Labour Inspection Convention, 1947 (No. 81) - Peru (Ratification: 1960)

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

Previous comment

The Committee notes the observations of the National Confederation of Private Business’ Institutions (CONFIEP), received on 31 August 2023.

The Committee notes the Government’s reply, in its report, to the observations made by the Autonomous Workers’ Confederation of Peru (CATP) in 2020. It particularly notes the following: (i) while Legislative Decree No. 1499 of May 2020 amended section 6 of the General Labour Inspection Act, the labour inspectorate provides guidance and technical assistance, including for enterprises and workers with the aim of promoting compliance with the regulations under section 3(2.1) of the General Labour Inspection Act; (ii) labour inspection is carried out in enterprises, work sites and, in general, places in which work is performed, even when the employer is in the public sector or companies in the State enterprise sector, which are governed by the labour legislation regulating private activities, (section 4(1) of the General Labour Inspection Act); and (iii) regarding the safety and health conditions of labour inspectors, including during the COVID-19 pandemic, the Government indicates that the occupational safety and health policy of the National Labour Inspection Authority (SUNAFIL) was approved by Decision of the Board of Directors No. 06-2022-SUNAFIL/PCD, of 11 November 2022. In this regard, the Government adds that SUNAFIL implemented a series of measures with the aim of ensuring occupational safety and health conditions, including: the provision of personal protective equipment for inspection personnel, as well as in central and local inspection offices; dissemination of visual material and the organization of discussions with the aim of educating and raising awareness among officials within the context of the COVID-19 pandemic; the conduct of COVID-19 elimination campaigns; the implementation of measures such as temperature checks, physical distancing and isolation; and the provision of training on occupational safety and health. Regarding the activities of SUNAFIL’s Training and Capacity-building Centre for the Labour Inspection System, the Committee refers to its comments under Article 7(3) below.

Articles 3(1) and 16 of Convention No. 81. Inspections in the mining sector. The Committee notes that, in its observations of 2023, the CATP expresses concern at the fact that, while the legislation does not exempt mining and transport enterprises or parts of these enterprises from the purview of the labour inspectorate, occupational safety and health inspection in small-scale and informal mining is not within the competence of SUNAFIL, but rather within that of regional governments through the Regional Office or Directorate for Energy and Mining (section 11 of the Regulations on Occupational Safety and Health in Mining, approved by Supreme Decree No. 024-2016-EM). The CATP indicates in particular that, due to the lack of SUNAFIL’s preventive and inspection powers, there have been many deaths in the sector, such as those of 27 miners in Yanaquihua resulting from the inhalation of carbon monoxide in a mining accident. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments in this regard. The Committee also refers to its comments on the Safety and Health in Mines Convention, 1995 (No. 176).

Article 4. Central authority. The Committee notes that, in its 2023 observations, the CATP indicates that SUNAFIL does not have permanent competence or functions in the area of labour inspection. Specifically, it indicates that section 3 of Act No. 30814 on strengthening the labour inspection system, of 5 July 2018, provides for the temporary assignment to SUNAFIL for a period of eight years as from the entry into force of the Act of competences and functions in the field of inspection which were the responsibility of regional governments. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments in this respect.

Articles 5(a), 12(1)(a) and 18 of the Convention. Effective cooperation between the inspection services and other government services and public or private institutions engaged in similar activities. Freedom of access to workplaces liable to inspection. Obstruction of inspectors in the performance of their duties. Further to its previous comments, the Committee notes that the Government indicates in its report that the joint interventions by the labour inspectorate and the National Police on fundamental rights, forced labour and/or child labour are carried out periodically, and generally also involve the participation of the Public Prosecutor’s Office or other competent entities. In particular, the Government indicates that, according to the records of the labour inspectorate’s integrated computer system, during the period 2022-23, a total of 1,044 inspections were conducted with the intervention or support of the National Police (944 in 2022). Regarding the obstruction of labour inspectors in their duties, the Committee notes that the Government refers to sections 45 and 46 of the Regulations to the General Labour Inspection Act, which cover serious and very serious infringements in such cases. In this respect, the Government indicates that, in the context of the inspections in which the National Police also participated, the matters addressed are related to child labour and forced labour, and that, since 2022, 15 inspection infringement reports have been issued, nine of which proposed a fine for obstruction of labour inspection, four for hazardous work and two for child labour. Lastly, regarding the safety and security of labour inspectors, the Committee notes that the Government refers to section 15(15)(2) of the Regulations to the General Labour Inspection Act, which establishes that the authorities and the National Police shall provide the assistance and cooperation required by labour inspectors for the discharge of their investigation duties. It also indicates that, under section 7.12.3.2 of Directive No. 001-2020-SUNAFIL/INII on the exercise of inspection duties, approved by Decision No. 031-2020-SUNAFIL, inspectors may be accompanied by police personnel to ensure their physical safety and entry, and may request a police report in the event of denied or impeded entry. The Committee notes the information provided, which responds to the previous request for information.

Article 5(b). Collaboration between labour inspectors and employers. The Committee notes that, in its observations, CONFIEP expresses concern at the lack of cooperation between labour inspectors and employers, particularly during the investigation stage of inspections. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments in this respect.

Article 7(1). Conditions for the recruitment of labour inspectors. Further to its previous comments, the Committee notes the Government’s indications that the internal promotion competitions for labour inspectors and supervisors are aimed at ensuring that those selected have knowledge and experience for the performance of their duties. In this regard, the Government indicates that assessments of knowledge, skills and/or competencies are carried out, and that labour inspector candidates must have two years of experience in the effective discharge of inspection duties as an assistant inspector, while inspection supervisor candidates must have three years of experience as a labour inspector. The Committee also notes that the Government reports that, in 2019, internal promotion competitions were held for six inspection supervisor positions and 23 labour inspector positions, and in 2021 for 15 and 22 positions, respectively. The Government also indicates that, in the 2021 competitions, measures were adopted for decentralized knowledge assessments. With reference to its observation on Articles 6 and 15, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the selection process for labour inspectors, both in relation to the process of the transfer of public servants to the civil service system and after this process has ended.

Article 7(3). Training of labour inspectors. Further to its previous comments, the Committee notes that the Government indicates: (i) the training activities for labour inspectors carried out between 2021 and June 2023, including the duration, number of participants and the manner in which they are selected; (ii) that the Training and Capacity-building Centre for the Labour Inspection System trained 427 inspectors from the Lima metropolitan inspection office and regional inspection offices at the national level in 2021, 475 in 2022 and 604 officials working for the national labour inspectorate between January and June 2023; (iii) that the selection of participants is carried out by means of a nomination request by the participant’s inspection office or by direct registration through an open competition, with priority given to the relevance of the subject matter to the duties of the official, as well as their availability; and (iv) that, during this period, the training consisted of courses, workshops and modules, some of which were delivered with the support of the ILO.

In reply to the observations of the CATP in 2020, the Committee notes the Government’s indications that: (i) at the Training and Capacity-building Centre for the Labour Inspection System, each year, a planning process is carried out which includes a training needs assessment, the identification of objectives and the formulation of programming in line with the institutional operational plan and the allocation of budgetary resources; (ii) the programming is developed in accordance with the technical and methodological recommendations contained in Directive No. 141-2016-SERVIR-PE on regulations for the management of the training process in public bodies, approved by the National Civil Service Authority (SERVIR); and (iii) this planning also includes action undertaken within the framework of strategic alliances with agencies such as the ILO.

The Committee notes that, in its observations in 2023, the CATP expresses concern at the training provided by the Training and Capacity-building Centre for the Labour Inspection System, indicating that training is insufficient, is provided by teachers who are not involved in labour inspection, and is not delivered from a fieldwork approach, but from a purely doctrinaire perspective. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments in this respect. The Committee also requests the Government to continue to provide detailed information on training offered to labour inspectors, including the number of inspectors attending each session and the duration and nature of training provided at these sessions.

Articles 10 and 16. Number of labour inspectors and frequency and thoroughness of inspections to ensure the application of the relevant legal provisions. Further to its previous comments, the Committee notes the Government’s indications that, between April 2014 and December 2022, the number of labour inspectors increased by 153 per cent, from 311 to 787. The Committee also notes that the number of inspections increased considerably between 2018 and 2019, from 75,240 to 110,671, but that, in the subsequent years, this number decreased by over half, with 54,035 inspections carried out in 2020, 42,847 in 2021 and 32,130 in 2022. The Committee notes that, in its 2023 observations, the CATP indicates that, despite the fact that the number of labour inspectors has increased since 2014, this number continues to be insufficient and does not ensure adequate coverage of inspection. The CATP also expresses its concern about the inadequate territorial distribution of labour inspectors. In particular, it indicates that this distribution does not correspond to the number of waged workers in the different regions of the country and does not appear to include criteria such as the level of noncompliance with labour legislation, the incidence of complaints or their seriousness, particularly considering that, in some regions, the majority of both formal and informal workers are engaged in specific activities such as mining, agro-industry and fishing, in which the incidence and seriousness of non-compliance varies.

The Committee also notes the Government’s indications that SUNAFIL develops the annual labour inspection plan, the purpose of which is to contribute to the planning and implementation of all inspection activities of the labour inspection system, with the aim of ensuring compliance with social and labour, occupational safety and health and social security legislation. The Committee notes that, in its 2023 observations, the CATP indicates that, given the low number of labour inspectors, there is no permanent and regular inspection system in place. While there are occasional and random inspections, inspections are generally carried out in response to allegations or complaints by workers or trade unions, which demonstrates that, currently, labour inspection in the country is basically reactive rather than preventive. The CATP adds that section 3 of Supreme Decree No. 007-2017-TR and its amendments establish that, for the same fiscal year, the Labour Inspection Authority shall not schedule more than one inspection order on the same subject for the same enterprise, except for occupational safety and health, fundamental labour rights and the registration of workers on the payroll, and allegations of non-compliance with social and labour obligations. Lastly, the CATP states that, according to the latest report of the National Institute of Statistics and Information Technology, 80 per cent of workers in the country work in the informal sector. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments with respect to the observations of the CATP. The Committee also asks the Government to continue to provide information on the number of labour inspectors and inspections conducted, including inspections concerning the informal sector, disaggregated by region and also by specific industries or activities to the extent possible.

Article 11. Material resources available to labour inspectors. Reimbursement of travel expenses. The Committee notes that, in reply to its previous request, the Government indicates that SUNAFIL has decentralized the services that it provides at the national level through its 26 offices and ten labour inspection platforms, with the aim of reaching more people and areas of the national territory. Regarding inspections in locations far from regional headquarters, the Government indicates that the budget covers travel and daily expenses, personal protective equipment, stationery, and furniture rental. With respect to mobile units, there are 25 units assigned to regional offices and 17 to the Lima metropolitan inspection office and four administrative units. In this regard, the Committee notes that, in its 2023 observations, the CATP indicates that: (i) in various regional offices, the work facilities are inadequate in view of the number of labour inspectors, the furniture is in poor condition, occupational safety and health standards are not respected, cleaning is insufficient, there is a shortage of water, and the electronic equipment is not correctly maintained; (ii) there is a lack of personal protective equipment; (iii) transport facilities are insufficient for labour inspectors to adequately carry out their duties, particularly to reach work sites and workplaces that are distant or remote, and that, consequently, the scope of action of the labour inspectorate is mainly limited, in practice, to urban and easy-to-reach areas, thus leaving workers in remote areas completely unprotected; and (iv) in several regional offices, there are delays in the reimbursement of local transport expenses for inspections due to cash-flow problems. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments in this respect, and also to provide detailed information on whether the decentralization of services has enabled more effective inspection of remote and distant workplaces.

Articles 12(1)(a) and 15(c). Inspections without previous notice. Duty of confidentiality in relation to complaints. Further to its previous comments, the Committee notes the Government’s indications that, in accordance with the principles of confidentiality and technical and functional autonomy provided for in the General Labour Inspection Act, inspection personnel carry out their duties and responsibilities free from any undue external influence, and maintain full confidentiality regarding the origin of any complaints or allegations reporting violations of the legal provisions under the purview of the labour inspectorate. Concerning the duty of confidentiality, the Government indicates that section 13 of the General Labour Inspection Act provides that, during the discharge of inspection duties, the personnel responsible shall respect the duty of confidentiality and maintain due discretion regarding the existence of a complaint and the identity of the complainant, which shall be maintained following the completion of the inspections. The Government adds that the duty of confidentiality regarding the complainant is maintained from the filing of the complaint (subsection 7.4.1 of the fourth version of Directive No. 002-2017-SUNAFIL/INII on the treatment of labour complaints, approved by Decision No. 204-2020-SUNAFIL), and that the entity receiving the complaint may grant protection measures for complainants, to guarantee their safety and prevent them from being prejudiced in any way (section 116(116)(4), of the single consolidated text of General Administrative Procedure Act No. 27444, approved by Supreme Decree No. 004-2019-JUS).

Concerning inspections without notice, the Government refers once again to section 5 of the General Labour Inspection Act, and indicates that, in the context of inspection activities, the personnel communicate their presence on site at the inspected workplace in order to identify themselves, which therefore does not constitute previous notice of their presence. Furthermore, this communication is subject to the condition that it does not undermine the effectiveness of the duties of the inspection personnel during the inspection. In this regard, it indicates that inspectors are empowered to enter freely any work site, establishment or place liable to inspection at any time of the day or night, and without previous notice, and to remain there for as long as the investigation warrants (second version of Directive No. 001-2020-SUNAFIL/INII on the exercise of inspection duties, approved by Decision No. 216-2021-SUNAFIL). The free entry of inspection personnel is subject to exceptions when the workplace is also the employer’s home, a situation which, although different from the normal activities of the inspection personnel, does not prevent them from performing their duties. While taking note of this information, the Committee refers to the point raised in its observations on Articles 12(1)(a) and (c), and 15(c).

Article 18. Adequate and effectively enforced penalties. Further to its previous comments, the Committee notes the Government’s indications that, according to SUNAFIL, 8,656 decisions imposing fines were handed down in 2022 and 3,899 before June 2023. The Committee also notes the Government’s indications that the Contribution Recovery and Enforcement Unit of the SUNAFIL Administrative Office was created on 17 June 2022, which covers contribution collection and enforcement. After its creation, contribution collection specialists from the 25 regional inspection offices, and both administrative and legal contribution collection and enforcement personnel from the Lima metropolitan inspection office, joined the new unit. These specialists collect fines at the national level. The Government also indicates that the enforced recovery of fines by regional inspection offices is the responsibility of the contribution recovery officer and enforcement auxiliary from the Bank of the Nation, in accordance with the agreement signed on 20 September 2017 between SUNAFIL and the Bank of the Nation, which is in the process of being renewed. The Committee also notes the Government’s indications that training workshops were held for personnel of the Contribution Recovery and Enforcement Unit in order to harmonize criteria for the management of contribution collection and enforcement at the national level, and working groups were set up with the aim of coordinating work and the amendments and adjustments to procedures and guidelines under the new Regulations on the Organization and Functions of the Contribution Recovery and Enforcement Unit and the powers granted to the Unit.

The Committee notes that, in its 2023 observations, the CATP indicates that: (i) the reforms carried out in recent years have been aimed at reducing the amount of fines, resulting in the weakening of inspections, as fines have no deterrent effect whatsoever for perpetrators; (ii) the frequency with which inspections result in effective sanctions is minimal and, according to the data published in SUNAFIL’s reports, in recent years, only one out of five infringement reports resulted in a final decision imposing sanctions; (iii) there is a lack of information on the amount of fines that are effectively collected, as they are often cancelled in administrative or judicial proceedings; and (iv) section 17(3) of the Regulations to the General Labour Inspection Act and section 40 of the General Labour Inspection Act provide for the reduction of fines if the fault is corrected as directed. The CATP states that the reduction of fines to such an extent weakens inspection and makes the procedure less effective. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments in this respect. The Committee also requests the Government to provide information on the functioning and the results of the Contribution Recovery and Enforcement Unit of the SUNAFIL Administrative Office, and particularly the amount of the fines collected. In addition, the Committee requests that the Government provide detailed information on the number and nature of violations found, the amount of fines imposed and collected, and the nature of any other sanctions imposed.

Articles 20 and 21. Preparation of periodical reports and publication and transmission to the ILO of the annual report. The Committee notes that the Government has published and communicated to the ILO the annual labour inspection reports for 2018, 2019, 2020 and 2021, which contain the information required under Article 21(a)–(g).The Committee welcomes this development and requests that the Government continue to provide the annual inspection reports containing all information required under Article 21(a)–(g).

[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 Autonomous Workers’ Confederation of Peru (CATP), received on 1 September 2023.

Articles 6 and 15(a) of the Convention. Status and conditions of service of labour inspectors. Regarding the process to transfer public bodies and servants to the civil service system, the Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that the National Labour Inspection Authority (SUNAFIL) is at the second stag, in which it has to draft a proposal for the reorganization of its human resources and that, therefore, inspectors are still under the private sector regime by virtue of Legislative Decree No. 728. In this regard, the Committee notes the CATP’s indication in its report that: (i) the transition of labour inspectors to a different labour system, as stipulated by the Civil Service Act (No. 30057) would lead to a reduction of their entitlements; (ii) this new system only offers a veneer of job stability, as it makes job retention conditional on a series of evaluations; (iii) considering the work overload of inspection personnel and their lack of training, the change of system would mean that they would be exposed to the risk of their assessments not being validated, which would serve as a reason for their dismissal; (iv) it was concerning that, in 2020, the public competition for around 100 auxiliary inspectors was declared unsuccessful due to negligence by SUNAFIL and that, since then, they have been working under a provisional status; and (v) if the positions of the inspectors were not confirmed and they were dismissed, issues may arise with regard to the legal certainty of SUNAFIL’s decisions, given that the decisions taken by those inspectors are subject to appeal due to their status. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments in this respect. Having noted concerns about the status and service conditions of inspectors over a number of years, the Committee urges the Government to take the necessary measures to: (i) swiftly complete the process to transfer labour inspectors to the civil service system; (ii) ensure that the process provides for conditions of service that guarantee stability of employment and are independent of changes of government and of improper external influences; (iii) provide information on the progress made in this regard. The Committee also requests the Government to provide information on the impact that the integration of the labour inspectorate into the new civil service system has on the conditions of service, salary scales, and career prospects of staff of regional governments with inspections functions, as well as specifically in comparison with categories of public servants who carry out similar functions in other government services, such as tax inspectors or police officers.

