to identify any violations of the national legislation and ensure that adequate sanctions were applied.

The Government member of Greece, speaking on behalf of the European Union (EU) and its Member States, as well as Albania, Iceland, Montenegro, Norway, Serbia, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Turkey and Ukraine, said that the Global Compact launched by the EU, the Government of Bangladesh and the ILO in July 2013 outlined commitments mainly related to the issues discussed by the Committee, including with regard to the Convention. The progress of Bangladesh in implementing several commitments under the Compact was to be welcomed, while sustained efforts were needed to ensure its full implementation. Amendments to the Labour Act were also to be welcomed and it was now important to implement legislation to follow suit. The Government needed to continue the modernization and strengthening of DIFE by restructuring and expanding it, increasing its staff and the training for labour inspectors. The Government should be encouraged to keep the ILO informed of any further progress in relation to those issues, as well as with respect to the proposed Labour Act 2014 for EPZs. The Government needed to address the remaining shortcomings identified by the Committee of Experts regarding the labour law reform, and to continue implementing the remaining outstanding commitments under the Compact. Commitments made to support and protect trade unions were also important as they had a positive impact on the work of the labour inspectorate. It was necessary to continue to support the Government in improving labour rights and factory safety, and to meet international labour standards, in collaboration with all stakeholders involved in the supply chain, including initiatives of global buyers. The decisive efforts of the Office to bring together the various relevant stakeholders to promote labour rights and safe workplaces should be welcomed and the Government was encouraged to avail itself of ILO technical assistance.

The Worker member of Canada referred to the campaign of the Canadian Labour Congress to push Canadian companies to join the Bangladesh Accord on Fire and Building Safety. He considered that a robust national inspection system was essential to prevent events like Rana Plaza. However, according to the statement from a trade unionist from the Bangladesh Free Trade Union Congress (BFTUC), limited progress had been achieved in labour legislation since the Rana Plaza tragedy. There was a wide gap between the promises made by the Government and the reality on the ground, in particular with respect to labour inspections. Although promises had been made concerning the appointment of 200 new inspectors, only 50 posts had already been filled. Besides, even if promises were fulfilled, the additional 200 inspectors would not be enough to cover adequately the high number of existing factories and the wide range of safety and health issues. It was urgent to increase the labour inspectorate’s human, material and financial capacity and to improve labour inspection reporting. Moreover, labour inspectors should be able to perform their work free from any pressure from employers. The labour inspectorate should also take adequate measures to compile independent data, evaluate its activities, address violations and prevent further deaths and injuries. He emphasized that in order to fully address the existing problems, it was essential for the workforce to be adequately informed, for trade unions to participate in capacity building and for labour inspectors to guide workers and employers in the implementation of the Convention. Furthermore, the recent establishment of the Tripartite National Health and Safety Council, as well as health and safety committees in factories, should help to inform workers and allow them to participate actively in the construction of a strong labour inspectorate. Workers and inspectors who reported violations should also be ensured adequate protection. The Government should give the highest priority to workers’ safety and health, which would enable the ILO to provide adequate technical assistance.

The Government member of Switzerland stated that his country endorsed the statement made by the EU, with the exception of the specific reference to the Compact between the EU, the ILO and Bangladesh. Switzerland supported the ILO’s action in Bangladesh, in particular its work under the Better Work Programme, and encouraged the Government to continue working towards strengthening labour inspection, OSH and the effective implementation of legislation with the support of all the partners to improve working conditions, particularly in the garment sector.

The Government member of the United States observed that the Rana Plaza disaster, which had occurred in April 2013, had highlighted the human costs of poor safety and unacceptable working conditions in Bangladesh’s RMG sector. In this respect, the Committee had stressed in 2013 that a climate of full respect for freedom of association could make a significant contribution towards the effective protection of workers’ safety. Indeed, at the Committee’s request, the Director-General of the ILO had submitted a detailed report to the Governing Body on the situation of trade union rights in Bangladesh which the Governing Body had discussed at its March 2014 session. The Committee was now considering the critical role of high-quality labour inspection in ensuring the effective implementation and enforcement of labour laws in making all workplaces safer in Bangladesh. To that end, a core element of the engagement of her Government and of the ILO with the Government of Bangladesh had been on the specific steps needed to strengthen the labour inspection system. She added that her Government had also provided funds to support workers’ ability to advocate for their rights and safety. She underlined the long-standing and serious concerns of the United States with respect to workers’ rights and working conditions in Bangladesh. To this effect and within the framework of the June 2013 Action Plan for the reinstatement of the Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) benefits and the July 2013 Global Compact for Continuous Improvements in Labour Rights between the EU, the ILO and the Government of Bangladesh, with which the United States was associated, her Government was engaged in ongoing dialogue with the Government of Bangladesh. In the discussions, which were focused on the RMG sector and EPZs, emphasis was put on the need to increase the number of labour inspectors, the improvement of the training of the inspectors, the establishment of clear procedures for independent and credible inspections, the increase of the resources at the disposal of inspectors to conduct effective inspections and the transparent publication online of inspection results. Furthermore, her Government had provided resources to the ILO technical assistance activities aiming to strengthen the labour inspection system in Bangladesh and supported programmes on workers’ awareness raising and training to improve their ability to organize and hence to provide input into safety and inspection processes. While acknowledging the Government’s commitment to improving compliance with international labour standards and welcoming the significant increase in the Government’s budget for labour law enforcement and its continued recruitment of additional inspectors, she considered that more action needed to be taken to ensure that the newly recruited inspectors received training, resources and full support from senior government officials. To this effect, it was also important that the private sector fulfilled its critical responsibility. In conclusion, the Government needed to continue to work with the ILO in the implementation of its commitments to comply with its obligations under the Convention, as well as to implement the reforms to the Labour Act. Moreover, it was also important to extend the authority of the Ministry of Labour and Employment to EPZs in order to secure improvements with regard to workers’ safety and the respect for their labour rights, particularly in the RMG sector.

The Worker member of Germany emphasized the importance of the implementation of the Convention by the Government. Despite initial progress, there was still an urgent need for action, and international enterprises, consumers and governments had to assume their responsibility. Many German enterprises produced in Bangladesh and had benefited from an underpaid labour force and poor working conditions. German enterprises producing in Bangladesh should be reminded of their corporate responsibility. Referring to the transparency requirement for carrying out labour inspections, he emphasized that labour inspections were not to be carried out for their own sake and that it was important that the results of the inspections were published and followed by appropriate steps, which was currently not the case in Bangladesh. Information and statistics had to be published with regard to the inspectors, the number of workers and enterprises, the inspections carried out, the violations reported and the sanctions imposed, and the number of accidents and occupational diseases. Finally, the transparency requirement was also important in the context of corruption as inspectors were accused of being open to bribery. Turning to the responsibility for labour inspections, he stated that the Convention clearly put the responsibility on the Government. While welcoming complementary inspections carried out in the framework of the Bangladesh Accord on Fire and Building Safety by actors other than the Government, it was important for the Government to fulfil its obligation to carry out inspections and not to shift its responsibility for carrying out inspections on a permanent basis. Finally, he considered that the Government should involve trade unions in its actions, as strong trade unions could make a significant contribution to effective and successful labour inspections and to preventing accidents in the workplace.

The Government member of Cuba expressed her appreciation for the information provided by the Government regarding the adoption of additional legislative provisions to enhance the protection of workers in the workplace and the improved efficiency of the labour inspection system, including by increasing the number of labour inspectors and inspections. The acceptance of ILO technical assistance and the express wish to work with the ILO, other international organizations and other countries to improve OSH demonstrated the Government’s will to prevent a repetition of serious accidents like those which had occurred in the past. She called for technical assistance to be continued, in particular to improve data management systems and training of labour inspectors.

The Government member of Sri Lanka stressed the importance of labour inspection to improve working conditions. With a view to strengthening labour inspection, the Government had to amend the labour legislation, restructure the labour inspection system and reinforce its human resources, enact separate legislation on EPZs, effectively implement the National Building Code and raise employers’ awareness on OSH issues. The Government had already taken certain measures in those respects with ILO technical assistance and needed to pursue its efforts in the future.

The Worker member of Japan, reiterating the important relationship between safe workplaces and respect for workers’ rights, recalled that the disasters of Rana Plaza and Tazreen demonstrated the vulnerability of those workers without the protection of strong unions. Some progress had been made in the country, including factory inspections under the Bangladesh Accord on Fire and Building Safety, but more needed to be done. Many new unions had been registered in the garment industry, but the Government was failing in its duty to protect the right of freedom of association and collective bargaining through efficient labour inspection. Therefore, many employers were refusing to sit at the bargaining table to negotiate with registered trade unions. Moreover, the minor improvements to the labour legislation had fallen well short of international standards. Hundreds of thousands of workers, the majority of whom were women, were still prohibited from establishing trade unions. For example, workers in a factory seeking to register their union in February 2014, had faced a strong anti-union campaign by the management. These workers, including trade union leaders, had been subject to intimidation and physical assault. He concluded by emphasizing that, without the protection of workers’ rights, there would be no guarantee of a safer workplace.

The Government member of Canada indicated that as a result of the tragedies which had occurred in late 2012 and early 2013, many efforts had been made in the area of labour inspection. Canada remained concerned at the dangerous working conditions in the garment sector, and expected that trading partners would ensure safe working conditions consistent with international standards. He noted the adoption of additional legislative provisions related to OSH, as well as the different initiatives undertaken, many of which were coordinated by the ILO. The Government was encouraged to continue to implement its National Tripartite Action Plan in a timely manner. While welcoming the recruitment and appropriate training of additional labour inspectors, he encouraged the Government to increase its efforts in this regard. Canada was committed to working with all stakeholders and was pleased to be one of the three principal supporters of “improving working conditions in the Bangladesh RMG sector”, an ILO project which stood ready to provide technical assistance and comprehensive training for labour inspectors. A skilled, competent and productive cadre of labour inspectors was essential for the Government to fulfil its regulatory role in an efficient and credible manner. The Government should collaborate with the social partners and the ILO for the effective implementation of the Convention by providing adequate protection for workers through safer workplaces as well as relevant statistical data on labour inspection activities.

The Government member of China noted that the Government of Bangladesh had revised the Labour Act and was developing a labour law to cover EPZs, in consultation with the relevant parties. The Government had adopted a national OSH policy, and was working to improve labour inspection in the construction sector. The labour inspectorate had been restructured and the number of labour inspectors had been increased. The Government was collaborating with the ILO to improve working conditions and labour inspection. This cooperation should be recognized, and it could be further improved in the future.

The Worker member of the United States, also speaking on behalf of the Worker members of France and Italy, said that Bangladesh suffered from a governance gap with regard to labour inspections, as the Government had failed to exercise political will, develop technical capacity and dedicate the necessary resources. Article 6 of the Convention provided that labour inspection was a state obligation, and nascent efforts to create such a labour inspectorate should be supported. This would take time to build, especially if labour inspections were not prioritized. While a force of 3,000 “industrial police” had been established in 2010 to investigate security and maintain law and order in industrial zones, there had not been a similar investment in labour inspection. Multinational brands and retailers had knowingly chosen to extend their supply chains into places where inexpensive labour, weak regulation and few workplace-based unions were central to the business model. In this regard, the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights provided that corporate responsibility to respect human rights existed independently of a State’s ability or willingness to fulfil its own human rights obligations. Labour inspection was the duty of the State, but where it did not fulfil that role, corporations and others might temporarily fill that governance gap. In Bangladesh, such monitoring was primarily carried out by private, voluntary, confidential and non-binding systems with little state presence, and the country had experienced workplace disasters resulting in the deaths of hundreds of workers. The multi-stakeholder initiatives being implemented would help in a transition towards a governmental labour inspection system that was tripartite, mandatory and binding, instead of unilateral, voluntary and unenforceable. Such private and voluntary inspection schemes weakened efforts to build a culture of mandatory government inspection and compliance. However, the Bangladesh Accord on Fire and Building Safety was an initiative that was moving in the right direction. It included workers, unions and employers and it held both brands and local suppliers throughout the supply chain financially responsible for conditions and remedies. Moreover, the arbitration process of the initiative meant that corporations at the top of the supply chain could be held accountable. Until the country enforced its national legislation, the Accord represented a rigorous, transparent inspection and enforcement mechanism to remedy violations. Corporate due diligence had a place in facilitating labour inspection, and broader representation by unions at the local, national and global levels should also guarantee that inspections included workers at all stages to address the root causes of workplace violations. Nonetheless, the Government needed to claim leadership of the regulatory system. It could not outsource regulatory functions to corporations and others indefinitely.

The Government member of India noted with satisfaction the 2013 amendments to the Labour Act of 2006, which focused on workers’ dignity, well-being, rights and safety, as well as the wage payment system, and on transparency in trade union registration, thereby promoting trade unionism and collective bargaining. Her Government also welcomed the upgrading of the Bangladesh Labour Inspectorate, which constituted a milestone in addressing working conditions and workers’ rights and safety. She valued the role of the ILO in providing extensive assistance to the Government of Bangladesh, and to employers’ and workers’ organizations in addressing issues related to workers’ rights and safety. She underlined the obligation of all member States to respect workers’ rights and to create a climate of trust for carrying out constructive consultations on these matters. She recalled that it was a privilege of member States to formulate and promulgate policies on these subjects which were implemented with technical assistance provided by the ILO. In conclusion, her Government supported the actions taken by the Government of Bangladesh to ensure better rights for workers and welcomed any tripartite agreement in this regard.

The Worker member of Pakistan indicated that although it had been revised in 2006, the national labour legislation remained largely based on outdated legislation dating from the period of British India. The implementation of the current legislation therefore needed to be assessed with respect to the health centres, the safety committees and the inspections undertaken and sanctions imposed by the labour inspectorate. It also contained numerous gaps, especially regarding the impossibility of forming unions in EPZs, as these had been replaced by ineffective Workers’ Welfare Associations, which was unacceptable. The Government should therefore not be exclusively concerned about foreign investment in the country, but should undertake comprehensive reforms so as to ensure the compliance of its legislation with international labour standards, so that EPZs were not beyond the scope of labour legislation, but effectively contributed to the economic development of the country in compliance with workers’ fundamental rights, and not to the enrichment of a minority who took the opportunity to pay reduced wages to EPZ workers.

The Government member of the Islamic Republic of Iran welcomed the progress achieved with regard to the restructuring of the labour inspection system, as well as the recruitment of new labour inspectors to increase the quantity and the quality of labour inspections. He also welcomed the adoption of a policy on OSH. He finally supported the measures to be taken to further improve the labour inspection system. In this regard, the continued technical assistance of the ILO was important.

The Government representative indicated that due note had been taken of the discussion, and reiterated a commitment to extending the inspection architecture of the country. Following the tragic Rana Plaza incident, various steps had been taken to address the remaining challenges, and steps would continue to be taken to meet the commitments made to the international community. This included the implementation of the Global Compact for continuous improvements in labour rights. The components of this programme consisted of: undertaking building and fire safety assessments; strengthening labour inspection and supporting fire and building inspection; building OSH awareness, capacity and systems; providing rehabilitation and skills training for victims of accidents; and implementing the Better Work Programme in Bangladesh. The Office of the Chief Inspector of Factories and Establishments had been upgraded to a Department, and the post of labour inspector had been classified as a Class 1 gazetted post. The recruitment for these positions was the responsibility of a public service commission, which was working very seriously on filling the vacant posts for inspectors. With the technical assistance of the ILO, basic training had been provided to the newly recruited inspectors. Moreover, the Government was organizing on a regular basis a four-week training course under the Department of Labour, and 143 tripartite training courses had been conducted. Labour inspectors had also received training on joint problem-solving techniques, compliance with fire safety and OSH standards, and the prevention of occupational diseases. Twenty-three special inspection teams had been formed to ensure safe working conditions in factories, and a publicly accessible database had been established. Through effective social dialogue, at both the national and international levels, efforts to improve working conditions for workers in Bangladesh would continue. In conclusion, he expressed appreciation of the constructive engagement of the ILO and development partners with regard to awareness raising, capacity building and the improvement of working conditions.

The Worker members indicated that there remained serious concerns with regard to labour inspection and the enforcement of labour law in Bangladesh. Workers still had little confidence that their rights at work would be fully respected and that an effective, independent labour inspectorate would work to effectively remedy violations of these rights. Bangladesh now received substantial donor funds and benefited from technical assistance programmes, and it appeared that one of the biggest obstacles to progress remained the lack of political will to address fundamental issues, as evidenced by the failure of the Government to address most of the points of the EU Sustainability Compact or the United States roadmap. In light of the numerous problems still remaining with regard to labour inspection and of the overall environment in which workers’ rights were violated with impunity, the Worker members called on the ILO to urge the Government to meet its short-term target immediately of 200 additional inspectors and to hire and train a labour inspection force of sufficient size in relation to the workforce. The ILO should also urge the Government to: amend immediately the law governing EPZs and provide any additional technical assistance if necessary; to amend immediately the Bangladesh Labour Act in conformity with the Convention, including enhancing the enforcement powers of inspectors and increasing fines for violations; issue the regulations giving effect to the 2013 amendments to the Labour Act; and ensure that inspectors had the resources necessary to carry out their work effectively. The Worker members also asked the ILO to provide technical assistance to improve the functioning of the judiciary, so that alleged labour law violations could be addressed fairly and quickly, and to send a direct contacts mission, undertaken in time to report to the Committee of Experts in 2014, to verify that the issues raised by the Worker members and the Committee of Experts were fully addressed.

The Employer members observed that the rich discussion showed that this was an important and serious case. The discussion had emphasized the importance of labour inspection, and particularly the need to improve the capacity of labour inspection services, as well as the importance of reporting. The case was of great significance for private sector supply chains in the RMG sector. It was important to note that much progress had been made, although much remained to be done. The Employer members emphasized that the establishment of a high-level committee to develop legislation for EPZs should be a priority and that the Government should avail itself of ILO technical assistance for this purpose. They noted that the staff of the labour inspection services had been increased with the appointment of additional inspectors. However, in view of the measures that were still needed, they urged the Government to continue availing itself of ILO technical assistance, and called on the Office to provide such assistance. It was also important to acknowledge that the Government had had to ask for more time, which was perfectly understandable in the context. The Employer members acknowledge that the Government was moving in the right direction with outside help. They urged the Government to continue to request technical and financial assistance to address the many capacity and political issues to improve the application of the Convention.

Conclusions

The Committee noted the oral information provided by the Government representative and the discussion that followed concerning the need to strengthen the labour inspection system, particularly taking into account recent serious events, such as the Rana Plaza building collapse.

The Committee observed that the outstanding issues in this case concerned: the strengthening of the human capital and resources available to the labour inspectorate, including transport facilities; sufficiently dissuasive sanctions and effective enforcement mechanisms; the adoption of regulations implementing the revised Labour Act; the protection of workers in export processing zones (EPZs); the promulgation of additional amendments to the Labour Act; and the publication and communication to the ILO of an annual labour inspection report.

The Committee noted the information provided by the Government on the progress made with respect to the strengthening and restructuring of the labour inspection system, including the approval of 392 additional labour inspection posts, the recruitment of 67 additional labour inspectors, and the conduct of a number of training activities. It also noted the Government’s reference to amendments to the Labour Act in 2013, following ILO technical assistance and tripartite consultation. The Government indicated that the regulations for implementing these amendments were currently being discussed and would soon be issued. The Committee further noted the Government’s indications that a separate and comprehensive Labour Act for EPZs was currently under preparation. Furthermore, a publicly accessible database for labour inspection had recently been launched with ILO assistance.

The Committee noted the reference to the various activities and programmes being undertaken by the Government and the social partners with ILO support, as well as those being implemented with other actors, such as: a major ILO initiative (including a Better Work Programme) aimed at improving working conditions in the ready-made garment (RMG) sector; the European Union Global Sustainability Compact for Continuous Improvements in Labour Rights; the National Tripartite Plan of Action on Fire Safety and Structural Integrity; the National Technical Committee; the Accord on Fire and Building Safety; and the Alliance for Bangladesh Worker Safety.

The Committee observed that while progress had been made, much remained to be done to strengthen the implementation mechanisms for ensuring the protection of workers. It urged the Government to recruit and train, without delay, a sufficient number of labour inspectors in relation to the workforce in the country, and to proceed without further delay to the recruitment of the 200 labour inspectors as the Government had undertaken to do in 2013. It also requested the Government to: provide for necessary resources for labour inspection; bring national legislation into compliance with the requirements of the Convention, in particular with regard to labour inspection powers and dissuasive sanctions for labour law violations; and improve the relevant enforcement mechanisms.

It expressed the firm hope that the regulations implementing the Labour Act would soon be issued so as to give effect to the amendments to the Act. The Government should prioritize the amendments to the legislation governing EPZs, so as to bring the EPZs within the purview of the labour inspectorate. The Committee also emphasized the need to coordinate with ILO support the various activities and programmes undertaken by the Government, the social partners, and those being implemented with other actors.

Highlighting the need for the availability of comprehensive inspection data, the Committee requested the Government to continue its efforts to collect such data, and to ensure that annual reports on the work of labour inspection services were published and regularly communicated to the ILO. These reports should include information on all the items listed in Article 21 of the Convention, in particular on workplaces liable to inspection, the number of workers employed therein, statistics on inspection visits, industrial accidents and diseases, violations recorded and penalties imposed.

The Committee urged the Government to continue to avail itself of ILO technical assistance for the purpose of implementing the above measures and expressed the hope that this assistance would strengthen the labour inspection system and enable the Government to give full effect to the Convention in the near future. In addition, it called on the Government to take urgent measures to ensure the effective implementation, in law and in practice, of labour inspection, with emphasis on EPZs. In this regard, the Committee invited the Government to accept a direct contacts mission that should report in time for the next meeting of the Committee of Experts. The Committee further requested the Government to report to the Committee of Experts at its next meeting on the measures taken to comply with the Convention.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2023, published 112nd ILC session (2024)

Previous comment

Articles 2, 3(1)(a) and (b), 5(a) and (b), 13, 17 and 18 of the Convention. Inspection activities to improve occupational safety and health (OSH) standards in the Ready-Made Garment (RMG) sector. The Committee notes the Government’s indication, in its response to the previous observations of the Trade Union’s International Labour Standards Committee (TU-ILS Committee), that the ready-made garment Sustainability Council (RSC) was set up by members representing brands, industry, and trade unions. The Government states that the RSC’s board of directors consists of 18 representatives, with 6 from each of the RSC constituents. Regarding the framework of coordinated monitoring of building safety in the RMG sector between the RSC and the DIFE, the Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that the framework has been approved by the Ministry of Commerce in October 2022, and that a Government Coordination Council (GCC) led by the Ministry of Commerce has been formed to monitor the coordination of the activities of the RSC and the DIFE. The Committee nevertheless notes that, according to the observations of the TU-ILS Committee, there is still a need for coordination between the RSC and the DIFE and for more coordination between the RSC and trade unions and safety committees at the factory level.

Regarding the work of NIRAPON and the RSC, the Committee notes the information provided by the Government regarding inspections conducted by the RSC and its statement that NIRAPON does not share its information with the Ministry of Labour and Employment. The TU-ILS Committee takes the view that NIRAPON is not functioning properly. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide detailed information on the coordinated activities of the RSC and the DIFE under the framework of coordinated monitoring of building safety in the RMG sector, including the activities of the GCC relating to the monitoring of such coordination. It also requests the Government to indicate measures taken to improve coordination between the RSC and trade unions and safety committees at the level of undertakings. The Committee also requests the Government to indicate the impact of the coordination framework on labour inspection activities to improve OSH standards in the RMG sector.

Regarding the Industrial Safety Unit (ISU), the Committee notes the Government’s statement the ISU now consists of twelve inspectors with training in fire, electrical and structural safety. The Committee once again requests the Government to provide information on the activities undertaken by the ISU.

Finally, the Committee previously noted that the remediation coordination cell (RCC) provides technical support for remediation measures in factories that fall under the NATIONAL Initiative (NI). In this respect, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that out of the 1,549 NI factories, 816 factories have closed down, 551 are undergoing follow-up by the ISU, 13 have joined private initiatives, 11 have moved under the authority of the export processing zones (EPZs), 111 factories have relocated, and 47 factories have been given Corrective Action Plan (CAP) completion certificate. The Committee further notes the statistics provided by the Government regarding the task forces in reviewing and approving the structural, fire and electrical safety plans of factories. The Government indicates that as at July 2023: (i) plans of 417 factories have been submitted to the electrical task force, with 177 approved and 240 returned for correction; (ii) plans for 367 factories have been submitted to the fire safety task force, with 125 approved and 242 returned for correction; and (iii) plans of 364 factories have been submitted to the structural task force, with 115 approved and 249 returned for correction. The Government further indicates that the escalation (compliance) protocol for remediation of 2019 is still in use, and that it consists of six rounds. A reminder or warning letter is issued for the first three rounds, a letter for the cancellation of the utilization declaration is issued to the Bangladesh Garments Manufacturers and Exporters Association (BGMEA) or the Bangladesh Knitwear Manufacturers and Exporters Association (BKMEA) in the fourth round, a motivational meeting call is made with the factory authority for the fifth round and legal procedures are undertaken by labour inspectors in the sixth round. The Committee further notes that, according to the Government, the new project on risk identification, technical assistance and remediation supervision for selected factories was not approved by the planning commission. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the number of factories undergoing follow-up by the RCC and on the activities of the task forces in reviewing and approving the structural, fire and electrical safety plans of factories. It also requests the Government to provide further information on the manner in which the remediation process is verified by the RCC.

Article 3(2). Additional functions entrusted to labour inspectors. Conciliation. Following its previous comments, the Committee notes the information provided by the Government regarding complaint settlements and its indication that 398 labour inspectors are engaged in conciliation functions, giving their full efforts to resolving disputes. The Committee notes that 398 labour inspectors giving full efforts in this area represents a substantial proportion of the human resources in the inspectorate as a whole, and that according to the TU-ILS Committee’s observations, the conciliation functions of labour inspectors may be moved to the Department of Labour following the legislative reform. The Committee requests the Government to provide detailed information onthe measures taken or envisaged to ensure that conciliation functions entrusted to labour inspectors do not interfere with the effective discharge of their primary duties or prejudice in any way the authority and impartiality which are necessary to inspectors in their relations with employers and workers.

Articles 9 and 14. Notification of industrial accidents and cases of occupational diseases. Following its previous comments on the under-reporting of occupational accidents and diseases, the Committee notes the information provided by the Government on the duties of safety committees in the promotion of OSH at the enterprise level, which includes assisting management in implementing OSH regulations and rules. The Committee notes that, according to the labour inspection report, there were 45 occupational accidents and 146 fatal accidents in the period 2021–22. The Committee also notes the Government’s indication that under-reporting is related to a lack of will from employers to report, as well as lack of penalties for non-reporting. According to the Government, the DIFE is raising awareness and has digitalized forms to report occupational accidents, dangerous incidents, and occupational diseases through the LIMA OSH module. Regarding the impact of technical standard operating procedures (SOPs), which describe the procedures for reporting occupational accidents and diseases, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that SOPs have a significant impact in reporting occupational accidents and diseases. Nevertheless, the Government indicates that as of 20 August 2023, no reports of occupational diseases have been made through LIMA, and according to the TU-ILS Committee’s observations, while there are provisions on reporting accidents to the DIFE, there is low implementation in practice. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the measures taken to improve the rate of reporting of occupational accidents and diseases to the DIFE. In addition, the Committee requests the Government to give serious consideration to providing for sufficiently dissuasive penalties for non-compliance with reporting obligations in relation to cases of occupational accidents and diseases, and to provide information on developments in response to this request.

Articles 20 and 21. Publication and communication of annual labour inspection reports necessary to evaluate the effectiveness of the labour inspection system. Following its previous comments, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that the labour inspection report of the DIFE for 2022-23 has not yet been published. The Committee observes that the labour inspection report for 2021–22 does not contain statistical information on workplaces liable to inspection and the number of workers employed therein (Article 21(c)), violations (Article 21(e)) and on occupational diseases (Article 21(g)).Taking into account the Government’s previous indication regarding the establishment of a database with statistics on workplaces liable to inspection, the Committee requests the Government to indicate whether the database is still in place. The Committee requests the Government to continue to take measures to ensure that the labour inspection reports contain all the information required in Article 21 of the Convention.

