Labour Inspection Convention, 1947 (No. 81) - Paraguay (Ratification: 1967)

Individual Case (CAS) - Discussion: 1992, Publication: 79th ILC session (1992)

A Government representative, the Vice-Minister of Labour, referred to the comment made by the Committee of Experts concerning Article 13 of the Convention and the powers of labour inspectors. In practice, the following procedure was applied: at the request of an interested party or officer, the Division of Occupational Safety and Health undertook a first inspection and, if the safety and health conditions were not adequate, the employer would be granted a reasonable period of time to remedy the situation. After this, a second inspection was carried out and if the situation was still unsatisfactory, sanctions would be imposed by means of an administrative resolution. Under the Health Code, which is enforced by the Ministry of Public Health and Welfare, in cases of immediate danger the operational licence of an establishment may be withdrawn. Furthermore a national tripartite Occupational Safety and Health Board had been created by Decree No. 10.836 of 6 September 1991. In conformity with section 280(b) of the Labour Code presently in force, a general technical manual containing standards concerning conditions in the workplace was provided to employers' and workers' organisations for consideration. This manual would soon be mandatory in the entire country and a copy would be transmitted to the ILO shortly. Furthermore, the Government had quintupled the budget of the Occupational Safety and Health Department as compared with last year. The Government was presently reviewing the possibility of technical and financial assistance from the ILO in order to evaluate the national situation with respect to working conditions and occupational safety and health. The Government representative admitted, as was pointed out in the Committee of Experts' comments, that the information provided by the Government was insufficient and stated that the necessary measures were being taken to overcome this difficulty by providing different workshops under the auspices of the ILO and through the horizontal cooperation which had begun with the ILO Office in Buenos Aires. With respect to Articles 10, 16, 20 and 21 of the Convention, while the number of inspectors was insufficient, the Minister intended to present in 1993 a new request to the Treasury for a substantial increase in the number of inspectors and an improvement in the conditions necessary for their effective functioning. Finally, he added that Decree No. 43, which established an increase in the fines applicable for non-compliance with labour provisions, was passed by Executive Order on 31 March 1992.

The Employers' members welcomed the information provided by the Government representative which led one to believe that the legislation would soon be in line with the Convention, but noted that action was also necessary to ensure compliance in practice. They noted the Government's indication that the resources necessary for inspection would be increased, but wondered whether the resources obtained would actually be sufficient and therefore urged the Government to make its best efforts to ensure that this would be the case. They further noted that additional powers would be given to labour inspectors and that a reasonable amount of time would be provided to employers to resolve problems before drastic sanctions would be imposed. They requested the Government to indicate how long a period of time would be given to employers to enable them to take the necessary action before sanctions would be applied. They noted the Government's indication of its intention to communicate the number of inspection visits carried out, but recalled that, under the Convention, an annual inspection report was to be published in order to permit a review of the national situation, the type of remedies used and to assess their effectiveness. Nevertheless, they were encouraged by the Government's statement and noted that the information provided in the next years would demonstrate whether the measures taken were sufficient.

The Workers' members recalled that there were two main problems with respect to the application of this Convention: (1) insufficient powers for labour inspectors; and (2) incomplete information provided in the inspection reports. They noted the Government's assurances that measures would be taken to improve the situation but stressed, as had been noted by the Employers' members, the importance of the practical application of the Convention. They urged the Government to communicate, as soon as possible, further information on the measures taken to improve the situation concerning the above two points for examination by the Committee of Experts.

The Government representative stated that the normal practice for labour inspection visits was to first carry out an initial visit, noting the irregularity, and then granting the employer a period of time to overcome the difficulties. Once this period had elapsed, a second visit was undertaken to verify the situation and, if the anomalies had not been corrected, an adminsitrative resolution would impose the fine established by law. He further noted that new standards existed with respect to non-compliance with labour law in areas other than those of occupational safety and health, and recalled once again the existence of Decree No. 43. Finally, he noted that the results of this Decree were encouraging and promised to inform the Office of the effects of its implementation.

The Committee noted the information provided by the Government. It stressed the importance of the Labour Inspectorate and the annual publication of its reports, in conformity with the Convention. It therefore expressed the hope that the Government would take the necessary steps to ensure the application of the Convention in the near future.

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

Previous comment

Article 3(2) of the Convention. Additional functions entrusted to labour inspectors. Further to its previous comments, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that joint inspections by the National Directorate of Migration (DNM) and the Ministry of Labour, Employment and Social Security (MTESS) have not been carried out. It also notes the information provided by the Government concerning the adoption of the Migration Act No. 6984 of 2022. Pursuant to this Act: (i) the employer must comply with the obligations arising from the labour legislation, irrespective of the migration status of the worker (section 7); and (ii) the DNM must inspect the workplaces of foreign workers in order to record possible violations relating to their migration status (section 79). The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the number of joint inspections carried out by the MTESS and the DNM, the number of violations of the labour legislation detected and the number of labour rights restored to foreign workers without residence permits, including recovery of wages, overtime, annual leave and social security credits.

Article 5(a) and (b). Cooperation between the inspection services, other government services and institutions and workers’ organizations. In response to its previous comments, the Committee notes the information provided by the Government that: (i) the MTESS uses the information available to the Social Insurance Institute (IPS) in order to determine the number of workers with social security coverage; (ii) in 2020, in the context of the health crisis caused by COVID-19, the MTESS and the IPS created a support unit to deal with queries from workers affected by the suspension of their employment contracts concerning payment of the compensatory financial benefit payable by the IPS; (iii) in 2021, the MTESS launched the campaign to formalize domestic work in cooperation with the IPS, domestic workers’ unions and the ILO; and (iv) in 2022, the MTESS continued campaign to formalize employment in the various sectors of economic activity, including micro, small and medium-sized enterprises. While noting the information provided by the Government, the Committee requests the Government to indicate whether joint inspections by the MTESS and the IPS are still envisaged and, if so, to provide information on the number of joint inspections carried out, the results achieved and action taken as a result.

Articles 11, 12, 16 and 18. Application in the Chaco region. Further to its previous comments, the Committee notes the information provided by the Government that: (i) in 2018, the Regional Labour Directorate in Boquerón was opened with a view to facilitating access to information, consultations and complaints for indigenous and non-indigenous workers in Chaco; (ii) as a result of the awareness-raising and training days for labour inspectors, including those held in the context of the Paraguay Okakuaa project (2015) and the ATLAS project (2019–2022), the Directorate has made progress on compliance with indigenous workers’ labour rights during the past three years.

With respect to the activities of the inspection services in the Chaco region, the Government reports that: (i) pursuant to MTESS Resolution No. 1212 of 2021, intensive monitoring was put in place in livestock establishments in the departments of Boquerón and Alto Paraguay; (ii) in 2021, 13 inspection procedures were carried out in the eastern region of Chaco; (iii) in 5 of those procedures, violations of labour legislation on conditions of work and the protection of workers while engaged in their work affecting more than 170 workers, were detected; and (iv) the violation reports arising from those procedures were forwarded to the Legal Advice Directorate to launch the appropriate administrative proceedings.

Lastly, in reply to its previous comments on the observations submitted by the Central Confederation of Workers Authentic (CUT-A), concerning shortcomings in labour inspections in the Chaco region, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that when the MTESS is informed of any particular case, it can carry out inspections and refer the proceedings to the judicial authorities as appropriate. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the functioning of the labour inspection services in the Chaco region, including information on the number of inspection visits undertaken, the number and nature of violations detected and the nature of penalties imposed. While noting the absence of a reply from the Government in relation to the number of labour inspectors operating in the aforementioned region, the Committee once again requests the Government to provide information on this matter.

Article 18. Adequate and effectively enforced penalties for obstructing labour inspectors in the performance of their duties. Further to its previous comments, the Committee notes that under section 4 of MTESS Resolution No. 1212 of 2021, should it be necessary to do so, the national police may be requested to assist for the purpose of carrying out the requisite inspections.

The Committee further notes the information provided by the Government relating to the obstruction of labour inspectors in the performance of their duties in practice. Noting that the Government has not provided information on measures taken in order for the national legislation to provide adequate penalties regarding cases in which labour inspectors are obstructed in the performance of their duties, the Committee once again requests the Government to provide information on the measures taken to that end. It also requests the Government to continue to provide information on the number of cases of obstruction of labour inspectors in the performance of their duties, specifying those in which labour judges have issued a search warrant in respect of establishments liable to inspection and where inspectors were accompanied by the police, pursuant to section 3, 2.1.1 and 2.1.2 of Resolution No. 47 of 2016 and section 18 of Act No. 5115 of 2013.

Articles 20 and 21. Annual report on the work of the labour inspection services. Further to its previous comments, the Committee notes that the MTESS management reports for 2020 and 2021 available on its website contain information on the number of inspection visits undertaken, but do not include information on the other matters required under Article 21 of the Convention. While noting the Government’s indication that the General Directorate of Labour Inspection and Monitoring sends half-yearly reports on the work of the labour inspection services to the competent directorates of the MTESS, the Committee once again requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that the annual reports on the work of the inspection services are published and communicated regularly to the ILO, and that they contain information on all matters covered under Article 21(a) and (g) of the Convention.

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

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

Previous comment

The Committee notes the observations of the Ibero-American Confederation of Labour Inspectors (CIIT), received on 31 August and 5 September 2023. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments in this respect.

Articles 6 and 7 of the Convention. Status, conditions of service and recruitment of labour inspectors. Further to its previous comments, the Committee notes the information provided by the Government that: (i) pursuant to Act No. 5554 of 2016 approving the National General Budget for 2016, the Public Service Secretariat established a policy to improve job security for contract staff in the public service with a minimum of four years of uninterrupted service (section 51); and (ii) in December 2021, the Ministry of Labour, Employment and Social Security (MTESS) launched the job security improvement process whereby contract staff were appointed as MTESS officials.