Articles 12(1)(a) and (c), and 15(c). Scope of the right of free entry of labour inspectors into workplaces liable to inspection. Further to its previous comments, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that, in accordance with section 10 of the General Labour Inspection Act, the activities of the labour inspectorate may also derive from an internal decision of the inspection system. In this respect, the Committee notes that the CATP regrets that, despite the amendments to the General Inspection Act, the general rule continues to be that labour inspectors may only act on the basis of an inspection order issued by the management bodies, and within the limits of that order, in a manner such that the possibility for labour inspectors to act on their own initiative is strictly limited to exceptional cases and is subject to formalities that prevent or discourage it. Noting with regret thatno measures have been adopted to amend the General Labour Inspection Act, the Committee urges the Government to take the necessary steps to ensure, in law and practice, the right of labour inspectors to enter freely any workplace liable to inspection, and thatinspections are not subject to an order issued by a higher authority.

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 2020, published 109th ILC session (2021)

The Committee takes note of the Government’s report and the supplementary information provided in light of the decision adopted by the Governing Body at its 338th Session (June 2020). The Committee also notes the observations on the Convention made by the Autonomous Workers’ Confederation of Peru (CATP), received in 2019 and in 2020 together with the Government’s report.

Articles 5(a), 12(1)(a) and 18 of the Convention. Effective cooperation between the inspection services and other government services and public or private institutions engaged in similar activities. Freedom of access to workplaces liable to inspection. Obstruction of inspectors in the performance of their duties. The Committee notes that, in reply to its previous request on the cooperation of the inspection services with the police, particularly in cases of the obstruction of inspections, the Government indicates that, during the course of 2019, with the cooperation of the National Police, through the activities of the Specialized Labour Inspection Unit on Forced Labour and Child Labour (GEIT-TFI SUNAFIL), 161 inspection activities were undertaken at the national level. The Government also indicates that during the activities of the GEIT-TFI SUNAFIL concerning possible obstructions to labour inspection actions, no decisions were taken to impose fines in 2019. In this respect, the Committee notes the allegation by the CATP that, while inspections related to child labour and forced labour are undertaken in collaboration with the police, based on the existence of an intersectoral agreement, in the case of other inspections, when labour inspectors are obstructed, it is necessary to request and obtain police support through the commissariats. The Committee requests the Government to continue providing information on collaboration between labour inspectors and police forces, including the measures adopted to ensure the protection and safety of labour inspectors. In this regard, the Committee requests the Government to provide more specific information, if available, on the number of inspections during which the police in practice ensures the protection and safety of labour inspectors and their free entry into workplaces, and any subsequent measures adopted in relation to penalties for the obstruction of labour inspectors in the performance of their duties.

Article 7(1). Conditions for the recruitment of labour inspectors. The Committee notes that, in its reply to the Committee’s previous request concerning internal competitions for labour inspectors and the selection criteria used in such competitions, the Government indicates that the criteria followed in such competitions are established in the Basic Rules for Internal Promotion Competitions, as approved when they are carried out, under the terms of section 4 of the Regulations on the Careers of Labour Inspectors (Presidential Decree No. 021-2007-TR) and section 26 of Act No. 28806 on the General Labour Inspectorate (LGTI). The Committee notes the CATP’s observations, according to which no internal competitions for promotion were held between 2007 and 2018 and that the participation of inspectors who live outside the city of Lima in the competitions organized in 2018 was burdensome and difficult due to the need to travel. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments on this subject, with an indication of the measures that it has adopted or plans to adopt to ensure that labour inspectors are selected with sole regard to their qualifications for the performance of their duties.

Article 7(3). Training of labour inspectors. The Committee notes that, in reply to its previous direct request concerning the activities of the Training and Capacity-building Centre for the Labour Inspection System, the Government indicates that the Centre undertook a total of 960 activities in 2019 within the framework of the Annual Training Plan of the Labour Inspection System (PAC-SIT 2019, approved by R.G. No. 022-2019-SUNAFIL), of which 109 related to capacity-building on labour inspection. The Government also indicates that 48 training activities concerned forced labour and child labour in 2019. The Committee also notes that the workshop on the strategic and participatory strengthening of labour inspection was held on 27 February 2020 in Lima with the presence of SUNAFIL, the European Union and the ILO. The workshop, which included a tripartite round table, had the objective of facilitating the process of the identification of the institutional priorities and needs of SUNAFIL to discharge its role in accordance with the national legislation. The Committee requests the Government to continue providing detailed information on the activities of the Training and Capacity-building Centre for the Labour Inspection System (including the content and duration of the activities, and the number of participants and the manner in which they were selected). The Committee also reminds the Government of the possibility to avail itself of ILO technical assistance in this regard.

Articles 10, 15 and 16. Number of labour inspectors and frequency and thoroughness of inspections to ensure the application of the relevant legal provisions. The Committee notes that, in reply to its previous request, the Government indicates that the criteria for the determination of needs in relation to the number of labour inspectors in SUNAFIL and the regional governments for inspection activities, include the number of workplaces to be inspected, the probability of non-compliance in workplaces and the total number of orders issued in each region. The Committee also notes the CATP’s allegation that the allocation of posts for each regional service of SUNAFIL and for the regional governments has not been based on technical criteria, such as the number of enterprises, the complexity of inspections and the number of workers in each region. The Committee further notes that, according to the data contained in the Annual Labour Inspection Reports for 2015, 2016 and 2017, the total number of inspectors fell from 480 in 2015 and 2016 to 458 in 2017, and that the change was due to a reduction in the number of auxiliary inspectors, while the number of labour inspectors and supervisors increased. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that SUNAFIL had 661 inspectors in 2019. The Committee also notes that in 2015 and 2016, a total of 62,780 and 65,105 inspections were carried out, respectively, and that this number fell to 61,938 in 2017. The Committee requests the Government to provide further information on the measures adopted, including those adopted within the framework of the strategic planning on enforcement with ILO technical assistance, 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 that the number of labour inspectors is sufficient to secure the effective discharge of their duties. In this regard, the Committee requests the Government to continue providing statistical data on the number of labour inspectors and the inspections carried out, disaggregated by category of inspectors and region.

Article 11. Material resources available to labour inspectors. The Committee notes that, in reply to its previous request, the Government indicates that the material resources made available to labour inspection offices at the national level are proportional to their operational capacity, administrative and inspection personnel, economic activity and the number of workplaces to be inspected, all of which is subject to the budget of SUNAFIL. In this regard, the Committee notes the CATP’s allegations that: (i) SUNAFIL does not have its own building; (ii) many of the inspections carried out by labour inspectors and auxiliary inspectors are in very remote and dangerous locations; (iii) there are currently only an average of 20 vehicles for over 250 inspectors of both categories, which are concentrated in the city of Lima; and (iv) the regional services of SUNAFIL only have a single vehicle, even though the distances to the major workplaces are greater than in Lima. The Committee recalls that, in its 2006 General Survey on labour inspection, in paragraph 238, it indicates that, in order to carry out its functions effectively, a labour inspectorate not only needs an adequate number of staff, with appropriate conditions for hiring, training and service, but that these staff must also be given the necessary resources to perform their tasks and to ensure that their role and the importance of their work is appropriately recognized. The Committee requests the Government to provide further information on the measures taken to ensure that the budgetary resources allocated to the labour inspection services are sufficient.

Articles 12(1)(a) and 15(c). Inspections without previous notice. Duty of confidentiality in relation to complaints. The Committee notes the CATP’s indication that some staff in the Regional Directorate of Labour and Employment of Tacna communicated confidential information to the media concerning inspection activities contained in the inspection orders issued to labour inspectors, thereby obstructing the work of inspection and giving notification to the enterprises to be inspected, including the subjects that would be inspected. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that section 5 of LGTI was amended by Decree No. 044-2019 of 30 December 2019. The first paragraph of section 5 provides that during inspections, inspection personnel can enter freely and without previous notice at any hour of the day or night any workplace liable to inspection. Section 5 also provides that, on the occasion of an inspection visit, inspectors shall notify the employer or his representative of their presence, as well as the workers, the workers’ representative or the union, unless they consider that such a notification may be prejudicial to the performance of their duties, and shall identify themselves with the credentials issued for this purpose. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments on the consequences or implications of the section 5 notification provision, particularly with respect to any measures adopted in practice to ensure that labour inspectors can enter without previous notice any workplace liable to inspection and also that they treat as absolutely confidential the source of any complaint bringing to their notice a defect or breach of legal provisions.

Article 18. Adequate and effectively enforced penalties. In its previous comment, the Committee noted that SUNAFIL has a unit specializing in the collection of fines imposed as a result of inspections in workplaces within its competence and that the Bill to strengthen the labour inspection system authorizes the Ministry of Labour and Employment Promotion, SUNAFIL and the regional governments to hire personnel responsible for the enforced collection of fines resulting from penalties issued by the inspection services. While noting the absence of a reply to its previous request, the Committee once again requests the Government to provide information on any developments in this regard and the results of these measures.

Articles 20 and 21. Preparation of periodical reports and publication and transmission to the ILO of the annual report. The Committee notes that, in reply to its previous request, SUNAFIL has published and communicated to the ILO the Annual Labour Inspection Reports for 2015, 2016 and 2017, which contain all the information required under Article 21(a) to (g). The Committee requests the Government to continue publishing and communicating to the ILO the reports for the following years.

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

The Committee takes note of the Government’s report and the supplementary information provided in light of the decision adopted by the Governing Body at its 338th Session (June 2020). The Committee also notes the observations on the Convention made by the Autonomous Workers’ Confederation of Peru (CATP), received in 2019, which refer to various issues raised by the Committee in its previous comment.

Moreover, the Committee notes the observations of the CATP, received in 2020 together with the Government’s report, which reiterate its 2019 observations and also refer to the following issues: (i) Legislative Decree No. 1499 (May 2020) amended section 6 of Act No. 28806 (the General Labour Inspection Act) by eliminating the advisory role that labour inspectors had towards employers and workers; consequently, employers presented a high number of requests for suspension of workers in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic which were not in conformity with legal requirements and were declared invalid by the administrative labour authority; (ii) the number of labour inspectors in the National Labour Inspection Authority (SUNAFIL) is insufficient; this implies an overload for inspectors which is an obstacle to the effective accomplishment of their functions; (iii) labour inspection only covers the private sector, which means that workers in the public sector are not covered; (iv) the SUNAFIL does not provide safe and healthy working conditions to labour inspectors, including the necessary preventative and protective measures in the context of the current pandemic; (v) the SUNAFIL’s training centre does not adequately plan its activities, which has a negative impact on the training of the inspectorate’s personnel; (vi) the labour inspectorate is not notified of work accidents occurring in the informal economy and therefore they are not investigated; (vii) the SUNAFIL does not have a work plan which would ensure the regular sanctioning of recidivist enterprises, the monitoring of frequent violations and the application of the sanctions imposed by the competent bodies based on the inspectorate’s work; and (viii) since 2015, annual labour inspection reports have not been published on the official webpage. The Committee requests the Government to transmit its comments in response to these serious allegations.

Articles 6 and 15(a) of the Convention. Legal status and conditions of service of inspectors. In its previous comments, the Committee noted the Government’s indication that the SUNAFIL and the regional governments had not yet incorporated the new civil service system envisaged by the Civil Service Act No. 30057 of July 2013 and that their employees were still governed by the labour legislation regulating private enterprises until the public service career system was implemented. In this regard, the Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that, as of June 2019, the National Civil Service Authority (SERVIR) includes 463 entities that are in the process of implementing the system envisaged by the Civil Service Act, and that these include the SUNAFIL and 17 regional governments. Moreover, the Government indicates, in its supplementary information, that the implementation of the new civil service system is progressive, by entities and offices, and that it is done in four stages (preparation of the institution concerned, analysis, implementation of internal improvements, and competitions under the new system) as provided for in the document entitled “Procedure for the transition of a public institution to the civil service system under Act No. 30057” approved by Presidential Resolution No. 034-2017-SERVIR/PE. The Government adds that the SUNAFIL is at stage two of the process and that its transition is therefore not yet finalized. The Government indicates that the integration of workers to the new civil service system can only happen once the institution concerned has completed the transition process. The Government also adds that those who perform labour inspection functions in regional governments, and who had been transferred to SUNAFIL under Act No. 30814 on the strengthening of the labour inspection system, are not part of the transition process to the new civil service system. The Committee also notes that the CATP emphasizes the importance of the Government ensuring that the implementation of the Civil Service Act does not have a negative effect on the legal status and conditions of service of inspectors. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the number of inspectors who have already been transferred to the civil service system, those who are still in a transitional period, those for whom the transition has not yet commenced, and those who will not be part of the transition process at all. It also requests the Government to provide information on the impact that the integration of the labour inspectorate into the new civil service system has on the conditions of service, salary scales, and career prospects of staff of regional governments with inspections functions. In addition, the Committee requests that the Government provide information on the legal status of each of these categories of inspectors, with an indication of whether they all benefit from guarantees, such as stability of employment, independence of changes of government and of improper external influences, irrespective of whether or not they have been included in the civil service system. The Committee further requests the Government to provide information on the salary scales, benefits and career prospects of labour inspectors in relation to other comparable categories of public servants engaged in similar functions in other Government services, such as tax inspectors and the police.

Articles 12(1)(a) and (c), and 15(c). Scope of the right of free entry of labour inspectors into workplaces liable to inspection. In previous comments, the Committee noted that the provisions of the General Labour Inspection Act, and particularly sections 10 to 13, make inspections conditional on an order from a higher authority. The Committee once again notes with regret that there has been no progress in this regard and that these provisions of the General Labour Inspection Act remain in force. The Committee recalls that in its 2006 General Survey on Labour Inspection, in paragraphs 265 and 266, it indicates that the different restrictions placed in law or in practice on inspectors’ right of entry into workplaces, such as restrictions on the free initiative of inspectors in this regard through the requirement for formal authorization issued by a higher authority or another competent authority, can only stand in the way of achieving the objectives of labour inspection as set out in the instruments. The Committee once again requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that, in law and practice, inspections are not subject to an order issued by a higher authority.

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 5(a), 11(2) and 12(1)(a) of the Convention. Effective cooperation between the inspection services and other government services and public or private institutions engaged in similar activities. Reimbursement of expenses necessary for the performance of their duties. Freedom of access to workplaces liable to inspection. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to provide information on the measures taken to improve cooperation between the inspection services and the police, investigation services and the Office of the Public Prosecutor.

In this regard, the Government indicates in its report that various technical and standards-related measures have been approved, such as Supreme Decree No. 011 2014 TR of 2014, which approved the Intersectoral Protocol to Combat Forced Labour, with the objective of facilitating synergies between the labour inspection services and other authorities, such as the National Police of Peru. It adds that the labour inspection services and the national police have been collaborating on action relating to child labour, informality and fundamental rights. The Committee requests the Government to continue providing information on the cooperation of the inspection services with the police, particularly with regard to cases of the obstruction of inspectors in their duties.

Article 7(1). Conditions for the recruitment of labour inspectors. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to provide information on the effect given in practice to the Regulations governing the careers of labour inspectors, which establish the procedures for entry into the profession and the conditions for the promotion of labour inspectors.

In this respect, the Government indicates that there are three categories of personnel in the inspection services: the highest level consists of supervisory inspectors, to which access is through internal competitions; the second is labour inspectors, to which access is also through internal competitions; and the final category is composed of auxiliary inspectors, which consists of persons entering the inspection services, recruitment into which is only by public competition based on merit. It adds that public competitions consist firstly of a selection phase, in which the candidates have to provide evidence of their academic training, experience and knowledge of labour legislation or occupational safety and health (OSH), as well as certain competencies such as leadership and communication and, secondly, a training phase, which the candidates have to complete. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the criteria applied in internal competitions and the manner in which such competitions are conducted.

Article 7(3). Training of labour inspectors. In its previous comments, the Committee noted the information provided by the Government to the effect that the National Labour Inspection Authority (SUNAFIL) had initiated a capacity-building plan at the national level for inspection personnel (including inspection personnel in the regions), the main themes of which were OSH, inspection procedures and social and labour standards. The Committee requested it to continue providing information on this subject. The Government indicates that the ILO has provided advice in the form of a proposal for a training programme for the labour inspection system in Peru. It adds that the training activities undertaken include: the establishment of the Training and Capacity-building Centre for the Labour Inspection System specializing in the development of training and capacity-building programmes; the implementation of a virtual SUNAFIL course; the provision of training programmes for trainers; the holding of an intensive training programme for recently hired auxiliary inspectors (as recommended by the ILO advisory services); and, within the context of the development plan for State personnel, the provision of 54 capacity-building courses for SUNAFIL personnel, with 677 participants. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the activities of the Training and Capacity-building Centre for the Labour Inspection System.

Article 9. Collaboration of qualified technical experts and specialists with the inspection services. In its previous comments on the collaboration of qualified technical experts and specialists with the inspection services, the Committee requested the Government to take measures rapidly to ensure such collaboration and to provide a copy of any text adopted or issued on this subject. In this connection, the Government indicates that section 3 of Supreme Decree No. 0022012-TR provides that the Ministry of Labour and Employment Promotion (MTPE) shall draw up a list of occupational safety and health experts with a view to issuing reports to the labour inspection services when so required. It adds that Directive No. 002-2016-SUNAFIL/INII, in section 7(3), empowers inspectors to include in inspections the specialists and/or technicians that they consider necessary for the discharge of their functions. For that purpose, they may request the MTPE, regional and local governments, the Ministry of Health and other institutions of the public administration to provide duly qualified technical experts and specialists.