[The Government is asked to reply in full to the present comments in 2024.]

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2023, published 112nd ILC session (2024)

Previous comment

The Committee notes the observations of the Trade Union’s International Labour Standards Committee (TU-ILS Committee), communicated with the Government’s report. The Committee also notes the reply of the Government to the observations submitted by the TU-ILS Committee in 2022.

The Committee notes that the complaint submitted in 2019 under article 26 of the ILO Constitution, concerning non-observance by the Government of Bangladesh of the Convention as well as of 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 349th Session (November 2023), taking note of the report submitted by the Government on 19 September 2023 on the progress made with the implementation of the road map of actions, the Governing Body, on the recommendation of its Officers, decided to: (i) request the Government of Bangladesh to report on further progress made in the implementation of the road map of actions to address all the outstanding issues mentioned in the article 26 complaint at its 350th Session (March 2024); and (ii) defer the decision on further action in respect of the complaint to that session or any subsequent session.

The Committee takes note of the additional information provided by the Government on 19 September 2023 on the progress made in the implementation of the road map to address all the outstanding issues mentioned in the article 26 complaint.

Legislative developments. Following its previous comments on the labour law reform, the Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that the tripartite working group, headed by the Joint Secretary of Labour, has finalized a draft amendment of the Bangladesh Labour Act, 2006 (BLA) and submitted its recommendations to the Tripartite Law Review Committee (TLRC). According to the Government, the amendment process is expected to be completed by December 2023, and it “will be more [in] compliance with ILO labour Standards.” The Government further indicates that the Bangladesh Export Processing Zone Authority (BEPZA) has formed a 15-member tripartite committee, responsible for amending the Export Processing Zone (EPZ) Labour Act, 2019 and that technical notes were prepared on the EPZ laws with the technical support from the ILO, with discussions being held to hold consultative workshops on their content. The Committee nevertheless notes the observations of the TU-ILS Committee, that there has been no agreement reached on 51 issues discussed by the TLRC. The Committee notes that the forthcoming legislative amendments provide an opportunity to resolve once and for all the outstanding issues of compatibility with the Convention. Noting also the trade union’s observations,the Committee expects that the amendments to the BLA and the EPZ Labour Act will take into account all the outstanding issues concerning the application of the Convention raised by the Committee in these comments, and requests the Government to continue providing detailed information on the progress of its legislative reform.

Articles 2, 4, 12 and 23 of the Convention. Labour inspection in EPZs and special economic zones (SEZs). Following its previous comments, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that, pursuant to section 290 of the EPZ Labour Rules of 2022, labour inspectors of the Department of Inspection for Factories and Establishments (DIFE) are only required to give written or oral intimation to the Executive Chairman of the BEPZA to conduct inspections in the EPZs, and do not need prior approval. The Government indicates that the BEPZA is currently working on the revision process of the EPZ Labour Act, in consultation with social partners and stakeholders, and that the Act will be amended by 2025. The Committee also notes the EPZ inspection checklist communicated by the Government. The Committee further notes the indication by the Government that as of July 2023, the DIFE has inspected 52 factories within EPZs with the overall compliance of the factories concerned having been found to be satisfactory in general.The Committee requests the Government to continue to take the necessary measures to ensure that labour inspectors are empowered to enter freely establishments in EPZs and SEZs without any restrictions, including by amending section 168 of the EPZ Labour Act which provides that DIFE inspectors are required to receive approval from the Executive Chairman of the BEPZA prior to the inspection of EPZs. In addition, the Committee requests the Government to indicate whether labour inspectors of the DIFE can carry out tests, examinations, and enquiries that are not covered by the EPZ inspection checklist but that they consider necessary to verify the strict observance of the relevant legal provisions. In the absence of information in this regard, the Committee once again requests the Government to provide detailed information on the number of inspections in the EPZs and SEZs undertaken by the DIFE that were announced, as compared with those that were unannounced, the number and nature of violations detected in each group, and the measures taken as a result of such violations. The Committee also requests the Government to indicate the number of workers employed in the EPZs and SEZs and those covered by the 52 inspection visits indicated by the Government.

Articles 5(b) and 15(a). Cooperation with employers and workers. Impartiality of labour inspectors. Following its previous comments, the Committee notes that the Government denies all previous allegations of the TU-ILS Committee regarding corruption and political or undue pressure on labour inspectors during inspections. The Government further states that there are institutional mechanisms in place to deal with malpractice, and that any written allegation of corruption or undue exercise of power would be investigated. Regarding the Hashem Food Factory incident in 2021, the Government indicates that the inspection occurred during the COVID-19 lockdown, and that the focus was on preventing the spread of COVID-19. The Committee also notes, however, that according to the TU-ILS Committee, factory operations at the Hashem Food Factory restarted soon after without the necessary changes, and that labour inspectors of the DIFE visit small establishments and shops instead of factories, because of the informal relationships between factories and labour inspectors. The TU-ILS Committee also alleges that labour inspectors do not sufficiently collaborate with the ready-made garment Sustainability Council (RSC) and that the National Industrial Health and Safety Council, which has identified 5,000 factories requiring safety changes, does not have workers’ representation. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments in respect of each of these observations. In addition, the Committee requests information on any instance in which inspectors were investigated for charges of being corruptly or politically influenced in the performance of their duties, and the results of any such investigations. The Committee also requests the Government to take measures to further improve collaboration between officials of the labour inspectorate and employers and workers or their organizations.

Articles 5, 7, 10, 11 and 16. Human and material resources of the labour inspectorate. Frequency and thoroughness of labour inspections. Cooperation with employers and workers organizations. Following its previous comments, the Committee notes that, according to the Government, as of 30 June 2023, there are 711 sanctioned posts compared to 575 sanctioned posts in 2022, of which 396 posts are filled (366 noted in 2022). The Government also indicates that there are 133 posts to be filled by promotion (2 for joint inspector-general and 131 for assistant inspector general). The Committee notes the statistics provided regarding the number of inspection visits conducted in the year 2022–23, with 47,826 inspection visits in total. Regarding material resources, the Committee notes that the statistics provided by the Government are similar to those of 2022, and that the labour inspectors have at their disposal two cars (previously five), three jeeps, 27 microbuses, 158 motorcycles, 40 scooters, 292 laptops and 339 desktop computers. The Government also indicates that the annual budget allocated for the DIFE has increased almost ten times since 2013 from 56.12 million Bangladeshi taka to 524.1 million taka in 2023. Noting that a considerable number of labour inspectors’ posts remain vacant,the Committee requests the Government to intensify its efforts toincrease the number of labour inspectors through recruitment and promotion of inspectors. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide statistics on the number of labour inspectors in the DIFE, including the number of posts filled by recruitment of new labour inspectors and those filled by promotion.

Article 6. Status and conditions of service of labour inspectors. Following its previous comments, the Committee notes the information provided by the Government on the current workforce of the DIFE, including the number of approved and filled posts for inspectors, and the information comparing the remuneration and conditions of employment of labour inspectors with tax collectors and the police. The Committee takes note of this information, which addresses its previous request.

Articles 12(1) and 15(c). Inspections without previous notice. Duty of confidentiality in relation to complaints. Following its previous comments, the Committee notes the statistics provided by the Government concerning the number of inspection visits conducted by labour inspectors of the DIFE in the year 2022–23. In particular, the Government indicates that a total of 47,826 inspections were conducted in 2022–23, with 19,229 announced and 28,597 unannounced inspections, out of which 3,150 were conducted by the DIFE as a result of a complaint. Regarding the confidentiality of complaints, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that complaint boxes are set up during inspections outside the range of camera surveillance, to allow workers to submit complaints anonymously. In addition, the Government indicates that workers can submit grievances against DIFE officials in cases where union members or workers who submitted a complaint face negative consequences from labour inspectors disclosing information. The Committee also notes the observations of the TU-ILS Committee, that: (i) there should be more unannounced inspections; (ii) labour inspectors may not conduct inspection visits at night; and (iii) there are limitations to the scope of labour inspection, as labour inspectors may not inspect sectors falling outside the scope of BLA. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments in respect of these observations. The Committee further requests the Government to continue to provide information on the number of inspection visits disaggregated between announced and unannounced inspection visits, separately noting the number of inspections resulting from complaints, along with information on the number and nature of violations found in response to each category of inspection visit. The Committee requests the Government to continue providing statistics on the use of the helpline and other mechanisms to submit anonymous complaints, including the number of inspections conducted as a result of a complaint and the outcome of such inspections.

Articles 17 and 18. Legal proceedings. Effectively enforced and sufficiently dissuasive penalties. Following its previous comments, the Committee notes that, according to the Government, the legal unit of the DIFE is fully functional and has one Legal Officer (with another who has yet to join), an inspector and other staff members. The Committee also notes the statistics provided by the Government indicating that in the year 2022–23, there were 495 cases solved in court with fines imposed in all of them, that the total amount of money collected from fines was 1,163,667 taka, equivalent to US$10,559 or an average of US$21.33 for each case where a fine was imposed, and that 653 cases are still pending. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that increasing penalties for relevant violations is being considered in the labour law reform. The Committee notes that, according to the additional information provided by the Government concerning the implementation of the third priority area of the road map of actions, a proposal to set up a fully-fledged Labour Court in Faridpur is currently awaiting approval. Noting that the Government had previously indicated that the legal unit would be expanded to nine officers, the Committee requests the Government to pursue its efforts to fill in the posts of the legal unit of the DIFE. The Committee urges the Government to take measures to ensure thatpenalties for labour law violations are sufficiently dissuasive and to clear the backlog of labour cases. The Committee further requests the Government to provide statistics on the number of violations detected by labour inspectors, and the provisions to which they relate. The Committee also requests the Government to provide information on any progress made in the establishment of a Labour Court in Faridpur.

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

[The Government is asked to reply in full to the present comments in 2024.]

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2022, published 111st ILC session (2023)

The Committee notes the observations of the Trade Union’s International Labour Standards Committee (TU-ILS Committee), received on 1 September 2022, referring to the matters addressed below.The Committee also notes the reply of the Government to the observations submitted by International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) in 2021.

Legislation. The Committee takes note of the information provided by the Government with respect to the adoption of the Standards Operating Procedures (SOPs) concerning (i) the approval of factory layout plans; (ii) labour complaints and investigations; (iii) labour inspection; (iv) registration and license giving processes; (v) occupational accident investigation (vi) occupational diseases. The Committee also notes the adoption of the Ready-Made Garment (RMG) and factory inspection checklist.

Articles 2, 3(1)(a) and (b), 5(a) and (b), 13, 17 and 18 of the Convention. Inspection activities to improve occupational safety and health (OSH) standards in the RMG sector. The Committee notes that in reply to its previous request, the Government indicates that a draft framework of cooperation and monitoring was prepared by the Department of Inspection for Factories and Establishments (DIFE) for the ready-made garment Sustainability Council (RSC) based on the terms and conditions of the licenses given to RSC by the Ministry of Commerce (MoC). The Government indicates that the draft is currently under consideration by the MoC. The Committee notes that, in the additional information provided by the Government concerning the implementation of the third priority area of the road map of actions (labour inspection and enforcement), a ten-member review panel for the RSC, headed by the Inspector General of the DIFE, and consisting of technical experts along with RSC representative, has been formed in March 2022 to address the appeals received from workers who are aggrieved by the activities of RSC. The Committee further notes that in its observation, the TU-ILS Committee indicates that the complaint mechanism under the ACCORD and ALLIANCE was faster and more effective than the one established under the RSC and its outcome was legally binding. The trade unions also indicate that, while the ACCORD used to be represented by buyers and trade unions, the RSC Governing Body consists of 12 employers and six workers and that therefore employers are more influential. Concerning NIRAPON, the trade unions indicate that they are not aware of its activities as its work is not visible. The Committee requests the Government to provide its reply to these observations. It also requests the Government to continue to provide detailed information on the progress made in the development of a framework of coordinated monitoring of building safety in the RMG sector between the RSC and the DIFE and provide the details of such framework once adopted. Noting the absence of information on the matters, the Committee requests the Government to (i) provide information on the work carried out by the NIRAPON and the RSC, specifying the extent to which they monitor fire, electrical and structural safety in all factories previously covered by the ALLIANCE and the ACCORD; and (ii) indicate the number of inspections undertaken by the NIRAPON and the RSC, the number and nature of corrective actions requested by each initiative, and the results of such corrective actions including – if there are factory closures – any measures to provide severance or new job prospects for affected workers.

The Committee notes that in reply to its previous comment, the Government indicates that (i) an Industrial Safety Unit (ISU) has been established, consisting of seven staff who received training in fire, electrical, and structural safety; and (ii) a proposal has been submitted for providing further assistance to the ISU, including a request for technical assistance to the ILO. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the measures adopted in order to ensure that the ISU is operational and to indicate the activities undertaken by the Unit.

The Committee notes that in reply to its previous request concerning remedial actions for safety issues, the Government indicates that the remediation coordination cell (RCC) provides technical support for remediation measures in factories that fall under the NATIONAL Initiative (NI) and verifies the progress in the implementation of the corrective action plans. The Government indicates that factory owners are responsible to complete the remediation using their own resources. The Government indicates that, out of the 1,549 NI factories, 748 factories closed and of the remaining, a total of 666 are undergoing follow-up by RCC, 13 have joined private initiatives, 11 have moved under the authority of the export processing zones (EPZ)and 111 factories have relocated from the building. The Government indicates that as of December 2021, the overall progress of factory remediation is 55 per cent. The Government also indicates that following the decision of the National Tripartite Committee on the National Tripartite Plan of Action on Structural, Fire and Electrical Safety in the RMG sector of Bangladesh, three task forces have been established (on structural issues, fire, and electrical safety). These task forces: (i) are headed by inspector general of the DIFE, with the participation of the Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology Experts, the Bangladesh Fire Service and Civil Defence, the Chief Electrical Inspectorate, the Public Work Division and DIFE officers; and (ii) approve the design of structural, fire and electrical plans made by factory management, with the support of consultancy firms. The Government also indicates that a new project on the risk identification, technical assistance and remediation supervision for selected factories is in the approval process. The project, which aims at reducing accidents in selected factories, will be implemented between July 2022 and June 2024 and will cover almost 2,000 RMG and non-RMG factories to ensure their safety-related compliance. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide detailed information on the number of factories covered by the NATIONAL initiative as well as the number of factories undergoing follow-up by the RCC, including those that have taken remedial actions. In this regard, the Committee requests that the Government provide information on the number of factories receiving technical support from the RCC, the nature of that support, and the manner in which the remediation process is verified by the RCC. The Committee also requests the Government to provide more information on the activities of the task forces in reviewing and approving the structural, fire and electrical safety plans of factories. Noting the absence of information on the implementation of the escalation (compliance) protocol for remediation of 2019, the Committee requests the Government to indicate whether this protocol is still in use and, if so, to provide details on its implementation. Finally, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the approval and implementation of the project on risk identification, technical assistance and remediation supervision for selected factories.

Article 3(2). Additional functions entrusted to labour inspectors. Conciliation. In reply to its previous comment, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that according to the citizen charter of DIFE, it takes 30 days to resolve complaints regarding the payment of wages and other benefits through the conciliation process established in section 124a of the Bangladesh Labour Act, 2006 (BLA). The Government adds that in the fiscal year 2021-2022, there were 3,604 complaints received and all of them were resolved. The Committee also notes the observations from the TU-ILS Committee, indicating that due to the responsibility of conciliation and wage settlement, DIFE inspectors are diverted from their main responsibilities. The trade unions indicate that the power of conciliation and grievance handling should be shifted from DIFE to the Department of Labour (DOL). The Committee recalls that, pursuant to Article 3(2) of the Convention, any further duties which may be entrusted to labour inspectors, including mediation, shall not be such as to interfere with the effective discharge of those primary duties or prejudice in any way the authority and impartiality which are necessary to inspectors in their relations with employers and workers.The Committee requests that the Government provide its reply to the observation of the trade unions. It also requests the Government to indicate the number of labour inspectors involved in conciliation functions and to indicate the proportion of time and resources spent on labour disputes, in comparison to those spent on the discharge of their primary duties as defined under Article 3(1) of the Convention.

Articles 9 and 14. Notification of industrial accidents and cases of occupational diseases. The Committee notes that, in reply to its previous comment, the Government refers to the provisions of the BLA, 2006 providing for the obligation of the employer to maintain a register and notify the DIFE of accidents and diseases (sections 80 and 82 of the BLA). The Government also refers to (i) an ongoing upgrade of the Labour Inspection Management Application (LIMA); (ii) awareness training provided to the employers; and (iii) a technical SOP on occupational disease approved by the Ministry of Employment and Labour (MoLE) in August 2022 for the use of DIFE inspectors in the field. The Committee also notes that in the additional information provided by the Government concerning the implementation of the third priority area of the road map of actions (labour inspection and enforcement), the Government indicates that the number of safety committees created in factories across the country increased to 5,959 as of 30 June 2022. In addition, the Committee notes that in their observation, the TU-ILS Committee indicates that the reasons for under-reporting of industrial accidents and disease include (i) the lack of will from the employers to report; (ii) the lack of sufficiently dissuasive penalties for non-reporting; and (iii) the lack of trade union presence and of effective safety committees at the level of the establishment.The Committee requests the Government to provide its reply to the observations of the trade unions. It also requests the Government to indicate the impact of the technical SOP on the reporting of occupational accidents and disease. In addition, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the duties of the safety committees in the promotion of OSH at the level of the establishment, including any involvement in the reporting or notification of occupational accidents to the DIFE. Noting the absence of information in this respect, the Committee requests once again that the Government (i) indicate any impact that the LIMA might have on the collection of statistics of industrial accidents and cases of occupational diseases; (ii) provide an assessment on the reasons for the underreporting of industrial accidents and the lack of reporting of any cases of occupational disease; (iii) indicate whether consideration is being given to providing for sufficiently dissuasive penalties for non-compliance with reporting obligations in relation to cases of occupational disease.

Articles 20 and 21. Publication and communication of annual labour inspection reports necessary to evaluate the effectiveness of the labour inspection system. Availability of inspection statistics in relation to all sectors. The Committee notes with interest that, in reply to its previous comment, the Government indicates that an initiative was taken to establish a detailed database of workplaces liable to inspection in Bangladesh. The Government indicates that there are around 32,029 factories registered (including RMG and non-RMG factories) and that this database is available on the website of the DIFE. The Committee also notes that the Government is in the process of publication of the labour inspection report for the financial year 2021-22. The Committee also notes the Government’s indication that as the LIMA will be fully functional from this year, the labour inspection report for 2022-2023 will reflect all the elements of Article 21 of Convention No. 81.The Committee requests the Government to continue to pursue its efforts to ensure that the labour inspection reports are published and contain all the information required in Article 21 of the Convention.

[The Government is asked to reply in full to the present comments in 2023.]

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2022, published 111st ILC session (2023)

The Committee notes the observations of the Trade Union’s International Labour Standards Committee (TU-ILS Committee), received on 1 September 2022, referring to the matters addressed below. The Committee also notes the reply of the Government to the observations submitted by International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) in 2021.

The Committee notes that the complaint submitted in 2019 under article 26 of the ILO Constitution, concerning non-observance by the Government of Bangladesh of the Convention as well as of 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 346th Session (November 2022), taking note of the report submitted by the Government on 9 September 2022 on the progress made with the implementation of the road map of actions, the Governing Body, on the recommendation of its Officers, decided to: (i) request the Government of Bangladesh to report on further progress made in the implementation of the road map of actions to address all the outstanding issues mentioned in the article 26 complaint at its 347th Session (March 2023); and (ii) to defer the decision on further action in respect of the complaint to that session.

The Committee takes note of the additional information provided by the Government on 9 September 2022 on the progress made in the implementation of the road map to address all the outstanding issues mentioned in the article 26 complaint.

Legislative developments. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its report concerning the establishment of an 18-member Tripartite Law Review Committee (TLRC) headed by the Additional Secretary (Labour) in March 2022 to work on the labour law reform. A separate 12-member working committee was also formed in July 2022, headed by the Joint Secretary (Labour), to support the Law Review Committee. The Government indicates that these two new committees are tasked to identify the areas in the existing law that need to be reformed in order to bring them in line with international labour standards. The Committee also notes, in the additional information provided concerning the implementation of the first priority area of the road map of actions (labour law reform), that the Bangladesh Labour Rules, 2015 were amended and published through gazette notification on 1 September 2022. Concerning the amendment of the Bangladesh Labour Act, 2006 (as amended in 2018) (BLA), the Committee notes the Government’s indication that the proposed revisions received by stakeholders (government, employers and workers organizations) will be compiled and sent to the TLRC by 30 October 2022. Upon completion of the work by the TLRC, the National Tripartite Consultative Council (NTCC) will be in a position to take up the issue of the amendments of the BLA. The Committee also notes the adoption of the Export Processing Zone (EPZ) Labour Rules in October 2022. The Committee also notes the observation from the TU-ILS Committee which indicates that the TLRC has been recently reformed, but that the legislative reform process is not advancing at the expected speed. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide detailed information on the progress made in the legislative reform process and on the measures adopted in order to ensure that such process takes into account the outstanding issues concerning the application of the Convention raised by the Committee.

Articles 2, 4, 12 and 23 of the Convention. Labour inspection in EPZs and special economic zones (SEZs). The Committee notes that in reply to its previous request the Government indicates that pursuant to the preamble and section 3(A), 4(d), 7(k) and 5A(2) of the Bangladesh Export Processing Zone Authority (BEPZA) Act, 1980, the BEPZA is the only appropriate authority of the Government for development, operation, management and control of the EPZs. The Government indicates that the BEPZA has been successfully performing its duties and responsibilities of administration and inspection in EPZs for the last four decades. The Government indicates that nevertheless it has adopted measures in order to ensure the operation of the Department of Inspection for Factories and Establishments (DIFE) in the EPZs, namely: (i) modalities of DIFE inspections in the EPZs have been incorporated in the amended EPZ Labour Rules; (ii) an EPZ inspection checklist has been prepared and shared with DIFE on 1 December 2021; (iii) on 16 May 2022, a meeting was held between the BEPZA and DIFE under the chair of the Minister of Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs regarding a transparent and accountable mechanism of inspections; and (iv) as of August 2022, the DIFE inspected 25 factories in EPZs and found overall compliances of the factories inspected.

The Committee also notes that the TU-ILS Committee indicates in its observations that there has been no noticeable impact from the development of the EPZ inspection checklist. The TU-ILS Committee adds that pursuant to section 168 of the EPZ Labour Act, the DIFE is only empowered to carry out announced inspections in the EPZs, after the approval of the Executive Chairman of the BEPZA. The trade unions indicate that the legislation should be amended in order to ensure that DIFE is in charge of inspections in the EPZs and that, until then, reports on the inspection of factories within the EPZ area on safety issues should be submitted to the DIFE by BEPZA on a monthly basis.

The Committee notes with concern that, according to section 289 of the EPZ Labour Rules of 2022, the Executive Chairman of the BEPZA remains the authority responsible for inspections in the EPZs. While the Committee also notes that, according to section 290, the inspectors of the DIFE may inspect any industry of any zone established within their jurisdiction by giving an intimation to the Executive Chairman, the rules provide that inspection shall be carried out in accordance with the checklist prepared by the authority. The Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that labour inspectors are empowered to enter freely establishments in EPZs and SEZs without any restrictions. The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether, under the EPZ Labour Rules 2022, DIFE inspectors are required to receive approval from the Executive Chairman prior to the inspection of EPZs, as foreseen in section 168 of the EPZ Labour Act. If such approval is necessary, the Committee requests that the Government provide information on the number of requests made, the number of requests approved, the time elapsed between each request and approval, and any reasons given for each failure to approve. It also requests the Government to provide copy of the EPZ inspection checklist and to indicate its impact on EPZ inspections, including whether labour inspectors are free to carry out any examination, test or enquiry which they may consider necessary in order to satisfy themselves that the legal provisions are being strictly observed. Further, the Committee requests the Government to indicate the progress made, in the context of the labour law reform mentioned above, in the amendment of section 168 of the EPZ Labour Act. Noting the information on the number of factory inspections undertaken by the DIFE in the EPZs, the Committee requests the Government to provide further details on the numbers of labour inspections undertaken in EPZs and SEZs that are in operation, disaggregated into inspections by the DIFE and inspections under the BEPZA, including whether the inspections were announced or unannounced, whether in response to a complaint or to an accident, and the number and nature of all violations detected and the measures taken as a result.

Articles 5(b) and 15(a).Cooperation with employers and workers.Impartiality of labour inspectors. The Committee notes thatthe TU-ILS Committee refers in its observation to allegations of corruption and undue pressure on DIFE inspectors in the performance of their duties. The trade unions indicate that labour inspectors are politically influenced or induced for various reasons to overlook safety and law enforcement issues. The trade unions refer in particular to the 2021 fire incident in the Hashem Food Factory where several workers died. According to the TU-ILS Committee, an inspection carried out two weeks before the incident considered the factory in compliance with safety rules. However, according to the trade unions, an investigation after the incident indicated a lack of fire safety measures. According to the trade unions, there is a lack of accountability in the inspection system and there are no penalties or departmental actions applied to labour inspectors when they fail to perform their duties. The trade unions also indicate that while inspections should be unannounced according to the law, there are times when an informal relationship is established between the factory management and the inspectors and, as a result, the establishment receives advanced notice of the inspection. The TU-ILS Committee also indicates that there is limited engagement of workers in the inspection process, noting that the quality of inspections should be ensured through tripartite accountability mechanisms established at the central, territorial and enterprise level. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments in respect of these trade unions observations.

Article 6. Status and conditions of service of labour inspectors.The Committee notes that in reply to its previous comment, the Government provides the structure of the current workforce of the DIFE with the indication of the number of positions filled and vacant at each grade. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that inspectors normally enter into service at the 10th grade as labour inspector and at the 9th grade as assistant inspector general and that with satisfactory performance inspectors can be promoted to higher level. Concerning the condition of service of labour inspectors, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that labour inspectors are appointed to permanent positions, and that the remuneration and employment tenure are similar to those of tax collectors and the police. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the structure of the DIFE workforce, including the number of officers appointed at each grade. Noting the absence of information on this point, the Committee requests the Government to indicate the number and grade of labour inspectors that left the DIFE. The Committee reiterates its request for detailed information comparing the remuneration and employment tenures of labour inspectors to those of tax collectors and the police.

Articles 5, 7, 10, 11 and 16. Human and material resources of the labour inspectorate. Frequency and thoroughness of labour inspections. Cooperation with employers and workers organizations.The Committee notes that in reply to its previous comment concerning the staffing of the DIFE, the Government indicates that, as of 30 June 2022, out of the 575 sanctioned posts, 366 are filled (313 in 2020) while 209 remain vacant. The Government also indicates that police and medical checks for additional 54 new recruits are ongoing and that a request will be submitted to the Ministry of Labour and Employment (MoLE) for the recruitment of another 46 inspectors. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that in 2022, the MoLE issued the final order for creation of an additional 136 posts of labour inspectors, and for the creation of eight new field offices. Concerning promotions, the Government states that 11 existing staff of DIFE were promoted to the post of labour inspectors general and that the gradations for the posts of deputy inspectors general and assistant inspectors general are underway. Finally, the Government indicates that a new organogram with 1,791 posts (currently 993 posts), of which 942 are for inspectors, was sent to the Ministry of Public Administration (MoPA) for approval and it is currently under consideration. The Committee notes that according to the TU-ILS Committee, there is a lack of inspectors to cover all the factories in the country. Concerning the number of inspection visits, the Committee notes the Government’s indication on the number of inspections conducted by the DIFE in the first seven months of 2022, disaggregated by sector. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the progress made in the recruitment and promotion of inspectors, as well as on the approval of the organigram of the DIFE. It also requests the Government to continue to provide information on the number of inspections undertaken by the DIFE, disaggregated by sector of economic activity.