It further notes the allegation by the CIIT in its observations that: (i) labour inspectors recruited in 2015 were recruited through a merit-based competition (a procedure laid down in section 8 of Decree No. 3857 of 2015) and not a competitive selection process for permanent positions; (ii) after passing the merit-based competition in 2015, labour inspectors were employed on annual service contracts and, therefore, have the status of self-employed workers providing civil or commercial services for the MTESS; (iii) the process to improve job security for labour inspection staff has not been completed; of the 19 inspectors still performing functions, only 8 have job stability, while the remaining 11 inspectors continue to work on annual contracts; and (iv) the salaries of inspectors have not been increased since 2015, which has caused a loss in their purchasing power and discouraged inspection staff from remaining in post. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the measures taken to ensure that the status and conditions of service of labour inspectors secure them stability of employment, including the measures adopted to ensure that all labour inspectors are appointed on a permanent basis as public officials, in accordance with Article 6. . In this respect, it requests the Government to indicate the contractual arrangements for currently employed labour inspectors. Furthermore, the Committee once again requests the Government to provide information on the salary and benefits structure applicable to labour inspectors in relation to the salary and benefits structure of public servants who perform similar functions, such as tax inspectors or the police.

Articles 10 and 11. Number of labour inspectors. Material conditions of work. Further to its previous comments, the Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that the possibility of increasing the number of labour inspectors depends upon the budget allocated to the Ministry of Labour, Employment and Social Security (MTESS) under the overall national budget. The Government adds that increasing the number of inspectors entails not only the cost of their salaries, but also the associated costs of training, equipment and means of transport necessary for the performance of their duties.

The Committee also notes the allegation of the CIIT that: (i) of the 30 inspectors recruited in 2015 only 19 remain in post, of whom 13 are assigned to the capital, Asunción, three to the department of Alto Paraná, one each to the departments of Cordillera, Paraguarí and Ñeembucú and none to the remaining 12 departments; and (ii) the labour inspection services have no vehicles for the performance of their duties. The Committee urges the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that the number of serving labour inspectors is sufficient to ensure the efficient functioning of the inspection services, and to provide labour inspectors with suitably equipped offices and the means of transport necessary for the performance of their duties. It requests the Government to continue to provide information on the measures taken to this end, including the number of labour inspectors assigned to each of the departments, as well as the number of offices and means of transport available to inspectors for the performance of their duties.

Articles 12(1)(a), (c)(ii), 16 and 18. Restrictions on the initiative of labour inspectors freely to enter workplaces liable to inspection. Limitations on carrying out labour inspections. The Committee notes with concern that the necessary steps have not been taken to amend MTESS Resolutions Nos 47 of 2016 and 56 of 2017, which restrict the powers of labour inspectors and the conduct of inspections, relating to inspection procedure to ensure compliance with labour, social security and safety and health standards.

The Committee also notes the information provided by the Government on: (i) the adoption of MTESS Resolution No. 217 of 2021 establishing the procedure for monitoring and administrative investigation in relation to reported occurrences of child labour; (ii) in accordance with clause 2 of the aforementioned Resolution, labour inspectors are empowered to enter freely and without prior notice at any hour of the day or night any workplace liable to inspection if they have a specific monitoring warrant; (iii) pursuant to sections 3 and 4 of MTESS Resolution No. 29 of 2023, inspection actions, including the requirement to present the mandatory labour-related documents and inspection visits, may only be undertaken if authorized by an inspection order issued by the highest MTESS authority. With reference to its General Observation of 2019 on the labour inspection Conventions, the Committee once again urges the Government to bring its national legislation into full conformity with the Convention. Specifically, it requests the Government to adopt without delay the necessary measures to ensure that labour inspectors with proper credentials may: (i) enter freely and without previous notice at any hour of the day or night any workplace liable to inspection, without requiring prior authorization from a higher authority (Article 12(1)(a)); and (ii) undertake labour inspections as often and as thoroughly as is necessary to ensure the effective application of the relevant leal provisions (Article 16).

In this respect, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the progress of the draft amendment to Resolutions Nos 47 of 2016 and 56 of 2017, as well as the amendment to Resolutions Nos 217 of 2021 and 29 of 2023. It also requests the Government to provide statistics on the number of inspection visits undertaken without previous notice by labour inspectors, as well as statistics on the number of penalties actually applied.

Lastly, the Committee notes that in its observations, the CIIT expresses its concern at the announcement made by the new Government, through MTESS Resolution No. 29 of 2023, that labour inspections would be suspended for an indefinite period. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments in this respect.

In light of the situation described above, the Committee notes with deep concern the failure of the Government to lift the limitations, established in the MTESS Resolutions Nos 47 of 2016 and 56 of 2017, to the powers of inspectors to enter freely and without prior notice any place liable to inspection and to the frequency and thoroughness of labour inspections. The Committee further notes with concern that, with the adoption of the MTESS Resolution No. 29 of 2023, inspection actions have been further restricted by the need to obtain an inspection order issued by the highest MTESS authority. In addition, the Committee notes with deep concern the persistent issues regarding the insufficient number of labour inspectors and material means assigned to the labour inspectorate. The Committee notes in particular the indications of the CIIT that inspectors are assigned only to four departments and to the capital district, while the remaining 12 departments have no assigned inspectors. The Committee therefore considers that this case meets the criteria set out in paragraph XX of its General Report to be asked to come before the Conference.

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

[ The Government is asked to supply full particulars to the Conference at its 1 12 th Session and to reply in full to the present comments in 202 4.]

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

Article 3(2) of the Convention. Additional functions entrusted to labour inspectors. Further to its previous comments on participation by labour inspectors in monitoring migrants, the Committee notes from the Government’s report that in 2016 the General Directorate of Migration concluded an inter-institutional agreement with the Ministry of Labour, Employment and Social Security (MTESS), the Social Insurance Institute (IPS) and the Industrial Union of Paraguay, with a view to establishing a strategic alliance to monitor and regulate the situation of migrants undertaking work in the various regions of the country. The Government indicates that the aim of the agreement is to allow the parties to coordinate their work in order to monitor enterprises and workplaces housing documented or undocumented foreigners, so as to determine their migratory status and, when appropriate, regularize them as immigrants, complying with the Migrants Act and to giving effect to the labour law in force. The Committee requests the Governing to indicate the measures adopted or envisaged to ensure that the duties entrusted to labour inspectors under the inter-institutional agreement concluded by the DGM with other parties, do not interfere with the effective discharge of their primary duties, established in Article 3(1) of the Convention, or prejudice in any way the authority and impartiality which are necessary to inspectors in their relations with employers and workers, as provided in Article 3(2) of the Convention. Equally, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the number of inspections in which labour inspectors participate under the inter-institutional agreement, the results obtained and the measures subsequently adopted, providing details of the number of cases which resulted in the regularization of the migrant workers.

Article 5(a). Cooperation between the inspection services and other government services and institutions. With regard to its previous comments concerning the Employer Worker Register, the Committee notes the adoption of Decree No. 8304 of 2017, regulating the registration of workers and employers, presentation of payrolls, communication and submission of electronic data and documents to the Administrative Labour Authority. The Committee also notes the adoption of Decree No. 9368 of 2018, which modifies certain provisions of Decree No. 8304. The latter Decree makes it obligatory for employers to register at the Department for the Registration of Employers and Workers of the MTESS within a fixed time-limit (section 3), it also provides for penalties in case of non-compliance with that obligation (section 6) and allows registration through the MTESS website and by means of the Unified System for Opening and Closing Businesses (SUACE), under the Ministry of Industry and Trade (section 4), specifying that the institutions that make up the SUACE will share data on the opening and closing of enterprises (section 14). In that regard, the Committee takes note of the information contained in the MTESS management reports from 2015 to 2019 on the operation of the Worker Employer Register, which includes the number of new employer registrations each year and, in some cases, the number of workers that they employ. The Committee also notes that the SUACE web site operates as a one-stop shop for information concerning the opening and/or formalization of enterprises, and is composed of the MTESS, the IPS and the DGM, and other institutions.

Still in relation to its previous comments, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that a framework agreement was concluded between the MTESS and the IPS in 2015, to share information on registration of enterprises in order to monitor social security contributions and registration of workers more closely against the payrolls recorded in the Employer Worker Register. In that regard, the Committee notes the adoption of the Resolution No. 593 of 2018, which provides for automatic migration of enterprises registered with the IPS when they are absent from the MTESS registry and that, according to the MTESS management report, 2018–2019, joint monitoring with the IPS is planned, under the coordination of the MTESS General Directorate of Labour Inspection and Monitoring (DGIF) and the IPS General Directorate of Workers’ and Employers’ Contributions, with the aim of detecting violations of labour standards and of uniting elements for social security monitoring, among other matters. The Committee requests the Government to provide further information on the way in which information received by the MTESS under the agreement concluded with IPS is used for the effective planning of inspection visits. The Committee also requests the Government to provide information on the number of inspections carried out jointly with the IPS and their results.

Article 18. Adequate and effectively enforced penalties for obstructing labour inspectors in the performance of their duties. Further to its earlier comments on the penalties for obstructing labour inspectors, the Committee notes that Title I of Book V of the Labour Code, which the Government references, provides for penalties for non-compliance with its provisions, but not for penalties for obstructing labour inspectors in the performance of their duties. In that regard, the Committee also notes that section 18 of Act No. 5115 of 2013, creating the MTESS, establishes that, for the proper and efficient performance of its functions and attributions, when circumstances so require and where there has been opposition to inspection, the Director-General of Inspection and Monitoring may request the competent labour court to issue a search order for public and private institutions, enforceable by public force. Section 3 of Resolution No. 47 of 2016, which approves the general inspection procedure for monitoring labour, social security and occupational safety and health legislation, establishes that: (i) during inspection visits inspectors may be accompanied, among other persons, by police officers (section 2.1.1.); (ii) where access to an enterprise, or a specific part of it, is refused, the inspector may submit a report on the situation to the Director-General of Inspection and Monitoring, in accordance with section 18(2) of Act No. 5115 (section 2.1.1.); and (iii) cases of obstruction of labour inspection include: preventing the inspector from questioning persons working in the workplace; removing, or allowing those persons to withdraw before being identified by the inspector; refusal by the employer, or by another person in charge, to provide information on workers that have not been adequately identified (section 2.1.2.). The Committee notes that neither Act No. 5115, nor Resolution No. 47 provide penalties for obstructing labour inspectors in the performance of their duties. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the application of sections 3, 2.1.1. and 2.1.2. of Resolution No. 47, and of section 18 of Act No. 5115, which refer to cases of obstruction of labour inspectors in the performance of their duties, specifying the number of cases of obstruction observed and giving details of cases where a labour court has issued a search order in respect of workplaces liable to inspection and where the inspectors have been accompanied by the police. Likewise, the Committee requests the Government to adopt the measures necessary in order for the national legislation to provide adequate penalties for persons who obstruct inspectors in the performance of their duty, in accordance with Article 18 of the Convention.