Article 10. Numbers of labour inspectors. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to provide information on the measures adopted to fill the posts of inspectors set out in the Personnel Assignment Table (CAP) of the SUNAFIL, which envisaged a total of 460 posts of auxiliary inspectors, 205 labour inspectors and 89 supervisors.

In this regard, the Government indicated in September 2015 that, of the 754 posts envisaged for SUNAFIL, 332 are occupied, of which 199 are auxiliary inspectors, 112 were inspectors and 21 are supervisors. In September 2016, it indicated that there were 466 inspectors at the national level. However, the Government does not specify, like it did in September 2015, the categories and number of inspectors working at the SUNAFIL, the MTPE and the regional governments. The Committee notes the indication of the Government that a draft law aimed at strengthening the labour inspection system will allow to recruit labour inspectors for the SUNAFIL, the MTPE and the regional governments, despite the fact that Law No. 29981 on the establishment of the SUNAFIL provides that the labour inspection functions of the MTPE have to be transferred to the SUNAFIL. Noting this information, the Committee requests the Government to explain why the draft law envisages the recruitment of labour inspection staff for the MTPE. It also requests the Government to indicate the criteria that apply for identifying the needs of labour inspectors at the SUNAFIL and in the regional offices.

Article 11. Material resources available to labour inspectors. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to provide information on the material resources available to labour inspectors for the discharge of their functions.

In this regard, the Government indicates that the SUNAFIL Department for Metropolitan Lima has 27 vehicles and the nine regional departments have one vehicle each. When these vehicles are not sufficient, SUNAFIL guarantees the reimbursement of transport and other unforeseen expenses. The Government adds that on the SUNAFIL webpage various directives have been issued concerning subjects such as the local mobility of inspectors, the allocation and use of vehicles, and the provision and supervision of daily expenses, and that the Bill to strengthen the labour inspection system authorizes the acquisition of vehicles. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the material resources available (premises, telephones, computers, Internet connections, photocopiers, measuring equipment, etc.) in labour inspection offices, both of the SUNAFIL and the regional governments, including the means of transport available.

Article 14. Notification to the labour inspection services of industrial accidents and cases of occupational disease. In its previous comments, the Committee reminded the Government of the importance of establishing a mechanism for the notification to the labour inspection services of industrial accidents and occupational diseases, and requested it to take the appropriate measures for that purpose. In this regard, the Government indicates that the MTPE has established a virtual register of industrial accidents and occupational diseases, known as the Occupational Accidents System (SAT), which is linked to the Labour Inspection Information System (SIIT), so that the cases recorded by the SAT are reported to the SIIT.

Article 18. Adequate and effectively enforced penalties. In its previous comments, the Committee asked whether the agreement concluded with the financial institutions for administrative support in the collection of fines, referred to previously by the Government, covered the collection of the penalties imposed in all workplaces liable to inspection.

In this context, the Government indicates, on the one hand, that the possibility of collecting fines resulting from the penalties imposed in the course of a labour inspection only exists for micro-enterprises within the territory of Metropolitan Lima which are on the list approved by the MTPE and, on the other hand, that SUNAFIL has not concluded any agreement with banks, but that it has a unit specializing in the collection of the fines imposed as a result of inspections in workplaces within its competence. It adds that the Bill to strengthen the labour inspection system authorizes the MTPE, SUNAFIL and the regional governments to hire personnel responsible for the enforced collection of fines resulting from penalties issued by the inspection services. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any developments in this regard and the results of these measures.

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

The Committee notes the observations made by the Autonomous Workers’ Confederation of Peru (CATP), received on 1 September 2016, which refer principally to the absence of sufficient personnel to ensure the effective discharge of the functions of the inspection services; the lack of sufficient financial and material resources, particularly in relation to premises, equipment and vehicles; freedom of access to workplaces liable to inspection; the reimbursement of expenses incurred by labour inspectors in the discharge of their duties; and finally the procedure for issuing penalties which, according to the CATP, does not fulfil its function. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments in this regard.

Articles 3(1)(a) and 4(1) of the Convention. Necessity to establish a central authority. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to specify the manner in which the National Labour Inspection Authority (SUNAFIL), as the central inspection authority, exercises in practice the functions of direction, organization, coordination, planning, follow-up and supervision, and to provide data on the inspections carried out, disaggregated by region (including with regard to micro-enterprises).

In this connection, the Government indicates in its report that the organic structure of SUNAFIL is based on three bodies: the first two formulate and propose policy in relation to inspection, prevention and advice, while the third oversees the action of all inspection bodies. The Committee also notes the data included in the Government’s report on the inspections carried out by region by the regional departments of SUNAFIL and the Regional Labour and Employment Promotion Departments.

Articles 6 and 15(a). Legal status and conditions of service of inspectors. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to provide information on the process of the transfer of labour inspection personnel to the public system and on any measures that may have been taken to continue improving the conditions of service of labour inspectors and ensuring their stability of employment and independence of changes of government and of any external influences.

In this regard, the Government indicates that section 20 of Act No. 29981 of January 2013, establishing the SUNAFIL, amends Act No. 28806, the General Labour Inspection Act, and Act No. 27867, the Basic Act on Regional Governments, and provides that SUNAFIL employees shall be governed by the labour legislation regulating private activities until the public service career system is implemented. The Government also indicates that the first supplementary transitional provision of Act No. 30057, the Civil Service Act, adopted in July 2013, provides that the implementation of the new civil service system shall be undertaken within a maximum period of six years from its entry into force. It adds that, up to now, SUNAFIL and the regional governments have not yet integrated the Civil Service Act. The Government also indicates that Supreme Decree No. 021-2007-TR, issuing the Regulations governing the careers of labour inspectors, provides in section 3(3)(2) that entry into the career system shall give rise to an employment relationship of a permanent nature and the right to reinstatement in the event of unjustified dismissal. The Committee trusts that within the period set out in the Civil Service Act, the SUNAFIL and the regional governments will be integrated into the civil service system and their personnel transferred to the public system.

Articles 12(1)(a) and (c), and 15(c). Scope of the right of free entry of labour inspectors into workplaces liable to inspection. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to take the necessary measures to amend sections 10 and 13 of the General Labour Inspection Act, under the terms of which labour inspectors must always take action based on an order from their superiors, including in the case of the receipt of a complaint, and that the competent authority has to issue the inspection order which shall designate the inspector or team that is to carry out the inspection and indicate the specific action to be taken.

The Committee regrets to note that no change has been made by the Government in this regard. Indeed, despite the Government’s indication that section 12 of the General Labour Inspection Act provides that the action carried out by the labour inspectorate may have its origins in an initiative by inspectors in cases where the action taken in compliance with an inspection order reveals facts related to the order, or which may be in violation of the current legislation, the Committee observes that this provision does not guarantee the freedom of initiative of inspectors. The Committee urges the Government to take appropriate measures to repeal the provisions which make inspections subject to an order issued by a higher authority.

Articles 19, 20 and 21. Preparation of periodical reports and publication and transmission to the ILO of the annual report. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure the preparation and publication of the annual report. In this regard, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that SUNAFIL has published an Annual Labour Inspection Plan and is currently preparing the Annual Labour Inspection Report in Peru for 2015. The Committee trusts that the Government will publish and communicate to the ILO an annual report on the work of the labour inspection services containing all the information required under Article 21(a)–(g).

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

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

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

Follow-up to the recommendations of the tripartite committee (representation made under article 24 of the ILO Constitution)

Article 3 of the Convention. Functions entrusted to inspection personnel. The Committee recalls that the tripartite committee set up to examine the representation made by the Autonomous Workers’ Confederation of Peru (CATP) (henceforth the tripartite committee) considered, in its conclusions, that the Government should take steps to ensure that inspection personnel are not required to perform purely administrative functions and can devote themselves fully to their duties under the Convention. In this regard, the Committee notes with interest that, according to the Government, the supervisory inspectors of the National Labour Inspection Authority (SUNAFIL) benefit from administrative support.

Article 5(a). Effective cooperation between the inspection services and other government services and public or private institutions engaged in similar activities. The Committee recalls that the tripartite committee invited the Government to consider the adoption of additional practical measures to improve the cooperation of the inspection services with the police, particularly in the event that labour inspectors are obstructed in their work, and with public prosecutors and the public prosecution service in dealing with employment accidents, as well as the adoption of the necessary measures to develop the cooperation envisaged in Act No. 29981. The Government indicates that section 7 of the General Labour Inspection Act establishes the requirement for persons discharging duties in the public sector including the national police to collaborate with the labour inspection system when they are so requested and to provide it with the information available to them. Furthermore, the Government indicates that where the labour inspection services find evidence of a potential crime, they are required to submit the relevant information to the public prosecution services, in accordance with section 8(3) of the General Labour Inspection Act. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the cooperation in practice between the labour inspection services and the police.

Article 9. Collaboration of qualified technical experts and specialists with the inspection services. The Committee recalls that the tripartite committee expressed the hope that qualified experts and specialists would soon be associated with the inspection services when required for the performance of their duties. The Government indicates that the draft Regulations on supervision, inspection and penalties in relation to occupational safety and health for the mining, electricity and hydrocarbon subsectors, Title III of which covers the appointment of occupational safety and health experts, is under revision by the General Policy Directorate of the Labour Inspectorate (formerly the Directorate General of the Labour Inspectorate) of the Ministry of Labour and Employment Promotion (MTPE). The Committee requests the Government to ensure that the necessary measures are taken rapidly to guarantee in practice the collaboration of qualified experts and technicians in the work of the labour inspection services and to provide a copy of any text adopted or issued in this respect.

Articles 12(1)(a) and (c), and 15(c). Scope of the right of free entry of labour inspectors to workplaces liable to inspection. The Committee recalls that the tripartite committee considered that the Government should take the necessary measures to follow up on the comments of the Committee of Experts in relation to Articles 12(1)(a) and (c), and 15(c) of the Convention. In its previous comments, the Committee indicated that it is essential that labour inspections are not subject to any requirement for pre-authorization and that the requirement of a mission order containing a description of the purpose of the inspection constitutes an obstacle to the guarantee by inspectors of confidentiality concerning the source of the complaint and the link between the inspection and a complaint (Article 15(c)). The Committee therefore requested the Government to take measures as soon as possible to bring the legislation and practice into conformity with the Convention on this point, in particular through the repeal of the legal provisions which make inspection visits dependent on an order issued by a higher authority as well as requiring that the scope and purpose of inspections must be identified in advance for all inspection visits.

The Committee notes that the Government indicates that the powers of inspectors are provided for in section 5(1) and (3) of the General Labour Inspection Act. Labour inspectors are prohibited from divulging the origin of any complaint bringing to their notice a defect or breach of legal provisions, under section 16 of the Regulations governing the careers of labour inspectors. However, the Committee notes that, under the terms of section 10(2) of the General Labour Inspection Act, the labour inspection services shall always take action in accordance with an order from a higher authority, including in the case of complaints, and that, under the terms of section 13 of the same Act (as amended by Act No. 29981), the competent authorities shall issue the inspection order indicating the inspector or inspection team designated to conduct the inspection visit and setting out the specific action to be taken. The Committee trusts that the Government will rapidly take the necessary measures to repeal the legal provisions which systematically subject inspections to an order issued by a higher authority, as well as the provisions requiring specific actions undertaken to be determined previously.

Article 14. Notification to the labour inspection services of industrial accidents and cases of occupational disease. The Committee recalls that in its conclusions, the tripartite committee invited the Government to discuss with the social partners the possibility of developing a mechanism for the transmission of information on industrial accidents and cases of occupational disease received by the MTPE and the Ministry of Health to the labour inspection services, and on any other means that could assist in the collection of more reliable statistical data on this subject. The Government indicates that the Occupational Safety and Health Act and its Regulations determine the cases of the notification of industrial accidents, hazardous incidents and occupational diseases and that a single form is available for such notifications, and that it is the responsibility of employers to comply with these provisions. The Committee recalls, as it did in paragraphs 118–120 of its 2006 General Survey on labour inspection, the importance of the establishment of mechanisms for the notification of the necessary data to the labour inspection services, so that it can fulfil the preventive mandate assigned to it by the Convention. The Committee therefore requests the Government to ensure the establishment of a mechanism through which the labour inspection services can be notified of industrial accidents and cases of occupational disease.

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

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

The Committee notes the observations made by the Single Confederation of Workers of Peru (CUT) and the Autonomous Workers’ Confederation of Peru (CATP), received on 2 and 6 September 2014, respectively. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments on the observations of the CUT and the CATP.

Follow-up to the recommendations of the tripartite committee (representation made under article 24 of the ILO Constitution)

The Committee notes that the Governing Body at its 321st Session (June 2014) approved the report of the tripartite committee set up to examine the representation made by the CATP.

Articles 3(1)(a), 4(1) and 16 of the Convention. Necessity to re-establish a central authority and the planning and due frequency and thoroughness of labour inspections. The Committee recalls that the tripartite committee asked the Government to provide information on the measures adopted to ensure that the regions implement effectively the inspection plans and conduct the planned visits with the frequency and thoroughness required by the Convention. The Committee notes that the Government indicates that the National Labour Inspection Authority (SUNAFIL) encompasses the National Unit for the Supervision of the Inspection System. Under the terms of section 36(e) of the Regulations on the organization and functions of SUNAFIL, the National Unit for the Supervision of the Inspection Systems supervises the regional units and administrative authorities responsible for labour inspection in regional governments implement effectively the inspection plans and carry out inspections with the frequency and thoroughness required by the Convention.

The Committee also recalls that the tripartite committee considered in its conclusions that, as a result of decentralization, the organization and functioning of the labour inspectorate are no longer fully consistent with Article 4(1) of the Convention since, in practice, the role of the Directorate General of Labour Inspection (DGIT) as a central authority has been significantly reduced. However, the tripartite committee also noted that, with the entry into force in 2013 of Act No. 29981 and its implementing regulations, the situation was changing for the better. The tripartite committee requested that the Government adopt on a regular basis the necessary measures, both in law and practice, to ensure compliance with this Article of the Convention. In this regard, the Committee observes that the Government indicates that SUNAFIL is the current central authority and the body responsible for the labour inspection system and that, in accordance with Ministerial Decision No. 037-2014-TR, its functions as the central authority at the national level were initiated on 1 April 2014. The Government adds that the regional governments can only discharge inspection functions within the scope of the responsibilities in relation to formal and informal micro-enterprises in accordance with the sectoral policies and plans and the standards issued by SUNAFIL. The Committee further indicates that, under the terms of section 19 of the General Labour Inspection Act, the central authority – SUNAFIL – has technical responsibility for the inspection services of regional governments, discharges the roles of direction, organization, coordination, planning, follow-up and supervision of the activities and operation of the inspection system at the national level. In light of the above, while the Committee welcomes the issuing of Ministerial Decision No. 037-2014-TR, it asks the Government to specify the manner in which SUNAFIL exercises in practice the functions of direction, organization, coordination, planning, follow-up and supervision, in relation to the regions, as well as to provide inspection data disaggregated by region, including with regard to micro-enterprises.

Articles 6 and 15(a). Legal status and conditions of service of labour inspectors. The Committee recalls that the tripartite committee considered that the recruitment of labour inspectors by regional governments under the labour systems of the private sector and administrative services contracts (CAS) is not in conformity with the requirements of stability of employment and independence of changes of government, and of improper external influences, as required by Article 6 of the Convention. The tripartite committee asked the Government to ensure that, while a single system relating to conditions of service was being implemented, as envisaged in the Civil Service Act, necessary measures were adopted to guarantee all labour inspectors equivalent conditions, ensuring adequate conditions of service and remuneration. The Committee notes that the Government indicates that as of the first half of 2014 neither regional governments nor SUNAFIL have been allowed to recruit labour inspectors under the labour system established by Legislative Decree No. 1057, namely CAS. The Government adds that the National Unit for the Supervision of the Inspection System of SUNAFIL has informed regional services and/or directorates of the exclusivity of the functions of inspection and that SUNAFIL will adapt to the system provided for in the General Regulations of the Civil Service Act of June 2014 (in so far as the staff governed by the CAS system may choose to transfer voluntarily to the civil service system) over the next few years. The Government indicates that the approval of the earnings scale of SUNAFIL by Supreme Decree No. 324-2013-EF, of 18 December 2013, raises the remuneration of labour inspectors by over 120 per cent. Finally, the Government also refers to the requirement for inspection personnel to conduct inspections in accordance with the principles of integrity, impartiality and confidentiality set out in the General Labour Inspection Act and the Regulations on the careers of labour inspectors, and it also provides information on the penalties to which they may be liable for the improper discharge of their functions and competencies, subject to disciplinary procedures conducted with their participation. While the Committee welcomes the measures taken to achieve uniformity in the recruitment of inspectors and their conditions of service throughout the national territory, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on any developments concerning the transfer of the labour inspection personnel to the civil service system and any measures that it might wish to take with a view to continue further improvement of its conditions of service.

Article 7(1). Conditions for the recruitment of labour inspectors. The Committee recalls that the tripartite committee requested that the Government take the necessary measures on a regular basis to ensure that recruitment criteria for labour inspectors in the regions are consistent with the requirements of this provision of the Convention. The Committee notes that the Government indicates that under the terms of section 20 of Act No. 29981, access to all levels of the career structure of labour inspectors is through public competition. It notes that inspectors are subject to annual evaluation procedures, and the recruitment and careers of labour inspectors are regulated by the Regulations on the careers of labour inspectors, which establish the procedures governing entry into the profession and conditions for promotion. The Committee asks the Government to provide information on the application in practice of the Regulations on the careers of labour inspectors.