Concerning the material resources available to the DIFE, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that labour inspectors have at their disposal five cars (previously one), three jeeps, 27 microbuses, 292 laptops and 339 desktop computers. The Committee notes that the 425 Android tablets, reported as available to labour inspectors in the previous Government report, are not listed in the material resources at the disposal of the DIFE. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the material resources of the DIFE, including any IT equipment available to the inspectors during inspection visits and how these material resources are distributed across different offices. The Committee also request the Government to provide information on the annual budget allocated to the DIFE.

Articles 12(1) and 15(c). Inspections without previous notice. Duty of confidentiality in relation to complaints.The Committee notes that in reply to its previous comment, the Government states that: (i) according to the BLA, 2006 and the standard operating procedure (SOP) issued on the basis of the Act, inspectors are entitled to perform announced and unannounced visits; (ii) for special cases such as those involving child labour, complaints investigation, probabilities of hiding evidences etc, an unannounced visit is conducted; (iii) inspectors prefer to conduct unannounced inspections to check if there are concealed issues but that, in cases where a prior document is required, the visit would be announced; (iv) the labour inspector has the discretion to decide whether to conduct announced or unannounced visits. The Government also provides the number of announced (959) and unannounced inspections (4,855) conducted in 2021-2022, collected through the Labour Inspection Management Application (LIMA). In this respect, the Committee notes that the total number of inspections for 2021-2022 collected through the LIMA and offline (43,644) is significantly higher than the total announced and unannounced inspections for the same period. Furthermore, the Committee notes that according to the SOP on Labour Inspection, regular inspections will usually be announced unless that is inconvenient for the performance of the duties of the inspectors. The SOP also provides that a minimum of 50 per cent regular visits should be announced, while special inspections (such as complaint investigation, accident investigation, etc.) are usually unannounced unless the announcement of the visit is necessary, for instance for ensuring the presence of witnesses. The Committee recalls once again the importance of undertaking a sufficient number of inspections that are unannounced to ensure that when inspections are conducted as a result of a complaint without prior notice, the fact of the complaint is kept confidential.

Concerning the confidentiality of complaints, the Committee notes the observation of the TU-ILS Committee indicating that: (i) the hotline provides an opportunity to file a complaint anonymously but sometimes it does not work; (ii) there is no information provided by the DIFE regarding the anonymity of the complaints and therefore workers are not aware that they can file a complaint without fear of retaliation; (iii) currently, an ID card is required to submit a complaint and DIFE should set up complaint boxes in factories to be inspected during inspection (out of the range of CCTV); (iv) there should be sanctions provided in the law for the disclosure of the details of a complaint by DIFE officials. The Committee also takes note of the Government’s indication that the modalities to ensure confidentiality are provided in the relevant SOP. Moreover, the Committee notes that in the additional information provided by the Government concerning the implementation of the third priority area of the road map of actions (labour inspection and enforcement), the Government states that (i) the helpline activated in June 2020 continues to operate and to receive complaints that are now managed through a database; (ii) the officials dealing with the helpline are being trained regularly; (iii) the complaint management cell, established at the DIFE in December 2020, was reorganized in January 2022 and consists of eight labour inspectors tasked to monitor the complaints received and addressed, update the number of complaints received and resolved, and arrange training for labour inspectors.

The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments to the observations of the trade unions. The Committee also requests the Government to continue to provide information on the number of announced and unannounced inspections conducted by the DIFE and to indicate the number of inspections conducted as a result of a complaint, and the outcome of all such inspections. With reference to the discrepancy noted between the total of announced and unannounced inspections and the total number of visits for the same period, the Committee requests the Government to provide more detailed information on the types of inspections conducted, including whether they were announced or unannounced.

Articles 17 and 18. Legal proceedings. Effectively enforced and sufficiently dissuasive penalties. The Committee previously noted that (i) the legal unit of the DIFE counts one officer and (ii) the Government planned to expand it to nine officers. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that in August 2022 one additional post of legal officer was approved. The Government also indicates that, in order to improve the proceedings for the enforcement of legal provisions, two foundation training courses for 60 inspectors were completed in the financial year 2021–22. These courses trained labour inspectors on the main provisions of the BLA, 2006 and Bangladesh Labour Rules, 2015. Concerning the measures introduced or envisaged to ensure that penalties for labour law violations are sufficiently dissuasive, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that there was an increase in the fines for the protection of women workers deprived of maternal welfare benefits and an increase in the amount of compensation in case of death or disability of workers following an occupational accident. In this regard, the Committee notes that, in their observation, the TU-ILS Committee indicates that penalties should be revised in consultation with trade unions. In addition, according to the trade unions, in cases of wage arrears, the existing 25 per cent interest for delayed payment is insufficient and should be increased to ensure effective deterrence. Concerning violations, the Government provides the numbers of cases filed and resolved for the period 2021-2022, including the number of cases of child labour identified. The Committee also notes that, in their observation, the trade unions indicate that labour justice in Bangladesh is long and cumbersome and that therefore it is discouraging for workers to file a complaint. The trade unions also indicate that there is a need to strengthen the enforcement process of labour courts decisions and that both the Department of Labour and the DIFE should be involved in the implementation of labour court judgments. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the progresses made in the established of a fully operational legal unit in the DIFE. Noting the observation from the trade unions and the limited progress reported by the Government on this matter, the Committee requests the Government to pursue its efforts to ensure that penalties for labour law violations are sufficiently dissuasive. Noting the absence of information in this respect, the Committee once again requests that the Government indicate the specific outcome of cases that are referred to the labour courts (such as the imposition of fines, the amounts collected from fines imposed, and also sentences of imprisonment) and to specify the legal provisions to which they relate. Finally, the Committee requests the Government to continue to provide up-to-date information on the number and nature of violations detected.

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

[The Government is asked to reply in full to the present comments in 2023.]

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

The Committee takes note of the additional information provided by the Government on 30 September 2021 on the progress made in the implementation of a roadmap to address all the outstanding issues mentioned in a complaint pending under article 26 of the ILO Constitution.

Legislation. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its report on the adoption of several instruments concerning the work carried out by the labour inspectorate, such as the escalation (compliance) protocol for remediation adopted in 2019 and the standard operating procedures adopted in 2020 on labour inspection, labour complaints investigation, approval of factory layout plan, registration and licensing of organizations, and investigation of occupational accidents. The Committee requests the Government to provide a copy of each of these instruments.

Articles 2, 3(1)(a) and (b), 5(a) and (b), 13, 17 and 18 of the Convention. Inspection activities to improve occupational safety and health (OSH) standards in the Ready-Made Garment (RMG) sector. With regard to its previous comments on the capacity of the competent public authorities to assume the monitoring of fire, electrical and structural safety in factories previously covered by the ALLIANCE and ACCORD initiatives, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that: (i) the Bangladesh worker safety initiative called NIRAPON was founded in 2019 with the aim of building upon the work of the ALLIANCE, which ceased its operations in December 2018 and that NIRAPON moved to North America and continues its operations from there; and, (ii) the ACCORD initiative ceased operations in May 2020 and its functions have been taken over by the ready-made garment (RMG) Sustainability Council (RSC). The Committee also takes note of the Government’s additional information that the Ministry of Public Administration (MOPA) is holding discussions with the ILO on the outline of a framework on how the Department of Inspection for Factories and Establishments (DIFE) and the RSC could collaborate for monitoring building safety in the RMG sector. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the work carried out by the NIRAPON initiative and the RSC, specifying the extent to which they monitor fire, electrical and structural safety in all factories previously covered by the ALLIANCE and the ACCORD, and indicating the number of inspections undertaken by each of the above-mentioned initiatives, the number and nature of corrective actions requested by each initiative, and the results of such corrective actions including – if there are factory closures – any measures to provide severance or new job prospects for affected workers. Concerning the NIRAPON initiative, the Committee requests the Government to indicate how it carries out its monitoring activities in practice while being based outside the country. The Committee also requests the Government to continue to provide information on any progress made in the development of a framework for coordinated monitoring of building safety in the RMG sector between the RSC and the DIFE.

As to its previous comments on progress towards the establishment of the Industrial Safety Unit (ISU) within the DIFE, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that a proposal to turn the Remediation Coordination Cell (RCC), which is responsible for monitoring the remediation work in all factories under the NATIONAL initiative, into a permanent ISU, has already been submitted by the DIFE and is pending approval by the MOPA. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on any progress made in the establishment of the ISU within the DIFE.

Moreover, the Committee notes the information provided by the Government on the work of the NATIONAL initiative, particularly on the fact that a number of factories that fell within its scope are now closed or monitored under other initiatives or authorities (629 factories are closed, 13 joined a private initiative and 12 are under the Bangladesh Export Processing Zones Authority). The Committee also notes the Government’s indication that 101 factories have relocated or shifted building and 794 factories are undergoing follow-up by the RCC. In this respect, the Government specifies that the overall progress of the factory remediation is at 48 per cent as of June 2021. The Committee also notes from publicly available information that the escalation (compliance) protocol for remediation of 2019 aims at expediting remedial actions in the RMG factories inspected under the NATIONAL initiative. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the number of factories covered by the NATIONAL initiative as well as the number of factories undergoing follow-up by the RCC that have taken remedial actions. It also requests the Government to provide information on the implementation of the escalation (compliance) protocol for remediation of 2019 as well as its results, including the number and nature of measures adopted. Lastly, noting the absence of the information on this respect, the Committee once again requests the Government to provide information on the increase in the number of staff in the Government bodies responsible for the monitoring of fire, electrical and structural safety and their expertise or specialist qualifications and training, as well as on the number of inspections undertaken by these bodies and the corrective action requested.

Article 3(2). Additional functions entrusted to labour inspectors. The Committee notes that, in reply to its previous comments on the conciliation procedure under the responsibility of the DIFE, the Government provides information on the development of the conciliation procedure regarding the payment of wages and other benefits as provided for in section 124a (payment of dues including wages through conciliations) of the Bangladesh Labour Act and section 113 (reconciliation about the wage and other dues) of the Bangladesh Labour Rules. Noting once again the absence of information in this regard, the Committee requests the Government to provide specific information on the proportion of time devoted to conciliation and mediation regarding the payment of wages and other benefits by indicating the number of complaints submitted and the number of conciliation and mediation procedures undertaken as a result.

Articles 9 and 14. Notification of industrial accidents and cases of occupational diseases. The Committee notes that, in response to its previous comments on the steps taken to improve the system for notifying the labour inspection services of industrial accidents and cases of occupational disease, the Government states that: (i) the reporting system on occupational accidents and diseases has been digitalized and integrated as a module in the Labour Inspection Management Application (LIMA), which is being upgraded; and, (ii) a technical standard operating procedure on occupational disease is currently being developed for the inspectors. The Committee takes note of the Government’s additional information that the LIMA is currently being used at all the district offices of the DIFE and that inspections are already being undertaken using this system. The Committee requests the Government to provide further information on the functioning of the digital reporting system on occupational accidents and diseases of the LIMA, including any impact that it may have on the collection of statistics of industrial accidents and cases of occupational diseases. It also requests the Government to provide information on any progress made in the development of a technical standard operating procedure on occupational disease for labour inspectors. Furthermore, noting the absence of information in this regard, the Committee once again requests the Government to provide an assessment on the reasons for the underreporting of industrial accidents and the lack of reporting of any cases of occupational disease, to which the Committee referred in its previous comments. Finally, the Committee also requests the Government to indicate whether consideration is being given to providing for sufficiently dissuasive penalties for non-compliance with reporting obligations in relation to cases of occupational disease.

Articles 20 and 21. Publication and communication of annual labour inspection reports necessary to evaluate the effectiveness of the labour inspection system. Availability of inspection statistics in relation to all sectors. With regard to its previous comments on further information on the establishment of a register of all workplaces liable to inspection, the Committee notes that the Government indicates that the process is ongoing to regularly update the information of the database of workplaces liable to inspection, which is available on the website of the DIFE, through registrations and licensing requests made in the LIMA. Lastly, the Committee notes with interest that the labour inspection reports for 2018, 2019 and 2020 have been published on the website of the DIFE. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on any progress made with regard to the establishment of a register of all workplaces liable to inspection. Noting that the annual labour inspection reports partially address the matters specified in Article 21 of the Convention, the Committee requests the Government to pursue its efforts to ensure that the future annual labour inspection reports deal with all the matters specified in the abovementioned article, including with regard to: statistics of workplaces liable to inspection and the number of workers employed therein (Article 21(c)); statistics of violations and penalties imposed (Article 21(e)); and statistics of occupational diseases (Article 21(g)).

[The Government is asked to reply in full to the present comments in 2022.]

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

The Committee notes the observations of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), received on 1 September 2021, referring to the matters addressed below, and requests the Government to provide its comments in this respect.

The Committee notes that the complaint submitted in 2019 under article 26 of the ILO Constitution, concerning non-observance by the Government of Bangladesh of the Convention as well as of 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 343rd Session (November 2021), taking note of the road map of actions submitted by the Government on 23 May 2021 and the report submitted by the Government on 30 September 2021, on the progress made with regard to its timely implementation, the Governing Body: (i) requested the Government to inform it of progress made in the implementation of the road map to address all the outstanding issues mentioned in the article 26 complaint at its 344th Session (March 2022), during which the Governing Body will again discuss the implementation of the roadmap; and (ii) deferred the decision on further action in respect of the complaint to its 346th Session (November 2022).

The Committee takes note of the additional information provided by the Government on 30 September 2021 on the progress made in the implementation of the roadmap to address all the outstanding issues mentioned in the article 26 complaint.

Legislative developments. The Committee takes note that, in the additional information provided concerning the implementation of the first priority area of the road map of actions (labour law reform), the Government details the progress made and envisaged with respect to the amendment of the Bangladesh Labour Rules (2015), the Bangladesh Labour Act (2006) (BLA), the Export Processing Zones (EPZs) Labour Act (2019), as well as to the adoption of the EPZs Labour Rules. The Committee requests the Government to adopt measures in order to ensure that the ongoing legislative reform process will take into account the outstanding issues addressed below as well as in the direct request to the Government, with a view to ensuring conformity of the legal framework with the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to provide detailed information on any progress made in this respect.

Articles 2, 4, 12 and 23 of the Convention. Labour inspection in EPZs and special economic zones (SEZs). The Committee previously noted: (i) that Chapter XIV of the EPZs Labour Act provides for inspections to be undertaken by the Directorate of Inspection for Factories and Establishments (DIFE) in the EPZs; (ii) the ongoing consultations 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); and (iii) that under section 168 of the EPZs Labour Act, DIFE inspectors are allowed to undertake inspections but a prior approval of the Executive Chairman of the BEPZA is required. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the development of inspection modalities for EPZs is ongoing and that, to this effect, a further meeting is expected to be held between the DIFE and the BEPZA to follow up on their last meeting held on 16 February 2021. The Committee further notes the Government’s indication that labour inspectors of the DIFE are regularly inspecting factories in EPZs without obstacles and in most cases without prior notice (inspections have been undertaken in nine factories between March and May 2021). Furthermore, the Committee takes note of the Government’s indication that the Bangladesh SEZs Authority (BEZA), which controls and supervises SEZs, will take all the necessary measures for the effective inspection of SEZs in accordance with Chapter XIV of the EPZs Labour Act (which provides for inspections by the DIFE). The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the outcome of the abovementioned discussions on the development of DIFE inspection modalities for EPZs. Noting the absence of information on any progress made in this regard, the Committee once again requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that labour inspectors are empowered to enter freely establishments in EPZs and SEZs without any restrictions, such as the approval required from the Executive Chairman of the BEPZA for the undertaking of inspections, pursuant to section 168 of the EPZs Labour Act. In this respect, the Committee once again requests the Government to provide information on the nature and the modalities of the above mentioned approval of the BEPZA, including whether 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 any reasons given for each failure to approve. It also requests the Government to provide statistical information on the labour inspections undertaken in EPZs and SEZs that are in operation, disaggregated into inspections by the DIFE and inspections under the BEPZA and the BEZA, including the overall number of inspections undertaken, the number and nature of all violations detected and the measures taken as a result.

Article 6. Status and conditions of service of labour inspectors. With regard to its previous comments, the Committee notes the Government’s statement in the additional information that the approval process of the proposal providing for the creation of new posts of labour inspectors is already underway and that a meeting was held on 31 August 2021 in the Ministry of Public Administration (MOPA) to assess that proposal. The Government also states that, upon clearance from all the Ministries involved in the approval process, this matter will be referred to the Bangladesh Public Service Commission (BPSC) (responsible for the selection of public service workers) for initiating the recruitment process. The Government specifies in its report that the number of labour inspector posts to be created will depend on the approval of the concerned Ministries. The Committee also notes the Government’s indication that new positions for 4 inspector generals, 12 joint inspector generals, 51 deputy inspector generals and 288 assistant inspector generals have been included as part of the proposal submitted to the MOPA. The Government indicates that, if approved, this will create more promotion opportunities for labour inspectors, and it further states that conditions of service for labour inspectors are the same as for other Government employees. The Committee also notes the observations of the ITUC that despite Government commitments in prior years to increase substantially the number of labour inspectors, there were 312 filled inspector posts and 221 vacant posts as of March 2019. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the career structure of the DIFE, including levels and positions as well as the number of appointments made at each position. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on any progress made in the process of creation of new posts and the recruitment of labour inspectors. Noting the absence of information in this regard, the Committee requests once again the Government to provide information on the attrition rate among inspectors at different professional levels. Finally, the Committee requests the Government to provide detailed information on the conditions of service of labour inspectors, including their levels of remuneration and their employment tenure in comparison to the remuneration levels and job tenure of other officials exercising functions of similar complexity and responsibility, such as tax collectors and the police.

Articles 7, 10, 11 and 16. Human and material resources of the labour inspectorate. Frequency and thoroughness of labour inspections. The Committee takes note that, in reply to its previous comments on the number of labour inspectors, the Government informs that: (i) the DIFE organigram consists of 993 posts, among which 575 are for labour inspectors; (ii) currently, 313 labour inspectors work in the DIFE; (iii) following a request from the DIFE, the recruitment process of 108 inspectors to fill vacant posts is underway; and (iv) due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the normal recruitment process is elongated and many of the public examinations are on hold. The Committee also notes the Government’s additional information that the BPSC has recommended to fill 99 of the 108 vacant posts requested by the DIFE, and that the Government is working on the preparation of a list of qualified inspectors to be promoted to the next upper level. Moreover, the Committee takes note that the labour inspection report of 2020–21 indicates that 14 labour inspectors (health) have joined in the DIFE and that 11 officers and staffs of different grades have retired and left from their jobs in this period. Furthermore, the Committee also notes the Government’s information that 47,361 labour inspection visits were carried out between 2020 and 2021. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the number of labour inspectors working at the DIFE and to provide information on any progress made in filling the 108 vacant posts, as well as on any other measures taken or envisaged to fill all of the remaining vacant posts. The Committee also requests the Government to provide information on the promotion of labour inspectors to senior posts, as well as on any specific measures taken to fill the posts left vacant because of those promotions. It also requests the Government to continue to include, in the labour inspection annual report, information on the number of labour inspection visits carried out, disaggregated by sector.

Furthermore, the Committee also notes the up-to-date information provided by the Government, in reply to its previous comments, on the training provided to labour inspectors (including the number of participants and subjects covered by in-house training programmes between 2020 and 2021). It also notes that, according to the information provided by the Government, the number of computers with internet connections increased from 80 in 2019 to 425 in December 2020 and that labour inspectors were equipped with 425 Android tablets to use during inspections. The Committee also notes that the number of vehicles allocated to the labour inspection service remained the same as in 2019. The Committee also notes an increase in the budget allocated to the DIFE, from 418.5 million taka in 2019–20 to 445 million taka in 2020–21. The Committee takes note that, in its observations, the ITUC indicates that inspectors suffer from logistic and transport shortages to carry out their duties properly, especially considering the additional inspection duties gained by the DIFE with regard to EPZs and SEZs. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments in this respect.

Articles 12(1) and 15(c). Inspections without previous notice. Duty of confidentiality in relation to complaints. In relation to its previous comments, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that: (i) the confidentiality of the complaint and the anonymity of the complainants are ensured, where applicable; (ii) according to the standard operating procedure on labour complaints investigation, adopted in 2020, a minimum of 50 per cent of the regular inspections are unannounced; and (iii) generally, all the special inspections (such as accident investigations and complaint investigations, among others) are unannounced, except where the presence of witnesses or certain documentation are required. The Committee notes that, pursuant to Article 15 of the Convention, exceptions on confidentiality are understood to require particular justification, with strict standards applied in this respect. The Committee requests the Government to take specific measures 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. Noting the absence of information in this regard, the Committee once again requests the Government to provide specific information on the number of unannounced inspection visits and those undertaken with prior notice, disaggregated by ready-made garment 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. Effectively enforced and sufficiently dissuasive penalties. With regard to its previous comments, the Committee notes that the Government once again reiterates that there is one legal officer at the DIFE responsible for the follow-up of labour law violations detected by labour inspectors, and that there is a plan to establish a legal unit at the DIFE, which is proposed to be composed of nine legal officers (less than the 17 legal officers previously mentioned by the Government). The Committee takes note of the Government’s additional information that the creation of new posts for a legal unit has already been requested by the DIFE to the MOPA. Furthermore, the Committee also notes the ITUC’s indication that fines for violations under the BLA remain too low to be dissuasive and are not enforced due to the lengthy legal process and to corruption. The ITUC also indicates that little data is available on the extent to which fines or penalties are imposed and that criminal proceedings for violations of the BLA are rare. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the progress made to establish a legal unit at the DIFE, indicating the number of staff and their functions, and to provide information on any other measures taken or envisaged to improve the proceedings for the effective enforcement of legal provisions. While noting the absence of information in this regard, the Committee once again requests the Government to provide information on: (i) any measures introduced or envisaged to ensure that penalties for labour law violations are sufficiently dissuasive; and (ii) the specific outcome of the substantial number of cases, indicated by the Government in the labour inspection report, that are referred to the labour courts (such as the imposition of fines, the amounts collected from fines imposed, and also sentences of imprisonment) and to specify the legal provisions to which they relate. Finally, the Committee requests the Government to provide up-to-date information on the number and nature of violations detected.

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

[The Government is asked to reply in full to the present comments in 2022.]

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

Articles 2, 3(1)(a) and (b), 5(a) and (b), 13, 17 and 18 of the Convention. Inspection activities to improve occupational safety and health (OSH) standards in the ready-made garment (RMG) sector. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that the 2015 direct contacts mission had raised doubts as to whether the public authorities responsible for fire, electrical and structural safety had the human resources and capacities required to take over from the private initiatives (the groups of retailers and apparel brands ACCORD and ALLIANCE that have been undertaking relevant inspections in RMG factories since the Rana Plaza collapse in 2013) on the expiry of their mandate. The Committee noted that there were plans to form a successor safety monitoring organization for ALLIANCE, and that an accord had been signed establishing a multi-stakeholder transition monitoring committee as regards the work of ACCORD. The Committee noted the observations made by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), that among the factories not covered by ACCORD or ALLIANCE, only 107 of 809 had taken all the suggested remedial action in accordance with the corrective action plan established.

The Committee notes from the website of the ALLIANCE that this initiative ceased operations as planned in December 2018 after five years of operations inspecting factories. The Committee notes from the information provided by the Government in its report in response to the Committee’s request that the operation of the ACCORD has been extended by 281 days effective May 2019, and further notes from the website of ACCORD that it has carried out over 37,000 inspections at more than 1,600 factories since its formation, listing over 260 remediated factories. The Committee notes that there have been no further recruits in the governmental authorities responsible for fire, electrical and structural safety. In this respect, it notes that the Government reiterates that the Department of Fire Service and Civil Defence (DFSCD) responsible for fire safety currently employs 268 inspectors (up from 50 in 2014), and that the capital development authorities responsible for building safety now employ a total number of 122 inspectors (up from 61 in 2013). The Committee also notes the Government’s indication that the Remediation Coordination Cell (RCC) responsible for monitoring the remediation work in all factories in terms of fire, electrical and structural safety increased the number of engineers (and 26 engineers from the Department of Inspection for Factories and Establishments (DIFE)) by recruiting a further 63 engineers (in addition to the 60 currently employed). The Government repeats that it is proposed to turn the RCC into a permanent “Industrial Safety Unit” at the DIFE, responsible for the monitoring of fire, electrical and structural safety of all factories. It adds that a proposal has already been submitted for approval, which includes 184 labour inspectors and ten offices (at headquarters and within nine divisional offices). The Committee notes that the Government does not provide the requested information on the number of factories (not covered by the private initiatives) that have undertaken the remedial action, but that it indicates that the new Labour Inspection Management Application (LIMA) will, once it is fully operational, allow for tracking of the progress of remedial action undertaken. Emphasizing that labour inspection is a public function and reiterating its concern that the public inspection authorities may not yet have the necessary capacity to assume monitoring of the factories that were covered by ALLIANCE and are currently covered by ACCORD, the Committee requests the Government to pursue its efforts to strengthen the capacity of the Government services responsible for the monitoring of fire, electrical and structural safety, with a view to ensuring the protection of workers. In this respect, the Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on increases in the number of staff in the responsible bodies, as well as progress towards the establishment of the Industrial Safety Unit within the DIFE. It also requests the Government to provide information on the number of inspections undertaken by these bodies and the corrective action requested. The Committee further requests the Government to provide information on the number of factories not covered by the ACCORD initiative that have taken the remedial action suggested in their corrective action plans.

Article 3(2). Additional functions entrusted to labour inspectors. The Committee previously noted the Government’s indication that labour inspectors of the DIFE are mainly entrusted with labour inspection functions within the meaning of the Convention, and that their functions relating to conciliation functions are limited to the payment of wages and benefits. The Committee notes that the Government indicates that inspectors of the DIFE will take initiatives to resolve complaints (relating to wages or other benefits due) through discussion if an application is made by the complainant to the Inspector-General of the DIFE or an authorized officer. The Committee once again requests the Government to provide information on the proportion of time devoted to conciliation and mediation regarding the payment of wages and benefits by indicating the number of complaints submitted and number of conciliation and mediation procedures undertaken as a result. In this respect, the Committee also requests the Government to provide further information on the conciliation procedure regarding the payment of wages and benefits.

Articles 9 and 14. Notification of industrial accidents and cases of occupational diseases. In its previous comments, the Committee noted the underreporting of industrial accidents and the lack of reporting of any cases of occupational disease. The Committee notes the Government’s reference, in response to its request, to measures undertaken to improve the system for the notifying of industrial accidents and cases of occupational disease. This includes the Government’s reference to the number of awareness-raising activities in factories and establishments (including, for example, information on occupational diseases) and the construction of a National OSH Research and Training Institute, due for completion in 2021 with a proposed 140 staff. The Committee notes from the statistical information provided by the Government that the number of occupational accidents reported decreased from 568 in 2017–18 to 88 in 2018–19 (although the number of fatalities increased from 36 to 121), and it observes that the Government again did not provide information on statistics of cases of occupational disease. The Committee also notes the Government’s information that there were no instances of failure to report occupational accidents to DIFE in 2017–18, but that the Government does not provide similar information for 2018–19 when the number of reported accidents decreased by 85 per cent (from 568 to 88). The Committee also notes the Government’s reiterated information that the medical doctors working at the DIFE will identify workers suffering from occupational diseases. The Committee requests the Government to provide an assessment on the reasons for the underreporting of industrial accidents and the lack of reporting of any cases of occupational disease. It requests the Government to continue to take steps to improve the system for notifying the labour inspection services of industrial accidents and cases of occupational disease, and provide relevant information in this respect (such as awareness-raising activities on employers’ obligations to notify industrial accidents and cases of occupational disease, incentives or penalties for the lack of reporting by employers, the training of medical doctors at the DIFE to enable them to identify cases of occupational disease, the dissemination of a list of occupational diseases and their symptoms, etc.). Since the Bangladesh Labour Act (BLA), only foresees penalties for non-compliance with reporting obligations as regards industrial accidents, the Committee also once again encourages the Government to consider providing for sufficiently dissuasive penalties for non-compliance with reporting obligations in relation to cases of occupational disease.