Articles 20 and 21. Annual report on the work of the labour inspection services. Further to its previous comments, the Committee notes that section 26 of Act No. 5115 establishes that the Director-General of Inspection and Monitoring shall publish an annual report, of a general nature, on the work of the inspection service under his control. In that regard, the Government indicates that the DGIF is responsible for drawing up the report and for its transmission to the ILO. The Committee notes that the MTESS management reports for 2015 to 2019 (available on the MTESS website) contain a section on the activities of the DGIF and provide information on legislation relevant to the functioning of the labour inspection service and on the number of inspection visits.

Nevertheless, the Committee notes that the MTESS management reports do not consistently present complete information on: (i) the staff of the labour inspection service; (ii) statistics on the workplaces liable to inspection and the number of workers therein; (iii) statistics on violations committed and penalties imposed; of (iv) statistics on occupational accidents and occupational diseases. The Committee encourages the Government to continue its efforts in preparing and publishing annual reports on the activities of the labour inspection services. The Committee trusts that future reports will cover all the issues listed in Article 21 of the Convention. In that connection, the Committee reminds the Government that it may request ILO technical assistance.

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

The Committee takes note of the observations of the National Confederation of Workers (CNT) and the Confederation of Workers Authentic (CUT-A), received in 2019.

Articles 6, 7, 10 and 11 of the Convention. Labour inspectors. Status and conditions of service, recruitment, training, number and material conditions of work. In relation to its earlier comments, the Committee notes from the Government’s report that the establishment of the Ministry of Labour, Employment and Social Security (MTESS) by Act No. 5115 of 2013 has improved labour inspectors’ working conditions. The Committee notes in particular the information provided by the Government to the effect that: (i) their remuneration is higher than that under the former Ministry of Justice and Labour; (ii) open competitions have been held for the recruitment of new inspectors to the public service: the MTESS employed 31 inspectors in 2015 and 25 inspectors in 2019; (iii) the new inspectors have received training through the training plan put in place by the ILO Country Office for the Southern Cone of Latin America, and continuous training was given to inspectors from 2015 to 2019 in areas including forced labour, child labour, and occupational safety and health; and (iv) new office space has been allocated to the Directorate for Labour Inspection and Monitoring (DGIF), and the inspectors are provided with all office supplies.

The Committee notes in its observations that the CUT-A remains concerned that: (i) the number of inspectors (fewer than 30 in all), is insufficient to cover the entire national territory; (ii) there is a lack of initial and continuous training for inspectors and no profile whereby to determine the requirements for their posts; (iii) there is a lack of inspectors holding public servant status. Instead, inspectors are contracted employees, which prevents them from performing their functions fully; and (v) inspectors are poorly remunerated. The Committee also notes from the CNT’s observations with regard to public sector workers that the contracted employees do not enjoy the same employment conditions as appointed public servants, for example, the right to a retirement pension, healthcare or cover against occupational risks, occupational accidents and diseases.

The Committee notes from the information provided by the Government that all inspectors who entered the service in 2015 did so through a merit-based competition and enjoyed the status of temporary public servants, while 22 of the 25 inspectors employed in 2019 held the status of temporary public servants, while three inspectors held the status of permanent public servants. In that connection, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that inspectors obtain their posts through open competition in conformity with sections 15 and 35 of Act No. 1626 of 2000 on the Public Service, and Decree No 3857 of 2015, which approves the general regulations governing selection for entry and promotion in the public service for permanent and temporary posts. Section 8 of the Decree cited establishes merit-based competition as the technical mechanism of selection for the recruitment of persons to the public administration, applicable, inter alia, to technical, daily wage or professional posts.

The Committee recalls in respect of the temporary recruitment of labour inspectors, apparently the case for the large majority of inspectors, that that form of recruitment is not in conformity with Article 6 of the Convention, which provides that the status and conditions of service of the inspection staff must be such that they are assured of stability of employment and are independent of changes of government and of improper influences. The Committee urges the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that the status and conditions of service of labour inspectors comply with the requirements of Article 6 of the Convention. In that respect, it also requests the Government to provide additional information of the salary structure and benefits applicable to labour inspectors and to public servants who perform similar functions in other government services (such as tax inspectors or the police). The Committee also requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to increase the number of labour inspectors. The Committee further requests the Government to continue providing information on the number of inspectors and their distribution by region, their status and conditions of service, giving details of the method employed for their recruitment and of their remuneration. The Committee also requests the Government to provide information on the number of suitably equipped local offices, as well as on availability of transport facilities necessary for the performance of labour inspectors’ duties, in accordance with Article 11 of the Convention.

Articles 11, 12, 16 and 18. Application in the Chaco region. Further to its earlier comments on the creation of labour law enforcement units in the Chaco region, the Committee notes that CUT-A indicates deep concerns in its observations at the shortcomings in labour inspection in that region, and that although the Government has opened an MTESS office there, the office has neither the means nor the independence to monitor possible irregularities in situ, and that the inspectors are only able to enter rural properties under court order. Moreover, CUT-A points out that not only do workers have to go to the MTESS office to register their complaint, but they must also deliver the official notice to their employer summoning the employer to clarify the situation. The Committee requests the Government to communicate its comments in respect of the CUT-A’s observations. With reference to its comments under the Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29), the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the functioning of the MTESS office established in the Chaco region and its impact on the application of the legislation on the working conditions and protection of workers in that region, including information on the number of inspection visits undertaken, the violations detected and the penalties imposed. The Committee also requests the Government to provide information on the number of labour inspectors at work in the region.

Article 12(1)(a). Restrictions on labour inspectors freely to enter workplaces liable to inspection. In its previous comments the Committee once again requested the Government to take the necessary measures, including through the amendment of Resolution No. 1278 of 2011 (which provides technical and legal guidance on aspects of the inspection and monitoring services and summary inspection procedures), to ensure that labour inspectors are empowered to enter freely any place liable to inspection. In that connection, the Committee notes the information provided by the Government to the effect that Resolution No. 47 of 2016 approved the general inspection procedure for monitoring labour, social security and occupational safety and health legislation, and repealed sections 1.1 and 1.19, on inspection processes, of Resolution No. 1278.

The Committee notes that article 3 of Resolution No. 47 provides that: (i) the general inspection procedure may be initiated ex officio, or by inspection order signed by the Minister or Vice-Minister of Labour, or at the request of a party. Once initiated, the DGIF will submit the complaints and/or requests for inspection to the legal counsel of the Vice-Minister of Labour, for a ruling on whether or not to proceed with an inspection (section 1.1.); (ii) in order to carry out inspections in response to complaints or requests, the respective inspection orders must be issued. Where the legal counsel of the Vice-Minister of Labour deems the orders inappropriate, they will be dismissed and filed (section 1.1.); (iii) in the case of an ex officio inspection or inspection at the request of a party (following acceptance of the request or complaint), the Director-General of Labour Inspection and Monitoring will submit a draft inspection order to the Minister or Vice-Minister of Labour for consideration (section 1.2.); (iv) the inspection orders must, among other requirements, be signed by the Minister or Vice-Minister; they are otherwise void (section 1.2.); (v) inspectors holding an inspection order are empowered to enter freely and without previous notice at any hour of the day or night any workplace liable to inspection and to remain there for the time required; and, (vi) to broaden the scope of the inspection (to monitor aspects not included under the inspection order), the inspectors must inform the Director-General of Labour Inspection and Monitoring, so that the Director-General may propose the consequent broadening of the inspection order to the Minister or Vice-Minister, including in the event of detection of imminent danger to the lives, physical integrity, safety and health of the workers (section 1.2.).

The Committee notes that Resolution No. 56 of 2017 amplifies Resolution No. 47 and approves the regulations governing the procedures for ensuring compliance with labour, social security, and occupational safety and health standards, and those for addressing non-compliance. Those regulations provide that: (i) the inspector dealing with the complaint alleging non-compliance and/or request for inspection shall submit the complaint to the Director-General of the DGIF for consideration (section 1); (ii) on receipt of the complaint and/or the request for inspection, the Director shall forward it to the Chief Legal Counsel of the Vice-Ministry of Labour, who shall decide whether or not an inspection is appropriate; if so, the DGIF shall submit the draft inspection order to the Minister or Vice-Minister of Labour (section 2); (iii) where the action is ex officio, the DGIF shall submit the draft inspection order for signature by the Minister or Vice-Minister (section 3); and (iv) Following endorsement by the Minister or Vice-Minister, the order shall be forwarded to the DGIF (section 4).

The Committee notes that by virtue of Resolutions Nos 47 and 56, only inspectors in possession of an inspection order signed by a higher competent authority (the Minister or Vice-Minister of Labour) may enter freely, at any hour of the day or night any workplace liable to inspection. The Committee recalls that Article 12 of the Convention provides that labour inspectors provided with proper credentials shall be empowered to enter freely and without previous notice at any hour of the day or night any workplace liable to inspection. The Committee also recalls that the requirement to obtain prior authorization before an inspection constitutes a restriction on the freedom of inspectors to conduct inspections, especially if they have reason to believe that an enterprise is violating compulsory legal provisions. The Committee therefore urges the Government to adopt without delay the necessary measures to amend MTESS Resolutions No. 47 of 2016 and 56 of 2017, on inspection procedure, to ensure compliance with labour, social security and safety and health standards, so as to guarantee that inspectors provided with proper credentials are able to enter freely any workplace liable to inspection, in accordance with Article 12(1)(a) of the Convention, without the need to obtain previous higher authorization.