Article 7(3). Training of labour inspectors. The Committee recalls that the tripartite committee requested that the Government pay particular attention to the continuity of training for labour inspectors in the regions. The Government indicates that SUNAFIL has initiated the implementation of a capacity-building plan for the present year for inspection personnel, including in the regions, and that in 2013, 104 training events were carried out (according to the Government, 279 inspectors were trained). The main subjects addressed during the training were occupational safety and health, inspection procedures and labour standards. The Committee encourages the Government to continue providing information on the training activities conducted for inspection personnel.

Articles 10 and 11. Human and financial resources and material resources of the labour inspectorate. The Committee recalls that the tripartite committee expressed the hope that the Government would take measures to assess the needs of the inspection services in terms of human and material resources. The Committee observes that the Government indicates that Supreme Decision No. 019-2013-TR approved the Personnel Allocation Table (CAP) of SUNAFIL, which includes a total of 460 auxiliary inspectors, 205 labour inspectors, and 89 inspection supervisors distributed through 26 regional offices. The Committee notes this information and requests the Government to provide information on the measures adopted to fill the approved posts. It also requests the Government to provide information on the material resources, particularly the means of transport, available to inspectors for the performance of their duties.

Article 18. Adequate and effectively enforced penalties. The Committee recalls that the tripartite committee expressed the hope that the Government would continue making practical efforts to improve the imposition and effective enforcement of penalties (under Act No. 29981). In this regard, the Government indicates that an agreement has been concluded with financial institutions for administrative support in the collection of fines. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on whether the agreement referred to by the Government also covers the collection of the penalties imposed on employers in all workplaces subject to inspection, including in micro-enterprises.

Articles 19, 20 and 21. Preparation of periodical reports and publication and transmission to the ILO of the annual report. The Committee recalls that the tripartite committee emphasized the need for the Government to adopt, on a regular basis, the necessary measures to collect full periodical data on the activities of local inspection offices with a view to giving effect to the Articles of the Convention. The Committee observes that the Government indicates that: (i) in accordance with section 15(f) of the Regulations governing the careers of labour inspectors, it is a requirement for the personnel to carry out inspection duties and to submit monthly reports on the results of their activities; and (ii) section 24 of the General Labour Inspection Act provides that labour inspectors shall report on their inspection activities to the respective director of inspection, and the latter shall report to the competent regional director who shall consolidate the information received and bring it to the knowledge of the central authority in the form, and at the intervals, that the central authority determines. The Committee notes this information, but also observes that no relevant information has been received. The Committee trusts that the Government will take the necessary measures to ensure the publication and communication to the ILO of an annual report on the activities of the labour inspection services, containing all the information required by Article 21(a)–(g). In this regard, the Committee invites the Government to consider the possibility, if necessary, of availing itself of ILO technical assistance.

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

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

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2011, published 101st ILC session (2012)

The Committee notes the Government’s report in response to its previous comments. The Committee notes the comments made by the Union of Labour Inspectors of the Ministry of Labour and Employment Promotion (SI Peru) dated 30 May 2011, and the Government’s response thereto, dated 15 September 2011. It also notes the comments made by the Autonomous Workers’ Confederation of Peru (CATP), dated 9 September 2011. The Committee requests the Government to provide any comments or information it deems appropriate in this respect.

The Committee notes that a representation under article 24 of the Constitution of the International Labour Organisation was presented to the Governing Body by the CATP (document GB.312/INS/16/4). In the course of its 312th Session (November 2011), the Governing Body decided that the representation was receivable, and appointed a tripartite committee to examine it.

In accordance with its usual practice, the Committee decided to postpone its examination of the application of this Convention pending the decision of the Governing Body in respect of the representation. The Committee will therefore examine the information supplied by the Government in its report relating to the period 2009–11 as well as the comments of the trade unions and the Government’s reply thereto, in the light of the decisions adopted in due course by the Governing Body in the framework of said representation.

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

The Committee notes the Government’s detailed report received at the ILO on 2 September 2009, as well as the documents attached. It also notes the observations made by the General Confederation of Workers of Peru (CGTP), the Single Confederation of Workers of Peru (CUT) and the Autonomous Confederation of Workers of Peru (CATP), dated 31 July 2009 and 1 September 2009 respectively, on the application of the Convention, which the ILO sent to the Government on 16 November 2009. However, the Government has not provided any comments concerning the points raised.

Article 6 of the Convention. Status and conditions of service of labour inspectors. According to the CGTP, the CUT and the CATP, in several regions of the country, labour inspection staff do not benefit from the status and conditions of service guaranteed to other public officials (level of pay and career prospects in particular), which are such that they are assured of stability of employment and are independent of any change of government and any improper external influence. The trade unions indicate that 33 of the 181 labour inspectors are carrying out their duties under temporary administrative service contracts (CAS), even though the career system and the guarantee of job stability should apply to all inspectors under the relevant regulations. Noting these allegations, the Committee notes that sections 6 and 25 of General Labour Inspection Act No. 28806, read in conjunction with section 3 of Supreme Decree No. 021-2007-TR, are in full conformity with the requirements of Article 6 of the Convention. Supreme Decree No. 037-2006-TR, which the trade union organizations emphasize may be amended on a discretionary basis by the Executive Authority, is not available to the ILO. The Committee nonetheless emphasizes that it is essential that the status, level of pay and career prospects of labour inspectors are such that they attract quality staff, retain them and protect them from any improper external influence. These conditions should not only be expressed in law on the basis of legal provisions, but should also be applied in practice. The Committee therefore requests the Government to clarify the status and conditions of service of the staff carrying out labour inspection duties as defined in Article 3(1) of the Convention. It requests it, in any case, to take measures to ensure the full application in both law and practice of Article 6 of the Convention, and to keep the ILO duly informed in this regard.

Article 7(3). Training of labour inspectors. According to the Government, in 2007, 1,394 persons, including inspectors carrying out labour inspection duties, as well as persons belonging to other groups (employers, workers, trade unions, administrative staff), were given various training (relating in particular to occupational safety and health, legislation, the safety and health management system and industrial relations) in the context of a training project promoted by USAID and MYPE Competitiva, with the aim of enabling labour inspectors to carry out their duties more effectively. The Committee notes that it is envisaged to continue and strengthen the training of labour inspectors, especially in matters relating to their new duties and in specific complex areas (freedom of association, outsourcing, forced labour, child labour). The Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide further information on the content, frequency and duration of the training given to inspectors in the course of their employment, as well as on the exact number of inspectors concerned in each case.

Articles 10 and 11. Human resources, transport facilities and other means of action available to the labour inspection services. With regard to the number of labour inspectors, the Committee notes that, according to the Government, the Regional Directorate of Labour and Employment Promotion of Lima was strengthened through the appointment of 100 additional inspectors in 2007. It was also envisaged to recruit 100 additional inspectors in 2008, to be deployed across the other regions taking into account the number of enterprises and the size of the economically active population, with the aim of recruiting 250 additional inspectors by 2011. The Committee notes that, according to the CGTP, the CUT and the CATP, labour inspectors usually have to wait around 45 days to be reimbursed for their travelling expenses. Furthermore, the amounts reimbursed do not correspond to the amounts actually spent and are instead calculated and granted on the basis of distance and limited to a maximum of four inspections per day. The Government acknowledges that the National Directorate of Labour Inspection (DNIT) does not have its own means of transport and that the four cars and six lorries allocated to it under Supreme Decree No. 002-2007 were made available to the headquarters of the Ministry of Labour and Employment Promotion, where they are used by the entire administration. The labour inspection services are therefore forced to call on other units or even use their employees’ own private vehicles to carry out inspections in areas where access is difficult. The Government further points out the shortage of protective clothing required for occupational safety and health inspectors as well as measuring equipment required to assess the risks posed to the health of workers, and indicates that some national directorates do not have offices that are suitable for the performance of inspection duties (accessibility, guarantee of confidentiality, etc.). In the Government’s view, the labour inspection budget should be increased to enable labour inspectors to carry out their duties more effectively. The Committee emphasizes that it is necessary that the needs to that end are expressed as precisely as possible by means of an assessment detailing the labour inspectorate’s current means and its results in relation to the number of workplaces covered (nature of activities, specific risks, geographical location, etc.) and the number and classes of workers employed therein. The Committee therefore requests the Government to take measures to carry out an assessment of the operation of the labour inspectorate and determine the human resources and material means that are necessary for its gradual improvement taking into account priority objectives. It requests it to keep the Office informed of any steps taken to that end and any progress made, as well as any difficulties encountered.

Articles 4, 15(c), 16 and 19. Planning and carrying out of inspections. The Committee notes that, according to the CGTP, the CUT and the CATP, labour inspectors continue to act mainly in response to complaints and not according to a schedule of inspections that takes into account predetermined criteria and allows them to target the branches of activity most exposed to hazards to the health and safety of workers, the legal provisions most liable to violation and the most vulnerable categories of workers. According to the unions, inspections relating to occupational safety and health are rare and, in 2008, these inspections accounted for 6.28 per cent of the total inspections carried out, while the number of inspectors responsible for inspections in this area was reduced by 50 per cent. The unions draw particular attention to the high rate of fatal accidents affecting temporary workers and point out that inspections in the public sector are rare. The Committee recalls that, under Article 16 of the Convention, workplaces should be inspected as often and as thoroughly as is necessary to ensure the application of the legal provisions enforceable by the labour inspectorate. Furthermore, it emphasizes that inspections give inspectors the opportunity to supply on-site technical information and advice to employers and workers (Article 3(1)(b)), particularly in matters relating to occupational safety and health, but also in other areas, and to make use of the broad powers of investigation defined in Article 12(1) to ensure the application of the relevant legal provisions. Furthermore, reiterating its 2008 direct request, the Committee once again stresses the need for the labour inspectorate to introduce a combination of different types of inspection (programmed, thematic, in response to a complaint) in order to cover as many workplaces as possible, but also to ensure the principle of confidentiality relating to complaints laid down in Article 15(c). In paragraph 263 of its General Survey of 2006 on labour inspection, the Committee recommends a practice of unannounced visits on a regular basis as a means of observing this principle. According to the information contained in the inspectorate’s 2007 annual report, 102,123 inspections seem to have targeted several branches of activity that are particularly sensitive with regard to safety and health, such as construction, home work, port work, oil companies, transport and mines. However, the Committee emphasizes that, in order to assess the coverage of the labour inspectorate, it requires not only the number of inspections carried out, but also the number of workplaces visited, and, above all, the number of workplaces liable to inspection across the country. The latter figure is particularly important for the planning of inspection activities. The Committee notes with interest the Government’s indication in its report that it is envisaged to ensure that, in future, the labour inspectorate develops a proactive approach based on information obtained in collaboration with the tax administration. It also notes with interest, with reference to its general observation of 2009 concerning the inter-institutional cooperation required for the establishment of a register of workplaces, that the labour inspectorate plans to establish broad cooperation with the National Superintendance of Tax Administration (SUNAT), the National Superintendance of Public Registries (SUNARP), the National Registry of Identification and Civil Status (RENIEC), the social security bodies (EsSalud), as well as the Public Sector Pension Fund (ONP) in order to implement the labour inspectorate’s integrated computer system (SIIT). It hopes that this will result in a mapping of workplaces which will allow the central labour inspection authority, established under Act No. 28806 on labour inspection, to draw up an appropriate schedule of inspections.

The Committee requests the Government to provide the ILO with its opinion concerning the inadequate coverage of the labour inspectorate with regard to occupational safety and health, as well as information concerning any measures taken to give effect to the above Articles of the Convention.

Articles 12(1)(a) and (c), and 15(c). Scope of the principle of the right of free entry of labour inspectors to workplaces liable to inspection. The Committee notes that, according to the Government, steps have been taken to bring the legislation into conformity with the above provisions of the Convention. However, it notes that, under section 8 of Supreme Decree No. 019-2007-TR amending Act No. 28806 on labour inspection, labour inspectors are authorized, where there is a threat to the life or safety of the workers, to carry out inspections on their own initiative without a prior mission order but that subsequent approval is required to validate the inspection. Consequently, it seems that labour inspectors still do not enjoy the right of free access to workplaces, as defined by Article 12(1). The Committee is therefore bound to emphasize once again that it is essential that labour inspections are not subject to any authorization. Furthermore, the requirement of a mission order containing a description of the purpose of the inspection constitutes an obstacle to the guarantee by inspectors of confidentiality concerning the source of the complaint and the link between the inspection and a complaint (Article 15(c)). Recalling that it has been commenting on the right of labour inspectors to enter freely any workplace liable to inspection for several years (2001, 2004, 2006, 2008), the Committee requests the Government to take measures as soon as possible to bring the legislation and practice into conformity with the Convention on this point, in particular through the repeal of the legal provisions which make inspection visits dependant on an order issued by a higher authority, as well as those providing that the scope and purpose of inspections must be established in advance for all inspection visits. The Committee requests it to provide information in its next report concerning these measures and to provide a copy of any relevant text.

Articles 20 and 21. Noting with interest, following its repeated requests, the provision of a report on the work of the labour inspectorate for 2007, the Committee draws the Government’s attention to the useful guidance contained in Paragraph 9 of the Labour Inspection Recommendation, 1947 (No. 81), concerning the manner in which the information required by Article 21(a)–(g) could be presented and would be grateful if it would take the necessary measures to ensure that an annual report containing the information set out in these provisions is published and communicated to the ILO in the near future.

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

The Committee duly notes the information supplied by the Government concerning the new provisions of legislation giving effect to a number of provisions of the Convention which have been the subject of previous comments in relation to the observations made by the Union of Labour Inspectors (SIT) in 2005.

Article 6 of the Convention. Conditions of service of inspection staff. The Committee notes with interest the adoption of a specific pay scale for inspection staff and the pursuit of discussions with the trade union regarding variable pay modulations linked to seniority, merit and other criteria. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would supply information on the outcome of these discussions and any practical follow-up action taken.

Articles 12, paragraph 1(a) and (c), and 15(c). Scope of the principle of the right of free entry of labour inspectors to workplaces liable to inspection. With reference to its previous comments, the Committee notes that the Government has not replied to its concerns regarding the legal restrictions on inspectors’ right of free access to workplaces, this right still being dependent on a mission order, regardless of whether the inspection visits are planned, are initiated following a complaint, or are intended to provide information and technical advice. These restrictions are laid down by section 10(2) and section 13(a) of General Labour Inspection Act No. 28806, and also sections 8 and 9.1 of the implementing regulations issued by Supreme Decree No. 019-2006-TR of 29 October 2006. Restrictions also apply to the scope of controls (section 13(5) of the Act and section 11 of the Decree). The Committee regrets that inspectors’ right of free access to workplaces liable to inspection, as laid down by section 5(2) of the abovementioned Act, is so limited by the abovementioned provisions that it is completely negated, which is in contradiction with Article 12, paragraph 1(a), of the Convention. This provision states that the exercise of this right may be subjected to the sole condition that the labour inspector is provided with proper credentials. On the basis of the preparatory work for the Convention, the Committee emphasizes that the expression “proper credentials” means documents which certify the status of the labour inspector. Without prejudice to the provisions governing inspection visits on the basis of criteria fixed at national or regional level by the central inspection authority for each branch of activity or legislative domain, the Committee once again emphasizes the need to give legal recognition to inspectors’ right of free access and free investigation in workplaces subject to inspection as provided for by Article 12, paragraph 1(a) and (c). It invites the Government to refer to paragraphs 265–271 and 274–278 of its General Survey of 2006 on labour inspection to grasp the foundation and scope of these provisions in relation to the goal the of effectiveness which they pursue, particularly in the light of Article 15(c) of the Convention, which states that labour inspectors must treat as absolutely confidential the source of any complaint … and must give no intimation to the employer or his representative that an inspection visit was made further to receipt of a complaint. Sufficient freedom to take the initiative with regard to inspection visits is essential for labour inspectors to be able to abide by the obligation of confidentiality by having the possibility of conducting a visit arising from a complaint in the same way as routine controls. By using his visit to extend controls to various other matters, the inspector will avoid the risk of the employer or his representative becoming aware of the existence of a complaint and exposing the person who made the complaint to possible reprisals. The Committee therefore strongly hopes that the Government will take the necessary measures as soon as possible to bring the legislation into conformity with these provisions of the Convention, i.e. that it will take steps to abolish the legal provisions which systematically make inspection visits dependent on an order issued by a higher authority, and also the provisions which state that the scope and subject of controls must be fixed in advance for all inspection visits.

Practical functioning of the labour inspection system. In its previous comment, the Committee noted that, owing to the ILO/FORSAT project, the labour inspectorate would soon have a system for the computerization of data concerning its activities. It notes that an annual inspection report has still not been published as provided for by Article 20. It hopes that the central authority will be in a position to meet this obligation in the near future. In the meantime, it would be grateful if the Government would supply in its report on the application of the Convention all available practical information and relevant documents enabling an evaluation of the coverage and effectiveness of the labour inspection system; the number, grades and geographical distribution of inspection staff; the number and geographical distribution of workplaces liable to inspection; the distribution of the vehicle fleet or a description of transport facilities available to inspectors; a description of arrangements promoting effective cooperation between the labour inspectorate and other public bodies and judicial institutions and relevant documentation (for example, concerning the establishment of the register of workplaces liable to inspection, statistics on industrial accidents and cases of occupational disease); a description of arrangements promoting cooperation between the labour inspectorate and employers and workers or their organizations (particularly with regard to occupational safety and health and information on new legislation); forms for inspection visits; copies of inspection reports ordering or recommending prosecution; copies or extracts of administrative or court decisions penalizing those responsible for violating the legal provisions on conditions of work; and any other relevant information or documentation.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2007, published 97th ILC session (2008)

The Committee notes that the information supplied by the Government on the impact that the earthquake which took place last August in its country has had on its capacity to submit its reports. 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:

With reference to its observation, the Committee draws the Government’s attention to the following points.