Articles 20 and 21. Publication and communication of annual labour inspection reports necessary to evaluate the effectiveness of the labour inspection system. Availability of inspection statistics in relation to all sectors. The Committee previously requested information on the concrete steps taken to establish a register of all work places liable to inspection and of the workers employed therein in sectors other than the RMG sector.

The Committee notes with interest from the website of the DIFE that the establishments listed on the website now include establishments in different sectors (and not only in the RMG sector). The Committee further notes the Government’s indication that between 2015 and 2018, about 35,000 unregistered factories have been registered, covering about 7.5 million workers. The Committee also notes that the Government reiterates that labour inspectors at the DIFE are using tablet computers with a mobile application that enable them to enter inspection data digitally. Having previously noted that the annual labour inspection report for 2016 was under preparation, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that the annual labour inspection reports for 2016, 2017 and 2018 have been drafted and will be submitted to the ILO once finalized. The Committee requests the Government to pursue its efforts to comply with its obligation under Article 20 to regularly prepare, publish and transmit to the ILO, copies of the annual labour inspection reports. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide further information on the progressive establishment of a register of all work places liable to inspection and of the workers employed therein in all sectors.

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

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

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.]

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2019, published 109th ILC session (2021)

Articles 2, 3(1)(a) and (b), 5(a) and (b), 13, 17 and 18 of the Convention. Inspection activities to improve occupational safety and health (OSH) standards in the ready-made garment (RMG) sector. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that the 2015 direct contacts mission had raised doubts as to whether the public authorities responsible for fire, electrical and structural safety had the human resources and capacities required to take over from the private initiatives (the groups of retailers and apparel brands ACCORD and ALLIANCE that have been undertaking relevant inspections in RMG factories since the Rana Plaza collapse in 2013) on the expiry of their mandate. The Committee noted that there were plans to form a successor safety monitoring organization for ALLIANCE, and that an accord had been signed establishing a multi-stakeholder transition monitoring committee as regards the work of ACCORD. The Committee noted the observations made by the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), that among the factories not covered by ACCORD or ALLIANCE, only 107 of 809, had taken all the suggested remedial action in accordance with the corrective action plan established.

The Committee notes from the website of the ALLIANCE that this initiative ceased operations as planned in December 2018 after five years of operations inspecting factories. The Committee notes from the information provided by the Government in its report in response to the Committee’s request that the operation of the ACCORD has been extended by 281 days effective May 2019, and further notes from the website of ACCORD that it has carried out over 37,000 inspections at more than 1,600 factories since its formation, listing over 260 remediated factories. The Committee notes that there have been no further recruits in the governmental authorities responsible for fire, electrical and structural safety. In this respect, it notes that the Government reiterates that the Department of Fire Service and Civil Defence (DFSCD) responsible for fire safety currently employs 268 inspectors (up from 50 in 2014), and that the capital development authorities responsible for building safety now employ a total number of 122 inspectors (up from 61 in 2013). The Committee also notes the Government’s indication that the Remediation Coordination Cell (RCC) responsible for monitoring the remediation work in all factories in terms of fire, electrical and structural safety increased the number of engineers (and 26 engineers from the Department of Inspection for Factories and Establishments (DIFE)) by recruiting another 63 engineers (in addition to the 60 currently employed). The Government repeats that it is proposed to turn the RCC into a permanent “Industrial Safety Unit” at the DIFE, responsible for the monitoring of fire, electrical and structural safety of all factories. It adds that a proposal has already been submitted for approval, which includes 184 labour inspectors and ten offices (at headquarters and within nine divisional offices). The Committee notes that the Government does not provide the requested information on the number of factories (not covered by the private initiatives) that have undertaken the remedial action, but that it indicates that the new Labour Inspection Management Application (LIMA) will, once it is fully operational, allow for tracking of the progress of remedial action undertaken. Emphasizing that labour inspection is a public function and reiterating its concern that the public inspection authorities may not yet have the necessary capacity to assume monitoring of the factories that were covered by ALLIANCE and are currently covered by ACCORD, the Committee requests the Government to pursue its efforts to strengthen the capacity of the Government services responsible for the monitoring of fire, electrical and structural safety, with a view to ensuring the protection of workers. In this respect, the Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on increases in the number of staff in the responsible bodies, as well as progress towards the establishment of the Industrial Safety Unit within the DIFE. It also requests the Government to provide information on the number of inspections undertaken by these bodies and the corrective action requested. The Committee further requests the Government to provide information on the number of factories not covered by the ACCORD initiative that have taken the remedial action suggested in their corrective action plans.

Article 3(2). Additional functions entrusted to labour inspectors. The Committee previously noted the Government’s indication that labour inspectors of the DIFE are mainly entrusted with labour inspection functions within the meaning of the Convention, and that their functions relating to conciliation functions are limited to the payment of wages and benefits. The Committee notes that the Government indicates that inspectors of the DIFE will take initiatives to resolve complaints (relating to wages or other benefits due) through discussion if an application is made by the complainant to the Inspector-General of the DIFE or an authorized officer. The Committee once again requests the Government to provide information on the proportion of time devoted to conciliation and mediation regarding the payment of wages and benefits by indicating the number of complaints submitted and number of conciliation and mediation procedures undertaken as a result. In this respect, the Committee also requests the Government to provide further information on the conciliation procedure regarding the payment of wages and benefits.

Articles 9 and 14. Notification of industrial accidents and cases of occupational diseases. In its previous comments, the Committee noted the under-reporting of industrial accidents and the lack of reporting of any cases of occupational disease. The Committee notes the Government’s reference, in response to its request, to measures undertaken to improve the system for the notifying of industrial accidents and cases of occupational disease. This includes the Government’s reference to the number of awareness-raising activities in factories and establishments (including, for example, information on occupational diseases) and the construction of a National OSH Research and Training Institute, due for completion in 2021 with a proposed 140 staff. The Committee notes from the statistical information provided by the Government that the number of occupational accidents reported decreased from 568 in 2017–18 to 88 in 2018–19 (although the number of fatalities increased from 36 to 121), and it observes that the Government again did not provide information on statistics of cases of occupational disease. The Committee also notes the Government’s information that there were no instances of failure to report occupational accidents to DIFE in 2017–18, but that the Government does not provide similar information for 2018–19 when the number of reported accidents decreased by 85 per cent (from 568 to 88). The Committee also notes the Government’s reiterated information that the medical doctors working at the DIFE will identify workers suffering from occupational diseases. The Committee requests the Government to provide an assessment on the reasons for the under-reporting of industrial accidents and the lack of reporting of any cases of occupational disease. It requests the Government to continue to take steps to improve the system for notifying the labour inspection services of industrial accidents and cases of occupational disease, and provide relevant information in this respect (such as awareness-raising activities on employers’ obligations to notify industrial accidents and cases of occupational disease, incentives or penalties for the lack of reporting by employers, the training of medical doctors at the DIFE to enable them to identify cases of occupational disease, the dissemination of a list of occupational diseases and their symptoms, etc.). Since the Bangladesh Labour Act (BLA), only foresees penalties for non-compliance with reporting obligations as regards industrial accidents, the Committee also once again encourages the Government to consider providing for sufficiently dissuasive penalties for non-compliance with reporting obligations in relation to cases of occupational disease.

Articles 20 and 21. Publication and communication of annual labour inspection reports necessary to evaluate the effectiveness of the labour inspection system. Availability of inspection statistics in relation to all sectors. The Committee previously requested information on the concrete steps taken to establish a register of all work places liable to inspection and of the workers employed therein in sectors other than the RMG sector.

The Committee notes with interest from the website of the DIFE that the establishments listed on the website now include establishments in different sectors (and not only in the RMG sector). The Committee further notes the Government’s indication that between 2015 and 2018, about 35,000 unregistered factories have been registered covering about 7.5 million workers. The Committee also notes that the Government reiterates that labour inspectors at the DIFE are using tablet computers with a mobile application that enable them to enter inspection data digitally. Having previously noted that the annual labour inspection report for 2016 was under preparation, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that the annual labour inspection reports for 2016, 2017 and 2018 have been drafted and will be submitted to the ILO once finalized. The Committee requests the Government to pursue its efforts to comply with its obligation under Article 20 to regularly prepare, publish and transmit to the ILO, copies of the annual labour inspection reports. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide further information on the progressive establishment of a register of all work places liable to inspection and of the workers employed therein in all sectors.

[The Government is asked to reply in full to the present comments in 2020.]

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2019, published 109th ILC session (2021)

Follow-up to the decisions of the Governing Body (complaints made under article 26 of the Constitution of the ILO)

The Committee notes that a 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), submitted by several Workers’ delegates to the 2019 International Labour Conference, was declared receivable in November 2019 and is pending before the Governing Body.

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 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 abovementioned discussions and consultations. 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. On the other hand, it also notes the reference of the Government to a proposal, following the recommendations of a recent study, to increase the number of labour inspectors working at the DIFE to 1,458, which will require the approval of the Ministry of Public Administration and the Ministry of Finance. The Committee also notes the up-to-date 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 Bangladesh taka (BDT) 351.20 million to BDT418.5 million. 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. 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 continue to provide information on the current number of labour inspectors working at the DIFE, 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 continue 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 BDT3.55 million (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.

[The Government is asked to reply in full to the present comments in 2020.]

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2018, published 108th ILC session (2019)

The Committee notes the observations of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), received on 1 September 2018.

Articles 2, 3(1)(a) and (b), 5(a) and (b), 13, 17 and 18 of the Convention. Inspection activities to improve occupational safety and health (OSH) standards in the ready-made garment (RMG) sector. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that doubts existed as to whether the public authorities responsible for fire, electrical and structural safety had the human resources and capacities required to take over from the private initiatives (the groups of retailers and apparel brands ACCORD and ALLIANCE that have been undertaking relevant inspections in RMG factories since the Rana Plaza collapse in 2013) – on the expiry of their mandate. The Committee notes from the website of the ALLIANCE initiative that there are plans to form a successor safety monitoring organization that will carry forward safety monitoring at the end of its mandate in December 2018. It notes from the website of the ACCORD that a transition accord has been signed on behalf of more than 180 brands, establishing a transition monitoring committee composed of representatives of the Government, signatory brands and trade unions, the Bangladesh Garment Manufacturers and Exporters Association (BGMEA) and the ILO that will continue its programme of inspections and remediation, assisted by joint labour-management safety committees at the factory level as well as a safety and health complaints mechanism.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication, in response to the Committee’s request on how the fire, electrical and structural safety will be ensured in the future, that the Department of Fire Service and Civil Defence (DFSCD) responsible for fire safety currently employs 268 inspectors (up from 50 in 2014), and that the capital development authorities responsible for building safety now employ a total number of 122 inspectors (up from 61 in 2013). The Committee further notes the Government’s indication that the Remediation Coordination Cell (RCC) responsible for monitoring the remediation work in all factories including the ACCORD and ALLIANCE factories in terms of fire, electrical and structural safety, recruited an additional number of 60 engineers (in addition to the existing 26 engineers from the Department of Inspection for Factories and Establishments (DIFE)), and was awaiting the recruitment of another 47 engineers. The Government further indicates that it is proposed to turn the RCC into a permanent “industrial safety unit” at the DIFE, responsible for the monitoring of fire, electrical and structural safety of all factories. The Committee also notes the observations made by the ITUC that among the factories not covered by ACCORD or ALLIANCE, only 107 of 809 had taken all the suggested remedial action in accordance with the corrective action plan established. Expressing concern that the public inspection authorities may not yet have the necessary capacity to assume monitoring of the factories currently covered by the private initiatives, the Committee requests the Government to pursue its efforts to strengthen the capacity of the Government services responsible for the monitoring of fire, electrical and structural safety, with a view to ensuring the protection of workers when the ACCORD and ALLIANCE initiatives come to an end. In this respect, the Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on increases in the number of staff in the responsible bodies, and on any plans to coordinate inspection and remediation activities with the ACCORD and ALLIANCE. The Committee also requests the Government to provide information on the number of factories not covered by these initiatives that have taken the remedial action suggested in their corrective action plans.

Article 3(2). Additional functions entrusted to labour inspectors. The Committee previously noted the Government’s indication that labour inspectors of the DIFE are mainly entrusted with labour inspection functions within the meaning of the Convention, and that their functions relating to conciliation functions are limited to the payment of wages and benefits. The Committee notes an absence of information in response to its request concerning the number of complaints made to the DIFE in 2016–17 dealt with through conciliation, and the number of cases dealt with through labour inspection visits in that period as a result of those complaints. The Committee once again requests the Government to provide information on the proportion of time devoted to conciliation and mediation functions by DIFE inspectors, by providing information on the number of labour inspection visits undertaken, compared with the number of cases dealt with through conciliation.

Articles 9 and 14. Notification of industrial accidents and cases of occupational diseases. The Committee previously noted the under-reporting of industrial accidents and the lack of reporting of any cases of occupational disease. The Committee notes that the Government refers, in response to its previous request, to a number of activities including the undertaking of awareness-raising meetings by DIFE inspectors at factories and the development of an excel database with statistics on industrial accidents and cases of occupational disease. The Committee also notes the Government’s information on statistics of occupational accidents in 2017–18, but observes that it does not provide information on statistics of cases of occupational disease. The Committee requests the Government to continue to take steps to improve the system for notifying the labour inspection services of industrial accidents and cases of occupational disease, and provide relevant information in this respect (such as the subjects covered in awareness-raising activities, the maintenance and regular updating of a list of cases of occupational diseases and the training of medical doctors), including specific information on the number of cases of occupational disease notified, if any. As the Government has not provided this information, the Committee also once again requests the Government to provide information on any instances in which inspectors determined that employers had failed to notify an occupational accident, along with criminal or civil penalties assessed for such offences under sections 80 and 290 of the Bangladesh Labour Act (BLA). The Committee also requests the Government to consider, in the context of the proposed reform of the BLA, the provision of sufficiently dissuasive penalties for non-compliance with reporting obligations in relation to cases of occupational disease.

Articles 20 and 21. Publication and communication of annual labour inspection reports necessary to evaluate the effectiveness of the labour inspection system. Availability of inspection statistics in relation to all sectors. Concerning the availability of statistics in sectors other than the RMG sector, the Committee previously noted a number of measures referred to by the Government to improve the collection of inspection data, including: (1) the proposed extension of the existing database on RMG factories and the workers employed therein beyond the RMG sector, and (2) the development of a mobile application and a digitalized reporting system from which inspection reports can be generated. In this respect, the Committee notes with interest the Government’s indication that since May 2018, all labour inspectors at the DIFE are using tablet computers with a mobile application that enables them to enter inspection data digitally. The Committee notes that the Government reiterates that the annual labour inspection report for 2016 is under preparation. The Committee encourages the Government to pursue its efforts to comply with its obligation under Article 20 to regularly prepare, publish and transmit to the ILO, copies of the annual labour inspection reports. As the Government has not provided any information in this respect, the Committee requests the Government to provide further information on the concrete steps taken to establish a register of all workplaces liable to inspection and of the workers employed therein in sectors other than the RMG sector. The Committee also requests the Government to continue to provide detailed information on the implementation of measures to improve the collection of inspection data (such as the recruitment of staff for the collection, compilation and updating of data).

[The Government is asked to reply in full to the present comments in 2019.]

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2018, published 108th ILC session (2019)

The Committee notes the observations of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), received on 1 September 2018.

Articles 2, 4 and 23 of the Convention. Labour inspection in export processing zones (EPZs) and special economic zones (SEZs). The Committee recalls its reiterated requests to bring export processing zones (EPZs) and special economic zones (SEZs) under the purview of the labour inspectorate. In this regard, the Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that the draft EPZ Labour Act (which will also apply to SEZs) has been revisited with a view to including provisions on labour inspection by the national labour inspection service, along with the existing supervision exercised by the Bangladesh Export Processing Zones Authority (BEPZA). The Committee also notes that the ITUC criticizes that the new draft EPZ Labour Act continues to entrust the BEPZA with the supervision of labour standards in EPZs. The trade union adds that the BEPZA is an entity primarily interested in protecting investment and not addressing labour law violations of workers. The ITUC states in this respect that there should be no discrimination between workers inside and outside of the zones with respect to their rights. Noting with concern that it has now been more than four years since the request of the Conference Committee on the Application of Standards (CAS) on this matter, the Committee urges in the strongest terms that the Government complete its revised draft of the EPZ Labour Act in the very near future in order to bring EPZs and SEZs under the purview of the labour inspectorate.

Article 6. Status and conditions of service of labour inspectors. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that retaining labour inspectors within the labour inspection services was a problem and that a number of recently recruited labour inspectors had left the Department of Inspection for Factories and Establishments (DIFE), after having been trained, to take up work with other government services. It also noted that the labour inspection services offered less favourable career prospects than other government services and requested the Government to review the professional profiles and grades of labour inspectors to ensure that they reflect the career prospects of public servants exercising similar functions within other government services, such as tax inspectors or the police.

The Committee notes the Government’s information provided in a table in reply to the Committee’s request, which shows that the salary of (regular) labour inspectors and tax inspectors are equal, but that police officers receive the same salary as the Assistant Inspector-General (which is one of the highest professional grades in the labour inspection service). The Committee also notes the Government’s indication that a study on the reasons for the high attrition rate, recommended, among other things, the development of the competencies of labour inspection staff and the creation of more senior positions. The Committee requests the Government to provide additional information on the salary and benefit structure applicable to labour inspectors and public servants exercising similar functions within other government services (such as tax inspectors or the police) in the highest professional categories of those services, as well as information on any measures taken or envisaged to align the conditions of service with that of public servants exercising similar functions. It also requests the Government to provide information on the specific measures taken to implement the recommendations made in the study on the reasons for the high attrition rate, concerning the creation of more senior positions within the labour inspection services.

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 welcomed the steady increase in the number of labour inspectors since the Rana Plaza tragedy in 2013. However, it notes with regret that the Government has not provided any new information on the progress made with the recruitment of labour inspectors for the filling of the 575 labour inspection positions approved in 2014. It further notes with concern that the number of labour inspectors decreased from 345 to 320 between 2017 and 2018. The Committee also notes the observations made by the ITUC that the effective enforcement of labour law continues to be absent due to the weakness of the labour inspection system, and that the frequency and quality of labour inspections remain insufficient. The trade union adds that the incidence of fatal occupational accidents remains high in the textile, ship-breaking and stone-crushing industries. The Committee urges the Government to continue to make every effort to recruit an adequate number of qualified labour inspectors, and to fill all of the 575 labour inspection posts that have already been approved in 2014. It requests the Government to continue to provide information on the current number of labour inspectors working at the DIFE, as well as on the number of labour inspection visits carried out, including specific information for those industries with high rates of occupational accidents. Noting the information provided by the Government in this respect, the Committee also requests the Government to continue to provide 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 comment, the Committee noted that in 2014, only 2.5 per cent of all inspections were random or complaints-driven inspections without prior notice. It emphasized that, in light of these extremely low numbers, both the duty of labour inspectors to maintain confidentiality that an inspection was made as a result of a complaint, and the efficiency of inspections, were put at risk. The Committee subsequently noted the Government’s indication that in 2016–17, the percentage of unannounced inspections (i.e. random or complaints-driven inspections implemented without prior notice) had increased to 20 per cent of all inspections, and that the codification of the duty to keep confidential the existence or source of a complaint could be considered in the context of the proposed review of the Bangladesh Labour Act (BLA). The Committee notes that the Government provides information on the total number of inspections and their results, but not the requested information on the results of unannounced inspection visits. The Committee further notes that the Government has not provided the requested information on any measures taken to codify the duty of confidentiality in the national legislation. The Committee once again urges the Government to consider codifying the duty of confidentiality, either in the context of the proposed review of the BLA or in other regulations or guidelines concerning labour inspection, for the purpose of legal certainty. It also requests the Government to provide information on the number of inspection visits that were unannounced and those that were undertaken with prior notice, and once again requests information on the results of unannounced inspections covering investigations of accidents or addressing complaints, including the nature of resolutions reached, violations identified and sanctions applied.

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 the number of inspections undertaken and violations detected in the 2017–18 fiscal year (39,710 inspections and 257,904 violations). It notes that in the same period, 1,689 cases were submitted to the labour courts of which 781 were resolved. The Committee notes with concern that the amount of penalties imposed up until May 2018 was Bangladesh Taka (BDT) 2.85 million (approximately US$3,401), which based on the number of cases resolved, appears to be quite low (an average of approximately US$5 per resolution). The Committee also notes the information provided by the Government, in response to its request, 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. However, 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, in the context of the proposed legislative reform of the BLA. In this respect, the Committee also notes the observations made by the ITUC concerning the need to strengthen the sanctions for employers that fail to comply with the legal provisions. The Committee once again requests the Government to provide information on any measures introduced or envisaged, in the context of the proposed legislative reform, to ensure that penalties for labour law violations are sufficiently dissuasive and, where applicable, to improve the proceedings for the effective enforcement of the legal provisions. In this respect, it also requests the Government to continue to provide information on the establishment of a legal unit at the DIFE, including on the number of staff and their functions, once established. Lastly, it once again requests the Government to provide information on the specific outcome of the cases referred to the labour courts (such as the imposition of fines or sentences of imprisonment and the legal provisions to which they relate).

The Committee also recalls that it previously noted that freedom of association cases (including cases of anti-union discrimination) were addressed by the Department of Labour (DOL). The Committee notes the Government’s indication, in response to the Committee’s request, that freedom of association cases are dealt with by the DOL because this Department is also responsible for the registration of employers’ and workers’ organizations, and their activities. The Committee notes the Government’s indications that labour officials of the DOL address cases of alleged violations of freedom of association through conciliation. In this regard, the Committee once again recalls its indications that cases of anti-union discrimination are not generally appropriate for conciliation or mediation and in any event must not undermine strict enforcement of applicable laws. With reference to its comments under the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), the Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the measures taken to secure the enforcement of legal provisions relating to freedom of association.

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

[The Government is asked to reply in full to the present comments in 2019.]

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2017, published 107th ILC session (2018)

Articles 2, 3(1)(a) and (b), 5(a) and (b), 13, 17 and 18 of the Convention. Inspection activities to improve occupational safety and health (OSH) standards in the ready-made garment (RMG) sector. Cooperation and collaboration of the labour inspectorate and other public or private institutions engaged in similar activities and the social partners. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that doubts existed as to whether the public authorities responsible for fire, electrical and structural safety had the human resources and capacities required to take over from the private initiatives – that is, the groups of retailers and apparel brands ACCORD and ALLIANCE – that have been undertaking relevant inspections in RMG factories since the Rana Plaza collapse in 2013 – on the expiry of their mandate. In this regard, the Committee noted that initiatives were under way to increase the number of inspectors within the capital development authorities (RAJUK) which are responsible for building safety and within the Department of Fire Service and Civil Defence (DFSCD) which is responsible for fire safety. The Committee also noted the efforts being made to coordinate the activities of the public authorities responsible for fire, electrical and structural safety in the Remediation Coordination Cell (RCC).

The Committee notes that the Government, in reply to its request for information on the number of inspectors working within the RAJUK and DFSCD, refers to ongoing recruitment for the RAJUK and an increase in the number of inspectors working at the DFSCD to 268 inspectors (as of July 2017). The Committee also notes the clarification provided by the Government in reply to the Committee’s request concerning the collaboration with the social partners, that the Inter-Agency Tripartite Committee established following the “National Tripartite Plan of Action on Fire Safety and Structural Integrity in the Ready-Made Garment Sector in Bangladesh” includes both employers’ and workers’ representatives. The Committee notes from information available on the website of the ALLIANCE, that this initiative will end in 2018, while the ACCORD initiative will continue beyond May 2018. The Committee requests that the Government continue to provide information on the increase in the number of inspectors within the public bodies responsible for building safety (RAJUK) and fire safety (DFSCD). The Committee also requests the Government to provide detailed information on specific forms of collaboration of the Department of Inspection for Factories and Establishments (DIFE) with workers’ and employers’ organizations or representatives. The Committee requests the Government to provide specific information on how the fire, electrical and structural safety of the factories covered by ALLIANCE will be ensured, and to indicate the relevant bodies responsible for taking over the tasks of that initiative.

Article 3(2). Additional functions entrusted to labour inspectors. The Committee notes the Government’s reiterated indications, in response to its previous request, that labour inspectors of the DIFE are mainly entrusted with labour inspection functions within the meaning of the Convention, that they are only entrusted with conciliation functions in respect of the payment of wages and benefits, and that labour officers of the Department of Labour (DOL) undertake conciliation and mediation functions in respect of all other matters. It further notes the Government’s indication, in reply to its previous request for information on the proportion of time devoted to conciliation and mediation functions by DIFE inspectors, that is not possible to provide such information. In this respect, the Committee notes the statistics provided by the Government in its report that in 2016–17, 2,550 complaints were received by the DIFE, of which 1,778 were resolved through inspections. Noting that 1,778 complaints were resolved through inspections in 2016–17, the Committee requests the Government to provide clarification on whether some or all of the 772 other complaints were dealt with through conciliation, and for any complaints that were dealt with through conciliation, the size of wage and benefit awards made pursuant to each conciliation.

Article 7. Training of labour inspectors. The Committee notes the Government’s information in reply to the Committee’s request concerning the training provided to labour inspectors.

Articles 9 and 14. Notification of industrial accidents and cases of occupational diseases. The Committee notes that the Government, in reply to the Committee’s previous request to continue to take measures to address the under-reporting of industrial accidents and the lack of reporting of any cases of occupational disease, refers to targeted inspection visits in high-risk sectors and the work of medical doctors among the labour inspectors at the DIFE which identify cases of occupational disease during inspection visits. Concerning the improvement of the system for the notification of industrial accidents and cases of occupational disease, the Government also reiterates that technical assistance provided by the ILO might be helpful for the development of a database on statistics of industrial accidents and cases of occupational diseases; and that technical assistance might also be helpful to conduct a survey on OSH in factories. The Committee requests that the Government continue to take steps to improve the system for notifying the labour inspection services of industrial accidents and cases of occupational diseases, requesting ILO technical assistance where needed, and including the development of a database on statistics of industrial accidents and cases of occupational disease. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any instances in which inspectors determined that employers have failed to notify an occupational accident, along with criminal or civil penalties assessed for such offences under sections 80 and 290 of the Bangladesh Labour Act (BLA). The Committee also requests the Government to consider, in the context of the proposed reform of the BLA, the provision of sufficiently dissuasive penalties for non-compliance with reporting obligations in relation to cases of occupational disease.

Articles 20 and 21. Publication and communication of annual labour inspection reports necessary to evaluate the effectiveness of the labour inspection system. Availability of inspection statistics in relation to all sectors. The Committee notes the Government’s reference to the annual labour inspection report for 2015–16 published on the website of the DIFE in the Bengali language, and its indication that the annual labour inspection report for 2016–17 is currently being prepared. Recalling its previous comments on the absence of statistics allowing an informed assessment of labour inspection activities in other sectors than the RMG sector, the Committee notes with interest that the Government provides information on measures taken to improve the collection of inspection data, including: (i) the development of a mobile and web-based application with ILO technical assistance; (ii) the integration in this application of a revised labour inspection checklist; and (iii) the development of a digitalized reporting system from which inspection reports can be generated. The Committee also notes the Government’s indication that it is intended to extend the existing database on RMG factories and the workers employed therein beyond the RMG sector. The Committee requests the Government to provide a copy of the annual labour inspection report to the Office, as requested under Article 20(3), if possible, including the most prominent parts in one of the approved ILO languages. The Committee further requests the Government to provide information on the concrete steps taken to establish a register of all workplaces liable to inspection and of the workers employed therein in sectors other than the RMG. The Committee also requests the Government to continue to provide detailed information on the implementation of measures to improve the collection of inspection data (such as the recruitment of staff for the collection, compilation and updating of data the absence of which has been identified as an obstacle in the 2015 direct contacts mission report).