Article 16. Frequency and thoroughness of labour inspections. The Committee notes that section 3(2.1) of Resolution No. 47 provides that: (i) more than one inspection visit may be made under one inspection order wherever the first visit has not made possible collection of all relevant data; and (ii) in no case may more than two visits be made under one inspection order.

In addition, the Committee notes from the observations of the CNT that for the period between 16 August and 1 November 2019 (slightly over two months) 98 enterprises where allegations of non-compliance with labour standards had been registered received inspection visits. The CNT points out, however, that while that figure represents a twofold increase in the number of monthly visits (about 40 visits) compared to the monthly average in 2017 and part of 2018, it is not even equivalent to one per cent of all enterprises listed, as at June 2019, by the Directorate for the Registration of Employers and Workers (59,567 enterprises nationwide). Consequently, the CNT indicates that the labour inspection is not fulfilling its fundamental role of ensuring compliance with the labour laws. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures adopted or envisaged to ensure that workplaces are inspected as frequently and as thoroughly as is necessary to guarantee the effective application of the relevant legal provisions, in conformity with Article 16 of the Convention.

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

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

Further to its observation, the Committee would like to raise the following issues.

Since the Government has not provided a reply in relation to any of the questions raised in the Committee’s previous direct request, the Committee is bound to repeat its previous comments, which read as follows:

Articles 3 and 5 of the Convention. Inter-institutional cooperation for the enforcement of the Labour Code in cases of public procurement. The Committee notes that an audit carried out in 2010 by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) on the role and sanctioning system of the public inspection services, which the Government has attached to its report, indicates that despite Act No. 2051/98 on public procurement which stipulates that such procurement is subject to compliance by the contractor with the provisions of the Labour Code and despite cooperation agreements between the National Directorate of Public Procurement, the Ministry of Justice and Labour and the Social Security Institute to ensure its implementation in practice, the supervision of contractors remains insufficient. The Committee requests the Government whether measures are envisaged by the labour inspection authority in cooperation with other competent institutions, to achieve greater effectiveness in the supervision of contractors executing public contracts under Act No. 2051/98.

Articles 12 and 18. Right of labour inspectors to free access of workplaces and penalties applicable in cases of obstruction of labour inspectors. Further to its comments since 1999 relating to the measures taken to cope with cases of denial by employers of the right of labour inspectors to free access for inspection purposes, it appears from the 2010 audit that in such cases labour inspectors can request the assistance of the police, together with an application for a judicial inspection order to enter the premises. However, it would appear that such procedures are lengthy and give employers the opportunity to camouflage potential shortcomings. In this regard, the Committee noted in its last comments a press release of the Ministry of Justice and Labour, dated 15 October 2009, concerning the creation of labour law enforcement units in the towns of Pozo Colorado, Filadelfia and Villa Hayes, in order to provide for the security of labour inspectors during inspection visits and improve the precarious conditions of work in the Chaco area.

The Committee asks the Government to indicate the specific provisions of the national legislation that prescribe penalties for obstructing labour inspectors in the performance of their duties, in accordance with Articles 12 and 18, and to provide information on the number of penalties actually imposed and effectively enforced for such violations.

The Committee also asks the Government to provide information and, where applicable, a copy of any relevant text(s) on the circumstances in which labour inspectors can request the assistance of the police if they are refused entry to workplaces, or if their lives and safety are endangered, including copies of inspection reports which refer to collaboration between police officers and labour inspectors in the exercise of their duties and the number of any relevant judgments handed down. Please also provide information on whether labour law enforcement units in the Chaco area have been created, and the impact on the enforcement of legislation on conditions of work and the protection of workers in this area.

Article 18. Level of penalties for labour law violations. The Committee notes that the 2010 audit refers to the inadequacy of applicable sanctions for labour law violations which do not have a sufficiently dissuasive effect. The Committee also recalls that the Government has not provided a copy of the labour inspection manual which contains information on the penalties applicable for such violations. The Committee requests the Government to specify the penalties applicable for labour inspection violations and to provide information on their actual enforcement as well as on any steps taken or envisaged to ensure that penalties have sufficiently dissuasive effect over the years.

Articles 19 and 20. Improvements in the computerization of administrative registers. The Committee notes that the Decent Work Country Programme for Paraguay envisages improvements in the computerization of administrative registers. The Committee requests the Government to specify whether these improvements include the data collection system used by the labour inspection service and, if so, to describe the impact of such improvements in the functioning of this service.

As the Government’s report contains only partial replies to its previous direct request, the Committee hopes that the next report will also include full information on the following matters previously raised, which read as follows:

Article 3(1) and (2), and Articles 5(a), 6, 12, 15(c) and 17 of the Convention. Additional duties entrusted to labour inspectors. The Committee notes that, according to the Government, contrary to the comments made by the Ibero-American Confederation of Labour Inspectors (CIIT) in 2006, the function of mediation falls within the remit of a department within the Ministry of Justice and Labour which is separate from the labour inspectorate and that inspectors are only involved in conciliation work very rarely. Referring to the Government’s report, the Committee notes, however, that labour inspectors have carried out joint activities with other inspection services, such as the Social Welfare Institute, the General Directorate of Migration, which comes under the Ministry of the Interior, and other bodies responsible for enforcing standards in the public transport sector, particularly under Decree No. 8768 of 17 May 2000 establishing an inter-institutional committee composed of these ministerial departments responsible for supervising labour standards and migration in the border areas of the national territory. In its General Survey of 2006 on labour inspection, the Committee was particularly interested in the negative effects that the involvement of labour inspectors in operations aimed at enforcing national migration policy can have on the performance of their primary duties (paragraph 78). In this regard, it drew the attention of governments to the need to ensure, in accordance with Article 3(2) of the Convention, that additional duties that are not aimed at securing the enforcement of the legal provisions relating to conditions of work and the protection of workers while engaged in their work are assigned to labour inspectors only in so far as they do not interfere with their primary duties. The Committee noted that inspections of clandestine work or illegal employment, which are increasingly closely linked to irregular migration, were carried out in many countries through a partnership between the labour inspectorate and other public administration bodies, each in pursuit of its own objectives. An examination of the situation relating to labour inspection in these countries showed that efforts to control the use of migrant workers in an irregular situation required the mobilization of considerable human and material resources, which inspectorates could only provide to the detriment of their primary duties. Furthermore, the Committee noted that, where the workers concerned are foreigners residing illegally in the country, they are doubly penalized in that, in addition to losing their job, they face the threat of expulsion, if not actual expulsion. The Committee considered that, in order to be compatible with the protective function of labour inspection, the verification of the legality of employment should have as its corollary the reinstatement of the statutory rights of all the workers concerned, and that the objective can only be met if the workers covered are convinced that the primary task of the inspectorate is to enforce the legal provisions relating to conditions of work and protection of workers. In paragraph 161 of the same General Survey, the Committee emphasized that the cooperation of the labour inspectorate with immigration authorities should be carried out cautiously, keeping in mind that the main objective of the labour inspection system is to protect the rights and interests of all workers and to improve their working conditions. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would indicate, in view of the above, the manner in which it is ensured that the participation of labour inspectors in operations to supervise the legality of the employment of migrant workers in no way contravenes Article 3(2) of the Convention and does not interfere with the discharge of the inspection functions defined in paragraph 1.

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

Articles 3, 5(a), 20 and 21 of the Convention. Absence of information on the application of the Convention, including continuous failure to submit an annual report on the labour inspection activities. The Committee notes that the Government’s report submitted to the Office is almost identical to the report submitted by the Government in 2011 and that it does not provide any reply to the questions raised in the Committee’s previous comments. In its previous observation in 2012, the Committee noted with regret that since the ratification of the Convention in 1967, the Government had never sent a complete annual labour inspection report to the Office as required by Articles 20 and 21 of the Convention. It observes that this year, again no annual labour inspection report has been received by the Office. While some relevant information is contained in the annexes provided with the Government’s report, the Committee considers that this information is not sufficient to allow for a thorough assessment of the application of the Convention.

The Committee notes, however, from the documentation attached to the Government’s report, that labour inspection campaigns have been carried out in specific economic sectors and geographical zones (for example, in el Chaco following complaints of forced labour) and that some relevant statistics are provided, that is information on the percentage of compliance with certain legal obligations in the commerce, transport and supermarket sector. The Committee notes in this regard, that the compliance level with Decree No. 580/08 (which requires all employers to register employment relationship in the Unified System of Business Registration (SUAE), a database which is to be shared by several governmental institutions), is about 80 per cent in these sectors. The Committee urges the Government, once again, to ensure that the necessary measures are taken by the labour inspection authority with a view to the preparation, publication and communication to the ILO of an annual labour inspection report under Article 20 of the Convention containing information on all the subjects covered by Article 21(a)–(g). In this regard, and with reference to its general observations of 2009 and 2010, the Committee once again asks the Government to provide information on the progress made in the implementation of Decree No. 580/08 and on the establishment of the SUAE.

Articles 6, 7, 10, 11, 15 and 16. Effectiveness of the labour inspection system. From the information provided in the Government’s report, the Committee notes that the percentage of labour inspectors who are permanent officials has now increased from 93.5 to 100 per cent. However, it notes from the Annual Labour Inspection Plan for 2013 of the Ministry of Justice and Labour communicated with the Government’s report that the following points have been identified as critical for the effective functioning of the labour inspectorate: (i) the insufficient number of labour inspectors; (ii) the lack of initial and continuous training of labour inspectors and the absence of a profile determining the requirements for their posts; (iii) the low level of remuneration (salary close to the minimum wage), no payment of travel allowances for inspections in workplaces located in the capital of the country and no payments of travel allowances prior to inspections in workplaces located in the interior of the country; and (iv) frequent reports of misconduct of labour inspectors, which are however not made in a formal manner so as to allow for their prosecution. In this regard, the Committee also notes, from the same source, that it is envisaged to: (i) establish the profile of labour inspectors; (ii) institute a Code of Ethics for Labour Inspectors; (iii) provide improved capacity building for labour inspectors; and (iv) equip the labour inspection services with computers and an Internet connection to enable the exchange of data in the SUAE with other institutions. In this regard, the Committee also notes the copy of Decree No. 607 of May 2013 on “Administrative measures for a better organization and management of the labour inspection services”.