1. Articles 10 and 16 of the Convention. Number of labour inspectors and inspections. With reference to its previous comments, the Committee notes a decrease in the number of labour inspectors which, according to the table provided by the Government, fell from 234 in 2003 to 203 in 2005. Further noting the persistence of the imbalance that it observed in its previous comments in the distribution of inspectors between the regional directorate in Lima and the 23 other regional directorates, the Committee would be grateful if the Government would: (i) indicate the reasons for the fall in numbers; (ii) specify the number of inspectors responsible for general conditions of work and those dealing with occupational safety and health; and (iii) indicate the number and geographical distribution of workplaces liable to inspection and the workers employed therein.

2. Articles 5(a) and 14. Cooperation between the competent services and notification of industrial accidents and cases of occupational disease to the labour inspectorate. With reference to its previous comments, the Committee notes with satisfaction that section 7 of Act No. 28806 of 19 July 2006, issuing the General Act on labour inspection, establishes the obligation for public bodies and persons discharging public functions to collaborate with the labour inspectorate when such collaboration is necessary for the discharge of the inspection function, and to provide the information at their disposal, including copies of employers’ notifications of industrial accidents and cases of occupational disease. It would be grateful if the Government would take measures rapidly to ensure the application in practice of this provision and provide information in its next report on these measures and their results, as well as copies of any relevant legal text, instruction, form or document.

3. Labour inspection and child labour. Further to its previous comments, the Committee notes with interest that the structures to combat child labour have been reinforced by the establishment, within the Regional Directorate of Labour and Employment Promotion in Lima-Callao, of a service responsible for the protection of minors and occupational safety and health. It notes in particular that this Directorate has undertaken a campaign in the areas most concerned, disseminated information on the legal provisions and procedures governing the issuing of authorizations for work by young persons, gathered information for the preparation of a methodological guide on labour inspection in relation to children, planned seminars on work by young persons and discussions in educational centres concerning the prevention of child labour and coordinated the implementation of a training programme for labour inspectors on this subject. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would indicate whether similar activities have been undertaken in other regions of the country and if it would provide information on the inspection activities undertaken in the field of child labour in the workplaces covered by the Convention and their results.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2007, published 97th ILC session (2008)

The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government on the impact that the earthquake which took place last August in its country has had on its capacity to submit its reports. 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 observation, which read as follows:

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its report and the attached documents, with particular reference to Supreme Decree No. 018‑2006-TR of 28 October 2006, amending the Regulations establishing the organization and functions of the Ministry of Labour and Employment Promotion, General Act No. 28806 of 19 July 2006 on the labour inspectorate and Decree No. 019/2006-TR of 28 October 2006 issuing regulations under the General Act on the labour inspectorate. The Committee also notes the new observations made by the Union of Labour Inspectors of the Ministry of Labour and Employment Promotion (SIT), received by the Office on 20 September 2005 and forwarded to the Government on 11 October 2005. The observations made by the Trade Union of Fishing Boat Masters and Owners of Puerto Supe and Associates (SCPPPSA), received by the Office on 3 December 2004 and 28 January 2005 and forwarded to the Government by letters dated respectively 17 December 2004 and 25 July 2005, are examined under the Shipowners’ Liability (Sick and Injured Seamen) Convention, 1936 (No. 55).

With regard to the observations made in 2005 by the SIT, the Committee notes that it reiterates in part the issues raised in an observation made in 2003, namely the numerous problems confronting the labour inspectorate, particularly the lack of support and commitment by the public authorities and the criticisms made by the social partners.

1. Lack of support and commitment by the authorities responsible for labour inspection. The SIT refers, among other matters, to the lack of the resources required for the operation of the labour inspectorate, in terms of infrastructure, equipment, transport facilities and the lack of consideration by the responsible authorities, resulting in pressure and unjustified victimization. Furthermore, the conditions of service of the majority of labour inspectors do not offer them any prospect of career promotion, and the level of their remuneration is clearly lower than that of their colleagues, and lower than for similar functions in other departments of the public service. The SIT provided documents containing comparative figures in this respect. It adds that a collective agreement negotiated by the SIT and the Ministry for 2004-05 was not applied in good faith by the latter. The SIT refers to a clause on the allocation of the professional travel expenses of inspectors and the delay in reimbursing their food and accommodation costs, with the arrangements failing to take into account necessary expenses on long-distance travel. The Committee notes that this agreement covers salaries, seniority allowances, the professional travel expenses of inspectors, the exercise of trade union activities and prospects to ensure against the risks related to the profession of inspector, training and temporary detachments to other units. However, from the viewpoint of the SIT, the Ministry, as employer, does not guarantee labour inspectors the conditions of service and stability envisaged in Article 6 of the Convention, nor decent working conditions. However, the SIT emphasizes that labour inspectors hold university diplomas of a fairly high level, are committed to solid moral and ethical principles and demonstrate professionalism and independence. It regrets that the requirement of dedication to one profession imposed on labour inspectors is not accompanied by salaries enabling them to live decently, in view of the importance of their responsibilities, and particularly the extension of their competence under the terms of section 1 of Act No. 28292 of 2004.

The Committee notes that the Government has not replied to the issues raised relating to the conditions of service and of work of labour inspectors. However, it notes with interest that Act No. 28806 of 2006 contains numerous provisions intended to guarantee labour inspectors a status and conditions of service that are in accordance with the requirements of the Convention. Section 26 of the Act provides that the system for the selection and the legal status of inspectors in the labour inspection system shall be governed by specific texts or the provisions applicable to the public service and administrative careers. These texts shall establish the legal status, conditions of service, remuneration, exclusivity of functions, transfer, promotion, classification of posts, termination of employment and disciplinary regime. The Act also establishes the conditions for recruitment and appointment in the inspectorate and the trial period for the various categories of inspection officials. The Committee notes in particular with interest that the means of ascertaining the aptitude of candidates to the profession shall be determined by the central authority of the labour inspection system (Article 7, paragraph 2) and that, in accordance with section 27, labour inspectors shall be obliged to participate in annual programmes of initial training and further training courses. Furthermore, under the terms of section 26, officials discharging inspection functions are ensured of employment stability and may not sanctioned, terminated or transferred for reasons other than a professional fault. The disciplinary procedure must be of an adversarial nature, which implies the hearing and participation of the official concerned.

The Committee hopes that the Government will not fail to provide rapidly the texts issued under the above provisions of the Act and that it will supply information on any action taken by the Minister for the Economy and Finances as a result of the conclusions of the technical and market studies which, according to the SIT, have been submitted to it for examination with a view to improving the salaries of inspectors.

With reference to the SIT’s observation, communicated to the Office in 2003, according to which inspectors are not protected against acts of aggression committed against them, the Committee notes that the Government has still not provided, as it indicated it would, copies of the correspondence that it stated it had addressed to the police authorities for this purpose. It requests the Government to provide the above copies with its next report.

2. Article 16. Coverage of the labour inspection system and priority establishments. The Committee notes that, according to the SIT, employers complain that inspections tend to target large and medium-sized formal enterprises and that a repressive approach is adopted. Workers’ organizations are reported to have expressed the hope that the inspectorate’s database would be extended to enterprises that are not inspected so as to ensure compliance with the labour legislation. According to the SIT, analysis of the inspections carried out shows that they are generally undertaken based on the interests of the responsible authorities, and therefore cover certain categories of enterprises, but that there is no strategic planning involved. The Committee notes that the Government has not provided comments on the trade union’s allegation concerning the methods of designating the workplaces to be inspected and the manner in which it is ensured that such inspections are unannounced and undertaken without previous notice, as required by Article 12, paragraph 1, of the Convention.

3. Articles 6 and 11, paragraph 1(b). Independence of labour inspectors and the provision of transport facilities. With reference to its previous comments, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that the use of means of transport belonging to employers to convey inspectors to remote workplaces only occurs occasionally. However, it notes with concern that this is a practice indicated by ten of the 24 regional divisions questioned on this point and that, in one of these divisions, in cases where inspections are carried out at the request of one party, they are financed to the level of 98 per cent by that party. The Committee therefore notes with interest that section 19 of the Regulations issued under the General Act on labour and the protection of workers of 2001, which authorized the labour inspectorate to have recourse to means of transport belonging to employers, workers or third parties concerned to undertake inspections in remote workplaces, was repealed by the General Act on labour inspection No. 28806 of 19 July 2006. It would be grateful if the Government would indicate the measures through which it is envisaged that inspectors will have the necessary means of transport available for the discharge of their functions.

4. Article 12. Right of inspectors to enter workplaces freely. With reference to its previous observation, the Committee notes with interest that, by virtue of section 13(2) of Decree No. 019 issued under the abovementioned Act, the labour inspector is not obliged to postpone the inspection when one of the parties is absent and that the inspection may proceed without prejudice to its validity. It also notes with satisfaction that, under the terms of section 5(1) of the above Act, the inspectors are also authorized, in accordance with Article 12, paragraph 1, of the Convention, not to notify the employer or her or his representative of their presence where they consider that such notification may be prejudicial to the effectiveness of the inspection. The Committee noted with interest in its previous observation certain amendments made to the legislation that previously covered the right of entry of inspectors into workplaces liable to inspection, while emphasizing that there nevertheless remained contradictions on certain matters in relation to the requirements of the Convention. This is still the case as, under the terms of section 10 of the Act of 2006 referred to above, all inspections are subject to a mission order from the responsible authority, including those based on a complaint or a request for information or technical advice. Contrary to the explanations provided by the Government in its report, there is therefore no exception to the principle of prior authorization, as this provision reiterates the requirement for a mission order not only for programmed inspections and those covering a specific field, but also for all inspections. As a result, inspectors never have the initiative of their action. Emphasizing the negative impact of the various restrictions placed in certain countries on the right of entry of inspectors on the effectiveness of their action, the Committee once again indicated in its 2006 General Survey on labour inspection that these restrictions in law or in practice can only stand in the way of achieving the objectives of labour inspection as set out in the instruments and that they are not in conformity with the Convention. It therefore urged the governments of the countries concerned to take the necessary measures to eliminate them in law and in practice (paragraph 266). With regard in particular to inspections resulting from a complaint, the Committee considers that the principle that they should be subject to a mission order is contrary to the principle set out in the Convention that the labour inspector should be prohibited from revealing to the employer the reason for the inspection. The Committee therefore hopes that the Government will not fail to take measures to amend the relevant legislation to bring it into conformity with the Convention on this essential point and to ensure that labour inspectors are henceforth empowered to enter freely workplaces liable to inspection, under the terms and conditions set out in Article 12.

5. Articles 10, 11 and 20. Financing the human, material and logistical resources necessary for the effective operation of labour inspection and preparation of an annual inspection report. With reference to its previous observation, in which it noted that a multinational cooperation project had been launched to strengthen labour administrations in the countries of the region (ILO/FORSAT), the Committee notes with interest, according to information provided recently by the ILO Regional Office, that a new information system on labour inspection is being established. This system should make it possible to provide the Office with detailed statistics. The Committee also notes that, in accordance with the General Act on labour inspection of 2006, the Ministry of Labour and Employment Promotion, regional governments and the competent public administration agencies will ensure that the labour inspection system has at its disposal, sufficient human resources, offices, premises, materials and equipment. Where there are no appropriate public means of transport, the necessary means of transport will be provided and travel and other incidental expenses arising from the discharge of their inspection functions will be reimbursed, in accordance with the provisions of the Convention. The Committee however notes that, under the terms of the final and transitional provisions of the Act (point 5), the scale of remuneration of labour inspectors whose employment relationship is governed by private law will only be modified in accordance with the availability of the corresponding budgetary allocations. It requests the Government to provide information on the budgetary provisions adopted or envisaged to give full effect to this provision and to indicate whether it is explicitly planned to harmonize the status of labour inspection personnel so as to secure for all inspectors the guarantees provided for in Article 6 of the Convention.

The Committee is addressing a request directly to the Government on certain matters.

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

With reference to its observation, the Committee draws the Government’s attention to the following points.

1. Articles 10 and 16 of the Convention. Number of labour inspectors and inspections. With reference to its previous comments, the Committee notes a decrease in the number of labour inspectors which, according to the table provided by the Government, fell from 234 in 2003 to 203 in 2005. Further noting the persistence of the imbalance that it observed in its previous comments in the distribution of inspectors between the regional directorate in Lima and the 23 other regional directorates, the Committee would be grateful if the Government would: (i) indicate the reasons for the fall in numbers; (ii) specify the number of inspectors responsible for general conditions of work and those dealing with occupational safety and health; and (iii) indicate the number and geographical distribution of workplaces liable to inspection and the workers employed therein.

2. Articles 5(a) and 14. Cooperation between the competent services and notification of industrial accidents and cases of occupational disease to the labour inspectorate. With reference to its previous comments, the Committee notes with satisfaction that section 7 of Act No. 28806 of 19 July 2006, issuing the General Act on labour inspection, establishes the obligation for public bodies and persons discharging public functions to collaborate with the labour inspectorate when such collaboration is necessary for the discharge of the inspection function, and to provide the information at their disposal, including copies of employers’ notifications of industrial accidents and cases of occupational disease. It would be grateful if the Government would take measures rapidly to ensure the application in practice of this provision and provide information in its next report on these measures and their results, as well as copies of any relevant legal text, instruction, form or document.

3. Labour inspection and child labour. Further to its previous comments, the Committee notes with interest that the structures to combat child labour have been reinforced by the establishment, within the Regional Directorate of Labour and Employment Promotion in Lima-Callao, of a service responsible for the protection of minors and occupational safety and health. It notes in particular that this Directorate has undertaken a campaign in the areas most concerned, disseminated information on the legal provisions and procedures governing the issuing of authorizations for work by young persons, gathered information for the preparation of a methodological guide on labour inspection in relation to children, planned seminars on work by young persons and discussions in educational centres concerning the prevention of child labour and coordinated the implementation of a training programme for labour inspectors on this subject. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would indicate whether similar activities have been undertaken in other regions of the country and if it would provide information on the inspection activities undertaken in the field of child labour in the workplaces covered by the Convention and their results.

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

The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its report and the attached documents, with particular reference to Supreme Decree No. 018-2006-TR of 28 October 2006, amending the Regulations establishing the organization and functions of the Ministry of Labour and Employment Promotion, General Act No. 28806 of 19 July 2006 on the labour inspectorate and Decree No. 019/2006-TR of 28 October 2006 issuing regulations under the General Act on the labour inspectorate. The Committee also notes the new observations made by the Union of Labour Inspectors of the Ministry of Labour and Employment Promotion (SIT), received by the Office on 20 September 2005 and forwarded to the Government on 11 October 2005. The observations made by the Trade Union of Fishing Boat Masters and Owners of Puerto Supe and Associates (SCPPPSA), received by the Office on 3 December 2004 and 28 January 2005 and forwarded to the Government by letters dated respectively 17 December 2004 and 25 July 2005, are examined under the Shipowners’ Liability (Sick and Injured Seamen) Convention, 1936 (No. 55).

With regard to the observations made in 2005 by the SIT, the Committee notes that it reiterates in part the issues raised in an observation made in 2003, namely the numerous problems confronting the labour inspectorate, particularly the lack of support and commitment by the public authorities and the criticisms made by the social partners.

1. Lack of support and commitment by the authorities responsible for labour inspection. The SIT refers, among other matters, to the lack of the resources required for the operation of the labour inspectorate, in terms of infrastructure, equipment, transport facilities and the lack of consideration by the responsible authorities, resulting in pressure and unjustified victimization. Furthermore, the conditions of service of the majority of labour inspectors do not offer them any prospect of career promotion, and the level of their remuneration is clearly lower than that of their colleagues, and lower than for similar functions in other departments of the public service. The SIT provided documents containing comparative figures in this respect. It adds that a collective agreement negotiated by the SIT and the Ministry for 2004-05 was not applied in good faith by the latter. The SIT refers to a clause on the allocation of the professional travel expenses of inspectors and the delay in reimbursing their food and accommodation costs, with the arrangements failing to take into account necessary expenses on long-distance travel. The Committee notes that this agreement covers salaries, seniority allowances, the professional travel expenses of inspectors, the exercise of trade union activities and prospects to ensure against the risks related to the profession of inspector, training and temporary detachments to other units. However, from the viewpoint of the SIT, the Ministry, as employer, does not guarantee labour inspectors the conditions of service and stability envisaged in Article 6 of the Convention, nor decent working conditions. However, the SIT emphasizes that labour inspectors hold university diplomas of a fairly high level, are committed to solid moral and ethical principles and demonstrate professionalism and independence. It regrets that the requirement of dedication to one profession imposed on labour inspectors is not accompanied by salaries enabling them to live decently, in view of the importance of their responsibilities, and particularly the extension of their competence under the terms of section 1 of Act No. 28292 of 2004.

The Committee notes that the Government has not replied to the issues raised relating to the conditions of service and of work of labour inspectors. However, it notes with interest that Act No. 28806 of 2006 contains numerous provisions intended to guarantee labour inspectors a status and conditions of service that are in accordance with the requirements of the Convention. Section 26 of the Act provides that the system for the selection and the legal status of inspectors in the labour inspection system shall be governed by specific texts or the provisions applicable to the public service and administrative careers. These texts shall establish the legal status, conditions of service, remuneration, exclusivity of functions, transfer, promotion, classification of posts, termination of employment and disciplinary regime. The Act also establishes the conditions for recruitment and appointment in the inspectorate and the trial period for the various categories of inspection officials. The Committee notes in particular with interest that the means of ascertaining the aptitude of candidates to the profession shall be determined by the central authority of the labour inspection system (Article 7, paragraph 2) and that, in accordance with section 27, labour inspectors shall be obliged to participate in annual programmes of initial training and further training courses. Furthermore, under the terms of section 26, officials discharging inspection functions are ensured of employment stability and may not sanctioned, terminated or transferred for reasons other than a professional fault. The disciplinary procedure must be of an adversarial nature, which implies the hearing and participation of the official concerned.