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2017, published 107th ILC session (2018)

Articles 2, 4 and 23 of the Convention. Labour inspection in export processing zones (EPZs) and special economic zones (SEZs). In its previous comments, the Committee noted that the Bangladesh Export Processing Zones Authority (BEPZA) remained responsible for securing the rights of workers in EPZs (and that the labour inspectorate of the Ministry of Labour and Employment did not carry out any inspections in these zones), and expressed deep concern that the Government had not yet given effect to the 2014 conclusions of the Committee on the Application of Standards (CAS) to bring EPZs within the purview of the labour inspectorate. In this respect, the Committee noted that a draft EPZ Labour Act had been prepared, in relation to which the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) raised a number of concerns, including that the supervision of EPZs would remain vested with the BEPZA, and that the powers and functions of the EPZ labour courts and the EPZ Labour Appellate Tribunal would be severely limited in comparison with courts established under the Bangladesh Labour Act (BLA), 2006.

Further to the Committee’s reiterated request to bring EPZs and SEZs under the purview of the labour inspectorate, the Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that it is proposed to modify the current draft EPZ Labour Act to provide for labour administration and inspection in EPZs under the BLA, and that a relevant draft would be shared with the Office in due course. However, the Committee notes that the information provided in the Government’s report under the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No.87), which suggests that, despite structural changes being made, the administration and inspection in EPZs will remain separate from those under the BLA. In this context, the Committee also notes that the Government expresses the view that the BEPZA has successfully performed its duties in the area of compliance for the last 35 years, through the use of counsellors in the area of labour, environment, industrial relations, fire and building safety. Noting with deep concern that it has now been more than three years since the CAS request on this matter, the Committee urges the Government to complete its revised draft in the very near future so that the EPZ Labour Act will bring EPZs under the purview of the labour inspectorate, as requested by the CAS in 2014, and that the same will be done in relation to SEZs.

Article 6. Status and conditions of service of labour inspectors. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that retaining labour inspectors within the labour inspection services was problematic and that a number of recently recruited labour inspectors had left the Department of Inspection for Factories and Establishments (DIFE), after having been trained, to take up work with other government services. In this regard, the Committee requested that the Government review the professional profiles and grades of labour inspectors to ensure that they reflect the career prospects of public servants exercising similar functions within other government services, such as tax inspectors or the police.

The Committee notes that the Government, in reply to the Committee’s request, refers to a revised salary structure for all government employees, available on the website of the Ministry of Finance in the Bengali language. According to the Government, the revised salary structure provides similar conditions for tax inspectors, labour inspectors and police officers. The Government also refers to a study to be undertaken with the assistance of the ILO, to discover the causes for the high attrition rate. Recalling from the report of the 2015 direct contacts mission (undertaken at the request of the CAS) that career prospects within the labour inspection services are not as favourable as those in the career civil service, the Committee once again requests the Government to provide information on the professional grade structure enjoyed by labour inspectors and other government employees exercising similar functions as well as further information on the salary and benefit structure applicable to labour inspectors. The Committee also requests the Government to provide information on the outcome of the study on the reasons for the high attrition rate of labour inspectors.

Articles 7, 10 and 11. Strengthening the human and material resources of the labour inspectorate. The Committee previously welcomed the increase in the number of labour inspectors from 43 to 283 (between 2013 and 2015), but noted with regret that the Government had failed to provide any new information in 2016 on the progress made with the recruitment of labour inspectors for the filling of the 575 approved labour inspection positions. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its report that 230 of the 575 positions still remain vacant, and that recruitment is ongoing. The Committee also notes the Government’s indication, in reply to the Committee’s request for further information on the material resources available to the labour inspectorate, that the budgetary allocation of the DIFE has continued to significantly increase; representing a fourfold increase from 2013–14 to 2017–18. In addition, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that an important project to further strengthen the capacity of the DIFE is under way. The Committee further notes, in reply to the Committee’s request, the information provided by the Government on the increase in equipment and transport facilities available to the labour inspectorate. The Committee requests the Government to specify the current number of labour inspectors working at the DIFE and to provide information about the training provided to new recruits including the subjects covered and the duration of such training. The Committee encourages the Government to continue to make every effort to fill all of the 575 labour inspection posts that have already been approved, with a view to ensuring the recruitment of an adequate number of qualified labour inspectors, taking into account the number of workplaces liable to inspection. The Committee also requests that the Government continue to provide information on the level of equipment and facilities available to the labour inspectorate.

Articles 12(1), 15(c) and 16. Inspections without previous notice. Duty of confidentiality in relation to complaints. In its previous comment, the Committee noted that in 2014, only 2.5 per cent of all inspections were random or complaints driven inspections without prior notice and it emphasized that, in that situation, the duty to maintain confidentiality of labour inspectors that an inspection was made as a result of a complaint, and the efficiency of inspections, were put at risk. In this respect, the Committee notes the Government’s reply, in relation to the Committee’s request for steps to ensure that a sufficient number of unannounced labour inspections (random or complaints-driven inspections implemented without prior notice) is undertaken, that during 2016–17, 20 per cent of all inspections were unannounced. The Committee notes that the Government reiterates, in reply to its previous requests to enshrine in law a requirement that the existence of a complaint and its source are kept confidential, that the absence of such a provision in the BLA, does not undermine confidentiality in practice. However, the Government adds that it is open to considering the codification of this duty in the context of the proposed review of the BLA. The Committee urges the Government to codify the duty of confidentiality, either in the context of the proposed review of the BLA or in other regulations or guidelines concerning labour inspection, for the purpose of legal clarity. The Committee requests that the Government provide information on the results of unannounced inspections covering investigations of accidents or addressing of complaints, including the nature of resolutions reached, violations identified and sanctions applied.

Articles 17 and 18. Legal proceedings, effective enforcement and sufficiently dissuasive penalties. The Committee notes that the Government, in reply to the Committee’s request for statistical information to enable the assessment of effective enforcement by the labour inspectorate, once again provides information on the number of workplaces inspected and the cases filed with the labour courts, but that it does not provide the requested information on penalties proposed by the inspectorate in connection with their detected violations or on the specific outcome of these cases (such as the imposition of fines or sentences of imprisonment). The Committee also notes that the Government, in reply to the Committee’s request for information on the measures taken to ensure that penalties for labour law violations are sufficiently dissuasive, indicates that the review of the amount of penalties might be considered in the context of the proposed review of the BLA. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the measures introduced or envisaged, in the context of the proposed legislative reform, to ensure that penalties for labour law violations are sufficiently dissuasive and, where applicable, to improve the proceedings for the effective enforcement of the legal provisions. The Committee also once again requests that the Government specify how many legal staff with responsibility for the enforcement of legal provisions are employed at the DIFE, and to provide information on the penalties recommended by the inspectorate, along with any relevant guidelines, and the outcome of the cases referred to the labour courts.

The Committee previously noted that freedom of association cases (including cases of anti-union discrimination) are addressed by the Department of Labour (DOL) which is, among other things, responsible for conciliation and mediation, and it indicated that cases of anti-union discrimination are not generally appropriate for conciliation or mediation and in any event must not undermine strict enforcement of applicable laws. The Committee requests the Government to provide information as to why violations of freedom of association are dealt with by the DOL, rather than the DIFE, and to provide detailed information on the manner in which it secures the enforcement of the legal provisions relating thereto.

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

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2016, published 106th ILC session (2017)

Articles 2, 3(1)(a) and (b), 5(a) and (b), 13, 17 and 18 of the Convention. Inspection activities to improve occupational safety and health (OSH) standards in the ready-made garment (RMG) sector. Cooperation and collaboration of the labour inspectorate and other public or private institutions engaged in similar activities and the social partners. In its previous comment, the Committee noted that, as of September 2015, a total number of 3,407 RMG factories had been subject to fire, electrical and structural inspections by the groups of retailers and apparel brands ACCORD and ALLIANCE and by national initiative. It also noted the decisions of the review panel at the Department of Inspection for Factories and Establishments (DIFE) established to follow up on the recommendations made in consequence of these initiatives. The Committee further noted from the direct contacts mission report that doubts existed as to whether the public authorities responsible for fire, electrical and structural safety had the human resources and capacities required to take over from the private initiatives – ACCORD and ALLIANCE – on the expiry of their mandate in 2018. In this regard, the Committee noted that initiatives were under way to increase the number of inspectors within the capital development authorities (RAJUK) which are responsible for building safety and within the Department of Fire Service and Civil Defence (DFSCD) which is responsible for fire safety. The Committee also noted the efforts being made to coordinate the activities of the public authorities responsible for fire, electrical and structural safety.

The Committee notes that the Government refers, in reply to the Committee’s previous request to continue to provide information on the measures taken to promote cooperation and coordination between the labour inspection service and initiatives engaged in similar activities to the Remediation Coordination Cell (RCC). The Government states that the RCC was established with ILO support to involve interested entities, particularly the DIFE, DFSCD, RAJUK and the Chittagong Development Authority, in the acceleration of remediating non conformity with health and safety standards process. In this regard, the Committee also notes the information provided by the Government concerning the collaboration with the social partners, including in the context of tripartite forums such as the National Industry, Health and Occupational Safety Council. The Committee notes however from the information on the composition of the Inter-Agency Tripartite Committee that while the Bangladesh Employers Federation (BEF), the Bangladesh Garment Manufacturers and Exporters Association (BGMEA) and the Bangladesh Knitwear Manufacturers and Exporters Association (BKMEA) are represented on this Committee, no trade union is represented. The Committee further notes the Government’s reference to regular contact between the DIFE and the BEF, the BGMEA and the BKMEA, and the invitation by the DIFE to the National Coordination Committee for Workers’ Education (NCCWE) and other trade union organizations to join tripartite forums. The Committee requests that the Government provide information on the increase in the number of inspectors within the public bodies responsible for building safety (RAJUK) and fire safety (DFSCD). Noting that the Inter-Agency Tripartite Committee does not include any workers’ representatives, the Committee requests that the Government ensure that the DIFE promotes collaboration with workers’ organizations or representatives in the same way as with employers’ organizations or representatives. It also requests that the Government report on the measures taken to enhance further collaboration with workers’ organizations or their representatives.

Articles 9 and 14. Notification of industrial accidents and cases of occupational diseases. In its previous comments, the Committee noted the Bangladesh Free Trade Union Congress (BFTUC)’s reference to the under-reporting of industrial accidents and the Government’s indication that no cases of occupational disease had yet been recorded due to a lack of staff and the absence of recording mechanisms for this purpose. Subsequently, the Committee noted the steps referred to by the Government to improve the system for notifying industrial accidents and occupational diseases, including: the recruitment of additional labour inspectors specializing in OSH; regular awareness-raising activities on employers’ legal obligations in relation to industrial accidents and cases of occupational diseases; and the initiation of work to digitalize the records of industrial accidents.

The Committee notes that, in reply to the Committee’s previous request to continue to provide information on the steps taken to improve the system for notifying industrial accidents and cases of occupational diseases, the Government refers to awareness-raising activities for employers and workers including training sessions and the distribution of posters, leaflets, and booklets and the display of digital banners. The Committee also notes the Government’s indication that the technical assistance provided by the ILO might be helpful for further awareness-raising activities, the development of a database on statistics of industrial accidents and cases of occupational diseases, and the purchasing of recording devices for the collating of statistics on industrial accidents and cases of occupational diseases. The Committee notes from the statistics provided by the Government that the number of recorded industrial accidents decreased by more than half from 1,230 in 2014 to 496 in 2015 (including 208 fatal accidents, 102 serious accidents and 186 other accidents), and that once again no statistics on recorded cases of occupational disease were provided. The Committee requests that the Government provide an explanation for the significant decrease in the number of industrial accidents recorded, and for the absence of any recorded cases of occupational disease. The Committee requests that the Government continue to take steps to improve the system for notifying the labour inspection services of industrial accidents and cases of occupational diseases, including with ILO technical assistance. Noting the information on the awareness-raising activities undertaken, the Committee requests that the Government provide information on other steps being taken, such as: the enforcement of sufficiently dissuasive penalties for non-compliance with reporting obligations (not only in relation to industrial accidents, but also in relation to cases of occupational disease); the recruitment of medical doctors to identify cases of occupational disease; and the purchase of recording devices, etc.

[The Government is asked to reply in full to the present comments in 2017.]

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2016, published 106th ILC session (2017)

The Committee recalls the discussion in the Committee on the Application of Standards (CAS) of the International Labour Conference at its 103rd Session (May–June 2014) on the application of the Convention, and the findings contained in the report prepared following the direct contacts mission undertaken in 2015 at the request of the Conference Committee.

Articles 3(1)(a) and (b), 13, 17, 18, 20 and 21 of the Convention. Inspection activities in sectors other than the ready-made garment (RMG) sector. Availability of inspection statistics disaggregated by sector. Publication and communication of annual labour inspection reports necessary to evaluate the effectiveness of the labour inspection system. In its previous comment, the Committee noted that inspection activities appeared to continue to focus on the RMG sector. The Committee notes that the Government provides a certain number of labour inspection statistics in its report, in reply to the Committee’s request, including in relation to: (i) the number of workplaces liable to inspection and workers employed therein (Article 21(c)); (ii) the number of inspection visits undertaken (Article 21(d)); (iii) the number of violations detected; (iv) the number of cases reported to the labour courts; (v) the total amount of penalties imposed (Article 21(e)); and (vi) the incidence of industrial accidents (Article 21(f)). However, the Committee also notes that disaggregated statistics were not consistently provided as requested by the Committee (for example, the total number of inspection visits undertaken in 2015 were not disaggregated by sector). This does not allow for an informed assessment concerning the adequacy of coverage by the labour inspectorate of other sectors.

While the Committee welcomes these statistics, it also notes that once again, no annual report on labour inspection activities was communicated to the ILO, despite the Government’s indication in its last report that such a report would be published soon. In reply to the Committee’s previous request to report in detail on the steps taken for the proposed establishment of a register of all workplaces liable to inspection and the workers employed therein, the Government indicates that ILO technical assistance would be helpful in developing such a register. In this respect, the Committee also notes the Government’s reference to an interagency working group (composed of the Department of Inspection for Factories and Establishments (DIFE), the Department of Fire Service and Civil Defense (DFSCD), the Directorate of Labour (DOL), the capital development authorities (RAJUK), the Bangladesh Employers Federation (BEF), the Bangladesh Garment Manufacturers and Exporters Association (BGMEA), the Bangladesh Knitwear Manufacturers and Experts Association (BKMEA) and the German Society for International Cooperation (GIZ)) established with a view to compiling a database of relevant information. The Committee trusts that the annual inspection report will be communicated soon, and that it will contain information on all the subjects listed in Article 21(a)–(g) of the Convnention. It also requests that the Government provide more detailed information on the concrete steps taken to establish a register of all workplaces liable to inspection and of the workers employed therein, including those undertaken with ILO technical assistance. The Committee also once again requests that the Government provide detailed information on the implementation of the measures announced in its previous report to improve the collection of inspection data (that is to say, the development of a computer-based reporting mechanism; the development of a revised labour inspection checklist; and the recruitment of staff for the collection, compilation and updating of data).

Article 3(2). Additional functions entrusted to labour inspectors. The Committee previously recalled, with reference to subsection 124(a) of the Bangladesh Labour Act (BLA) and Rule 113 of the 2015 Bangladesh Labour Rules (BLR, 2015) regulating mediation and conciliation in claims concerning outstanding payments or benefits, as well as with reference to Paragraph 8 of the Labour Inspection Recommendation, 1947 (No. 81), that the functions of labour inspectors should not include the conciliation or arbitration of labour disputes.

In this respect, the Government explains that two separate departments, namely, the DIFE and the DOL are responsible for the enforcement of the BLA, 2006 (as amended). The Government adds that subsection 124(a) of the BLA, 2006 (as amended) entrusts – DIFE labour inspectors with conciliation functions in respect of wages only, and that labour officers of the DOL undertake conciliation and mediation functions in respect of all other matters. Noting the Government’s indication that the conciliation and mediation functions of labour inspectors are limited to the payment of wages and benefits, the Committee requests the Government to provide detailed information on the proportion of time devoted to conciliation and mediation functions by DIFE labour inspectors in 2015 and 2016. The Committee also requests that the Government give consideration to entrusting the mediation and conciliation of individual labour disputes concerning wages and benefits to another public body, such as the DOL.

Article 6. Status and conditions of service of labour inspectors. In its previous comment, the Committee noted from the direct contacts mission report that the retention of labour inspectors was problematic 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. In this regard, the Committee requested that the Government review the professional profiles and grades of labour inspectors to ensure that they reflect the career prospects of public servants exercising similar functions within other government services, such as tax inspectors or the police.

The Committee notes that the Government indicates, in reply to this request, that labour inspectors enjoy stability of employment, that their basic service conditions are similar to other permanent government employees and that their service rules ensure equality among all labour inspectors in terms of wages and career prospects. The Committee once again requests that the Government provide information on the wages and benefits, as well as professional grade structure, enjoyed by other government employees exercising similar functions, such as tax inspectors or police officers. The Committee requests that the Government identify the reason for the high attrition rates in the case of labour inspectors so far as it relates to matters other than their conditions of service.

Article 7. Training of labour inspectors. In its previous comment, the Committee noted with interest that all labour inspectors had received training on a number of subjects, including occupational safety and health (OSH). While noting the general information on training in the Government’s report, the Committee notes that the Government has not provided a reply in relation to the Committee’s request for specific information on the training provided to labour inspectors following the adoption of the Bangladesh Labour Rules (BLR), 2015. Neither does the Government provide the requested information on whether the Government has given specific attention, in the design of the training programmes for labour inspectors on freedom of association, to its comments under the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), so as to ensure that all training is carried out in full conformity with that Convention. The Committee requests that the Government provide detailed information on the training provided to labour inspectors during the period covered by its next report. It once again requests that the Government provide information on how it has specifically addressed the Committee’s comments under Convention No. 87 in the design of the training for labour inspectors on freedom of association.

Articles 10 and 11. Strengthening of the human and material resources of the labour inspectorate. In its previous comments, the Committee noted the steps taken to strengthen and restructure the labour inspectorate, including by the proposed threefold increase of its human and budgetary resources. In its previous comment, it welcomed the increase in the number of labour inspectors from 43 to 283 (between 2013 and 2015), and noted that the vacant positions were in the process of being filled, including through the request made to the Public Service Commission to recruit 154 additional labour inspectors.

The Committee notes with regret that the Government has failed to provide any new information on the progress made in the recruitment of labour inspectors (including those specializing in OSH) and that it has not provided the concrete timeline as requested for the filling of the 575 approved positions and the recruitment of the 800 labour inspectors that the Government had previously committed itself to. However, the Committee welcomes the description provided by the Government concerning the improvement in the material conditions of the labour inspectorate (in particular, the transport facilities now available) and the steady increase in the budget allocation to the DIFE. The Committee once again requests that the Government fill, without further delay, all of the 575 labour inspection posts that have already been approved, and recruit an adequate number of qualified labour inspectors taking into account the number of workplaces liable to inspection. It requests that the Government continue to provide information on the improvement in the resources and on the material and transport facilities available to the labour inspectorate.

Articles 12(1), 15(c) and 16. Inspections without previous notice. Duty of confidentiality in relation to complaints. In its previous comment, the Committee noted that in 2014, only 668 of the 25,525 labour inspections carried out in 2014 were unannounced, and expressed the view that, where only 2.5 per cent of all inspections are random or complaints-driven inspections undertaken without prior notice, the establishment of a link between the inspection and the existence of a complaint can readily be established, and confidentiality is, in consequence, undermined. Further, it also considered that principally conducting announced inspections may undermine the effectiveness of inspections because problems may be concealed and so remain undetected.

The Committee notes that the Government indicates, in reply to its previous request to enshrine in law a requirement that the existence of a complaint and its source are kept confidential, that the absence of such a provision in the BLA, 2006 (as amended) does not undermine confidentiality in practice. The Committee further notes that the Government has not provided a reply to its previous request for information on the practical steps taken to ensure that a sufficient number of unannounced labour inspections (that is, random or complaints-driven inspections implemented without prior notice) are undertaken so as to ensure that labour inspectors are able to effectively discharge their duty to maintain confidentiality. The Committee once again requests that the Government ensure that a sufficient number of unannounced labour inspections are undertaken and requests that the Government provide information on any practical measures taken in this regard. The Committee also requests that the Government codify the duty of confidentiality, either in the Labour Act or in other regulations or guidelines concerning labour inspection, for the purpose of legal clarity.

Articles 17 and 18. Legal proceedings, effective enforcement and sufficiently dissuasive penalties. In its previous comments, the Committee noted the International Trade Union Confederation’s (ITUC) indication that the enforcement of the law remained a serious challenge for a number of reasons. These included the absence of any power in the hands of a labour inspector to impose a fine and the need to report all cases of non-compliance to the courts, the insufficiency of legal staff employed by the Ministry of Labour and Employment and the DIFE and the low level of fines which were too negligible to be dissuasive. The Committee also noted from the direct contacts mission report that sentences of imprisonment were rarely, if ever, imposed.

The Committee notes that the Government once again recalls that the level of fines for certain provisions of the BLA, were increased to 25,000 Bangladeshi taka (BDT) (approximately US$325) following the 2013 amendments to the Labour Act. In reply to the Committee’s request, the Government also indicates that labour inspectors must still refer all cases of non-compliance to the courts and that in 2015, 30,186 labour inspections were carried out and 1,431 cases were filed with the labour courts (including 253 cases concerning OSH and 12 cases concerning child labour). Concerning the Committee’s request to provide information on the number of trade union cases referred to the labour courts, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that all relevant cases (including cases of anti-union discrimination) were addressed by the DOL who are responsible for conciliation and mediation. In this regard, the Committee observes that cases of anti-union discrimination are not generally appropriate for conciliation or mediation and in any event must not undermine strict enforcement of applicable laws.

Finally, the Committee notes that the Government, once again, does not provide information on any proposed steps directed at improving the effective enforcement of labour law, nor does it provide the requested information on the outcome of cases referred to the labour courts. The Committee once again urges the Government to provide information on the measures introduced or envisaged to ensure that penalties for labour law violations are sufficiently dissuasive and that fines are effectively enforced.

The Committee further urges the Government to provide the previously requested information on the number of violations detected and information on the number of cases filed with the labour courts and the outcome of such cases (the number of infringements found and the amount of any fine imposed, etc.). The Committee once again requests that the Government specify how many legal staff with responsibility for the enforcement of the violations detected are employed at the DIFE.

Articles 2, 4 and 23. Labour inspection in export processing zones (EPZs) and special economic zones (SEZs). In its previous comments, the Committee noted that the Bangladesh Export Processing Zones Authority (BEPZA) remained responsible for securing the rights of workers in EPZs. It noted that counsellors, conciliators and arbitrators of the BEPZA were responsible for handling labour disputes and dealing with unfair labour practices, in addition to the labour courts designated to address labour disputes in EPZs. However, the Committee noted the absence of a labour inspection system (within the meaning provided for under the Convention) in EPZs. It expressed deep concern that the Government had not yet given effect to the 2014 conclusions of the CAS and prioritized amendments to the legislation governing EPZs so as to bring them within the purview of the labour inspectorate. In this respect, the Committee also noted that a separate draft Labour Act for EPZs had been prepared, which according to the observations of the ITUC, gave rise to a number of concerns. These concerns included that enforcement in EPZs would remain vested with the BEPZA and that the powers and functions of the EPZ labour courts and the EPZ Labour Appellate Tribunal established under the draft Labour Act for EPZs would be severely limited in comparison with courts established under the BLA.

The Committee notes that the Government indicates, in reply to its reiterated request to bring the EPZs within the purview of the labour inspectorate, that the Cabinet has approved a comprehensive draft EPZ Labour Act which provides for the enhanced protection of workers in EPZs, and which is in the process of being adopted by Parliament. It also notes the Government’s reply, in response to its request concerning the legislation applicable in the proposed SEZs, that SEZs will initially be governed by the EPZ Labour Act. The Committee once again expresses the firm hope that the EPZ Labour Act will bring EPZs under the purview of the labour inspectorate as requested by the Conference Committee and the Committee of Experts. The Committee also requests that the Government ensures that SEZs will be brought within the purview of the labour inspectorate.

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

[The Government is asked to reply in full to the present comments in 2017.]

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2015, published 105th ILC session (2016)

The Committee notes the Government’s reply to its previous questions concerning (i) the responsibilities and inspection activities under the Bangladesh National Building Code (BNBC), and (ii) the developments concerning labour inspection and occupational safety and health (OSH), including the establishment of an OSH Council, and the setting up of a committee to work on rules and regulations concerning OSH (Articles 3(1) and 5(b) of the Convention).

Articles 9 and 14. Notification of industrial accidents and cases of occupational diseases. The Committee previously noted the observations made by the Bangladesh Free Trade Union Congress (BFTUC) on the under-reporting of industrial accidents and the Government’s indication that it was working on rules for the notification of cases of occupational diseases pursuant to section 82 of the Bangladesh Labour Act (BLA) (which provides that the form and time limits for the notification of occupational diseases shall be prescribed by rules), but that no cases of occupational disease had yet been recorded due to a lack of staff and the absence of recording mechanisms for this purpose.

In this regard, the Committee also notes that Rule 74 of the 2015 Labour Rules provides that an employer (or the concerned worker or other person) shall notify the labour inspection services within 24 hours where “it appears to the employer or he learns that a worker suffers from a disease described in Schedule II of the Rules”. The Committee also notes that there do not seem to be any consequences for employers where they fail to notify the labour inspection services in accordance with this provision, though section 290 of the BLA provides for sanctions where an employer has failed to notify the labour inspection services of an occupational accident in circumstances where it results in a fatality or serious injury. The Committee further notes from the information provided by the Government that in 2014, 1,230 industrial accidents were recorded, but no statistics are provided on cases of occupational disease.

With regard to the Committee’s request concerning the steps taken to improve the system for notifying the labour inspection services of industrial accidents and occupational diseases, the Committee notes that the Government refers to the recruitment of additional labour inspectors specializing in OSH. The Government also refers to the regular awareness-raising activities of labour inspectors, drawing employers’ attention to their legal obligations in relation to industrial accidents and occupational diseases. It also notes the Government’s indication that work is currently being undertaken to digitalize the records of industrial accidents. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the steps being taken to improve the system for notifying the labour inspection services of industrial accidents and incidents of occupational disease (by, for example, awareness-raising activities among employers and workers concerning the recording and notification of industrial accidents and occupational diseases, the penalties for non-compliance with reporting obligations and whether they are adequate, the recruitment of medical doctors to identify incidents of occupational disease, the purchase of recording devices for this purpose, etc.).

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2015, published 105th ILC session (2016)

The Committee recalls the discussion in the Committee on the Application of Standards (CAS) of the International Labour Conference at its 103rd Session (May–June 2014) on the application of the Convention.

Following the request made by the CAS, the Committee notes that a direct contacts mission to Bangladesh took place from 18 to 20 October 2015, and that the mission has prepared a report on the follow-up to the 2014 conclusions of the Conference Committee concerning the application of the Convention.

Legislative developments. The Committee notes that the Bangladesh Labour Rules implementing the revised Labour Act (BLR, 2015) were published in the Official Gazette on 15 September 2015. The Committee makes observations on the relevant parts of these Rules under the Articles of the Convention referred to below.

Articles 2, 3(1)(a) and (b), 5(a), 13, 17 and 18 of the Convention. Inspection activities to improve occupational safety and health (OSH) standards in the ready-made garment (RMG) sector. The Committee previously noted the various activities and programmes being undertaken by the Government and the social partners with ILO support, as well as those being implemented with other actors, to improve OSH standards in factories in the RMG sector.

It notes the Government’s indication in its report that, as of September 2015, a total number of 3,407 RMG factories had been subject to fire, electrical and structural inspections (1,333 by the national initiative, 1,274 by the group of retailers and apparel brands, ACCORD, and 800 by the group of retailers and apparel brands, ALLIANCE). The review panel established by the Department of Inspection for Factories and Establishments (DIFE) to follow up on the recommendations made in consequence of these initiatives ordered the closure of 34 factories, and the partial closure of 49 factories (following inspections of 110 factories). The Committee notes from the information contained in the direct contacts mission report that doubts exist as to whether the public authorities responsible for fire, electrical and structural safety have the human resources and capacities required to take over from the private initiatives – ACCORD and ALLIANCE – once their mandate expires in 2018. In this regard, the Committee notes from the information provided in the Government’s report that initiatives are under way to increase the number of inspectors within the public bodies responsible for building safety (the capital development authorities (RAJUK)) and fire safety (Department of Fire Service and Civil Defence (DFSCD)).