The Committee recalls in this regard that the granting of the appropriate status and conditions of service to labour inspectors, including appropriate wages and career prospects, in accordance with Article 6, and the obligation for labour inspectors to comply with the duty of confidentiality, under Article 15(c), are essential safeguards against improper behaviour.

The Committee asks the Government to provide information on the progress made with the implementation of the measures referred to in the Annual Labour Inspection Plan for 2013, as well as with the implementation of Decree No. 607 of May 2013 and its impact on the effectiveness of the work of the labour inspection services.

In this context, it once again asks the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to: (i) improve the conditions of service of labour inspectors (increased remuneration, or at least adaptation to the level of other inspectors discharging similar functions, and improved career prospects, including variations in remuneration based on education, training, merit or length of service) (Article 6); (ii) increase the number of labour inspectors, with a view to ensuring that workplaces are inspected as often and as thoroughly as necessary (Article 10); and (iii) improve the initial training provided to labour inspectors to enable them to carry out their duties as effectively as possible and to offer them subsequent training in the course of employment (Article 7), and (iv) improve the material and logistical resources available to labour inspectors (Article 11).

Referring to its previous comments in this regard, the Committee also once again asks the Government to provide information on the impact of international cooperation within the framework of the Common Market of the Southern Cone (MERCOSUR) in relation to the discharge of the labour inspectors’ preventive and enforcement duties in the area of conditions of work and the protection of workers.

Articles 12(1)(a) and (2)(c), and 15. Restrictions on the initiative of inspectors to enter freely workplaces liable to inspection. Referring to its previous observation in this regard, the Committee once again asks the Government to take the necessary measures, including the amendment of Resolution No. 1278 of September 2011, to ensure that inspectors are empowered both in law and in practice to enter freely at any hour of the day or night any workplace liable to inspection, as provided in Article 12(1)(a) of the Convention and that the requirement of prior authorization of inspection visits is brought to an end.

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

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

Further to its observation, the Committee would like to raise the following issues.

Articles 3 and 5 of the Convention. Inter-institutional cooperation for the enforcement of the Labour Code in cases of public procurement. The Committee notes that an audit carried out in 2010 by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) on the role and sanctioning system of the public inspection services, which the Government has attached to its report, indicates that despite Act No. 2051/98 on public procurement which stipulates that such procurement is subject to compliance by the contractor with the provisions of the Labour Code and despite cooperation agreements between the National Directorate of Public Procurement, the Ministry of Justice and Labour and the Social Security Institute to ensure its implementation in practice, the supervision of contractors remains insufficient. The Committee requests the Government whether measures are envisaged by the labour inspection authority in cooperation with other competent institutions, to achieve greater effectiveness in the supervision of contractors executing public contracts under Act No. 2051/98.

Articles 12 and 18. Right of labour inspectors to free access of workplaces and penalties applicable in cases of obstruction of labour inspectors. Further to its comments since 1999 relating to the measures taken to cope with cases of denial by employers of the right of labour inspectors to free access for inspection purposes, it appears from the 2010 audit that in such cases labour inspectors can request the assistance of the police, together with an application for a judicial inspection order to enter the premises. However, it would appear that such procedures are lengthy and give employers the opportunity to camouflage potential shortcomings. In this regard, the Committee noted in its last comments a press release of the Ministry of Justice and Labour, dated 15 October 2009, concerning the creation of labour law enforcement units in the towns of Pozo Colorado, Filadelfia and Villa Hayes, in order to provide for the security of labour inspectors during inspection visits and improve the precarious conditions of work in the Chaco area.

The Committee asks the Government to indicate the specific provisions of the national legislation that prescribe penalties for obstructing labour inspectors in the performance of their duties, in accordance with Articles 12 and 18, and to provide information on the number of penalties actually imposed and effectively enforced for such violations.

The Committee also asks the Government to provide information and, where applicable, a copy of any relevant text(s) on the circumstances in which labour inspectors can request the assistance of the police if they are refused entry to workplaces, or if their lives and safety are endangered, including copies of inspection reports which refer to collaboration between police officers and labour inspectors in the exercise of their duties and the number of any relevant judgments handed down. Please also provide information on whether labour law enforcement units in the Chaco area have been created, and the impact on the enforcement of legislation on conditions of work and the protection of workers in this area.

Article 18. Level of penalties for labour law violations. The Committee notes that the 2010 audit refers to the inadequacy of applicable sanctions for labour law violations which do not have a sufficiently dissuasive effect. The Committee also recalls that the Government has not provided a copy of the labour inspection manual which contains information on the penalties applicable for such violations. The Committee requests the Government to specify the penalties applicable for labour inspection violations and to provide information on their actual enforcement as well as on any steps taken or envisaged to ensure that penalties have sufficiently dissuasive effect over the years.

Articles 19 and 20. Improvements in the computerization of administrative registers. The Committee notes that the Decent Work Country Programme for Paraguay envisages improvements in the computerization of administrative registers. The Committee requests the Government to specify whether these improvements include the data collection system used by the labour inspection service and, if so, to describe the impact of such improvements in the functioning of this service.

As the Government’s report contains only partial replies to its previous direct request, the Committee hopes that the next report will also include full information on the following matters previously raised, which read as follows:

Article 3, paragraphs 1 and 2, and Articles 5(a), 6, 12, 15(c) and 17 of the Convention. Additional duties entrusted to labour inspectors. The Committee notes that, according to the Government, contrary to the comments made by the Ibero-American Confederation of Labour Inspectors (CIIT) in 2006, the function of mediation falls within the remit of a department within the Ministry of Justice and Labour which is separate from the labour inspectorate and that inspectors are only involved in conciliation work very rarely. Referring to the Government’s report, the Committee notes, however, that labour inspectors have carried out joint activities with other inspection services, such as the Social Welfare Institute, the General Directorate of Migration, which comes under the Ministry of the Interior, and other bodies responsible for enforcing standards in the public transport sector, particularly under Decree No. 8768 of 17 May 2000 establishing an inter-institutional committee composed of these ministerial departments responsible for supervising labour standards and migration in the border areas of the national territory. In its General Survey of 2006 on labour inspection, the Committee was particularly interested in the negative effects that the involvement of labour inspectors in operations aimed at enforcing national migration policy can have on the performance of their primary duties (paragraph 78). In this regard, it drew the attention of governments to the need to ensure, in accordance with Article 3(2) of the Convention, that additional duties that are not aimed at securing the enforcement of the legal provisions relating to conditions of work and the protection of workers while engaged in their work are assigned to labour inspectors only in so far as they do not interfere with their primary duties. The Committee noted that inspections of clandestine work or illegal employment, which are increasingly closely linked to irregular migration, were carried out in many countries through a partnership between the labour inspectorate and other public administration bodies, each in pursuit of its own objectives. An examination of the situation relating to labour inspection in these countries showed that efforts to control the use of migrant workers in an irregular situation required the mobilization of considerable human and material resources, which inspectorates could only provide to the detriment of their primary duties. Furthermore, the Committee noted that, where the workers concerned are foreigners residing illegally in the country, they are doubly penalized in that, in addition to losing their job, they face the threat of expulsion, if not actual expulsion. The Committee considered that, in order to be compatible with the protective function of labour inspection, the verification of the legality of employment should have as its corollary the reinstatement of the statutory rights of all the workers concerned, and that the objective can only be met if the workers covered are convinced that the primary task of the inspectorate is to enforce the legal provisions relating to conditions of work and protection of workers. In paragraph 161 of the same General Survey, the Committee emphasized that the cooperation of the labour inspectorate with immigration authorities should be carried out cautiously, keeping in mind that the main objective of the labour inspection system is to protect the rights and interests of all workers and to improve their working conditions. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would indicate, in view of the above, the manner in which it is ensured that the participation of labour inspectors in operations to supervise the legality of the employment of migrant workers in no way contravenes Article 3(2) of the Convention and does not interfere with the discharge of the inspection functions defined in paragraph 1.

Article 8 of the Convention. Gender balance within the labour inspectorate. The Committee notes that the Decent Work Country Programme provides for ILO support in identifying good practices relating to gender balance within the public sector in coordination with the Public Service Secretariat and the Ministry of Justice and Labour, and developing a national programme on gender equality in the public service. Noting that, according to the statistics provided, there are 35 men inspectors and 14 women inspectors within the labour inspectorate, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the measures taken or envisaged to encourage women to join this profession, particularly n high-level posts.

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

Articles 3(1), 5(a), 20 and 21 of the Convention. Failure to submit an annual report on the labour inspection activities. Absence of information on the establishment of a register of employment relationships. The Committee notes with regret that since the ratification of the Convention in 1967, the Government has never sent a complete annual labour inspection report to the Office as required by Articles 20 and 21 of the Convention. Moreover, the Government’s latest report does not contain the information previously requested by the Committee on the implementation or impact of Decree No. 580/2008 which requires all employers to register employment relationships in the Unified System of Business Registration (SUAE), a database which is to be shared by several governmental institutions.

The Committee urges the Government to ensure that the necessary measures are taken by the labour inspection authority with a view to the preparation, publication and communication to the ILO of an annual labour inspection report under Article 20 of the Convention containing information on all the subjects covered by Article 21(a)–(g). In this regard, and with reference to its general observations of 2009 and 2010, the Committee once again asks the Government to provide information on the progress made in the implementation of Decree No. 580/08 and on the establishment of the SUAE, as well as the latter’s impact on the activities of the labour inspection, in relation to ensuring the enforcement of the legal provisions relating to conditions of work and the protection of workers while engaged in their work (Article 3(1)).