The Committee hopes that the Government will not fail to provide rapidly the texts issued under the above provisions of the Act and that it will supply information on any action taken by the Minister for the Economy and Finances as a result of the conclusions of the technical and market studies which, according to the SIT, have been submitted to it for examination with a view to improving the salaries of inspectors.

With reference to the SIT’s observation, communicated to the Office in 2003, according to which inspectors are not protected against acts of aggression committed against them, the Committee notes that the Government has still not provided, as it indicated it would, copies of the correspondence that it stated it had addressed to the police authorities for this purpose. It requests the Government to provide the above copies with its next report.

2. Article 16. Coverage of the labour inspection system and priority establishments. The Committee notes that, according to the SIT, employers complain that inspections tend to target large and medium-sized formal enterprises and that a repressive approach is adopted. Workers’ organizations are reported to have expressed the hope that the inspectorate’s database would be extended to enterprises that are not inspected so as to ensure compliance with the labour legislation. According to the SIT, analysis of the inspections carried out shows that they are generally undertaken based on the interests of the responsible authorities, and therefore cover certain categories of enterprises, but that there is no strategic planning involved. The Committee notes that the Government has not provided comments on the trade union’s allegation concerning the methods of designating the workplaces to be inspected and the manner in which it is ensured that such inspections are unannounced and undertaken without previous notice, as required by Article 12, paragraph 1, of the Convention.

3. Articles 6 and 11, paragraph 1(b). Independence of labour inspectors and the provision of transport facilities. With reference to its previous comments, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that the use of means of transport belonging to employers to convey inspectors to remote workplaces only occurs occasionally. However, it notes with concern that this is a practice indicated by ten of the 24 regional divisions questioned on this point and that, in one of these divisions, in cases where inspections are carried out at the request of one party, they are financed to the level of 98 per cent by that party. The Committee therefore notes with interest that section 19 of the Regulations issued under the General Act on labour and the protection of workers of 2001, which authorized the labour inspectorate to have recourse to means of transport belonging to employers, workers or third parties concerned to undertake inspections in remote workplaces, was repealed by the General Act on labour inspection No. 28806 of 19 July 2006. It would be grateful if the Government would indicate the measures through which it is envisaged that inspectors will have the necessary means of transport available for the discharge of their functions.

4. Article 12. Right of inspectors to enter workplaces freely. With reference to its previous observation, the Committee notes with interest that, by virtue of section 13(2) of Decree No. 019 issued under the abovementioned Act, the labour inspector is not obliged to postpone the inspection when one of the parties is absent and that the inspection may proceed without prejudice to its validity. It also notes with satisfaction that, under the terms of section 5(1) of the above Act, the inspectors are also authorized, in accordance with Article 12, paragraph 1, of the Convention, not to notify the employer or her or his representative of their presence where they consider that such notification may be prejudicial to the effectiveness of the inspection. The Committee noted with interest in its previous observation certain amendments made to the legislation that previously covered the right of entry of inspectors into workplaces liable to inspection, while emphasizing that there nevertheless remained contradictions on certain matters in relation to the requirements of the Convention. This is still the case as, under the terms of section 10 of the Act of 2006 referred to above, all inspections are subject to a mission order from the responsible authority, including those based on a complaint or a request for information or technical advice. Contrary to the explanations provided by the Government in its report, there is therefore no exception to the principle of prior authorization, as this provision reiterates the requirement for a mission order not only for programmed inspections and those covering a specific field, but also for all inspections. As a result, inspectors never have the initiative of their action. Emphasizing the negative impact of the various restrictions placed in certain countries on the right of entry of inspectors on the effectiveness of their action, the Committee once again indicated in its 2006 General Survey on labour inspection that these restrictions in law or in practice can only stand in the way of achieving the objectives of labour inspection as set out in the instruments and that they are not in conformity with the Convention. It therefore urged the governments of the countries concerned to take the necessary measures to eliminate them in law and in practice (paragraph 266). With regard in particular to inspections resulting from a complaint, the Committee considers that the principle that they should be subject to a mission order is contrary to the principle set out in the Convention that the labour inspector should be prohibited from revealing to the employer the reason for the inspection. The Committee therefore hopes that the Government will not fail to take measures to amend the relevant legislation to bring it into conformity with the Convention on this essential point and to ensure that labour inspectors are henceforth empowered to enter freely workplaces liable to inspection, under the terms and conditions set out in Article 12.

5. Articles 10, 11 and 20. Financing the human, material and logistical resources necessary for the effective operation of labour inspection and preparation of an annual inspection report. With reference to its previous observation, in which it noted that a multinational cooperation project had been launched to strengthen labour administrations in the countries of the region (ILO/FORSAT), the Committee notes with interest, according to information provided recently by the ILO Regional Office, that a new information system on labour inspection is being established. This system should make it possible to provide the Office with detailed statistics. The Committee also notes that, in accordance with the General Act on labour inspection of 2006, the Ministry of Labour and Employment Promotion, regional governments and the competent public administration agencies will ensure that the labour inspection system has at its disposal, sufficient human resources, offices, premises, materials and equipment. Where there are no appropriate public means of transport, the necessary means of transport will be provided and travel and other incidental expenses arising from the discharge of their inspection functions will be reimbursed, in accordance with the provisions of the Convention. The Committee however notes that, under the terms of the final and transitional provisions of the Act (point 5), the scale of remuneration of labour inspectors whose employment relationship is governed by private law will only be modified in accordance with the availability of the corresponding budgetary allocations. It requests the Government to provide information on the budgetary provisions adopted or envisaged to give full effect to this provision and to indicate whether it is explicitly planned to harmonize the status of labour inspection personnel so as to secure for all inspectors the guarantees provided for in Article 6 of the Convention.

The Committee is addressing a request directly to the Government on certain matters.

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

Referring also to its observation under the Convention, the Committee draws the Government’s attention to the following points.

Articles 6 and 11, paragraph 1(b), of the Convention. The Committee notes that, under section 19 of the Regulations implementing the General Labour Act, labour inspection may have recourse to the transport facilities of employers, workers or third parties, to visit workplaces which are difficult to access. This provision does not comply with the Convention, and particularly Article 11(b), which establishes the obligation for the competent authority to make the necessary arrangements to provide labour inspectors with the transport facilities necessary for the performance of their duties, in cases where suitable public transport facilities do not exist. The Committee also emphasizes the serious risk of dependency which may arise for labour inspectors under the above provision, despite the obligation for inspectors to indicate in their records the inspections carried out under these conditions. Such dependency is contrary to the principles of impartiality and authority that are indispensable in the relations between labour inspectors and employers and workers. The Government is therefore requested to take measures rapidly to amend the legislation to bring it into line with the Convention on this essential matter and to keep the ILO informed of the progress made.

Articles 10 and 16. Referring to its previous comments, and while noting with interest the significant increase of labour inspection staff between 1999 and 2004, the Committee observes that its imbalanced distribution between the regional directorate in Lima and the 23 other regional directorates has deepened since 1999. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would: (i) indicate the reasons which may justify this distribution of labour inspectors; (ii) specify the number of inspectors responsible for general conditions of work and those dealing with occupational safety and health; and (iii) provide information on the geographical distribution of workplaces liable to inspection and on the workers occupied therein.

Article 14. The Committee notes that section 35 of the General Labour Inspection Act establishes the obligation for employers, workers and the Ministry of Health (through its health centres, the social health insurance scheme ESSALUD, superintendence of health-care providers, clinics and hospitals) to notify the Ministry of Labour and Employment Promotion of industrial accidents and cases of occupational disease, in accordance with the instructions contained in the relevant regulations. It also notes that draft regulations on occupational safety and health are being examined establishing a national information system on occupational accidents and diseases and that a notification form has been designed. The Government is requested to take the necessary measures to ensure that the labour inspector is informed of occupational accidents and cases of occupational diseases, as envisaged by this Article of the Convention, and to provide copies of any relevant provisions.

Labour inspection and child labour. The Committee notes with interest the establishment of a multi-sectoral committee responsible for the implementation of the activities set out in the Plan of Action for Children and Young Persons 2002-10 (PNAI) and of the National Executive Committee for the Prevention and Elimination of Child Labour. It also notes the coordination by the Regional Labour and Employment Promotion Directorate of Lima-Callao of a national plan to prevent and eliminate child labour. Further noting the information concerning the draft review of the Code of Children and Young Persons, the Committee asks the Government to provide information on the role and activities of the labour inspectorate in combating child labour and on the results achieved in relation to the objectives pursued.

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

Further to its previous comments, the Committee notes that the Government has still not communicated any of the many documents indicated as being attached to its replies communicated to the ILO in November 2003 to the observations formulated in September 2003 by the Union of Labour Inspectors of the Ministry of Labour and Employment Promotion (SIT) on the application of the Convention. The Committee is therefore bound to recall its previous comments concerning the points raised by the SIT, which read as follows:

According to the SIT, labour inspection is not a priority for the Government and does not therefore benefit from the necessary support from the public authorities. It adds that the establishment of a trade union by labour inspectors with a view to defending the interests of the occupation has been punished by a series of intimidation measures against its leaders and members.

Functions, status, conditions of service and safety of labour inspectors. According to the SIT, over half of labour inspectors, including the leaders and members of the trade union, have been affected by transfers to other duties and unannounced evaluations which may be assimilated to direct or tacit threats of dismissal. The personal safety of labour inspectors is not guaranteed, as they are not even covered in the event of employment accidents and no measures are taken to collaborate with the forces of order in the event of obstructions to the discharge of inspection duties.

The SIT adds that the direction of the labour inspectorate has endeavoured to dissuade labour inspectors from joining the trade union by indicating tacitly, during a meeting concerning the allocation of training grants, that they would be provided to inspectors favourable to the administration, which did occur in practice.

According to the Government, transfers of labour inspectors are not a new development related to the establishment of the trade union. It indicates that they are dictated by the requirements of the service and, more recently, to respond to the training needs of the labour inspectorate, in accordance with the new policy of the Ministry. Certain inspectors, for example, have been made responsible for examining collective redundancies in state enterprises, public sector bodies and local governments. The Government states that the transfers of inspectors to which the SIT refers were prior to the establishment of the trade union and are not therefore related to it. It adds that the new duties are related to the functions for which the inspectors were recruited and do not therefore jeopardize the principle of the employment stability of inspectors. This employment stability is guaranteed by the nature of their employment relationship, which is covered by permanent contracts in the context of the General Act respecting labour inspection and the protection of workers. In the view of the Government, the dismissal of inspectors is subject to the conditions set out by the Act and is undertaken on the grounds of a grave professional fault.

The Government emphasizes the particular interest of the national directorate of labour inspection for the training of inspectors, particularly in the fields of safety and health in industrial activities, and it refers to a training project in the framework of an annual plan involving the selection of candidates on the basis of their professional qualifications and experience, to the exclusion of any other discriminatory criteria.

With regard to the personal safety of labour inspectors, the Government states that labour inspectors are protected and that the relevant criminal procedures are initiated whenever the situation so requires. In response to the allegation of the SIT that no measures have been taken to ensure the support of the police forces for inspectors in the event of difficulties in the discharge of their duties, the Government states that such support is envisaged in section 7(b) of the General Act respecting labour inspection and the protection of workers and that, in addition, the directorate of the labour inspection recently addressed the relevant communications to police stations.

Human resources, material resources, transport facilities and the reimbursement of travel expenses. The SIT indicates that the lack of support from the central government for the inspection services is reflected in the first place in the derisory nature of the budget allocated to the labour inspection services. It indicates that inspectors are obliged to cover personally their professional travel expenses, the reimbursement of which is subject to a complex and burdensome procedures, including for inspections of distant workplaces. In the view of the Government, these allegations are without foundation, as the labour inspectorate benefits from a legal status and conditions of employment that are such as to guarantee the objectivity and professionalism of its personnel, as well as measures to strengthen the human and material resources of the services, despite the budgetary restrictions and other austerity measures affecting the whole of the public sector. The Government nevertheless acknowledges that Act No. 28034 of 2003 respecting new austerity measures has imposed restrictions on the use of service vehicles, with the labour inspectorate having at its disposal a single vehicle. Nevertheless, according to the Government, it has recently decided to allocate labour inspectors a budget to cover their professional travel expenses, including their accommodation and incidental travel expenses for inspections of distant workplaces. With regard to office equipment, it indicates that it will be a case of the inspection services being allocated a monthly budget. Furthermore, in the context of a project for the modernization of the labour inspectorate, with the support of the ILO Regional Office, the purchase is envisaged of new computer equipment, vehicles and furniture, as well as training at the national and international levels for labour inspectors.

The Committee notes that the numerous documents which the Government indicated as being attached, in support of the information provided in reply to the matters raised by the Organization, have not been received by the Office. It hopes that they will be provided in the near future and that they will permit a complete examination of the situation at the Committee’s next session.

The Committee reminds the Government of the list of documents as attached to the communication of November 2003:

1.  Communications dated 11 July 2003 to several police stations in Lima.

2.  List of labour inspectors.

3.  List of labour inspectors with an indication of the method of recruitment.

4.  Copy of an employment contract between the Ministry of Labour and labour inspectors.

5.  Decision of the Secretary-General No. 059-2002-TR/SG approving Instruction No. 003-2002-TR/SG on the training programme of the labour inspectors and their temporary duties in other areas.

6.  Instruction No. 003-2002-TR/SG referred to above.

7.  List of training activities carried out in 2002-03 and participants in these activities.

8.  Copy of order forms for the purchase of equipment necessary for labour inspectors.

9.  Copy of mission authorizations indicating the corresponding financial allowances.

10.  Copies of memos authorizing staff travel.

11.  Copy of the 2003 annual public sector budget Act (No. 27829).

12.  Copy of Act No. 28034 of 22 July 2003 adopting additional austerity measures to rationalize public expenditure.

13.  Copy of Ministerial Decision No. 241-2003-TR dated 26 September 2003, authorizing the public prosecutor, on behalf of the Ministry of Labour, to initiate legal proceedings against the aggressors of a female inspector.

Article 12 of the Convention. Right of inspectors to enter workplaces freely. Referring to its previous comments on the implementation of the provisions of this Article, the Committee notes the adoption on 20 July 2004 of Act No. 28292 amending the General Labour Inspection and Worker Protection Act and Presidential Decree No. 010-2004-TR amending the regulations implementing the above Act.

In particular, it notes with interest that section 7 of the General Labour Inspection and Worker Protection Act and section 11 of these Regulations have been amended with a view to extending the period during which inspectors are authorized to carry out, freely and without prior notice, inspections of workplaces. This period now not only comprises normal working hours day and night in workplaces, but also at night outside normal night working hours, to allow controls relating to clandestine work, the technical inspection of machines and equipment which cannot be carried out while they are operating and inspections that are necessary in the case of imminent danger to the safety and health of workers.

The Committee notes, however, that certain legal provisions of the above Act and regulations, as amended, are in contradiction not only with the principle of the right of inspectors to enter workplaces freely, as set out in the new legislation, but also with the relevant provisions of Article 12 of the Convention.

Indeed, section 9(c) of the Act and section 39(A) of the Regulations drastically restrict the right of inspectors to initiate inspections by providing that (except in cases of risks to the safety and health of workers), all inspections are subject to prior written authorization by the administrative labour authority (AAT). Moreover, pursuant to section 37.1 of the Regulations, such authorization should define and limit the scope of the investigations authorized following a complaint.

Section 40(b) of the Regulations prescribes that the presence of the employer or her or his representative at the workplace is imperative for an inspection to be carried out, without which the inspector is obliged to postpone the inspection and notify the employer of its date. Moreover, section 40(f) of the Regulations requires the inspector to be accompanied by the employer and workers during the whole inspection, except during interrogations.

The Committee draws the Government’s attention to the comments that it made in its General Survey of 1985 on labour inspection (paragraph 168 et seq.) on the importance which should be attached to the inspectors’ right of free access to workplaces and their right to free control during the visits. While acknowledging the value of the planning and targeting of inspections by the central inspection authority, depending on the means available, the economic background and the priorities selected based on the assessment of the needs (paragraph 243 of the Survey), the Committee nevertheless pointed out that excessive bureaucracy, such as the requirement of special permits for each inspection, could prejudice the efficiency of inspections. With regard to the written authorization required from the AAT to carry out inspections based on complaints, the Committee considers that this requirement is in any case contrary to the principle set out in Article 15(c) of the Convention under which labour inspectors should be prohibited from revealing to the employer the reason for the visit.

With regard to the obligation for inspectors to be accompanied during inspections by the employer and workers, this is bound to limit the freedom of expression and spontaneity of workers, thereby jeopardizing the effectiveness of the inspection. The Convention is explicit on this point, since Article 12, paragraph 2, establishes the right of the inspectors to derogate from their duty to notify the employer or her or his representative of their presence during inspections where they consider that such notification might be prejudicial to the effectiveness of the inspection.

The Committee therefore urges the Government to continue its efforts to extend the scope of the right of inspectors to enter and inspect workplaces liable to inspection freely, in accordance with the letter and the spirit of the Convention; and to take appropriate measures to remove any obstacles to the exercise of these rights established by laws and regulations, namely: the requirement of prior authorization from the central labour inspection authority to carry out any inspection for any reason whatsoever; the obligation to postpone an inspection in the event of the absence of the employer or her or his representative; and the obligation for inspectors to be accompanied by the employer and workers during inspections. The Committee hopes that relevant information will be provided to the ILO.

2. Cooperation for the establishment of an effective inspection system. The Committee notes, according to the information available to the ILO, the action taken in the context of the regional multilateral ILO technical cooperation project, FORSAT, financed by the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs of Spain for the strengthening of labour administration services. In particular, the Committee notes with interest that the strengthening of labour inspection is an important component of the project and that it involves vocational training for inspection staff and working methods and procedures. Expressing the hope that the measures taken through the FORSAT project will facilitate the production of an annual labour inspection report, in line with Articles 20 and 21 of the Convention, the Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide information on the implementation of the project and its impact on the operation of the labour inspection system in the light of the provisions of the Convention and the points raised in the Committee’s previous comments.