Inspection activities in sectors other than the RMG sector, including construction. The Committee notes that following the Committee’s previous request the Government has indicated in its report that in 2015 the construction sector has been one of the priority sectors for inspection due to the high number of occupational accidents within it. In this regard, the Committee also notes, however, that the information contained in the Government’s report provided following the direct contacts mission in October 2015 suggests that inspection activities continue to be focused on the RMG sector. The Committee further notes that the direct contacts mission report indicates that the informal sector, which accounts for 87 per cent of the workforce of the country (according to a DIFE 2015 report), is not covered by labour inspections at all.

The Committee requests the Government to provide detailed information on the labour inspection activities disaggregated by sector on an annual basis (including statistics relating to the workplaces in the different sectors and the number of workers employed therein, the number on labour inspections carried out, the violations detected and the penalties imposed, the statistics of occupational accidents and diseases, including deaths resulting from these accidents and diseases etc.).

Cooperation of the labour inspectorate and other public or private institutions engaged in similar activities. In relation to the Committee’s previous request concerning coordination between the labour inspection services and public and private initiatives, the Committee welcomes the Government’s reference in its report to: (i) the development of common minimum standards (devised by the Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology (BUET) with the assistance of the ILO) for assessing the fire, electrical and structural integrity of RMG factories across public and private initiatives; (ii) the coordination of fire and structural inspections by the High-Level National Tripartite Committee on Fire Safety and Structural Integrity; (iii) the regular coordination meetings between the DIFE, DFSCD and RAJUK; and (iv) the use of a unified checklist by the relevant public bodies, including the DIFE and DFSCD. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information in this regard.

Article 3(2). Additional functions entrusted to labour inspectors. The Committee previously noted that the new subsection 124(a) of the Bangladesh Labour Act (BLA), as amended, entrusts the Chief Inspector or any other officials authorized by the Chief Inspector to act as mediator and conciliator in claims concerning outstanding payments or benefits. The Committee notes that Rule 113 of the newly adopted BLR, 2015 makes further provision in this regard.

The Committee once again recalls that Article 3(2) of the Convention provides that any further duties entrusted to labour inspectors shall not be such as to interfere with the effective discharge of their primary duties. Moreover, it draws the Government’s attention to the guidance contained in Paragraph 8 of the Labour Inspection Recommendation, 1947 (No. 81), which provides that the functions of labour inspectors should not include acting as conciliator or arbitrator in proceedings concerning labour disputes. The Committee therefore once again requests the Government, in particular in view of the limited human resources available to the labour inspection services, to take the necessary steps to ensure that, in accordance with Article 3(2), any other duties entrusted to labour inspectors do not interfere with the performance of their primary duties. In this regard, consideration should be given to entrusting the mediation and conciliation of individual labour disputes to another public body.

Articles 6 and 7. Status and conditions of service of labour inspectors. Training of labour inspectors. The Committee notes with interest the Government’s indication that, from January 2014 to August 2015, all labour inspectors have been trained in relation to labour law, inspection techniques and OSH.

The Committee also notes from the information contained in the direct contacts mission report that the retention of labour inspectors is problematic. This appears to be because labour inspectors fall outside the career civil service. In this regard, it notes from the direct contacts mission report that a number of recently recruited labour inspectors left the DIFE, after having been trained, to take up work with other government services. The Committee further notes the statements made by the DIFE that it intends in the future to directly recruit labour inspectors to posts outside the career civil service (and not via the Civil Service Commission). The Committee requests the Government to take the necessary steps to ensure that labour inspectors are brought within the career civil service so as to provide them with the same level of protection and career prospects as other public servants. In this regard, it requests the Government to review the professional profiles and grades of labour inspectors and ensure that they reflect those of public servants exercising similar functions, such as tax inspectors or the police. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the training of labour inspectors, following the adoption of the BLR, 2015. The Committee requests the Government to give specific attention, in the design of the training programmes for labour inspectors on freedom of association, to its comments under the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), so as to ensure that all training is carried out in full conformity with that Convention.

Articles 10 and 11. Strengthening of the human and material resources of the labour inspectorate. The Committee previously noted the steps that had been taken to strengthen and restructure the labour inspectorate, including by the proposed threefold increase of the Department’s human and budgetary resources and the recruitment of 88 additional labour inspectors.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the number of approved labour inspection posts has been increased to 575, and that 230 labour inspectors have been recruited since 2013, bringing the total number of labour inspectors to 283 (187 specializing in general working conditions, 28 specializing in health, and 35 specializing in safety). It further notes the Government’s indication that the vacant positions are in the process of being filled. In this regard, it notes from the information contained in the direct contacts mission report that the Public Service Commission has been asked to recruit 154 additional labour inspectors. The Committee also recalls the Government’s previous commitment to raising the total number of labour inspectors to 800.

The Committee welcomes the improvement in the transport facilities (including through the provision of 160 motorcycles, 15 microbuses and one jeep) and the computer and office equipment available to labour inspectors, referred to by the Government. Welcoming the progress made with the recruitment of additional labour inspectors, the Committee expresses the firm hope that the Government will, without further delay, fill all of the 575 labour inspection posts that have already been approved, and recruit an adequate number of qualified labour inspectors taking account of the number of workplaces liable to inspection. In this regard, it requests the Government to provide a concrete timeline for the filling of the 575 positions that have been approved and for the recruitment of the 800 labour inspectors it has previously committed itself to. It also asks the Government to provide information on the efforts undertaken to increase the number of labour inspectors specializing in OSH.

The Committee further requests the Government to provide a detailed description of the material resources available to the labour inspection offices (i) at the central level, and (ii) within the 23 districts (office space, telephones, computers, Internet connections, photocopiers, measuring devices, etc.), including the transport facilities available.

Articles 12(1), 15(c) and 16. Inspections without previous notice. Duty of confidentiality in relation to complaints. The Committee notes from the information provided in the Government’s report that only 668 of the 25,525 labour inspections carried out in 2014 were unannounced. The Committee notes that the limited number of unannounced inspections may undermine the effectiveness of such inspections in identifying safety and health problems that may otherwise remain concealed or undiscovered. The Committee refers to paragraph 263 of its 2006 General Survey on labour inspection, where it emphasizes the importance of unannounced visits, especially in cases where the employer may be expected to attempt to conceal a violation, by changing the usual conditions of work, preventing a witness from being present or making it impossible to carry out an inspection. In this context, the Committee previously noted that the BLA, as amended, does not contain any legal requirement to refrain from disclosing the identity of the author of a complaint or from indicating that an inspection has taken place in consequence of a complaint. The Committee also recalls its previous observations on the need to carry out a sufficient number of random labour inspections without prior notice to enable labour inspectors to effectively discharge their obligation to treat as confidential the source of any complaint. The Committee is of the view that in the current situation, where only 2.5 per cent of all inspections are unannounced, the establishment of a link between the inspection and the existence of a complaint can readily be made, and confidentiality is, in consequence, undermined. The Committee once again requests the Government to take appropriate steps to enshrine in law a requirement that the existence of a complaint and its source are kept confidential. The Committee also requests the Government to ensure that a sufficient number of unannounced labour inspections are undertaken and requests that the Government provide information on any practical measures taken in this regard.

Articles 17 and 18. Legal proceedings, effective enforcement and sufficiently dissuasive penalties. The Committee previously noted that following the 2013 amendments to the BLA, the maximum fine that could be imposed for a general violation of the BLA had been increased from 5,000 Bangladesh Taka (BDT) to BDT25,000 (approximately from US$65 to US$325), and that the maximum period of imprisonment for obstruction of an inspector had been increased to six months. In this context, it noted the ITUC’s indication that the enforcement of the law remained a serious challenge for a number of reasons. These included the absence of any power in the hands of a labour inspector to impose a fine and the need to report all cases of non compliance to the courts, the insufficiency of legal staff employed by the Ministry of Labour and Employment or the DIFE and the low level of fines which are too negligible to be dissuasive.

In relation to the Committee’s request for information on the number of violations detected, the Committee further notes from the statistics provided by the Government that 1,110 cases were referred to the labour courts. The Committee notes that no information is available on the outcome of these cases. However, the Committee understands from the direct contacts mission report that sentences of imprisonment are rarely, if ever, imposed. The Committee further notes that the Government once again refers to the increase in the level of fines for certain provisions of the BLA following the 2013 amendments, but it does not provide information on any measures envisaged to further increase and enhance the effective imposition of these fines, notwithstanding the very low level of fines available. The Committee once again requests the Government to provide information on the measures introduced or envisaged to ensure that penalties for labour law violations are sufficiently dissuasive and that fines are effectively enforced.

The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the number of violations detected, and the number of cases filed with the labour courts. It also requests the Government to provide details on the areas to which these violations relate (OSH, freedom of association, child labour, etc.) and their outcome (the number of convictions in relation to the infringements reported, the amount of any fine imposed, etc.).

In this context, the Committee also requests the Government to specify how many legal staff are working at the DIFE with responsibility for the enforcement of the violations detected, and to clarify whether labour inspectors have the power to issue fines themselves or whether they have to submit all cases of non compliance to the labour courts.

Articles 2, 4 and 23. Labour inspection in EPZs. The Committee previously noted that the Bangladesh Export Processing Zones Authority (BEPZA) remained responsible for ensuring the rights and privileges of the workers of enterprises operating in EPZs, and that 60 counsellors were dedicated to this function. In this regard, it noted the observations of the ITUC that counsellors undertook limited grievance handling but that there was no labour inspection system in EPZs. It also noted the conclusions of the CAS, according to which the Government should prioritize the amendments to the legislation governing EPZs, so as to bring the EPZs within the purview of the labour inspectorate. The Committee further noted that a separate draft Labour Act for EPZs had been prepared, and notes that this draft has been sent to the Ministry for vetting before being sent to Parliament for adoption. In its previous comment, the Committee noted the observations of the ITUC, according to which the draft Labour Act for EPZs gives rise to a number of concerns. These include the fact that labour inspection and enforcement in EPZs remain vested with the BEPZA and that the powers and functions of the EPZ Labour Courts and the EPZ Labour Appellate Tribunal established under the draft Labour Act for EPZs are severely restricted in comparison with courts under the BLA.

The Committee also notes that the Government indicates, in response to the question concerning the activities of the staff responsible for the enforcement of the rights of workers, that in 2014, 160 cases were brought to the labour courts and 70 were settled. However, no further details are provided concerning, in particular, the subject matter of the cases concerned. The Government further indicates that conciliators and arbitrators in EPZs are responsible for dealing with unfair labour practices, but the Government has not provided information on the number of cases dealt with by them. The Committee also notes the information contained in the direct contacts mission report that there are no fines for labour law violations provided for in the current legislation applicable to EPZs (the 2010 EPZ Workers Welfare Association and Industrial Relations Act (EWWIRA) and the 1989 Bangladesh BEPZA Instructions (1 and 2)). It also notes the statement made by one employer, as referred to in the direct contacts mission report, that no workplace inspections were taking place in EPZs. The Committee expresses deep concern that EPZs continue to be excluded from labour inspection. The Committee once again requests the Government to provide information on the measures taken to bring the EPZs within the purview of the labour inspectorate.

It requests the Government to provide detailed information on the activities carried out within EPZs to ensure that workers’ rights are secured (including on the violations detected and the legal provisions to which they relate, the number of cases referred to the courts and the penalties imposed). The Committee also once again requests the Government to provide statistics on the number and nature of industrial accidents and cases of occupational diseases in EPZs and where they are recorded.

Articles 2, 4 and 23. Labour inspections in Special Economic Zones (SEZs). The Committee notes from the direct contacts mission report that the Government proposes to establish Special Economic Zones (SEZs). The Committee requests the Government to confirm that the provisions of the BLA and the BLR, 2015, in so far as they relate to labour inspection, will apply to such areas.

Articles 20 and 21. Publication and communication to the ILO of an annual labour inspection report. The Committee previously noted with interest the launching of a publicly accessible database system on fire, electrical and building inspections in the RMG sector. It notes the information in the direct contacts mission report that this database will also contain information on labour inspections and working conditions.

The Committee welcomes the Government’s indication, in reply to its previous requests, that efforts are being made to establish a register of all workplaces liable to inspection and of the workers employed therein, and that an annual labour inspection report is currently being prepared and should be published soon. In this regard, it also notes the information in the direct contacts mission report that efforts are being made to establish an improved and more efficient system of data collection and analysis through the development of a computer-based reporting mechanism and the recruitment of staff for the collection, compilation and updating of data. Moreover, a revised labour inspection checklist, which takes account of the legal requirements in the BLR, 2015, should improve the collection of relevant data.

The Committee trusts that the annual inspection report will be communicated soon, and that it will contain information on all the subjects listed in Article 21(a)–(g). It requests the Government to report in detail on the concrete steps taken to establish a register of all workplaces liable to inspection and of the workers employed therein, as well as the other measures described above to improve the collection of inspection data. The Committee requests the Government to continue to avail itself of the technical assistance from the Office for this purpose.

[The Government is asked to reply in detail to the present comments in 2016.]

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

Referring to its observation, the Committee wishes to raise the following additional points.

Articles 2, 3(1)(a) and (b), 5(a), 13, 17 and 18 of the Convention. Inspection activities in the construction sector. 1. Occupational safety and health (OSH) of construction workers. The Committee previously noted the observations of the Bangladesh Free Trade Union Congress (BFTUC) that despite a high number of fatal casualties in the construction sector, a separate inspectorate or agency, as foreseen under the Bangladesh National Building Code (BNBC) of 1993, had not been established, and that the Department of Inspection for Factories and Establishments (DIFE) assumes the function of inspection in the construction sector in practice, but only performs irregular inspections due to the lack of inspection staff. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the labour inspection activities in relation to the enforcement of the legal provisions on the safety and health of construction workers, and to provide relevant statistical data (including on the 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 which have occurred in the construction sector.

2. Building safety. The Committee notes the additional information in the Government’s report that the authorities in the different administrative divisions are responsible for ensuring building safety, and that they are in the process of increasing their staff. The Capital Development Authority and the Chittagong Development Authority are responsible for the inspection of building safety in the capital and south-east respectively, and are also mainly responsible for the building security of factories in the ready-made garment (RMG) sector. According to the Government’s indications, the DIFE assumes responsibility for some electrical safety parts of factory buildings. The Committee also asks the Government to provide information on the control activities in relation to building safety, including relevant statistical data.

Article 3(2). Additional functions of labour inspectors. The Committee notes that the new subsection 124(a) of the Bangladesh Labour Act (BLA) in its amended version, entrusts the Chief Inspector or any other officials authorized by the Chief Inspector to act as mediator and conciliator in claims concerning the payment of outstanding payments or benefits. In this regard, the Committee would like to recall that Article 3(2) of the Convention provides that any further duties which may be entrusted to labour inspectors shall not be such so as to interfere with the effective discharge of their primary duties or to prejudice in any way the authority and impartiality which are necessary to inspectors in their relations with employers and workers. Paragraph 8 of the Labour Inspection Recommendation, 1947 (No. 81) provides that the functions of labour inspectors should not include that of acting as conciliator or arbitrator in proceedings concerning labour disputes. The Committee requests that the Government, in view of the limited human resources available to the labour inspection services, take the necessary steps to ensure that, in accordance with Article 3(2), any other duties entrusted to labour inspectors do not interfere with the performance of their primary duties.

Article 5(b). Collaboration with workers’ and employers’ organizations. The Committee notes the Government’s indications that the tripartite National Health and Safety Council (NIHSC) elaborated a national OSH policy in 2013, which was not attached to the Government’s report contrary to the indications of the Government.

The Committee further notes the information on the website of the public building assessment initiative of the National Tripartite Plan of Action on Fire Safety and Structural Integrity, carried out by the Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology under the supervision of the National Tripartite Committee. The Committee asks the Government to provide a copy of any document relating to the national OSH policy and information on its application in practice. It further asks the Government to provide detailed information on the activities of the National Tripartite Committee in relation to labour inspection in the RMG sector and a copy of any relevant documentation.

Article 6. Status and conditions of service of labour inspectors. The Committee notes that the Government still has not provided any text governing the conditions of service of labour inspectors. The Committee therefore once again asks the Government to provide the requested text.

Articles 12(1), 15(c) and 16. Duty of confidentiality in relation to complaints. The Committee previously noted that the BLA, in its amended version of July 2013, still does not contain any legal requirement to refrain from disclosing the identity of the author of a complaint or from indicating that an inspection took place as a result of a complaint. In this regard, it noted the Government’s explanations, according to which, as the Committee understands them, the lack of material resources, including transport facilities and the absence of proper training, is the greatest threat to the observance of confidentiality in practice.

The Committee notes that the Government refers to the powers and prerogatives of labour inspectors in the BLA, but does not address the issue relating to the absence of a legal requirement for labour inspectors with regard the duty of confidentiality. The Committee also notes that the International Organisation of Employers (IOE) in its observations received on 28 August 2014 emphasizes that labour inspectors need to receive training in relation to their obligations, responsibilities and duties.

The Committee once again asks the Government to take appropriate measures to ensure that the duty of confidentiality regarding the existence of a complaint and its source is duly reflected in law. Please also provide any practical measures taken in this regard, such as the training of labour inspectors so as to enable them to observe their duty of confidentiality in practice.

Recalling its considerations in paragraph 263 of its 2006 General Survey on labour inspection that the performance of a sufficient number of unannounced inspection visits in relation to inspections with prior notice is indeed necessary to enable labour inspectors to discharge their obligation of confidentiality with regard to the source of any complaint, and also to prevent the establishment of any link between the inspection and a complaint, the Committee once again asks the Government to indicate the number of unannounced visits in relation to the total number of inspection visits.

Articles 9 and 14. Notification of industrial accidents and cases of occupational diseases. The Committee previously noted the BFTUC’s observations on the under-reporting of industrial accidents and the Government’s indications that it is currently working on the rules for the procedure of notification of cases of occupational diseases, in application of section 82 of the BLA, but that no cases of occupational diseases had yet been recorded due to the lack of staff to determine such cases and the absence of the required recording devices for this purpose.

The Committee understands, from the indications made by the Government and the IOE that the recruitment of the additional medical labour inspectors, resulted in increased activities of labour inspectors to provide advice and information to employers, including on the identification of cases of occupational disease, and their reporting obligations under the law. The Committee asks the Government to continue to provide information on the measures taken for the improvement of the system for the notification of industrial accidents and cases of occupational disease to the labour inspectorate, as well as on the impact of the abovementioned measures.

The Committee also once again asks the Government to report on the progress made in the formulation of the procedural rules for the notification of cases of occupational diseases adopted pursuant to section 82 of the BLA and to provide a copy, once they are adopted.

[The Government is asked to report in detail in 2015.]

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

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

The Committee notes the discussion in the Committee on the Application of Standards (CAS) on the application of this Convention, as well as the Government’s report received on 18 September 2014 and the joint observations of the International Organisation of Employers (IOE) and the Bangladesh Employers’ Federation (BEF), received on 28 August 2014, and the observations of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), received on 31 August 2014.

The Committee notes that the discussion in the CAS concerned the need to strengthen the labour inspection system, in the light of recent serious events, such as the Rana Plaza building collapse, and in particular: (1) the technical assistance activities to improve occupational safety and health (OSH) standards in the ready-made garment (RMG) sector; (2) the strengthening of the human capital and resources available to the labour inspectorate, including transport facilities; (3) the adoption of regulations implementing the revised Labour Act and the promulgation of additional amendments to the Labour Act; (4) sufficiently dissuasive sanctions and effective enforcement mechanisms; (5) the protection of workers in export processing zones (EPZs); and (6) the publication and communication to the ILO of an annual labour inspection report.

The Committee notes that, following the invitation by the CAS to accept a direct contacts mission, the Government indicated its willingness to extend the necessary support and cooperation for such a mission, to be scheduled in the first half of 2015.

1. Technical assistance activities concerning the RMG sector

Articles 2, 3(1)(a) and (b), 5(a), 13, 17 and 18 of the Convention. Inspection activities in the RMG sector. Cooperation of the labour inspectorate and other public or private institutions engaged in similar activities. The Committee notes the reference made, during the discussions in the CAS, to the various activities and programmes undertaken by the Government and the social partners with ILO support, as well as those being implemented with other actors to improve OSH standards in factories in the RMG sector. They include: the National Tripartite Plan of Action on Fire Safety and Structural Integrity (NTPA); a major ILO initiative (including a Better Work Programme); the European Union Global Sustainability Compact for Continuous Improvements in Labour Rights; the Accord on Fire and Building Safety, an agreement between global unions and a European-dominated group of retailers and apparel brands (Accord); and the Alliance for Bangladesh Worker Safety, an alliance of predominantly American retailers and apparel brands (Alliance).

The Committee notes the information from the website of the Department of Inspection for Factories and Establishments (DIFE) on the progress made (as of 15 September 2014) with the assessment initiatives of the NTPA, the Accord and the Alliance, concerning the structural integrity, as well as the fire and electrical safety of RMG factories. In this regard, it notes that the public building assessment initiative of the NTPA, carried out by the Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology under the supervision of the National Tripartite Committee, inspected 380 of the targeted 1,500 RMG factories. It further notes that the private assessment initiatives, namely the Accord and the Alliance inspected 1,094 (of the 1,400 targeted RMG factories) and 587 (of the 587 targeted RMG factories), respectively. The Committee further notes from the information available on the Accord’s website that the Accord inspections have identified more than 80,000 safety issues and that more than 400 corrective action plans were finalized by the factories and companies and signatories, and approved by the Chief Labour Inspector.

The Committee notes that the ITUC deplores the lack of progress made by the NTPA concerning the achievement of the abovementioned assessment target of 1,500 inspections by the end of 2014. The Committee recalls that discussions in the CAS also concerned the serious lack of coordination and cooperation among relevant government agencies and private institutions on building and fire safety and labour inspection. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide detailed information on the activities undertaken to improve OSH conditions in the RMG sector in the framework of the various activities and programmes for this purpose and urges the Government to take the necessary measures to strengthen and expedite inspections on structural integrity. The Committee also invites the Government to provide information on any measures taken or envisaged to promote coordination and cooperation among the labour inspection services, and the other public and private initiatives concerned with the structural integrity, fire and electrical safety of factory buildings (such as joint inspection visits, the exchange of relevant information, etc.).

Please also provide information on the results of the abovementioned assessment initiatives (for example, number of inspections carried out, number and nature of cases of non-compliance with the legal obligations detected, and number of penalties imposed as well as the preventive measures taken with a view to remedying defects observed which might constitute a threat to the health or safety of the workers, including measures with immediate executory force).

2. Strengthening of the resources available to the labour inspectorate, including transport facilities

Articles 7, 10 and 11. Strengthening of the human and material resources of the labour inspectorate. Training of labour inspectors. The Committee notes the indications of the Government and the IOE on the progress made in the strengthening and restructuring of the labour inspectorate, including the upgrading of the Inspection Directorate to the level of an Inspection Department, its enlargement to encompass offices in 23 districts, and the proposed threefold increase of the Department’s human and budgetary resources. In this regard, the Committee notes the proposed increase in the number of labour inspectors from 183 to 575 and the proposed increase in the budget from 60.29 billion Bangladesh taka (BDT) in 2013–14 (approximately US$781,310) to BDT150.55 billion in 2014–15 (approximately US$1,953,925). It notes that of the 392 additional labour inspection posts that were approved, 88 new labour inspectors have been recruited and provided with basic training. The Committee also notes the Government’s reference to four-week training courses for labour inspectors at the Industrial Relations Institutes at the Department of Labour on a regular basis. It notes that further training will be provided with ILO technical assistance.

The Committee notes that the ITUC emphasizes the critical need for additional labour inspectors and that the numerous delays in their recruitment call into question the Government’s sense of urgency, and ultimately its commitment to build up a proper labour inspection service. The ITUC expresses the view that the recruitment of 200 additional labour inspectors, which the Government had committed to do by the end of 2013, has not yet been achieved, and falls short of the supervisory requirements for the RMG sector with 4 million workers and does not address issues outside of this sector where the majority of workers are employed.

The Committee further notes the information provided by the ITUC that transportation for inspectors is extremely limited or non-existent and that most inspectors rely on public transportation to get to factories in the absence of dedicated agency vehicles. According to the ITUC, this may prevent the timely inspection of a factory and opens the door for employers to corrupt the inspectors, who are in fact paying for transportation and other costs. In this regard, the Committee notes that the Government indicates that factory inspectors are being provided with vehicles for the discharge of their duties. The Government states in its report that the ILO has undertaken to provide motorcycles for labour inspectors, which will increase labour inspector’s mobility. The Committee once again urges the Government to strengthen its efforts to furnish the labour inspectorate with the resources that it needs to operate effectively. Welcoming the initial steps already taken by the Government, the Committee expresses the firm hope that the Government will, without further delay, fill the labour inspection posts that have already been approved, and recruit an adequate number of qualified labour inspectors in relation to the number of workplaces liable to inspection. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the improvement in the resources, and the material and transport facilities available to the labour inspection services, and detailed information on the training provided to labour inspectors (including on the frequency, subjects and duration of training, as well as the number of participants).

3. Legislative reforms

Article 28. Information on laws and regulations. Regulations implementing the revised Labour Act. The Committee notes the Government’s indications that, through consultation with different stakeholders, draft rules implementing the revised Labour Act have been prepared and are in the process of being finalized. It notes that following a request made by the Government, the Office examined these draft rules, including with regard to labour inspection and OSH, and transmitted its comments to the Government. However, the observations of the ITUC indicate that the key ILO comments on the draft have not been fully implemented, including with regard to OSH. It further notes the indications made by the ITUC that no efforts are being taken to further amend the Labour Act, as previously announced by the Government, so as to bring it into conformity with international labour standards. The Committee encourages the Government to take into account the comments of the Office in the finalization of the implementing rules. It asks the Government to provide information on the progress made with the adoption of these rules, and supply a copy of them, once they have been adopted. The Government is also asked to provide information on any action taken for the further review of the Labour Act.

4. Sufficiently dissuasive sanctions and effective enforcement mechanisms

Articles 17 and 18. Legal proceedings and effective enforcement of adequate penalties. The Committee notes that the Government has not provided the requested information on the number of violations detected, the number of cases filed with the labour courts and their outcome. It also notes that following the 2013 amendments to the Labour Code, the level of penalties to be imposed for general violation of the Labour Code increased from BDT5,000 to BDT25,000 (approximately US$65 to US$325). Further, under the 2013 amendments, fines for obstructing labour inspectors from carrying out their duties rose from BDT5,000 to BDT25,000, approximately US$325.

In this regard, it notes the indications of the ITUC, according to which the enforcement of the law remains a serious challenge. The ITUC recalls that labour inspectors do not have the power to issue fines, and can only report cases of non-compliance to the courts. Neither the Directorate of Labour nor the DIFE has legal staff, and factory owners often hire experienced lawyers to fight the charges brought to the courts, quickly overwhelming the under-resourced labour inspectors and investigators and preventing penalties from being enforced. According to the ITUC, fines for violations generally still remain far too low to be dissuasive and are not enforced due to lengthy legal processes and corruption. The ITUC indicates that fines under the Labour Act remain negligible. The Committee also notes the indications of the IOE that the maximum period of imprisonment for obstruction of inspectors had increased to six months of imprisonment. The ITUC further indicates that it is unaware of any criminal proceedings pending for any violation of the Labour Act, except for those relating to the Rana Plaza case. As the data is not available, it is also unaware of the extent to which any fines or penalties are imposed and collected.

The Committee also notes the observations of the IOE, according to which three additional labour courts need to be established in three additional administrative divisions. The Committee requests that the Government provide information on the measures taken to ensure that the level of fines introduced is sufficiently dissuasive and that these fines are effectively enforced. The Committee once again requests that the Government provide information on the number of violations detected (including the number of violations relating to OSH), the number of cases filed with the labour courts and their outcome (including the number of convictions in relation to the infringements reported, amount of fines imposed, etc.).