Regional cooperation and other efforts to enhance coordination and coherence. The Committee notes that the Government’s report contains the text of an audit carried out in 2010 by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) on the role and sanctioning system of the public inspection services (hereinafter the “2010 audit”), which, while pointing to a number of problems in the labour inspection system relevant to the application of the Convention, also notes that joint inspection visits in border areas between Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay organized within the framework of the Common Market of the Southern Cone (MERCOSUR), have contributed to the implementation of unified criteria for inspection procedures in these countries. The Committee also notes that the Government has requested assistance in the framework of a partnership agreement between the ILO and the Government of Brazil for the promotion of South–South cooperation in Latin America, aimed at extending social security coverage in the country. In this context, it was envisaged inter alia to establish a forum of inspectors from the different inspection services for the coordination of their work (including through biannual meetings, but more importantly through internet and telephone contacts) and the design of model reports for easy reference on issues of interest to the respective governmental institutions. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide information on the impact of international cooperation within the framework of MERCOSUR in relation to the discharge of the labour inspectors’ preventive and enforcement duties in the area of conditions of work and the protection of workers. Noting that the Government has requested technical assistance in the framework of the partnership agreement between the ILO and the Government of Brazil, the Committee invites the Government to take formal steps in this regard and to keep the Office informed.

Articles 6, 10 and 16. Number and conditions of service of labour inspectors and number of inspection visits. The Committee notes that, according to the Government, the number of labour inspectors decreased from 34 in 2009 to 31 in 2011 and the number of inspection visits fell from 1,641 in 2009 to approximately 1,204 in 2010. Moreover, according to the Government, while the proportion of labour inspectors who are permanent officials has now increased from 85 to 93.5 per cent, their level of remuneration remains very close to the legal minimum wage. The Committee reiterates its request for the necessary measures to be taken so as to improve the conditions of service of labour inspectors and controllers (increased remuneration, or at least adaptation to the level of other inspectors discharging similar functions, and improved career prospects, including variations in remuneration based on education, training, merit or length of service). It requests the Government to indicate any measures taken or envisaged to increase the number of labour inspectors, with a view to ensuring that workplaces are inspected as often and as thoroughly as necessary.

Article 7(3). Training of labour inspectors. The Committee notes that the Government does not provide information on any measures taken to improve the initial and subsequent training of labour inspectors, as previously requested. It therefore once again requests the Government to take measures to improve the initial training provided to labour inspectors to enable them to carry out their duties as effectively as possible and to offer them subsequent training in the course of employment thereby updating their knowledge and skills and allowing them to adapt to technological or other developments in the world of work.

Furthermore, the Committee once again requests the Government to provide a copy of the labour inspection manual produced in cooperation with the trade unions: the Paraguayan Central of Workers (CPT), the National Union of Workers (CNT) and the Single Confederation of Workers (CUT); and employers’ organizations: the Industrial Union of Paraguay (UIP) and the Federation of Production, Industry and Commerce (FEPRINCO).

Article 11. Material and logistical means available to the labour inspectorate. The Committee notes that the Government reports some improvements in the material and logistical resources available to labour inspectors (purchase of seven computers and printers and installation of a telephone line). The Committee asks the Government to continue providing information on any measures taken to improve the material and logistical resources available to labour inspectors, which the Government describes as scarce.

Articles 12(1)(a) and (2)(c), and 15. Restrictions on the initiative of inspectors to enter freely workplaces liable to inspection. The Committee notes that Decision No. 1278 of September 2011, which is attached to the Government’s report, still requires a formal authorization of inspection visits through an inspection order to be issued by the Deputy Minister of Labour and Social Security and the Director-General for Labour “where appropriate”. It recalls that it has been raising this issue for a number of years in its comments under Articles 12 and 15. The Committee once again urges the Government to take the necessary measures, including the amendment of Decision No. 1278 of September 2011, to ensure that inspectors are empowered both in law and in practice to enter freely at any hour of the day or night any workplace liable to inspection, as provided in Article 12(1)(a) of the Convention and that the requirement of prior authorization of inspection visits is brought to an end.

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

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

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

Article 3, paragraphs 1 and 2, and Articles 5(a), 6, 12, 15(c) and 17 of the Convention. Additional duties entrusted to labour inspectors. The Committee notes that, according to the Government, contrary to the comments made by the Ibero-American Confederation of Labour Inspectors (CIIT) in 2006, the function of mediation falls within the remit of a department within the Ministry of Justice and Labour which is separate from the labour inspectorate and that inspectors are only involved in conciliation work very rarely. Referring to the Government’s report, the Committee notes, however, that labour inspectors have carried out joint activities with other inspection services, such as the Social Welfare Institute, the General Directorate of Migration, which comes under the Ministry of the Interior, and other bodies responsible for enforcing standards in the public transport sector, particularly under Decree No. 8768 of 17 May 2000 establishing an inter-institutional committee composed of these ministerial departments responsible for supervising labour standards and migration in the border areas of the national territory. In its General Survey of 2006 on labour inspection, the Committee was particularly interested in the negative effects that the involvement of labour inspectors in operations aimed at enforcing national migration policy can have on the performance of their primary duties (paragraph 78). In this regard, it drew the attention of governments to the need to ensure, in accordance with Article 3(2) of the Convention, that additional duties that are not aimed at securing the enforcement of the legal provisions relating to conditions of work and the protection of workers while engaged in their work are assigned to labour inspectors only in so far as they do not interfere with their primary duties. The Committee noted that inspections of clandestine work or illegal employment, which are increasingly closely linked to irregular migration, were carried out in many countries through a partnership between the labour inspectorate and other public administration bodies, each in pursuit of its own objectives. An examination of the situation relating to labour inspection in these countries showed that efforts to control the use of migrant workers in an irregular situation required the mobilization of considerable human and material resources, which inspectorates could only provide to the detriment of their primary duties. Furthermore, the Committee noted that, where the workers concerned are foreigners residing illegally in the country, they are doubly penalized in that, in addition to losing their job, they face the threat of expulsion, if not actual expulsion. The Committee considered that, in order to be compatible with the protective function of labour inspection, the verification of the legality of employment should have as its corollary the reinstatement of the statutory rights of all the workers concerned, and that the objective can only be met if the workers covered are convinced that the primary task of the inspectorate is to enforce the legal provisions relating to conditions of work and protection of workers. In paragraph 161 of the same General Survey, the Committee emphasized that the cooperation of the labour inspectorate with immigration authorities should be carried out cautiously, keeping in mind that the main objective of the labour inspection system is to protect the rights and interests of all workers and to improve their working conditions. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would indicate, in view of the above, the manner in which it is ensured that the participation of labour inspectors in operations to supervise the legality of the employment of migrant workers in no way contravenes Article 3(2) of the Convention and does not interfere with the discharge of the inspection functions defined in paragraph 1.

Article 8 of the Convention. Gender balance within the labour inspectorate. The Committee notes that the Decent Work Country Programme provides for ILO support in identifying good practices relating to gender balance within the public sector in coordination with the Public Service Secretariat and the Ministry of Justice and Labour, and developing a national programme on gender equality in the public service. Noting that, according to the statistics provided, there are 35 men inspectors and 14 women inspectors within the labour inspectorate, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the measures taken or envisaged to encourage women to join this profession, particularly n high-level posts.

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

The Committee notes the Government’s report, the partial replies to the comments made in 2006 by the Ibero-American Confederation of Labour Inspectors (CIIT), the documents attached and the press release by the Ministry of Justice and Labour dated 15 October 2009, received later. It notes with interest the adoption of a Decent Work Country Programme under a tripartite agreement concluded between the Ministry of Justice and Labour, employers’ and workers’ organizations and the ILO, and draws the Government’s attention to the following points.

Articles 3, paragraphs 1(a) and 2, and 18 of the Convention. Low level of supervision; impunity of those committing offences. In reply to the criticism made in 2006 by the CIIT concerning the low level of supervision of the legislation relating to conditions of work and the protection of workers, the Government points out that the new administration, in office since the election of a new President in August 2008, has been able to bring to light numerous cases of reported violations which have not resulted in legal proceedings and bring them to the attention of the public prosecutor. Referring to the statistics attached to its report, the Government emphasizes that the number of charges and penalties imposed (where cases have been the subject of court decisions) has since increased and the amounts of the fines imposed have also increased substantially. The Committee notes this information with interest and requests the Government to provide, while awaiting the production of an annual report on inspection activities as provided for by Articles 20 and 21, statistical data on the violations reported by inspectors in the areas covered by the Convention, the legal action taken against employers at fault and the penalties imposed.

Recalling that, in accordance with Article 18, the penalties should be not only adequate but also effectively enforced, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the proportion of penalties imposed which are effectively enforced. It invites the Government to refer to Paragraph 9(c) of the Labour Inspection Recommendation, 1947 (No. 81), with regard to the manner in which statistics could usefully be presented.

Article 6. Precarious status and conditions of service of labour inspectors. In reply to the allegations made by the CIIT concerning the poor conditions of service and precarious status of labour inspectors, the Government acknowledges that the collective agreement concluded in 1998 by the Ministry of Justice and Labour and the Single Union of Officials and Employees of the Ministry of Justice and Labour (SUFEMJTPY) is not applied in practice. It indicates that 85 per cent of labour inspectors are permanent officials, while the remaining 15 per cent are new recruits or persons seconded from other ministerial departments or State institutions. With regard to the level of remuneration of inspectors, the Government provides information showing that it is very close to the legal minimum wage and is in no way commensurate with their level of training, the complexity of their duties or their length of service. The Government also indicates that an investigation conducted in respect of several inspectors following allegations of corruption resulted in six titular controllers/inspectors being charged and suspended until the end of the proceedings. It also resulted in more than half the number of titular inspectors being transferred to other posts within the same Ministry and the recruitment of nine new inspectors. These developments have resulted in a substantial reduction in the level of seniority of personnel. The Committee expresses concern at the situation described by the Government and urges it to take the necessary measures to enhance the conditions of service of labour inspectors and controllers (remuneration, career prospects, consideration of their socio-economic role) to protect them from the corrupt practices to which they are currently exposed on account of their vulnerability. The Committee requests the Government to refer in this respect to paragraphs 201 to 220  of its 2006 General Survey on labour inspection and to provide information in its next report on the measures taken or envisaged in this regard including, in particular, information allowing a comparison of the conditions of service of labour inspectors with those applicable to other officials carrying out activities with a comparable level of responsibility, such as inspectors in the ministry responsible for finance and tax.