The Committee is addressing a request directly to the Government on other points.

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

Referring also to its observation, the Committee once again asks the Government to supply information on the following points.

Article 3 of the Convention. Under the terms of section 5(g) of the General Act respecting labour inspection and the defence of workers, the inspection services may be called upon by the law or by other legal provisions to discharge duties in addition to those set out in paragraph 1(a) to (c) of this Article. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide details and clarifications on the nature of these duties and indicate the manner in which it is ensured, as required by paragraph 2 of the same Article, that they do not interfere with the effective discharge of the primary duties of labour inspectors, nor prejudice in any way the authority and impartiality which are necessary to inspectors in their relations with employers and workers.

Article 5(a). According to the information provided in the Government’s report, the protection of young workers is the coordinated and complementary responsibility of the Ministry of Labour and Social Promotion, the Ministry for the Promotion of Women and Human Development (PROMUDEH), the Ministry of Health and the Ministry of Education. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide a copy of any text providing a legal basis for such coordination, as well as any relevant information on the results of the coordination or any difficulties which may have been encountered.

Article 6. The Committee notes that the Government has not provided information concerning the nature of the employment relationship of the new labour inspectors recruited under the Emergency Decree of 21 April 1996, which is a matter raised by the Association of Labour Inspectors. It is therefore requested to provide this information and also to indicate the measures taken to give effect to section 6(2) of the General Act respecting labour inspection, the application of which is reported to have been frozen for budgetary reasons, and under the terms of which labour inspectors are public officials recruited after competition under a contract without limit of time.

Articles 10 and 16. In its previous report, the Government provided information showing a clear imbalance in the distribution of the staff of the labour inspection services between the region of Lima and the rest of the country, and the Committee noted that this imbalance was reflected in the statistics of workplace inspections. The Committee requested the Government to indicate the precise distribution of labour inspectors in geographical terms and by specialization, as well as the corresponding number of workplaces liable to inspection. The Government has not provided the information requested, but has expressed its intention of taking measures to remedy the situation. The Committee hopes that the Government will be in a position to provide in its next report the required information, as well as indications on the nature and implementation of the announced measures.

Article 12. In accordance with section 7(a) of the General Act respecting labour inspection and the defence of workers, labour inspectors are authorized to enter freely and without previous notice at any "reasonable hour" workplaces liable to inspection. The Committee emphasizes that it is essential that there is a legal basis for the right to enter freely at any hour of the day or night any workplace liable to inspection (Article 12, paragraph 1(a)), and to enter by day any premises which inspectors have reasonable cause to believe are liable to inspection (paragraph 1(b)). It therefore requests the Government to take the necessary measures rapidly to bring the legislation into conformity with the Convention in this respect and to provide full information on the progress achieved in this matter.

Article 14. The Committee cannot overemphasize the importance of the role of labour inspectors in the development and implementation of an effective policy for the prevention of occupational risks. To play this role fully, it is necessary for them to be informed of the occurrence of industrial accidents and cases of occupational disease, as required by this Article of the Convention. The Committee trusts that the Government will take measures without delay to establish the obligation for their notification and that it will provide the relevant information.

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

The Committee notes with regret that the Government’s report has not been received. It is therefore bound to repeat its previous comments, which read as follows:

Requirement for the central inspection authority to publish and transmit to the ILO an annual inspection report. Several decades after ratification of this instrument no annual inspection report has yet been transmitted to the ILO. The Committee therefore draws the Government’s attention once again to the essential nature of the reporting obligation incumbent on the central inspection authority under Articles 20 and 21 of the Convention. It accordingly urges the Government to take the necessary steps as soon as possible to ensure that the central authority is in a position to fulfil the obligation. The purpose of publishing an annual report of the kind provided for in these Articles of the Convention is, in particular, to inform at the national level the social partners of the labour inspectorate’s activities and how effective they are, so that they may express any relevant views. The transmission of such reports to the ILO constitutes, at the international level, an indispensable basis for the supervisory bodies to monitor application of the Convention as part of a constructive dialogue with the Government.

Furthermore, the Committee notes the comments made by the Association of Labour Inspectors of the Ministry of Labour and Employment Promotion (SIT) concerning the application of the Convention and the information supplied in reply by the Government.

According to the SIT, labour inspection is not a priority for the Government and does not therefore benefit from the necessary support from the public authorities. It adds that the establishment of a trade union by labour inspectors with a view to defending the interests of the occupation has been punished by a series of intimidation measures against its leaders and members.

Functions, status, conditions of service and safety of labour inspectors

According to the SIT, over half of labour inspectors, including the leaders and members of the trade union, have been affected by transfers to other duties and unannounced evaluations which may be assimilated to direct or tacit threats of dismissal. The personal safety of labour inspectors is not guaranteed, as they are not even covered in the event of employment accidents and no measures are taken to collaborate with the forces of order in the event of obstructions to the discharge of inspection duties.

The SIT adds that the direction of the labour inspectorate has endeavoured to dissuade labour inspectors from joining the trade union by indicating tacitly, during a meeting concerning the allocation of training grants, that they would be provided to inspectors favourable to the administration, which did occur in practice.

According to the Government, transfers of labour inspectors are not a new development related to the establishment of the trade union. It indicates that they are dictated by the requirements of the service and, more recently, to respond to the training needs of the labour inspectorate, in accordance with the new policy of the Ministry. Certain inspectors, for example, have been made responsible for examining collective redundancies in state enterprises, public sector bodies and local governments. The Government states that the transfers of inspectors to which the SIT refers were prior to the establishment of the trade union and are not therefore related to it. It adds that the new duties are related to the functions for which the inspectors were recruited and do not therefore jeopardize the principle of the employment stability of inspectors. This employment stability is guaranteed by the nature of their employment relationship, which is covered by permanent contracts in the context of the General Act respecting labour inspection and the protection of workers. In the view of the Government, the dismissal of inspectors is subject to the conditions set out by the Act and is undertaken on the grounds of a grave professional fault.

The Government emphasizes the particular interest of the national directorate of labour inspection for the training of inspectors, particularly in the fields of safety and health in industrial activities, and it refers to a training project in the framework of an annual plan involving the selection of candidates on the basis of their professional qualifications and experience, to the exclusion of any other discriminatory criteria.

With regard to the personal safety of labour inspectors, the Government states that labour inspectors are protected and that the relevant criminal procedures are initiated whenever the situation so requires. In response to the allegation of the SIT that no measures have been taken to ensure the support of the police forces for inspectors in the event of difficulties in the discharge of their duties, the Government states that such support is envisaged in section 7(b) of the General Act respecting labour inspection and the protection of workers and that, in addition, the directorate of the labour inspection recently addressed the relevant communications to police stations.

Human resources, material resources, transport facilities and the reimbursement of travel expenses. The SIT indicates that the lack of support from the central government for the inspection services is reflected in the first place in the derisory nature of the budget allocated to the labour inspection services. It indicates that inspectors are obliged to cover personally their professional travel expenses, the reimbursement of which is subject to a complex and burdensome procedures, including for inspections of distant workplaces. In the view of the Government, these allegations are without foundation, as the labour inspectorate benefits from a legal status and conditions of employment that are such as to guarantee the objectivity and professionalism of its personnel, as well as measures to strengthen the human and material resources of the services, despite the budgetary restrictions and other austerity measures affecting the whole of the public sector. The Government nevertheless acknowledges that Act No. 28034 of 2003 respecting new austerity measures has imposed restrictions on the use of service vehicles, with the labour inspectorate having at its disposal a single vehicle. Nevertheless, according to the Government, it has recently decided to allocate labour inspectors a budget to cover their professional travel expenses, including their accommodation and incidental travel expenses for inspections of distant workplaces. With regard to office equipment, it indicates that it will be a case of the inspection services being allocated a monthly budget. Furthermore, in the context of a project for the modernization of the labour inspectorate, with the support of the ILO Regional Office, the purchase is envisaged of new computer equipment, vehicles and furniture, as well as training at the national and international levels for labour inspectors.

The Committee notes that the numerous documents which the Government indicated as being attached, in support of the information provided in reply to the matters raised by the Organization, have not been received by the Office. It hopes that they will be provided in the near future and that they will permit a complete examination of the situation at the Committee’s next session.

The Committee renews it direct request of 2001 to the Government.

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

The Committee notes the Government’s report and the attached documents, including the General Act respecting labour inspection and the defence of workers, issued by Legislative Decree No. 910 of 2000, and the Regulations issued under the above Act by Supreme Decree No. 020-2001-TR.

Article 3 of the Convention. Under the terms of section 5(g) of the General Act respecting labour inspection and the defence of workers, the inspection services may be called upon by the law or by other legal provisions to discharge duties in addition to those set out in paragraph 1(a) to (c) of this Article. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide details and clarifications on the nature of these duties and indicate the manner in which it is ensured, as required by paragraph 2 of the same Article, that they do not interfere with the effective discharge of the primary duties of labour inspectors, nor prejudice in any way the authority and impartiality which are necessary to inspectors in their relations with employers and workers.

Article 5(a). According to the information provided in the Government’s report, the protection of young workers is the coordinated and complementary responsibility of the Ministry of Labour and Social Promotion, the Ministry for the Promotion of Women and Human Development (PROMUDEH), the Ministry of Health and the Ministry of Education. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide a copy of any text providing a legal basis for such coordination, as well as any relevant information on the results of the coordination or any difficulties which may have been encountered.

Article 6. The Committee notes that the Government has not provided information concerning the nature of the employment relationship of the new labour inspectors recruited under the Emergency Decree of 21 April 1996, which is a matter raised by the Association of Labour Inspectors. It is therefore requested to provide this information and also to indicate the measures taken to give effect to section 6(2) of the General Act respecting labour inspection, the application of which is reported to have been frozen for budgetary reasons, and under the terms of which labour inspectors are public officials recruited after competition under a contract without limit of time.

Articles 10 and 14. In its previous report, the Government provided information showing a clear imbalance in the distribution of the staff of the labour inspection services between the region of Lima and the rest of the country, and the Committee noted that this imbalance was reflected in the statistics of workplace inspections. The Committee requested the Government to indicate the precise distribution of labour inspectors in geographical terms and by specialization, as well as the corresponding number of workplaces liable to inspection. The Government has not provided the information requested, but has expressed its intention of taking measures to remedy the situation. The Committee hopes that the Government will be in a position to provide in its next report the required information, as well as indications on the nature and implementation of the announced measures.

Article 12. In accordance with section 7(a) of the General Act respecting labour inspection and the defence of workers, labour inspectors are authorized to enter freely and without previous notice at any "reasonable hour" workplaces liable to inspection. The Committee emphasizes that it is essential that there is a legal basis for the right to enter freely at any hour of the day or night any workplace liable to inspection (Article 12, paragraph 1(a)) and to enter by day any premises which inspectors have reasonable cause to believe are liable to inspection (paragraph 1(b)). It therefore requests the Government to take the necessary measures rapidly to bring the legislation into conformity with the Convention in this respect and to provide full information on the progress achieved in this matter.

Article 14. The Committee cannot overemphasize the importance of the role of labour inspectors in the development and implementation of an effective policy for the prevention of occupational risks. To play this role fully, it is necessary for them to be informed of the occurrence of industrial accidents and cases of occupational disease, as required by this Article of the Convention. The Committee trusts that the Government will take measures without delay to establish the obligation for their notification and that it will provide the relevant information.

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

Requirement for the central inspection authority to publish and transmit to the ILO an annual inspection report. Several decades after ratification of this instrument no annual inspection report has yet been transmitted to the ILO. The Committee therefore draws the Government’s attention once again to the essential nature of the reporting obligation incumbent on the central inspection authority under Articles 20 and 21 of the Convention. It accordingly urges the Government to take the necessary steps as soon as possible to ensure that the central authority is in a position to fulfil the obligation. The purpose of publishing an annual report of the kind provided for in these Articles of the Convention is, in particular, to inform at the national level the social partners of the labour inspectorate’s activities and how effective they are, so that they may express any relevant views. The transmission of such reports to the ILO constitutes, at the international level, an indispensable basis for the supervisory bodies to monitor application of the Convention as part of a constructive dialogue with the Government.

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

The Committee notes the information contained in the Government’s report for the period ending August 1999. The Committee notes that the Government envisages, in the context of a strategy for the promotion of prevention, wide dissemination of the legal provisions relating to employment in the form of brochures and posters to bring them to the knowledge of workers and employers. In addition, an awareness-raising campaign on the rights and obligations of workers and employers is envisaged, with media support such as newspapers and magazines. It also notes with interest the information indicating the implementation of training activities for inspectors and administrative staff of the inspection services, particularly with the assistance of the ILO and in coordination with institutions such as the National Institute for Statistics and Informatics (INEI) on the use of data-processing equipment and the industry and construction training service (SENCICO) on measures relating to security and hygiene at work. Noting also the adoption of a new code for children and young persons in Act No. 27337 of 21 July 2000, the Committee requests the Government to supply information on the follow-up given to the abovementioned project to disseminate legislative information and on its impact, if any. It would also be grateful if the Government would indicate the measures taken in application of the abovementioned Act and specify the role of labour inspectors in this matter.

Articles 3(2) and (6) of the Convention.  Referring to its previous comments, the Committee notes that, according to the Government, the independence and impartiality of state officials is ensured by Supreme Decree No. 023-99-PCM of 15 June 1999 which lays down prohibitions, incompatibilities and restrictions in relation to their main duties. The Committee, however, notes the lack of the information requested in its previous comments further to the comments from the Association of Labour Inspectors in regard to the nature of the contract of new inspectors recruited in application of Emergency Decree No. 015-96-TR of 21 April 1996. The Government is requested to supply this information and to indicate in what manner, in accordance with Article 3, paragraph 2, it is ensured that the duties performed by labour inspectors in regard to the prevention of social conflicts are not prejudicial to the exercise of their main duties as defined in Article 3(1).

Article 7(3).  The Committee notes that, in the restructuring of labour inspection functions, the Government has recruited by competition new inspectors specialized in law, accounting, economics, industrial engineering and human relations. It notes furthermore the communication of a text consisting of six articles concerning the Ministry of Labour and Social Development procedure for assessing inspectors. Noting that this text does not include any information indicating its origin and legal nature, the Committee would be grateful if the Government would supply a copy of the official text.

Article 8.  The Committee would be grateful if the Government would supply information on the proportion of women on the labour inspection staff and indicate whether special duties are assigned to male and female inspectors respectively.

Article 10.  The Committee notes that, according to the Government’s report, in 1999 the country had 80 inspectors at Lima (of which 72 were responsible for supervising general working conditions and eight responsible for safety and hygiene inspection); 78 other inspectors (including three responsible for safety and hygiene inspection) worked in the rest of the territory. Noting the apparent imbalance in geographical distribution of inspectors, the Committee requests the Government to indicate their distribution by service and as a function of their specialization as well as the number of workplaces, by inspection service and by activity, liable to inspection.

Article 14.  Further to its previous comments, the Committee once again asks the Government to supply information on the procedure for declaration and notification to the competent authorities of industrial accidents and cases of occupational disease.

Article 16.  The Committee notes that, according to the Government, 30,000 inspection visits took place in metropolitan Lima in 1998, of which 4,750 concerned hygiene and safety at work, and some 30,000 in the rest of the country. Further to its previous comments and recalling that, according to Article 16, workplaces liable to inspection shall be inspected as often and as thoroughly as is necessary to ensure the effective application of the relevant legal provisions, the Committee hopes that, by means of the systematization and computerization announced by the Government, the latter will be able to supply information on the manner in which effect is given to this provision of the Convention by indicating the total number of workplaces liable to inspection and the number of workers employed there.

Articles 20 and 21.  The Committee requests the Government to ensure that an annual inspection report containing information on the subjects listed under Article 21 will be published regularly and transmitted by the central inspection authority to the ILO, in accordance with Article 20, and to supply information on the measures taken to this end.

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

Referring also to its observation under the Convention, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on a certain number of points.

Article 6 of the Convention. The Committee asks the Government to provide a copy of the regulations governing the periodic evaluation of labour inspectors.

Article 7, paragraph 3. In its previous comments the Committee asked the Government to send information on the measures taken or contemplated for training of serving inspectors. The Committee notes the indication of the report that in accordance with section 3 of Supreme Decree No. 004-96-TR, dated 10 June 1996, the labour inspectors shall have professional training and knowledge about the inspection function and other functions within the competence of the Ministry of Labour and Social Development; shall perform their functions with efficiency, decency; and shall be subject to permanent training conducted by the Ministry of Labour and Social Development or entities designated by it. The report also indicates that in 1995-96 the following courses were conducted: (i) theoretical and practical course about the labour inspection in Peru given by the Technical Department of the Ministry of Labour and Social Development from November 1995 to February 1996; (ii) course in professional ethics given by the personnel of the National Superintendence of Tax Administration in February 1996; (iii) theoretical and practical course about labour inspection and labour matters given by the Vice-Ministry of Labour and other functionaries of the Ministry in November 1996; (iv) weekly group discussions conducted in the Sub-Directorate of Inspection, Hygiene and Security for the purposes of unification of criteria in respect of techniques of inspection and actualization in labour legislation; and (v) the programme of training of labour inspectors given by the members of the Consultative Commission on Labour and technical advisers of the High Directorate of the Ministry of Labour and Social Development in July 1997. In connection with the above the Committee requests the Government to provide information on any evaluation done following these training courses as concerns the efficiency and integrity of the labour inspection. It hopes that the Government will continue to provide particulars on training courses in its future reports.