5. The protection of workers in export processing zones (EPZs)

Articles 2, 4 and 23. Labour inspection in EPZs. The Committee notes the Government’s indications given during the discussions in the CAS that the Bangladesh Export Processing Zones Authority (BEPZA) remains responsible for ensuring the rights and privileges of the workers of enterprises operating in EPZs. The Committee further notes the conclusions of the CAS, according to which the Government should prioritize the amendments to the legislation governing EPZs, so as to bring the EPZs within the purview of the labour inspectorate. In this regard, the Committee notes the Government’s indications in its report that a separate draft Labour Act for EPZs was prepared, and is waiting for placement in Parliament for adoption. It notes that following a request made by the Government, the Office examined the draft Labour Act for EPZs, including with regard to labour inspection, and transmitted its comments to the Government.

The Committee notes that, according to the information contained on the BEPZA’s website, “the BEPZA is the official organ of the government to promote, attract and facilitate foreign investment in the EPZs. The primary objective of an EPZ is to provide special areas where potential investors would find a congenial investment climate, free from cumbersome procedures”. The Committee notes the repeated indications of the Government that the 60 counsellors working in EPZs are responsible for ensuring the rights of workers and safe and healthy working conditions.

The Committee notes that the ITUC expresses particular concern at the fact that EPZs, employing roughly 400,000 workers are still excluded from the scope of the Labour Act, and that labour inspectors therefore have no mandate to conduct labour inspections in EPZs. Counsellors undertake limited grievance handling, but there is no labour inspection in EPZs. It further notes the indications of the ITUC that the draft Labour Act for EPZs raises a number of concerns and in particular that: (i) labour inspection and enforcement in EPZs remain vested with the BEPZA without any responsibility given to labour inspectors; (ii) the powers and functions of the EPZ Labour Courts and the EPZ Labour Appellate Tribunal established under the draft Labour Act for EPZs are severely restricted in comparison with courts under the Bangladesh Labour Act (for example, workers have to seek authorization of the executive chairman of the BEPZA to bring a criminal case against an employer); and (iii) the enforcement of a number of provisions will depend on the implementing rules and regulations elaborated by the Government and the BEPZA, to which workers are not expected to be given the opportunity to contribute.

The Committee notes that the Government has not provided the requested information on the activities of the bodies responsible for inspections in EPZs; in particular it has not provided relevant statistical data, the number of industrial accidents and cases of occupational diseases. The Committee asks the Government to provide information on the measures taken so as to bring the EPZs within the purview of the labour inspectorate. In this respect, it encourages the Government to take into account the comments of the Office on the draft Labour Act for EPZs. It further requests the Government to provide information on the activities of the staff responsible for the enforcement of the legal provisions relating to conditions of work and the protection of workers in EPZs (including the number of violations detected and the penalties imposed), and statistics on the number and nature of industrial accidents and cases of occupational diseases that occurred in EPZs.

6. Publication and communication to the ILO of an annual labour inspection report

Articles 20 and 21. Publication of an annual labour inspection report. The Committee notes that once again no annual report on the work of the labour inspection services has been received by the Office. In addition, no statistical information was provided by the Government on the number of labour inspections carried out, the number of violations detected, the penalties imposed and the registered industrial accidents and cases of occupational disease. The Committee previously noted that the Government expressed the need for technical assistance for the development of improved data management systems. In this regard, the Committee notes with interest the Government’s indications that a publicly accessible database system for labour inspections in the RMG sector was launched in March 2014 with ILO technical assistance, and is now available on the website of the DIFE. The Committee notes that the website contains a list of RMG factories, the number of workers employed therein, the number of inspections carried out by the Alliance, Accord and NTPA, as well as electronic copies of inspection reports of the Alliance, Accord and NTPA in individual RMG factories (including the shortcomings identified and relevant measures recommended). It also notes the information on the total number of factories that were closed or partially closed, as a result of the inspections by the Alliance, Accord and NTPA.

The Committee notes the indications of the ITUC that reporting on labour inspection is infrequent and incomplete, and that transparency on the public and private inspection initiatives leaves much to be desired. The ITUC states the RMG sector database of the DIFE contains no information on the penalty procedures initiated, in the event of non-compliance with the legal observations detected. Noting the measures already taken in relation to the collection of inspection data in the RMG sector, the Committee asks the Government to indicate the measures taken with a view to setting up a register of all workplaces liable to inspection and the workers employed therein, as well as the collection of inspection data in other sectors. It also asks the Government to provide information on measures taken with a view to the fulfilment by the central inspection authority of its obligation to publish and transmit to the ILO an annual report in accordance with Articles 20 and 21 of the Convention. The Committee asks the Government to continue avail itself of technical assistance of the Office for this purpose.

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

[The Government is asked to report in detail in 2015.]

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

With reference to its observation, the Committee would like to raise the following additional points.

Article 3(1)(b) of the Convention. Provision of technical advice to workers and employers. The Committee notes that the Bangladesh Labour Act (BLA), in its amended version of July 2013, still does not appear to explicitly entrust labour inspectors with the function of providing advice and guidance to employers and workers. In this regard, the Committee notes the Government’s indications according to which labour inspectors are willing to provide such advice and guidance, but that their number and training is insufficient to assume this role in a satisfactory manner. The Committee once again requests the Government to indicate the legal and practical measures taken or envisaged to promote a more active role of labour inspectors in guiding and advising workers and employers and to provide detailed information on any activities of the labour inspectorate in relation to the provision of information and advice during the period covered by its next report.

Article 5(b). Collaboration with workers’ and employers’ organizations. The Committee understands from the information provided in the Government’s report that the tripartite National Health and Safety Council (NIHSC), of which the Chief Inspector of the Modernization and Strengthening of the Department of Inspection for Factories and Establishments (DIFE) is a member, is still in the process of elaborating the national occupational safety and health (OSH) policy. The Committee once again asks the Government to provide a copy of any document relating to the national OSH policy and information on its application in practice. Please also provide information on any other activities of the NIHSC in relation to labour inspection and a copy of any relevant documentation.

[The Government is asked to supply full particulars to the Conference at its 103rd Session and to report in detail in 2014.]

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

The Committee notes the Government’s reply, received by the Office on 9 February 2011, to the observations made by the Bangladesh Free Trade Union Congress (BFTUC), dated 26 August 2010, and the observations of the Bangladesh Employers’ Federation (BEF) transmitted with the Government’s report on 16 September 2012.

Articles 2, 4 and 23 of the Convention. Legislative reforms, reform of the labour inspection system and scope of labour inspection. 1. Legislative reform. The Committee notes that the Government, in reply to the observations made by the BFTUC concerning the absence of specific occupational safety and health (OSH) provisions for the various sectors now covered by the revised Bangladesh Labour Act (BLA), expresses the view that OSH issues are adequately addressed in Chapters 6, 7, 8 and 12 of the Act. In this regard, the Committee notes that the BEF emphasizes the progress already achieved through the adoption of additional provisions in several areas (OSH, social security, maternity benefits, etc.) and refers to continuing legislative reforms. The Committee notes that the Bangladesh Labour (Amendment) Act, 2013 (Act No. 30 of 2013) was adopted in July 2013 and establishes some additional requirements in the area of OSH (such as the creation of safety committees in factories with more than 50 workers, the mandatory use of personal protective equipment and the establishment of health centres in workplaces of more than 5,000 workers, etc.). The Government is requested to keep the ILO informed of any further progress made in the process of reviewing the BLA and to supply a copy of the amended text and any implementing regulations, once they have been adopted.

2. Reform of the labour inspection system. The Committee understands that the BEF emphasizes the need for the legislative amendments to be accompanied by effective labour inspection so as to ensure the effective implementation and enforcement of the new legislation. In this context, the Committee notes the Government’s indications that, in view of the large number of factories and other establishments in the country, the restructuring of the labour inspection system is currently under active consideration (according to the data provided in the Government’s report, the number of (registered) factories increased from 10,500 in 2006 to 26,463 in 2011). In this regard, the Committee notes the information provided by the Government that the Ministry of Labour and Employment (MOLE) is working on a project entitled “Modernization and Strengthening of the Department of Inspection for Factories and Establishments (DIFE)”. The Committee notes that in this framework it is envisaged to: (i) restructure the organization of the DIFE, including through the establishment of additional field and regional offices throughout the country; (ii) increase the total manpower of the DIFE; (iii) improve the material means available to; and (iv) training for labour inspectors. The Committee also notes that an increase in the budget allocated to labour inspection is envisaged for this purpose. The Committee asks the Government to keep the Office informed of any measures taken or envisaged within the proposed restructuring of the labour inspection system, with a view to strengthening it.

3. Labour inspection in export processing zones (EPZs). The Committee recalls the comments previously made by the National Coordination Committee for Workers’ Education (NCCWE), according to which EPZs are totally excluded from the scope application of national labour laws, and that there is a separate Act applicable to workers in EPZs providing for limitations of inspection.

The Committee notes the Government’s indications that industrial relations in EPZs are governed by the 2010 EPZ Workers Welfare Association and Industrial Relations Act (EWWIRA) and the “1989 Bangladesh Export Processing Zones Authority (BEPZA) Instructions (1 and 2)”. It further notes that, under section 40 of the EWWIRA, so-called counsellors are responsible for the enforcement of the EWWIRA and the BEPZA Instructions, and for ensuring the rights of workers and safe and healthy working conditions. Since June 2005, 60 counsellors have been working in the different EPZs in the country, reporting directly to the “managers for industrial relations” responsible for the respective EPZs. The Committee further notes the Government’s indications that the BEPZA conducts training programmes for the members of the elected Workers Welfare Association (WWA) and for the human resources personnel of the respective enterprises, including on OSH, industrial relations, decent working conditions, grievance handling procedures and social dialogue. The Committee also notes that the BEPZA established two training institutes in Chittagong and Dhaka, among others, to raise awareness on workers’ rights and duties.

The Committee notes from the discussions during the International Labour Conference in June 2013 on the application of the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), by Bangladesh, that the BLA is not applicable in EPZs and that, following the expiration of the EWWIRA on 31 December 2013, the Government plans to work with the ILO to find ways of bringing EPZ areas under the purview of national labour law. It also notes the actions that are being taken with assistance from the ILO and other international organizations, a broad range of countries and enterprises in the garment sector to improve safety and health, particularly following the recent events in this sector, which resulted in the deaths of more than 1,000 workers. Noting that the EWWIRA will expire on 31 December 2013, the Committee asks the Government to provide any text governing the status and conditions of service of counsellors as well as the number of counsellors currently working in EPZs and to indicate how the Government assures them stability of employment and independence of changes of government and improper external influences. Please provide further details on the reporting lines in EPZs (in particular, the body or person accountable for “managers for industrial relations”).

Furthermore, the Government is once again requested to provide information on the activities of the bodies responsible for inspections in EPZs, by submitting relevant statistical data on labour inspection activities, including on the 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. Please also provide information on the total number of workplaces in EPZs and the number of workers employed therein.

4. Labour inspection in the construction sector. The Committee previously noted the BFTUC’s comments that despite the high number of fatal casualties in the construction sector (106 registered deaths in 2009), a separate inspectorate or agency, as foreseen under the Bangladesh National Building Code (BNBC) of 1993, had not been established. In this regard, the Committee notes the Government’s indications that the DIFE assumes the function of inspection in the construction sector in practice, but only performs irregular inspections due to the lack of inspection staff. It further notes that only six cases of labour violations in this sector were recorded during the reporting period. The Committee once again asks the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to ensure that the construction sector is inspected effectively (including the establishment of a separate inspectorate or agency as foreseen under the BNBC, the increase in the number of inspections by the DIFE, the specific training of labour inspectors, etc.) and to provide relevant statistical data on the activities undertaken in this sector.

Articles 7, 10, 11 and 16. Human and material resources of the labour inspectorate. Training of labour inspectors. The Committee notes from the data provided by the Government in its report that the number of labour inspectors has increased by approximately 20 per cent (from 155 in 2006 to 185 in 2011), the number of inspection visits has almost doubled (from 35,950 in 2006 to 61,184 in 2011), and the number of registered factories liable to inspection has more than doubled (from 10,500 in 2006 to 26,463 in 2011). The Committee also notes the general information provided by the Government on the training of labour inspectors.

The Committee further notes an upward trend in the budget allocated to the DIFE, from 36,530,000 Bangladeshi takas (BDT) in 2009–10 (approximately US$468,754) to BDT50,343,000 (US$646,002) in 2011–12, which the Government still considers to be insufficient for the effective performance of labour inspection functions (this amount makes up 7 per cent of the total budget allocated to the Ministry of Labour and Employment (MOLE)). However, the Committee notes that it is envisaged, in the framework of the proposed restructuring of the labour inspection services, to increase the budget allocated to labour inspection and to provide for improved human and material resources. The Committee once again encourages the Government to do its utmost, in the framework of the restructuring of the labour inspection services, to furnish the labour inspectorate with the resources that it needs to operate effectively, in order to ensure that the number of labour inspectors is adequate in relation to the number of workplaces liable for inspection (Article 10 of the Convention), they are provided with the material means and transport facilities necessary for the performance of their duties (Article 11) and they receive adequate training for the performance of their duties (Article 7(3)).

In this regard, the Committee asks the Government to continue to provide information on the total number of labour inspectors and their distribution at headquarters and in the districts, in relation to the number of workplaces liable to inspection and the workers employed therein. Please also provide more specific information on the training that is provided during the period covered by the Government’s next report including on the frequency, subjects and duration of training, as well as on the number of participants.

Articles 9 and 14. Notification of industrial accidents and cases of occupational diseases. The Committee notes that the Government has not provided any comments in relation to the functioning of the recording of industrial accidents in practice and the presumed discrepancy between the registered numbers and actual fatalities, as indicated by the BFTUC in 2008. The Committee further notes the Government’s indications that, while it is currently working on the rules for the procedure of notification of cases of occupational diseases, in application of section 82 of the BLA, no cases of occupational diseases have yet been recorded due to the lack of staff to determine such cases and the absence of the required recording devices for this purpose. The Committee asks the Government to provide an appreciation of the functioning in practice of the reporting of industrial accidents and, where applicable, the measures taken for its improvement (awareness raising among employers concerning their obligations in this regard, sanctions imposed for non-compliance, etc.).

It asks the Government to report on progress made in the formulation of the procedural rules for the notification of cases of occupational diseases adopted pursuant to section 82 of the BLA and to provide the Office with a copy, once they are adopted. Please also provide information on any progress made in the development of a relevant system and its implementation in practice (including the recruitment of additional medical inspectors, and the conduct of, or referral for, medical exams by inspectors). In this regard, the Committee would once again like to draw the Government’s attention to the ILO code of practice on the recording and notification of occupational accidents and diseases, published in 1996, which contains useful guidance intended for those responsible for the reporting, recording and notification of occupational accidents and diseases and which can be found on the ILO website.

Articles 6, 12(1) and 15(c). Right of inspectors to enter workplaces freely. Status and conditions of service of labour inspectors and duty of confidentiality in relation to complaints. The Committee previously noted the repeated indications by the BFTUC that employers are informed in advance of the date of intended inspection visits. In this regard, the Committee notes the Government’s explanations that, while there is no requirement in the BLA to inform employers in advance about inspection visits, giving prior notice is in some cases necessary for the effective performance of inspections in practice (for instance, where the presence of the employer or his/her representative is required for access to registers and documents). It further notes the Government’s indications that both inspections with advance notice and unannounced visits without prior notice are regularly carried out.

The Committee also recalls its previous comments in which it emphasized, in the context of the comments made by the BFTUC and the NCCWE concerning the fear of workers to report breaches of the law for fear of reprisals, that the granting of appropriate status and conditions of service to labour inspectors, including appropriate wages and career prospects, in accordance with Article 6, and the requirement for labour inspectors to comply with the duty of confidentiality, under Article 15(c), are essential safeguards against improper behaviour.

In this regard, the Committee notes that the BLA, in its amended version of July 2013, still does not contain any legal requirement to refrain from disclosing the identity of the author of a complaint or from indicating that an inspection took place as a result of a complaint. Furthermore, the Government has not provided the Office with any text governing the conditions of service of labour inspectors, as requested. However, the Government states that labour inspectors are granted conditions similar to those of other Government employees, receive wages based on their length of service and have equal career prospects in accordance with the applicable rules, all of which ensures their stability of employment and their independence from improper external influences. In this regard, it notes the Government’s explanations, according to which, as the Committee understands them, the lack of material resources, including transport facilities and the absence of proper training, is more likely to threaten the observance of confidentiality in practice than the other factors mentioned above.

Considering all of the above, the Committee refers to paragraph 263 of its 2006 General Survey on labour inspection and recalls that the performance of a sufficient number of unannounced inspection visits in relation to inspections with prior notice is indeed necessary to enable labour inspectors to discharge their obligation of confidentiality with regard to the source of any complaint and also to prevent the establishment of any link between the inspection and a complaint (Article 15(c)). The Committee once again requests the Government to take appropriate measures to ensure that the duty of confidentiality regarding the existence of a complaint and its source is duly reflected in law and to provide information on the operation and impact of these measures in practice. It also asks the Government once again to keep the ILO informed of the progress made and to provide any text governing the conditions of service of labour inspectors. It also requests the Government to indicate the number of unannounced visits in relation to the total number of inspection visits during the next reporting period and to provide information on the results secured from unannounced visits (violations identified, sanctions imposed, compliance actions taken) in comparison to announced visits.

Articles 17 and 18. Legal proceedings and effective enforcement of adequate penalties. The Committee previously noted the BFTUC’s suggestions for the prosecution of breaches of national labour law, which included: (i) the creation of more labour courts, in addition to the seven labour courts already existing, which might be too remote from the main labour inspection office; and (ii) the recruitment of lawyers to represent inspectors in the filing and prosecuting of cases, which according to the BFTUC, is a function that is extremely time consuming. In this regard, the Committee notes with interest the Government’s information on the establishment of three additional labour courts in the three new administrative divisions Rangpur, Sylhet and Barisal.

The Committee also previously noted the observations made by the BFTUC according to which no cases involving a failure to comply with health and safety duties under the BLA 2006 have been filed in three of the seven labour courts. In this regard, the Government indicates that most cases lodged with the courts relate to OSH, and that the number of cases filed has increased (from 777 cases in 2009 to 1,096 cases in 2011). However, the Committee also notes the Government’s indications that, due to the lack of personnel and relevant data management systems, the cases filed could not be disaggregated according to the legal provisions to which they relate.

Finally, the Committee notes the Government’s indications that the increased level of penalties under the BLA 2006 has had a positive impact on industrial relations. In this regard, it notes that the number of inspection visits increased from 39,123 in 2008 to 61,184 in 2011; the number of violations detected increased from 52,423 in 2008 to 69,539 in 2011; the number of cases filed with the labour courts increased from 910 in 2008 to 1,558 in 2011; and the amount of the fines imposed increased from 1,214,000 Bangladeshi takas (BDT) in 2008 (approximately US$15,578) to BDT1,520,000 (approximately US$19,504) in 2011. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the number of violations detected (and the number of these violations relating to OSH), the corresponding fines issued and the number of cases filed with the labour courts and their outcome (number of convictions in relation to the infringements reported, amount of fines imposed, etc.).

Articles 20 and 21. Publication of an annual inspection report. The Committee notes that no annual report on the activities of the labour inspection services has been received by the Office and that the last annual report within the meaning of the Convention was communicated in 2003. The Committee notes that the BEF, like the Government in its previous report, emphasizes the importance of keeping systematic records of inspection data (number of inspections, violations detected, corrective measures ordered, outcomes of cases filed with the labour courts, statistics of occupational accidents and cases of occupational diseases, etc.) as a basis for evaluating the effectiveness of the activities of the labour inspection services. In this regard, it also notes that the Government’s indications on the need for technical assistance for the development of improved data management systems. The Committee once again asks the Government to indicate the measures taken with a view to setting up a register of workplaces liable to inspection and the workers employed therein (particularly through inter-institutional cooperation, as recommended in its 2009 general observation), and to provide information on any measures taken for this purpose, with a view to the fulfilment by the central inspection authority of its obligation to publish and transmit to the ILO an annual report in accordance with Articles 20 and 21 of the Convention.

Technical assistance. The Committee notes the Government’s indications on technical assistance needs in various areas, that is the restructuring of the labour inspectorate, the establishment of additional labour courts, the strengthening of the human and material resources, including measuring devices available to the labour inspectorate, training for labour inspectors and the development of improved data management systems. The Committee invites the Government to provide information on any action taken or envisaged related to labour inspection as a result of the technical assistance provided by the Office, particularly in the context of the programme to improve safety and health in the garment industry.

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

[The Government is asked to supply full particulars to the Conference at its 103rd Session and to report in detail in 2014.]

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2010, published 100th ILC session (2011)

The Committee notes the Government’s reports for 2008 and 2010. According to the Government, the latest report incorporates the comments of the Bangladesh Employers’ Federation (BEF). The Committee also notes the observations of the National Coordination Committee for Workers’ Education (NCCWE) transmitted with the Government’s report, as well as the communications of the Bangladesh Free Trade Union Congress (BFTUC) dated 31 August 2008 and 26 August 2010, which are based on the 2010 report of the Bangladesh Occupational Safety, Health and Environment Foundation (OSHE).

Further to its previous comments, the Committee notes with satisfaction that the level of penalties to be imposed for violations of labour legislation has significantly increased (see below, Article 18): The Bangladesh Labour Act (BLA) now provides for a maximum fine of 25,000 taka (approximately US$356) whereas the repealed 1965 Factories Act only provided for a maximum fine of 1,000 taka (approximately US$14).

Articles 1, 2 and 4 of the Convention. Safety and health legislation and functioning of the system of labour inspection. The Committee notes with interest that the BLA came into force in October 2006 and replaced 26 Acts, 14 Ordinances and about 35 rules and regulations, repealing among others, the 1965 Factories Act. The Act has considerably enlarged the scope of the Factories Act 1965, which applied only to factories. The new Act applies to all “establishments” defined very widely to include “shops, commercial establishments, industrial establishments or premises in which workers are employed for the purpose of carrying on any industry” (section 2(31)); “industry” is defined as meaning “[a]ny business, trade, manufacturer, calling service employment or occupation” (section 2(69)); the Act also applies to the construction industry (section 6(61)(i)). In particular, the Committee notes with interest that section 2(7) extends the scope of labour inspection to factories employing more than five workers (in contrast with the previous Act, which only covered factories employing more than ten workers).

According to the BFTUC’s comments in 2008 and 2010, while the wider scope of application of the BLA, which is currently under revision, has considerable additional impact in terms of other obligations relating to payment of wages and trade union rights, it does not represent a reform in terms of safety and health obligations. In the view of the BFTUC, the safety and health obligations in the BLA are not relevant to the conditions of workplaces other than factories (construction sites, shops, offices, etc.), due to the fact that these obligations are worded in terms almost identical to those of the Factories Act and no additional provisions which take into account the specific safety and health requirements in the various sectors now covered by the BLA have been included in the Act. The Committee requests the Government to make any observations it considers relevant in relation to the comments of the BFTUC and NCCWE and to indicate the impact of the BLA in terms of the labour inspection activities by economic sector, in particular, numbers of visits and their outcomes, as well as statistics of the violations detected, sanctions imposed and occupational accidents and diseases recorded. The Committee also requests the Government to forward any legal text adopted in the process of reviewing the BLA.

Construction sector. According to the 2010 communication of the BFTUC, at the same time as the BLA was enacted, the Government also “gazetted” the Bangladesh National Building Code (BNBC), which was drafted as early as 1993. The BNBC became law in November 2006. It contains specific health and safety provisions for the construction sector and provides for the establishment of an agency responsible for the enforcement of the code, which does not come under the responsibility of the Department of Inspection for Factories and Establishments at the Ministry for Labour and Employment (DIFE). However, the BFTUC indicates that such an inspectorate or agency has not been established so far despite the high number of fatal casualties in the sector (106 registered deaths in 2009). The Committee requests the Government to make any comments it deems appropriate in relation to the allegations of the BFTUC. It also requests the Government to furnish a copy of the BNBC and to specify its relationship to the BLA. Please also indicate the measures taken or envisaged to ensure that the construction sector is effectively inspected, and provide relevant statistical data regarding inspection visits and their outcomes, as well as occupational accidents and diseases in this sector.

Labour inspection in export processing zones (EPZs). The Committee notes that, according to the NCCWE, EPZs are totally excluded from the labour law and there is a separate Act for workers in EPZs, which includes limitations for inspection. The Committee requests the Government to make any observations it considers relevant to the comments of the BFTUC and NCCWE, to specify the body responsible for inspection in EPZs, to give an overview of its activities (inspection visits, violations reported, legal provisions concerned, types of sanctions imposed) and to provide relevant statistical data.

Article 3(1)(b) and (c). Provision of technical advice to workers and employers. The Committee notes that the BFTUC continues to deplore that labour inspectors fail to provide sufficient advice and guidance to employers and indicates that no advice or guidance literature for workers and employers has been produced by the Government. It points out that the BLA – in the same way as the repealed Factories Act 1965 – does not explicitly entrust labour inspectors with the function of providing advice and guidance to employers and workers. However, the Committee notes from an annotated version of the BLA available at the ILO that, as a result of case law, inspectors are expected to give advice and guidance in the course of the discharge of their enforcement duties. Recalling that enforcement and the provision of information and advice are two inseparable functions of a labour inspection system, the Committee requests the Government to provide detailed information on the activities of the labour inspectorate in relation to the provision of information and advice and to indicate the legislative and practical measures taken or envisaged to promote a more active role of labour inspectors in guiding and advising workers and employers, especially on the recently adopted labour legislation.

In this context, and further to its previous comments (in 2006), the Committee once again asks the Government to provide copies of the basic texts of the project “Improvement of the working environment, health and safety in factories” carried out in collaboration with the World Health Organization, together with information on the progress made in the framework of this project in terms of cooperation with the social partners to improve health and safety conditions at work and in terms of reducing the number of industrial accidents and cases of occupational disease.

Article 3(2). Additional functions entrusted to labour inspectors. The Committee notes that, according to Chapter XX, section 317(3)(e) of the BLA, labour inspectors are entrusted with the function of conciliation in industrial disputes. As indicated in paragraphs 72–74 of the General Survey of 2006 on labour inspection, the Committee would like to stress that conciliation is not among the duties of the labour inspectorate as defined in Article 3(1) of the Convention. It recalls the importance of avoiding overburdening inspectorates with tasks which by their nature may be understood as incompatible with their primary function of enforcing legal provisions, as provided for in Article 3(2). The assignment of the conciliation of industrial disputes to any other body or officials would enable labour inspectors to carry out their supervisory function more consistently, resulting in better enforcement of labour legislation and hence a lower incidence of labour disputes. In this regard, the Committee draws the Government’s attention to Paragraph 8 of the Labour Inspection Recommendation, 1947 (No. 81), according to which “the functions of labour inspectors should not include that of acting as conciliator or arbitrator in proceedings concerning labour disputes”. The Committee thus requests the Government to take all the necessary legislative and practical measures to relieve labour inspection staff of all conciliation duties and to enable labour inspectors to devote themselves more fully to supervising the legislation on working conditions and the protection of workers, in conformity with Article 3(2).

Article 5(b) Collaboration with workers’ and employers’ organizations. The Committee notes that section 323 of the BLA provides for the establishment of a tripartite national council for industrial health and safety and that section 323(2)(j) provides that the current labour chief inspector will be a member and secretary of this council. It further notes with interest that, according to the communication of the BFTUC in 2010, the Tripartite National Industrial Health and Safety Council has been set up and has elaborated a national policy for occupational safety and health in industrial establishments. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide a copy of any document relating to the national policy for occupational safety and health, together with information on its application in practice. It asks the Government to provide information on any other activities of the Council in relation to labour inspection and a copy of any relevant documentation.