Article 9. The Committee notes that in accordance with section 16 of Supreme Decree No. 004-96-TR, when verifying compliance with the provisions in the field of hygiene and occupational safety, the Inspection Authority shall have at its disposal specialized technical personnel, and, if necessary, shall request assistance of public sectors involved. The Committee asks the Government to provide indications as to: (i) the legal status, conditions and forms of participation of such technical personnel in the work of the labour inspection; (ii) the respective provisions of the legislation that impose on the entities of the public sector the duty to provide assistance to the labour inspectorate; and (iii) the particular forms of such assistance.

Articles 6 and 12, subparagraph 1(a). The Committee notes that in the observations it submitted to the ILO in October 1996, the Association of Labour Inspectors alleges the decrease in remunerations. It also notes the response by the Government that in the framework of the policy of fiscal austerity it has been decided that certain officials, including labour inspectors, observe normal working hours. Taking into consideration that opportunity to conduct the inspection visits during night-time is crucial for the work of the labour inspection, and that in the absence of adequate motivation the labour inspectors may not be stimulated to conduct such visits, the Committee asks the Government to indicate whether labour inspectors are adequately compensated for the conduct of inspection visits in the night-time, i.e. outside their normal working hours.

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

In its previous comments, the Committee noted the observations by the Association of Labour Inspectors of the Ministry of Labour and Social Development of October and November 1996, which were communicated to the Government for comment. The Committee notes the Government's response to the Association's allegations (document No. 001-97-TR/OAJ-OAI) as well as the Government's report for the period ending September 1997. The Committee observes that the organization of the labour inspectorate is governed in particular by Decree No. 004-96-TR of 10 June 1996 on the procedure for labour inspection.

Article 6 of the Convention. The Committee recalls the observations of the Association of Labour Inspectors alleging the non-conformity with this Article of the Convention of the new recruitment procedures introduced under Emergency Decree No. 015-96-TR of 21 April 1996. The Committee notes the Government's response to these allegations, as well as the indication in its report to the effect that the above Decree established a Programme of Labour Inspection and Legal Orientation and that recourse was held to an external competition so as to hire professionals in areas such as law, economics, accounting, industrial engineering, social work. The Committee hopes that the Government will provide information on the nature of the contract under which these new labour inspectors were recruited, the difference, if any, of their status and conditions of employment with those of inspectors recruited previously, and on any measures adopted or envisaged to ensure that labour inspectors are assured of stability of employment and are independent of changes of government and of improper external influences.

Article 10. The Committee notes from the report that in September 1997 approximately 100 labour inspectors were working in the Sub-Directorate of Inspection of the Regional Direction of Labour and Social Development of Lima and Callao. The Committee asks the Government to provide information on the total number of labour inspectors and their distribution among administrative subdivisions of the country.

Article 14. The Committee notes the indication of the report that, according to the information of the Office of Statistics and Information of the Ministry of Labour and Social Development, 44 work accidents occurred in 1996. The Committee hopes that the Government will provide information, including relevant regulations, on the current procedure for the registration of work accidents and occupational diseases and their notification to the competent state authorities.

Article 16. The Committee notes the indication of the report that 21,115 planned inspection visits and 9,203 inspection visits of a special character took place from August 1996 to July 1997. The Committee also notes that the absence of information on the total number of workplaces liable to inspection and the number of workers employed therein makes it impossible to evaluate figures presented by the Government in order to determine whether the frequency of inspections of workplaces is sufficient to ensure the effective application of the relevant legal provisions. The Committee hopes that the Government will provide the necessary information in the very near future.

Articles 20 and 21. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that no annual report on labour inspection has been received since the ratification of the Convention in 1960 and expressed the hope that all appropriate measures would be taken without delay so that annual reports, containing the information required under Article 21, will be published and sent to the ILO within the time-limits laid down in Article 20. The Committee notes with regret that despite all previous requests the Government did not transmit a copy of such report to the ILO. The Committee emphasizes once again that the preparation and publication of annual general reports on the work of inspection services is an essential means for assessing how the Convention is applied and for planning the corrective measures which should be taken. The Committee trusts that all appropriate measures will be taken without delay so that annual reports, containing the information required under Article 21 of the Convention, will be published and sent to the ILO within the time-limits laid down in Article 20.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1996, published 85th ILC session (1997)

The Committee notes the adoption on 11 June 1996 of Supreme Decree No. 004-96-TR. The Committee intends to examine this Decree at its next session and requests the Government to supply information on the application in practice of the Decree.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1996, published 85th ILC session (1997)

In its previous comments the Committee noted a communication of 6 November 1995 from the Association of Labour Inspectors of the Ministry of Labour and Social Development alleging non-compliance with Articles 6, 9, 10 and 16 of the Convention. The Committee notes the comments made by the Government on these observations in a communication of 12 January 1996. The Committee also notes the further allegations made by the Association of Labour Inspectors in communications of October and November 1996 which were sent to the Government for comment on 31 October, 26 November and 5 December 1996 respectively.

1. In the observations it submitted in 1995, the Association of Labour Inspectors alleged non-compliance with Articles 6 (stability of employment), 9 (association of duly qualified technical experts and specialists), 10 (sufficient number of inspectors) and 16 (frequency and thoroughness of inspections).

Article 6. The Association indicated that, in 1992, inspectors were obliged to submit once again to competitive examination for the jobs that they already held and that six monthly evaluations introduced in 1992 have resulted in a reduction in the number of inspectors; the Association alleges that neither the stability nor the independence of inspection staff is guaranteed in regard to changes of government and external influences. The Committee notes the Government's indications in its reply of 12 January 1996 to the effect that stability and independence are ensured when public officials show proof of integrity and efficiency and that the decisions adopted after the six-monthly evaluations may be contested through administrative channels and the courts. The Committee notes that according to the Government's reply it would appear that the inspectors were dismissed because the evaluation of their work was not satisfactory. The Committee notes, however, that these officials seem to have had many years of service and that if the Government considered them inadequate for the service they could have been given appropriate training in the performance of their duties in accordance with Article 7, paragraph 3, of the Convention. The Committee asks the Government to send information on the measures taken or contemplated for training of serving inspectors.

Article 9. The Committee notes that the Association alleged that following an internal reform the Directorate of Occupational Safety and Health has been abolished and the Labour Inspectorate is no longer supported by specialists and experts in occupational health and safety. The Committee notes that in its reply of 12 January 1996, the Government recognizes that the safety and health inspection service no longer has an adequate number of staff but that under Decree No. 04-95-TR the inspection authorities can request the support of appropriate public services. The Committee notes that the participation of specialists is provided in a very general way in the procedure and that, furthermore, the Decree has been repealed by Decree No. 04-96-TR of 11 June 1996. The Committee requests the Government to supply information on the measures taken or envisaged to ensure the participation of duly qualified specialists and technicians in order to ensure the application of the legal provisions relating to health and safety.

Article 10. The Association of Labour Inspectors alleged that the number of inspectors has been reduced by 33 per cent of the total number of inspectors employed in the country in 1991 (70 inspectors for a population of 4 million workers, approximately), that it is insufficient to secure the effective discharge of the duties of the inspectorate, and that the number of inspections carried out is very low (barely 600 ordinary inspections in 1995). It also alleged that the inspectors are assigned administrative tasks such as document filing and archiving and others which bear no relationship to their inspection duties. The Committee notes that in its reply the Government considers that the Convention leaves to the ratifying State the decision regarding the number of inspectors it deems necessary to carry out inspection work; it also states that the inspectors do not carry out administrative tasks. The Committee recalls that the number of inspectors must be sufficient to secure the effective discharge of inspection duties. The allegations of the labour inspectors seem to indicate that filing documents and other administrative work which is not linked directly or indirectly with the work of controlling the application of labour standards and which is imposed on inspectors at a time when, according to available statistics, inspections have decreased sharply, hinder or even prevent the effective exercise of the inspection service. The Committee requests the Government to supply information on the measures taken or envisaged to ensure the application of this Article of the Convention.

Article 16. The Association of Labour Inspectors alleged that the labour inspection services are paralysed and that there is a danger that the inspectors will be replaced by persons recruited through an employment agency. The Committee notes that in its reply of 12 January 1996 the Government rejects the allegation that these services are paralysed and states that a reform of the inspection system is in progress, with the aim of emphasizing the preventive aspect of inspection. The Committee notes from the statistics supplied by the Government that there was a sharp drop in inspections in September and October 1995 which was exacerbated in November and December. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures taken to ensure that inspections are carried out as often and as thoroughly as is necessary.

2. The Committee notes the further allegations submitted by the Association of Labour Inspectors in October and November 1996 and notes that the Association refers specifically to the emergency Decree of 29 March 1996, No. 015-96, on the "Labour Inspection and Legal Guidance Programme". This provides for the restructuring of labour inspectorate duties, comprising the complete modification of its operative and administrative parts and revamping current procedures: employment contracts may be concluded with non-qualified persons on a temporary basis to carry out inspection duties; all reports on inspection procedures prior to 31 March 1996 are closed (including, according to the Association of Labour Inspectors, the reports of 455 scheduled inspections conducted in 1995); fines imposed before 31 December 1995, up to an amount of 1,000 soles are cancelled (according to the complainant organization this represents some 95 per cent of the fines imposed); a directive issuing the Decree (Directive No. 01-96-DNRT) states that the files set aside from 2 January 1996 shall be considered as forming part of the annual inspection plan. The Association provides a list of 20 labour inspectors dismissed on 19 February 1996 and nine inspectors dismissed before that date. It denounces the replacement of labour inspectors by staff not included on the Ministry organizational chart nor on the salary roll who are working on service contracts. According to the Association, the temporary staff replace the inspectors in their inspection duties while the inspectors are assigned to administrative and manual tasks. The Committee requests the Government to make its comments on these supplementary allegations of the Association of Labour Inspectors.

3. The Committee notes that the above-mentioned "Labour Inspection and Legal Guidance Programme" ends on 31 December 1996. It requests the Government to provide information on the measures adopted and results achieved under the programme.

4. Articles 20 and 21 of the Convention. The Committee recalls that in its previous comments it noted that no annual report on labour inspection has been received since the ratification of the Convention, 35 years ago. The Committee emphasizes once again that the preparation and publication of period reports on the activities of the inspection services is an essential means for assessing how the Convention is applied and for planning the corrective measures which should be taken. It trusts that all appropriate measures will be taken without delay so that annual reports, containing the information required under Article 21, will be published and sent to the ILO within the time-limits laid down in Article 20.

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

With reference to its observation on the Convention, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the following matters:

1. Article 3, paragraph 1(b) and (c), of the Convention. The Committee notes that, in contrast with Presidential Decree No. 003-83-TR, Presidential Decree No. 04-95-TR does not give effect to these provisions of the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures which have been taken or are envisaged to give effect to these provisions of the Convention.

2. Article 7. The Committee notes the provisions of section 4 of Presidential Decree No. 04-95-TR. It would be grateful if the Government would indicate the means by which the qualifications of candidates are ascertained and if it would provide information on the training received by inspectors.

3. Article 12, paragraph 1(c)(i). The Committee notes that, under the terms of section 15 of Presidential Decree No. 04-95-TR, inspection visits are carried out with the participation of representatives of the employer and the workers. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would indicate the manner in which it is ensured that inspectors are able to interrogate alone the employer or the staff of the enterprise on any matters concerning the application of the legal provisions, in accordance with this Article of the Convention.

4. Article 14. Please indicate the manner in which effect is given to the provisions of this Article, which requires that the labour inspectorate shall be notified of industrial accidents and cases of occupational disease.

5. Article 15(c). The Committee notes that, in contrast with Presidential Decree No. 003-83-TR, Presidential Decree No. 04-95-TR does not contain any explicit provision imposing upon inspectors the obligation to treat as absolutely confidential the source of any complaints and to give no indication to the employer or his representative that a visit of inspection was made in consequence of the receipt of such a complaint. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would indicate the measures which have been taken or are envisaged to give effect to this provision of the Convention.

6. The Committee notes that the Basic Guide on Labour Inspection contains a summary of the principal provisions of labour law that are in force and are subject to verification by the inspectorate, in accordance with Presidential Decree No. 04-95-TR, and that employers are obliged to abide by the text of the Guide. The Committee notes that the Guide contains the following sections: general obligations, documents which must be displayed by the employer in the workplace, specific obligations and obligations of the employer with regard to the rights and benefits of workers. The Committee notes that the general obligations set out in the Guide include the verification of the authorization to work of young persons and the responsibility to keep a register containing the data of young workers. This register must contain, among other information, data on the date of birth of the young person, the work performed, the remuneration, working hours, the school attended and school hours. The Committee requests the Government to supply detailed information on the cases of non-compliance reported both as regards the responsibility to keep the above registers, and the various types of data that have to be entered, including the sanctions imposed in the event of violations of the legal provisions, in accordance with Article 12, paragraph 1(c)(ii), and Articles 17 and 18 of the Convention.

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

The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government in its reports for 1993 and 1995. It also notes the observations made on 16 November 1995 by the Association of Labour Inspectors of the Ministry of Labour and Social Development.

1. Articles 10, 16, 20 and 21 of the Convention. With reference to its previous comments, the Committee notes that some statistical information has been provided by the Government concerning the activities of the labour inspectorate. The Committee deduces from the statistical table attached to the report that in the regions the current number of inspectors is lower, and sometimes distinctly lower, than the number of inspectors required. With reference to Articles 10 and 16 of the Convention, the Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures which have been taken or are envisaged to ensure that the number of labour inspectors is sufficient to secure the effective discharge of the duties of the inspectorate and that workplaces are inspected as often and as thoroughly as is necessary to ensure the effective application of the relevant legal provisions.

The Committee also notes that, although the Government has provided some statistical information on the activities of the labour inspectorate, it is nevertheless bound to note once again that it has not received an annual report on labour inspection, and that this situation has remained unchanged since the ratification of the Convention 35 years ago. The Committee recalls that the preparation and publication of periodic inspection reports, as required by the Convention, is an essential means of determining the manner in which the instrument is applied and the remedial measures that need to be taken. The Committee trusts that the appropriate measures will be taken without delay to ensure that annual inspection reports, containing precise information on all the matters enumerated in Article 21, are published and transmitted to the ILO within the time-limits set out in Article 20.

2. The Committee notes the communication from the Association of Labour Inspectors of the Ministry of Labour and Social Development, dated 6 November 1995, alleging non-compliance with Articles 6, 9, 10 and 16 of the Convention.

According to the Association of Labour Inspectors, inspectors were obliged in November 1992 to submit once again to competitive examination for the jobs that they already held, even where they had been recruited as a result of a competition, under threat of being declared surplus to requirements. Furthermore, since 1992, six-monthly evaluations have been carried out which have resulted in the termination of the activities of various inspectors, despite their qualifications. The current number of inspectors has been reduced by 33 per cent of the total number of inspectors employed in the country in 1991 (70 inspectors for a population of 4 million workers, approximately), who also have to discharge administrative tasks as well as their inspection duties. As a result, only a minimum number of under 600 ordinary inspections have been carried out in 1995.

According to the Association of Labour Inspectors, taken together with the commencement of an administrative inquiry against ten labour inspectors, this is undermining the guarantee of stability of employment for the staff of the labour inspection services, and is aggravated by the negative effects on their independence of changes of government and improper external influences, as well as affecting the frequency and thoroughness required for inspections to be able to ensure the effective application of the relevant legal provisions.

According to the Association of Labour Inspectors, this situation is aggravated by the fact that the Directorate of Occupational Safety and Health has ceased to operate, with the result that part of its staff has been made redundant and the others have been reassigned to other services, and that as a consequence the labour inspectorate is no longer supported by physicians specializing in occupational health and safety or other professional technical specialists. According to the allegations, the labour inspection services have been paralyzed since 25 October and the staff have been informed verbally that none of the inspectors will continue to discharge their inspection functions, but that they will be replaced by persons contracted for that purpose, probably through an enterprise providing personnel services, and that the Ministry of Labour has met with this personnel to give "training chats" for a brief period not exceeding one week.

The Committee requests the Government to make its own comments on the allegations made by the Association of Labour Inspectors.

3. The Committee notes Presidential Decree No. 04-95-TR respecting the procedures of the labour inspectorate, which repealed Supreme Decrees Nos. 003-83-TR and 032-83-TR. It also notes the Basic Guide on Labour Inspection, approved by Ministerial Decision No. 036-95-TR. It is addressing a request directly to the Government concerning a number of matters related to the above texts.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1993, published 80th ILC session (1993)

The Committee notes the comments made by the Union of Workers of the Country Inn SA and the National Federation of Hotel and Allied Workers of Peru, and the Government's reply. These comments concern the manner in which certain legal provisions relating to wages are respected. The Government indicates in its reply that it does not agree with these comments and states moreover that a new agreement could be negotiated on this subject between the establishments and workers in question. With reference to its 1992 observation, the Committee hopes that the Government will supply all the necessary information concerning the measures which have been taken by the inspection services to ensure, in conformity with Article 3 of the Convention, that the provisions in question are observed.

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

Articles 10, 16, 20 and 21 of the Convention. Further to its previous comments, the Committee notes the brief information provided concerning numbers of inspection visits and fines imposed in 1990 (Article 21(d) and (e)). It recalls that the preparation and publication of regular inspection reports as required by the Convention are an essential means of determining the manner in which it is being applied, and in particular whether workplaces are inspected as often and as thoroughly as necessary, and enabling necessary corrective measures to be taken. It hopes the Government will ensure that the requirements of the Convention are fully observed and that it will supply full details. The Government may wish in this connection to keep in touch with the competent technical services of the ILO.

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

Articles 20 and 21 of the Convention. The Committee takes note of the information and the statistics concerning the activities of the labour inspectorate communicated by the Government in its report on the application of the Convention. However, it regrets to note that, since the ratification of the Convention, no inspection reports have yet been published. It trusts that, in accordance with the repeated assurances of the Government, appropriate steps will be taken without delay to ensure that annual inspection reports, containing detailed information on all the subjects listed in Article 21, are published and communicated to the ILO within the time-limits set forth in Article 20. [The Government is requested to supply full particulars to the Conference at its 77th session.]