Article 14. Notification of industrial accidents and occupational diseases. Further to its previous comments, in which it asked the Government to take steps to secure the adoption of legal provisions setting forth the instances and the manner in which the labour inspectorate must be informed of cases of occupational diseases, the Committee notes with interest that the BLA contains, in sections 80 and 82, a reporting obligation for employers with regard to both occupational accidents and occupational diseases and provides in section 290 for a penalty for the failure of employers to give notice of an occupational accident. It further notes that, whereas section 80 provides for the period in which the labour inspectorate must be informed of industrial accidents, as far as the reporting of occupational diseases is concerned, section 82 provides that the form and time limits for the notification of occupational diseases shall be regulated by rules. The Committee notes, however that, according to information communicated by the BFTUC in 2008, the reporting of occupational accidents does not function well in practice and that the registered numbers do not seem to correspond with actual fatalities. The Committee requests the Government to make any comment it considers relevant on the points raised by the BFTUC. It asks the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged, including the rules to be issued under section 82 of the BLA, for the notification of occupational diseases, and to provide information on any progress in the development of a relevant system and its implementation in practice. The Committee would like to draw the Government’s attention in this regard to the ILO code of practice on the recording and notification of occupational accidents and diseases, published in 1996, which contains useful recommendations intended for those responsible for the reporting, recording and notification of occupational accidents and diseases and which can be found at: www.ilo.org/safework/normative/codes/lang--en/docName--WCMS_
107800/index.htm.

Articles 6 and 15(c). Probity of labour inspectors and duty of confidentiality in relation to complaints. Further to their previous comments, the BFTUC and the NCCWE continue to question the probity of inspectors who, after the reform of the BLA, are still under no legal obligation to refrain from disclosing the identity of the author of a complaint or from indicating that an inspection took place as a result of a complaint. While the Government states that, in practice, inspectors do not disclose the identity of the complainant, the trade unions indicate that workers prefer not to report breaches of the law by employers for fear of reprisals. The Committee recalls that the granting of the appropriate status and conditions of service to labour inspectors, including appropriate wages and career prospects, in accordance with Article 6, and the obligation for labour inspectors to comply with the duty of confidentiality, under Article 15(c), are essential safeguards against improper behaviour. It notes that, although under the terms of section 334 of the BLA inspectors shall be deemed to be public servants, there has been no apparent progress with regard to the issues raised previously by the BFTUC concerning the level of their salary and the absence of career prospects. The Committee asks the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to ensure that the conditions of service of inspectors are such that they are assured of stability of employment and independence from any improper external influence, especially through appropriate wage levels and career prospects. Furthermore, the Committee requests the Government to take, without delay, appropriate steps aimed at supplementing the law to ensure that the duty of confidentiality regarding the existence of a complaint and its source is duly respected by labour inspectors. It asks the Government to keep the ILO informed of the progress made and to provide any text governing the conditions of service of labour inspectors.

Articles 7, 10, 11 and 16. Human and material resources of the labour inspectorate. Training of labour inspectors. According to the BFTUC, while the budget allocation to labour inspection has further increased, it represents a mere 0.004 per cent of total government expenditure. The BFTUC is of the view that the lack of financing of the labour inspectorate has less to do with the lack of resources and more with the lack of interest and commitment over the years to improving workers’ safety. The NCCWE also refers to the lack of authority and accountability of the labour inspection department. While a table included in the observations made by the BTFUC shows that the number of labour inspectors has risen from 78 in 2006 to 93 in 2010, the trade union regrets the absence of significant progress in giving effect to the repeated commitments of the Government to increase labour inspection staff, and especially the staff of the occupational safety and health inspectorate where numbers have remained the same over the last 26 years. The Committee notes that the Government, in its 2010 report, acknowledges that the number of labour inspectors is insufficient in relation to the number of workplaces liable to inspection which, according to the 2010 communication by the BTFUC, has further increased, without providing information concerning its indication in its 2008 report that 48 new labour inspectors would be recruited.

Moreover, according to the comments made by the BFTUC and the NCCWE in 2010, the Government has failed to take any visible steps to modernize the infrastructure of the labour inspectorate. Despite the acquisition of some new sound and light equipment through an international donor, there continues to be a lack of logistical support (transport facilities, training materials, necessary equipments for examinations or testing). With regard to the allegations previously made by the BFTUC, the Government acknowledges the lack of proper vehicles, but refers, in a general manner, to the provision of travelling allowances to labour inspectors and denies that employers cover any travelling expenses of labour inspectors.

Finally, the Committee notes that the BFTUC again refers to the inadequacy of training in the light of the rapid changes in technology and methods of work in all sectors of the economy. It notes in this regard the information provided by the Government in 2008 and 2010 that, in addition to the initial one-month training at the Industrial Relations Institute (IRI) and the 15 days’ in-house training offered by the senior officials of the DIFE, labour inspectors are provided with regular training courses by the IRI and other government training institutions, as well as training financed by organizations such as the German Society for Technical Cooperation (GTZ) or the ILO. It, however, acknowledges that inspectors are not sufficiently trained for the discharge of their duties. The Committee encourages the Government to do its utmost to furnish the labour inspectorate with the resources that it needs to operate effectively, if necessary within the framework of international financial cooperation, in order to ensure that the number of labour inspectors is adequate in relation to the number of workplaces liable for inspection (Article 10 of the Convention), that they are provided with the material means and transport facilities necessary for the performance of their duties (Article 11) and that they receive adequate training for the performance of their duties (Article 7(3)). The Government is requested to provide information on:

–           the total number of labour inspectors and their distribution at headquarters and in the various field, regional and branch offices, in relation to the number of workplaces liable to inspection and the workers employed therein, as provided for in Article 10(a)(i) and (ii);

–           the amounts and conditions for the reimbursement of travel costs and allowances to labour inspectors, including a copy of a reimbursement form; and

–           the frequency, content and duration of training, as well as the number of participants and the practical impact of such training.

Article 12(1). Right of inspectors to enter workplaces freely. The Committee notes the repeated indications by the BFTUC that employers are informed of the date of intended inspection visits. The Committee would like to draw the Government’s attention to the fact that it is important that there should be no prior notification of inspection visits to the employer or her or his representative, unless the labour inspector deems such notification necessary for the effectiveness of the control to be performed. The Committee asks the Government to take the necessary steps to secure the full effect in law and in practice of Article 12(1) of the Convention and to provide a copy of any relevant legal or administrative text adopted to this end.

Article 17. Prompt legal proceedings. Modifications in the procedure for the prosecution of violations of national labour provisions. The Committee notes that there have been some modifications in the procedure for the prosecution of violations of national labour provisions. Whereas, under section 107(2) of the 1965 Factories Act, only the magistrate’s court had jurisdiction over an offence under this Act or any rules or orders made thereunder, section 313(1) of the BLA now establishes the jurisdiction of labour courts for offences under the BLA. Further, whereas under section 107(1) of the Factories Act, prosecutions could only be initiated by labour inspectors, under section 313(2) of the BLA, aggrieved workers and trade unions can now also initiate court proceedings. The Committee notes the suggestions made by the BFTUC with regard to the prosecution of breaches of labour law, namely: (i) the creation of more labour courts, in addition to the seven labour courts already existing in the country, which might be far away from the main office; and (ii) the recruitment of lawyers to represent inspectors in the filing and prosecuting of cases which, according to the BFTUC, is a function that is extremely time consuming. The Committee further notes that the trade union regrets that no prosecutions involving breaches of health and safety duties have been filed under the BLA in three of the seven labour courts. The Committee asks the Government to provide information on the total number of cases filed by labour inspectors, and to provide particulars of the classification of such infringements according to the legal provisions to which they relate, and to ensure that this information is included in the annual report sent to the ILO. Further, the Committee would be grateful if the Government would send any information or comments in reply to the suggestions made by the BFTUC.

Article 18. Adequate penalties. With regard to the increase of the level of penalties noted at the beginning of this comment, the Committee further notes that the BLA also introduces new offences for violations, for example as regards the causing of fatalities and serious bodily injuries by employers through the breach of an obligation under the BLA, or the failure by employers to report an occupational accident. The Committee asks the Government once again to provide available information on the number and level of the penalties imposed for offences reported by labour inspectors and to ensure that this information is included in the annual report sent to the ILO. Please also indicate the impact of the increased penalties on the observance of labour law.

Articles 20 and 21. Publication of an annual report. According to the Government, the collection of comprehensive data for the publication of regular annual reports is hampered by the low number of labour inspectors and inspection visits. Noting, however, that the Government is aware of the importance of keeping registers containing useful data, the Committee would like to stress that one of the aims of Articles 20 and 21 is to allow the central inspection authority to gather the information needed to determine, in the light of the social and economic objectives of labour inspection, the resources required to operate the services efficiently and to submit appropriate budgetary proposals for the attainment of these objectives. Referring to its comment under Articles 7, 10, 11 and 16, the Committee once again emphasizes the importance of increasing the budget allocated to the labour inspectorate. It again asks the Government to take the necessary measures for the establishment of a register of workplaces liable to inspection and of the workers employed therein (particularly through inter-institutional cooperation as recommended in its 2009 general observation), and to provide information on any measures taken for this purpose, with a view to the fulfilment by the central inspection authority of its obligation to publish and transmit to the International Labour Office an annual report in accordance with Articles 20 and 21 of the Convention.

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

The Committee notes the Government’s report received by the ILO on 29 September 2008 in reply to its comments of 2006. It also notes that the Bangladesh Free Trade Union Congress (BFTUC) issued a comment on 30 August 2008 concerning the application of this Convention, which the ILO sent to the Government on 17 September. The Committee will examine the Government’s report together with the comment from the trade union organization, as well as any comment which the Government may wish to make on the matters raised by it, at its next session.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2006, published 96th ILC session (2007)

The Committee refers the Government to its observation and requests it to provide information on the following matters.

1. Legislation enforceable by labour inspectors. The Committee notes with interest the adoption of a new Labour Code. It would be grateful if the Government would indicate whether the new Code is now in force, and to provide a copy of it.

2. Articles 10 and 16 of the Convention. Appropriate numbers of labour inspectors. The Committee notes that in reply to its previous comments, the Government states its firm intention of increasing the labour inspectorate both in quality and in quantity, and that a concrete proposal of the Inspection Directorate is under consideration by the Government. It also states that ILO technical assistance could make an important contribution to improving the effectiveness of the labour inspection system, inter alia, through appropriate training for human resource development and the provision of modern technology for the Inspection Directorate. The Committee hopes that the Government will not fail to indicate the measures taken to put its intentions into effect and that it will report on them to the ILO. It asks the Government also to provide all useful information on any progress made and on difficulties encountered. Please also provide particulars of the strength of the labour inspectorate, its geographical distribution and, if appropriate, the distribution of duties.

With reference to its previous comments, the Committee again asks the Government to supply information on the effect given to the proposal by the Bangladesh Employers’ Federation regarding its involvement in inspection activities, referred to by the Government in its report for 2001, and to provide details on the purpose, extent and implications of such involvement if it already exists.

3. Articles 3(b), 13 and 14. Health and safety protection. The Committee notes that the Government is committed to ensuring decent working conditions at workplaces, which should be free from all hazards, including occupational accidents and diseases. Noting the information that the relevant legal provisions are being amended accordingly and that the number of medical inspectors is being increased, it requests the Government to provide copies of the relevant legal provisions in the versions currently in force.

The Committee notes with interest that the Inspection Directorate of the Government is conducting a series of training programmes under a project entitled “Improvement of the working environment, health and safety in the factories”, in collaboration with the World Health Organization (WHO) and that a project on occupational safety and health is being implemented by the Health Directorate of the Government in which the Department of Labour and the Inspection Directorate are participating regularly. The Committee asks the Government to provide copies of the basic texts of the abovementioned projects, together with information on progress made since the launch of these projects in terms of cooperation with the social partners to improve health and safety conditions at work and in terms of reducing the number of industrial accidents and the cases of occupational disease. Please also provide particulars of the content and duration of the training set up by the Inspection Directorate, and the number and functions of the persons attending the training.

4. Article 14. Notification of industrial accidents. The Committee notes with concern that unlike industrial accidents, cases of occupational disease are not normally notified, which is contrary to the Convention. The Committee cannot overemphasize the social and economic interest of developing a system for informing and sensitizing employers and workers about such matters, and of enabling labour inspectors to carry out health and safety supervision in such a way as to contribute to reducing occupational risks liable to cause specific diseases. It would be grateful if the Government would take steps to secure the adoption of legal provisions setting forth the instances and the manner in which the labour inspectorate must be informed of cases of occupational disease and to make inspectors responsible for providing information and technical advice to employers and workers in order to heighten their awareness of such matters.

5. Article 18. Effective enforcement of appropriate penalties. According to the Government, the level of penalties and fines has been raised sufficiently in the new Labour Code, on the basis of a tripartite consensus, keeping in view the severity of the violations. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide copies of the relevant laws and regulations. Please also provide any available regional or national statistics on the number and seriousness of the penalties actually applied for offences reported by labour inspectors, and to indicate progress made in terms of better observance of the law thanks to the updating of penalties.

6. Article 21. Annual labour inspection report. The Committee hopes that the Government will shortly publish and send to the ILO, as it said it would, an annual report on the work of the inspection services containing the information required by Article 21(a) to (g). It would be grateful if the Government would present this information, as far as possible, in the manner proposed in Recommendation No. 81.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2006, published 96th ILC session (2007)

The Committee notes the Government’s report for the period ending on 30 October 2006. It also notes the observations on the application of the Convention received on 28 August 2006 from the Jatiya Sramik League, the Bangladesh Trade Union Kendra, the Jatiya Sramik Federation Bangladesh, the Jatiyo Sramik Jote, the Bangladesh Free Trade Union Congress, the Bangladesh Labour Federation and the Bangladesh Jatiya Sramik Federation. The Committee notes that the report sent by the above organizations is based on research carried out from May to August 2006 by the Bangladesh Occupational Safety, Health and Environment Foundation (OSHE) and the Centre for Corporate Accountability. It addresses matters raised by the Government in its report and draws, inter alia, on interviews with inspectors and workers and on available literature.

1. Article 10 of the Convention. Budget and number of inspectors. According to the abovementioned organizations, the budget for labour inspection is clearly insufficient despite a recent increase. Furthermore, there are not enough inspectors in charge of enforcement to meet requirements, as many posts remain vacant and inspectors specialized in particular issues. In terms of human and material resources for the inspection of occupational safety and health, there has been no change in the last 20 years, whereas the number of registered premises has increased by 67 per cent and the number of workers in the same period by 140 per cent. Ever since a major industrial accident caused 58 deaths in a garment factory, inspectors, including dock inspectors, now inspect only garment factories.

2. Article 7. Training of labour inspectors. According to the abovementioned organizations, inspectors receive one month’s induction training at the Industrial Relations Institute, which may be the only training they receive in the course of their career; this is inadequate in view of the great variety of industries and the production technologies used in them.

3. Article 11. Availability of material resources and refunding of transport costs. According to the above organizations, inspectors’ offices are not well equipped, inspectors do not have access to vehicles in order to undertake inspections, expenses are paid only if the factory is within 5 kilometres of the divisional office and the process for repayment of expenses can be very long-winded. More often than not, inspectors are unable to take with them certain types of equipment for technical inspections. In some regions, where inspectors have to travel up to 200 kilometres to visit a factory, they expect employers to pay their expenses.

4. Article 3, paragraph 1(b) and (c). Provision of technical advice to workers and employers, and improvement of labour legislation. The above organizations regret that the technical advice provided to workers and employers is limited and there is no mechanism to ensure that such guidance, particularly on occupational safety and health, where there has been no new legislation since 1979 is presented clearly.

5. Article 6 and Article 15(c). Probity and observance of confidentiality regarding the source of complaints. There appears to be a climate of suspicion regarding the probity of inspectors, who are under no legal obligation to refrain from disclosing the identity of the author of a complaint or indicating that the inspection took place as a result of a complaint. Consequently, workers prefer not to report breaches of the law by the employer for fear of reprisals.

6. Article 17. Prompt legal proceedings. Although, under the legislation, employers who break the law may be prosecuted immediately and without previous warning, in practice it would appear that inspectors systematically give employers an opportunity to remedy matters before prosecuting. Inspectors prosecute cases themselves without any help from lawyers. However, they seldom do so because of constraints such as these and in particular when cases are adjourned time and again and courts are far away from the main office.

7. Article 18. Adequate penalties. According to the abovementioned report, the law provides for a maximum fine which is negligible in amount and thus too small to provide the appropriate deterrent effect required by the Convention.

The Committee trusts that the Government will not fail to send any information or comments it deems useful in reply to each of the points raised by the abovementioned organizations, together with such relevant documentation as it is able to provide.

The Committee is addressing a request directly to the Government on the application of certain provisions of the Convention.

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

The Committee notes that the Government’s report only replies in part to its previous comments.

Articles 10 and 16 of the Convention. Appropriate numbers of labour inspectors. The Committee notes once again that financial restrictions are continuing to have a severe impact on the availability of human resources in the field of labour inspection. Drawing the Government’s attention to the possibility of seeking international financial cooperation with a view to fulfilling the material requirements of the Convention, the Committee would also like to emphasize that technical assistance from the ILO could make an important contribution to improving the effectiveness of the labour inspection system. It therefore urges the Government to take all the necessary measures to this end and to inform the Office of the results achieved. Furthermore, it would be grateful if the Government would provide details as to the meaning and the scope of the involvement, referred to in a previous report, of the Bangladesh Employers’ Federation in inspection activities.

Articles 9, 13 and 14. Health and safety protection. The Committee notes with interest that there are between ten and 12 medical inspectors, in accordance with the provisions of the Factories Act, 1965, and to help with casualties of industrial accidents and occupational diseases. With reference to its 2002 observation, the Committee once again asks the Government to provide information on any further legal and practical measures taken to decrease the number of occupational accidents and diseases.

Articles 17 and 18. Effectiveness of legal proceedings and appropriate penalties. The Committee notes that, under section 96 of the Factories Act, 1965, any person who obstructs a labour inspector in the discharge of her or his duties shall be liable to a fine of up to 500 Taka or three months of imprisonment. The Committee recalls that, as indicated in paragraph 263 of its General Survey of 1985 on labour inspection, it is essential for the effectiveness of inspection services that penalties should be fixed at a sufficiently high level to have a dissuasive effect and for the rates of fines to be periodically reviewed so as to meet this objective. In this regard, the Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide information and clarifications on how effect is given to the above provisions of the Convention and indicate any measures taken or envisaged to ensure that the amounts of fines are periodically reviewed so that they meet the objectives described above, despite monetary inflation.

Article 21. Annual labour inspection report. Noting the statement by the Government that appropriate measures have been taken to publish an annual general labour inspection report, the Committee expresses the firm hope that such a report will soon be sent to the ILO and that it will include as many data as possible as required under points (a) to (g) of Article 21.

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

The Committee notes the Government’s report. It requests the Government to provide further information on the following points.

Articles 10 and 16 of the Convention. Further to its previous comments, the Committee notes that due to the financial constraints, the Government could not strengthen the staff of the inspection service, but that it intends to consider the proposal made by the Bangladesh Employers’ Federation (BEF) to involve itself in inspection activities. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide details concerning this proposition of the BEF.

Article 14. The Committee notes that, even though according to the annual inspection report for 1999 there were no occupational diseases reported, it did not, however, signify that there were none but indicated that employers were not sufficiently informed and advised about the pertinent procedures. The Committee therefore requests the new Government to keep the Office informed of all progress made in tracking down occupational diseases.

Article 20. The Committee notes the information contained in the annual inspection report. It requests the Government to indicate the manner in which this report, which expresses in its preface the hope that it will be useful to employers, workers and people in charge of labour administration, is made accessible to them.

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

The Committee notes the information contained in the Government’s reports. It requests the Government to provide detailed information on the points raised below.

Labour inspection and child labour.  The Committee notes with interest the information in the Government’s most recent report on the inspection activities tending to the elimination of child labour. Referring also to its 1999 general observation under the Convention, the Committee requests the Government to continue to provide in its next reports detailed information on this matter.

Articles 10, 11 and 16.  The Committee notes the information in the Government’s reports in reply to its previous comments. It notes that the number of registered factories, shops and establishments, which are liable to inspection, has been continuously increased, while the number of inspectors has remained unchanged since 1992 (103 inspectors). Noting that the Government’s most recent report supplies no information on measures taken or envisaged with regard to the increase of inspection staff to which the Government referred in previous reports, the Committee requests the Government to provide full particulars in this regard.

Article 13.  Further to its previous comments, the Committee notes the information supplied by the Government concerning the powers of labour inspectors related to this Article. It would appreciate if the Government would indicate whether, according to Article 13(2)(b), inspectors have the power to make or have made orders requiring measures with immediate executory force in the event of imminent danger to the health or safety of the workers. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would also supply copy of the relevant legislation.

Noting in the Government’s reports that a tripartite committee has been set up to review all existing labour laws in the light of the ratified Conventions and of Recommendations, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on any progress made in this regard.

Article 14.  The Committee notes the information that the Government is making efforts to improve the process of detecting occupational diseases through special inspection programmes by the medical part of the inspection authority. It requests the Government to supply information on any progress made in this regard.

Articles 20 and 21.  In accordance with the provisions of these Articles, the central authority should publish an annual general report on the work of the inspection services under its control (Article 20) and transmit a copy to the ILO. The annual reports should also include the information required on the subjects enumerated under Article 21. Noting that no annual report has been transmitted to the ILO since the one for 1993 and that the Government’s recent reports contain only limited information on the subjects listed under Article 21, the Committee requests the Government to take appropriate measures for annual reports containing information on each of the subjects listed in points (a) to (g) of Article 21 be published and submitted to the ILO on a regular basis.

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

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:

Articles 10, 11 and 16 of the Convention. Further to its previous comments, the Committee notes with interest the indication in the Government's most recent report that due to the increase in the workload of the labour inspectorate, a proposal to expand the inspection services is under active consideration by a committee set up by the Government. The Committee hopes these developments will result in permitting the Government to take the necessary measures to expand the staff of the inspectorate and thus increase the number and frequency of inspections. Please provide full particulars with the next report.

Article 13. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in reply to its previous comments. It would like to refer to the general nature of the powers given to inspectors under section 26 of the Shops and Establishment Act, 1965, and further notes that any expanded powers they may have under section 14(3) of the Payment of Wages Act, 1936, are limited to questions of wages. The Committee hopes that the Government will consider taking measures to provide inspectors with all necessary powers to make or to have made orders including for measures with immediate executory force regarding matters other than wages. Please provide full particulars in this respect in the next report.

Article 14. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in reply to its previous comments, and in particular the fact that while industrial accidents are reported, reports on occupational diseases are seldom available, possibly due to inadequate diagnosis and the general attitude of not reporting such cases. The Committee notes with interest the information that the Government expects the situation to improve considerably with the implementation of its small-scale project on occupational health analysis and accident prevention training. Please supply information on any progress made in this regard.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1995, published 83rd ILC session (1996)

Articles 10, 11 and 16 of the Convention. Further to its previous comments, the Committee notes with interest the indication in the Government's most recent report that due to the increase in the workload of the labour inspectorate, a proposal to expand the inspection services is under active consideration by a committee set up by the Government. The Committee hopes these developments will result in permitting the Government to take the necessary measures to expand the staff of the inspectorate and thus increase the number and frequency of inspections. Please provide full particulars with the next report.

Article 13. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in reply to its previous comments. It would like to refer to the general nature of the powers given to inspectors under section 26 of the Shops and Establishment Act, 1965, and further notes that any expanded powers they may have under section 14(3) of the Payment of Wages Act, 1936, are limited to questions of wages. The Committee hopes that the Government will consider taking measures to provide inspectors with all necessary powers to make or to have made orders including for measures with immediate executory force regarding matters other than wages. Please provide full particulars in this respect in the next report.

Article 14. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in reply to its previous comments, and in particular the fact that while industrial accidents are reported, reports on occupational diseases are seldom available, possibly due to inadequate diagnosis and the general attitude of not reporting such cases. The Committee notes with interest the information that the Government expects the situation to improve considerably with the implementation of its small-scale project on occupational health analysis and accident prevention training. Please supply information on any progress made in this regard.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1994, published 81st ILC session (1994)

Articles 10, 11 and 16 of the Convention. Further to its previous comments, the Committee notes from the Government's report that it is currently studying two schemes for the expansion of the labour inspectorate by strengthening the Department of Inspection for Factories and Establishments, and by instituting a training programme on health analysis and prevention. It notes from the 1992 annual inspection report that the number of inspectors has remained unchanged while there has been a steady growth in the number of new shops liable to inspection. While the Committee notes the improvements in the efficiency of inspection and the growth in the number of cases brought to courts, it hopes the Government will still increase the number of inspectors to ensure that inspections of workplaces are as often and as thorough as is necessary. Please provide all details with the next report.

Article 13. The Committee notes the information provided in reply to its previous comments. It hopes the Government will continue to supply data as to the operation of the Shops and Establishments Act, and that it will give further consideration to the need to ensure inspectors have all necessary powers to make or have made orders to remedy defects.

Article 14. Please provide particulars on the measures taken or envisaged to ensure that the inspectorate is notified of all industrial accidents and cases of occupational disease as required by this Article.

Article 15. The Committee has noted the provisions of the Government Servants (Conduct) Rules, 1979.

Article 21. The Committee notes with interest the information provided by the Government in reply to its previous comments. It hopes future inspection reports will include, as promised by the Government, all available information and in particular statistics of occupational diseases (Article 21(g)). Please supply information on any measures taken to ensure that legal provisions relating to health and occupational diseases are duly enforced.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1992, published 79th ILC session (1992)

Articles 10, 11 and 16 of the Convention. Further to its previous comments, the Committee notes the information provided in the Annual Report for the Year 1988 of the Department of Inspection for Factories and Establishments. In addition, the Government states that, although it is keen to expand the labour inspectorate, this has not been possible because of financial constraints. The Committee hopes the Government will continue to provide information on developments, bearing in mind the Convention's requirements.

Article 13. In its earlier comments, the Committee observed that the Shops and Establishments Act does not empower inspectors to make or have made orders to remedy defects. In its report, the Government states that it is not felt necessary to supplement the Act in this respect. The Committee hopes the Government will consider the matter further, with a view to taking the measures necessary to ensure inspectors have all the powers required by the Convention in respect of commercial workplaces. Meanwhile, the Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide available information on the practical application of this Article in workplaces covered by the Shops and Establishments Act.

Article 15. The Committee notes that the text of the Government Servants' Conduct Rules, to which the Government refers, was not enclosed with the report. It once again requests the Government to furnish this text with its next report.

Articles 3(1)(a) and 21. Further to its observation, the Committee notes that no statistics of occupational diseases are included in the annual report for 1988 (Article 21(g)). It hopes the Government will supply information on any measures taken to ensure that legal provisions relating to health and occupational diseases are duly enforced. It hopes future inspection reports will include all available information in this respect.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1992, published 79th ILC session (1992)

Articles 20 and 21 of the Convention. The Committee notes with interest the useful information provided by the Government in the Annual Report for the Year 1988 of the Department of Inspection for Factories and Establishments, the first received for some time, and that the report for 1989 has been under compilation. It hopes that reports of this kind will be published and sent within the time-limits required by the Convention.

The Committee is also addressing comments on the application of the Convention directly to the Government.

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

Articles 10, 11 and 16 of the Convention. With reference to its previous comments, the Committee notes from the Government's report that, owing to financial constraints, it has not been possible to take measures to strengthen the Department of Inspection. It trusts that, in its next report, the Government will be able to provide information on the progress made in this connection.

Article 13. The Committee notes that, despite repeated assurances by the Government that the Shops and Establishments Act would be supplemented by provisions conferring on labour inspectors the powers provided for in this Article of the Convention, no measures have yet been taken. It hopes that the Government will take appropriate measures in the near future.

Article 15. The Committee notes that the text of the Government Servants' Conduct Rules to which the Government refers, was not enclosed with the report. It requests the Government to furnish this text with its next report.

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

Articles 20 and 21 of the Convention. The Committee notes with regret that no progress has been made with regard to publication of the annual reports on the work of the labour inspection services. It trusts that the Government will not delay in taking the necessary measures to ensure that these reports containing, in particular, statistical data on the points listed at Article 21 are published, placed at the disposal of the persons concerned and transmitted to the International Labour Office within the period laid down by Article 20.