Article 7, paragraph 3. Inadequacy of training for labour inspectors. The Committee notes three resolutions of the Deputy Minister of Labour and Social Security attached to the Government’s report concerning the various training courses which have been provided for officials, including labour inspectors, namely: a four-day training workshop in the context of the HIV/AIDS in the workplace project; a three-day workshop on work and health within the labour inspectorate; a day on labour law and AIDS in the context of the HIV/AIDS project; and an advanced computer course. The Government also announces other courses organized specifically for occupational safety and health inspectors, without providing further information. The Government adds that a labour inspection manual has been produced in cooperation with workers’ organizations (CPT, CNT and CUT) and employers’ organizations (UIP and FEPRINCO). The manual deals with: the objectives and principles of labour inspection and supervision; the characteristics of the labour inspection service and its fields of competence; the different types of inspection and the various areas covered; the responsibilities and duties of inspectors; the labour inspection procedure; the preparation of inspection reports and follow-up inspections; and finally the penalties applicable under the labour legislation. The relevant ILO Conventions and Recommendations, as well the national legislative provisions, laws and decrees, governing the activity of labour inspection and supervision are attached to the manual. Referring to the allegations made by the CIIT concerning the inadequacy of training for labour inspectors, the Committee notes that the training sessions mentioned by the Government are very short, concern relatively limited matters compared to the numerous and complex duties they have to carry out and were only attended by a small number of inspectors. The Committee requests the Government to take measures to improve the initial training provided to labour inspectors to enable them to carry out the duties set out in Article 3(1) of the Convention, as effectively as possible and to offer them subsequent training in the course of employment  to update their knowledge and skills to enable them to adapt to technological or other developments in the world of work. The Committee would be grateful if it would provide information on the measures taken or envisaged to that end and on any difficulties encountered. The Committee also requests the Government to provide a copy of the above labour inspection manual.

Article 11. Inadequacy of material resources for inspectors. The Committee notes that the Government does not indicate any progress concerning the material resources made available to inspectors and does not reply to the concerns expressed by the CIIT in this regard. However, it notes that under the Decent Work Country Programme, labour inspection is one of the five priorities of labour policy. The Committee requests the Government to take measures, if necessary with external financial assistance, to improve the material and logistical resources available to labour inspectors with a view to the effective performance of their duties and to provide information in this respect.

Article 12, paragraph 1(a), and Article 15(c). Restrictions on the right of inspectors to enter workplaces liable to inspection: obstacles to compliance with the obligation of confidentiality relating to complaints. The Committee notes, according to the documents attached to the report, that labour inspectors are not empowered, as provided for under Article 12(1)(a) of the Convention, to enter freely any workplace liable to inspection and that all inspections seem to be subject to an order by the Deputy Minister of Labour. In its 2006 General Survey mentioned above, the Committee considered that the requirement for a formal authorization issued by a higher authority or by another competent authority to carry out an inspection constitutes a restriction on the principle of the inspectors’ free initiative with regard to the inspection of workplaces (paragraph 265). In accordance with Article 12 of the Convention, inspectors should be empowered to carry out inspections subject only to their being provided with proper credentials. The inspector’s professional identity card should suffice to meet the requirement of proper credentials referred to in the Convention. The Committee therefore requests the Government to take the necessary measures to bring this practice to an end and to ensure that inspectors are empowered, in both law and practice, to enter freely at any hour of the day or night any workplace liable to inspection, as provided for by paragraph 1(a) of Article 12, and to provide information on these measures and their results.

Articles 15(c), 16, 19, 20 and 21. Planning of inspections: conditions required for compliance with the obligation to treat complaints as confidential and for the publication of an annual report on labour inspection activities, as a tool for the evaluation and improvement of the labour inspection system. The Committee notes with interest Decree No. 580 creating the Department for the Registration of Employment Relationships, regulating the Employee Employer Register and defining the penalties applicable in the case of violation, under which all employers are under the obligation to ensure registration in the Employment Register within 60 days from the start of an employment relationship (section 3). It also notes that the tripartite agreement on the Decent Work Country Programme provides for improved computerization of administrative registers and the granting of benefits to employers, particularly to SMEs, who enter into formal employment relationships. The Committee hopes that the Decent Work Country Programme will be launched quickly, as the existence of a workplace register is necessary to achieve the objectives of the Convention. Such registers are an essential tool for the application of Article 16 relating to the frequency and quality of inspections. They facilitate the planning and carrying out of routine inspections in the workplaces covered by the Convention and ensure that labour inspectors comply with the obligation to treat complaints as confidential with a view to preventing the employer or his representative from detecting any link whatsoever between the inspection and the likelihood of a complaint, identifying the person responsible for the complaint and taking reprisals against that person (Article 15(c)). The Government is requested to take measures, particularly through the implementation of the Decent Work Country Programme, to give full effect in both law and practice to the above provisions and to provide information on the progress made in that regard, in particular on the results of the implementation of Decree No. 580 in relation to the above objectives of the Convention.

Noting the continued failure to give effect to Articles 20 and 21 concerning the publication, transmission and content of the annual inspection report, as well as the lack of information on this matter, the Committee requests the Government to provide information in its next report on the implementation of the necessary measures to that end, particularly in response to the efforts to computerize data as envisaged in the Decent Work Country Programme and apply the provisions of the inspection manual relating to the obligation of inspectors to submit periodical reports to the higher authority (Article 19).

Articles 5(a) and 21(e). Effective cooperation between the labour inspection services and the judicial bodies. According to the press release of the Ministry of Justice and Labour, dated 15 October 2009, the creation is envisaged, in the context of the Decent Work Country Programme, of units specializing in labour law within the public prosecutors’ offices in the towns of Pozo Colorado, Filadelfia and Villa Hayes, with a view to improving conditions of work in the Chaco area. Appropriate training should be provided to these public prosecutors to enable them to support the measures taken by labour inspectors in enforcing the law. The Committee takes due note of this information and requests the Government to keep the ILO informed of the follow-up to this project and to indicate any other measures taken to promote effective cooperation between the labour inspection services and the judicial bodies.

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

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

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

The Committee notes the Government’s report and the attached documentation. Although the report was received too late to be examined by the Committee at its present session, the Committee nevertheless reminds the Government that the observations of the Ibero-American Confederation of Labour Inspectors (CIIT), received by the ILO on 4 December 2006, were forwarded to it on 1 March 2007. It notes that the Government’s report does not refer to the CIIT’s observations and does not therefore provide comments on the matters raised therein. The Committee observes that most of the concerns expressed by the CIIT relate to the following points, on which it has been commenting since 1999.

1. Article 6 of the Convention. Precarious status and conditions of service of labour inspectors. According to the CIIT, labour inspectors are not assured of stability of employment as required by the Convention so as to ensure their independence of changes of government and of improper external influences. Any change of government involves the risk that they may lose their job and therefore the independence which guarantees the impartiality and authority necessary for the discharge of their duties. Furthermore, in the view of the CIIT, the level of their remuneration is very low and does not correspond to their individual qualifications. For example, the head of the Occupational Safety and Health Department, who also carries out inspections, receives a lower salary than that of many other inspectors.

2. Article 7, paragraph 3. Absence of adequate training for labour inspectors for the performance of their duties. The CIIT deplores the fact that no appropriate training is provided to inspectors and that they do not even have a guide or manual so that they can perform the duties entrusted to them.

3. Article 11. Precarious and inadequate nature of working conditions. In its observations, the CIIT indicates that the premises and working conditions of the labour inspectorate are far from complying with the minimum conditions required by the Convention. For example, the offices of inspectors are not separated by partitions and there is a lack of equipment and materials.

4. Article 3, paragraphs 1(a) and 2, and Article 18. Low level of supervision; impunity of those committing offences, and the burden of conciliation functions. The CIIT deplores the fact that the violations that are detected do not give rise to the imposition of the penalties established by the law and that inspectors are principally engaged in conciliation functions. As a result, the authority and impartiality which are necessary in their relations with employers and workers are seriously prejudiced.

The Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide the ILO with any comment that it deems appropriate in relation to the observations made by the CIIT. It will examine such comments together with the Government’s report at its next session.

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

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

The Committee notes the Government’s report and the attached documentation. Although the report was received too late to be examined by the Committee at its present session, the Committee nevertheless reminds the Government that the observations of the Ibero-American Confederation of Labour Inspectors (CIIT), received by the ILO on 4 December 2006, were forwarded to it on 1 March 2007. It notes that the Government’s report does not refer to the CIIT’s observations and does not therefore provide comments on the matters raised therein. The Committee observes that most of the concerns expressed by the CIIT relate to the following points, on which it has been commenting since 1999.

1. Article 6 of the Convention. Precarious status and conditions of service of labour inspectors. According to the CIIT, labour inspectors are not assured of stability of employment as required by the Convention so as to ensure their independence of changes of government and of improper external influences. Any change of government involves the risk that they may lose their job and therefore the independence which guarantees the impartiality and authority necessary for the discharge of their duties. Furthermore, in the view of the CIIT, the level of their remuneration is very low and does not correspond to their individual qualifications. For example, the head of the Occupational Safety and Health Department, who also carries out inspections, receives a lower salary than that of many other inspectors.

2. Article 7, paragraph 3. Absence of adequate training for labour inspectors for the performance of their duties. The CIIT deplores the fact that no appropriate training is provided to inspectors and that they do not even have a guide or manual so that they can perform the duties entrusted to them.

3. Article 11. Precarious and inadequate nature of working conditions. In its observations, the CIIT indicates that the premises and working conditions of the labour inspectorate are far from complying with the minimum conditions required by the Convention. For example, the offices of inspectors are not separated by partitions and there is a lack of equipment and materials.

4. Article 3, paragraphs 1(a) and 2, and Article 18. Low level of supervision; impunity of those committing offences, and the burden of conciliation functions. The CIIT deplores the fact that the violations that are detected do not give rise to the imposition of the penalties established by the law and that inspectors are principally engaged in conciliation functions. As a result, the authority and impartiality which are necessary in their relations with employers and workers are seriously prejudiced.

The Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide the ILO with any comment that it deems appropriate in relation to the observations made by the CIIT. It will examine such comments together with the Government’s report at its next session.

[The Government is asked to reply in detail to the present comments in 2008.]

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

The Committee notes the information contained in the Government’s report in reply to its previous comments, as well as the observations made by the Ibero-American Confederation of Labour Inspectors (CIIT) received by the ILO in June 2002, supplementing the observations made in 1999. It also notes the documents attached to the Government’s report.

In its successive comments, the CIIT refers to a number of dysfunctions in the labour inspection system including: the absence of inspection in certain regions, particularly in Chaco Paraguayo and certain towns in the country; and the precarious employment situation of labour inspectors, the alleged discrimination in relation to their salaries, the absence of training and working tools, the intimidation measures to which they are subjected, the impunity of employers who raise obstacles to the discharge of their functions, the impunity of those violating the legislation on conditions of work and the inadequacy of the human, logistical and material resources of the labour inspectorate.

1. Article 2 of the Convention. Coverage of the labour inspection system. The Committee notes that, without replying to the organization’s allegations on this subject, the Government nevertheless indicates that labour inspectors were brought together in a seminar on forced labour organized with ILO support in the region of Chaco Paraguayo. It requests the Government to specify whether all towns and regions, including those in which indigenous workers are engaged in industrial and commercial establishments, are covered by the inspection services and to provide any relevant statistical data.

2. Article 6. Status and conditions of service of labour inspectors. With regard to the precarious professional situation of labour inspectors, their extreme vulnerability on the occasion of the frequent changes of government and authority, and the discriminatory treatment in relation to salaries affecting certain of them, the Government has provided information to the effect that the personnel of the inspection services are covered by the Public Service Act, as well as by the collective agreement on conditions of work concluded by the Minister of Justice and Labour and the Single Union of Officials and Employees in that Ministry, approved by Decree No. 22264 of 7 August 1998, under the terms of which the appointment of career officials first involves a trial period of two months, at the end of which it becomes definitive. The Government adds that, in accordance with section 20 of the same text, decisions to change the functions and relocate officials can only be taken with their explicit consent, and that such decisions are first submitted to the union which can oppose them by means of a reasoned appeal. Noting that the Government has not however provided the Office, as it indicated that it would, and despite the request made on 7 April 2006, with the text of the above collective agreement, the Committee would be grateful if it would do so as soon as possible.

The Committee also requests the Government to indicate the measures adopted or envisaged to secure for all the inspection staff, including those assigned to safety and health, a status and conditions of service commensurate with the level of their responsibilities and to provide a copy of any relevant text.

3. Article 7, paragraph 3. Training of labour inspectors. In reply to the point raised by the CIIT, alleging that labour inspectors do not have the required training, as the only manual made available to them is obsolete, the Government indicates that training is provided by the Paraguayan Institute of Labour Studies (IPET) before candidates to the profession of inspector enter service and that they each receive a copy of the “Labour inspection manual”. Furthermore, according to the Government, during the course of their employment, inspectors also benefit from retraining courses which are provided by the same institution. In addition to the specific training on forced labour provided to inspectors in Chaco Paraguayo, thematic courses and workshops were organized in 2004 and 2005 on child labour. The Committee trusts that the implementation of the project for the modernization and strengthening of the labour inspection service, with the support of the ILO, to which the Government refers, will target, among other subjects, the updating of training for labour inspectors so as to enable them to respond to the changing needs relating to the protection of workers, and that the Government will soon be in a position to provide detailed information on the content and duration of the training, and on the number of inspectors who received such training.

4. Articles 10, 11 and 16. Human, financial and material resources necessary for the operation of the labour inspection system and the frequency of inspections. The insufficient numbers of inspection staff, the lack of equipment, office materials and means of transport, the absence of the reimbursement of travelling and incidental expenses to inspectors, and the insufficient number of inspections, most of which are reactive rather than proactive, are all matters of concern referred to by the CIIT and acknowledged by the Government, with particular reference to the lack of means of transport and even suitably equipped offices for certain inspectors. It states that travel expenses are nevertheless reimbursed to labour inspectors who provide receipts and that a commission responsible for undertaking programmed inspections has been created, but that an increase in human and material resources is indispensable if the frequency of inspections is to increase. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures adopted or envisaged to strengthen the human and material resources of the labour inspectorate so that it responds progressively to the requirements of Article 10 in relation to staff numbers, Article 11 concerning material conditions of work and transport facilities and Article 16 with regard to the frequency and quality of inspections.

5. Article 3, paragraph 2. Functions of mediation and supervision of legislation. The Committee notes with interest, in response to the point raised by the CIIT concerning the excessive volume of mediation undertaken by inspectors to the detriment of their inspection activities, that the situation has now been rectified due to the assignment of mediation functions to other officials. However, it is not clear from the two resolutions concerning staff appointments Nos. 11 and 12, of 9 and 10 December 2003, provided by the Government, that all labour inspectors have definitively been relieved of their mediation and conciliation functions in relation to the resolution of collective labour disputes. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide information on this matter and supply a copy of any relevant legal provision.

6. Article 12, paragraph 1(a), and Article 18. Free access of inspectors to workplaces liable to inspection and penalties for obstructing labour inspectors in the performance of their duties. According to the CIIT, the authorities have not reacted to information reporting the denial by certain employers of the right of labour inspectors to free access for the purposes of inspection. The Government indicates that, in practice, in such cases labour inspectors submit a report to the courts applying for judicial authorization to enter the premises. The Committee requests the Government to provide information of a practical nature concerning the duration of such a procedure and its impact in terms of the effectiveness of inspection and on the measures taken to ensure that, in accordance with Article 18, adequate penalties are imposed and effectively enforced against those obstructing labour inspectors in the performance of their duties.

7. Articles 20 and 21. Annual inspection report. The Committee notes with regret that no inspection report has been provided for around a decade. However, it notes with interest that the Government has been able to provide information concerning the imposition of penalties against employers in violation of the legislation respecting conditions of work, as well as statistical tables on industrial accidents in establishments located in the capital and the interior of the country in 2004. It trusts that the Government will not fail to take measures as rapidly as possible to enable the central inspection authority to develop its capacity for the compilation of information on the activities of the inspection services, where necessary with ILO technical assistance, and to publish and communicate to the Office, in accordance with Article 20, an annual inspection report covering the whole of the country and all the matters addressed in Article 21.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2005, published 95th ILC session (2006)

Referring to its observation, the Committee trusts that the Government will supply additional information on the following points raised in its previous direct request, which read as follows:

Article 3. Functions of the system of labour inspection. The Committee notes the allegations of the Ibero-American Confederation of Labour Inspectors that the conciliatory function is the major activity conducted by labour inspectors in Paraguay, blunting the discharge of their primary duties within the meaning of this provision. This situation was such as to prejudice the authority and impartiality necessary to inspectors in their relations with employers and workers. The Committee asks the Government to provide its response to these comments.

Article 6. Legal status and conditions of service of the inspection staff. In its comments the Ibero-American Confederation of Labour Inspectors alleges that the labour inspectors are not independent of changes of government. It also states that the salaries of inspectors are very low; that the differentiation in the levels of salaries is based not upon the level of education, but on administrative matters; that out of nine safety and hygiene inspectors four receive lower salaries. The Committee notes the indication in the Government’s report that the average salary of the labour inspectors currently is about US$350 while the average salary of other public functionaries and workers in the private sector is approximately US$180. The Committee asks the Government to indicate how the independence of labour inspectors of changes of government is assured and to provide its response to the above allegations.

Article 7, paragraph 3. Adequate training for the performance of inspection duties. The Committee notes that the Ibero-American Confederation of Labour Inspectors alleges the absence of training of labour inspectors. The Committee notes the information in the Government’s report concerning the courses for persons interested in becoming labour inspectors, conducted by the Paraguayan Institute for Labour Studies (IPET), and information concerning arrangements for subsequent training (refresher courses conducted in IPET, and courses especially organized for Inspectors of Hygiene and Occupational Safety). The Committee hopes that the Government will continue to supply information in this respect.

Article 12. Powers of labour inspectors. The Committee notes the allegations of the Ibero-American Confederation of Labour Inspectors that labour inspectors are prevented from entering industrial and commercial undertakings and that the authorities take no steps to remedy the situation when they are informed thereof. The Committee asks the Government to indicate the specific provisions of the national legislation prescribing penalties for obstructing labour inspectors in the performance of their duties and, in particular, for preventing them from entering freely and without previous notice at any hour of the day or night any workplace liable to inspection, and provide information on the practical application of this provision.

Articles 17 and 18. Prompt legal proceedings; adequate penalties. The Ibero-American Confederation of Labour Inspectors alleges that the sanctions provided in the legislation are not applied. The Committee asks the Government to send its comments on these allegations, providing the statistics of violations and penalties imposed.

Articles 20 and 21. Annual reports. The Committee notes that no annual report on the work of the inspection services has been received by the ILO. The Committee asks the Government to provide a copy of such report within the time limits set forth by Article 20, paragraph 3. The Committee also reminds it that annual reports published by the central inspection authority shall deal in particular with all items listed in Article 21, including statistics of industrial accidents and of occupational diseases (Article 21, paragraphs (f) and (g)).

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2005, published 95th ILC session (2006)

The Committee notes with regret that it has not received a report. It notes, moreover, that no report has been received since 1999 and that the Government has not accepted the invitation to transmit its comments on an observation received in June 2002 from the Ibero-American Confederation of Labour Inspectors (CIIT). The Committee trusts that the Government will provide a full report for examination at its next session and that it will contain detailed information on all the points  raised in its previous observations.

A request relating to certain issues is again addressed directly to the Government.

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

Also referring to its observation, the Committee once again notes with regret that the Government’s report has not been received. It must therefore repeat its reiterated previous direct request, which read as follows:

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

Referring also to its observations, the Committee hopes that the Government would supply information on the following points raised in its previous direct request:

Article 3. Functions of the system of labour inspection. The Committee notes the allegations of the Latin American Confederation of Labour Inspectors that the conciliatory function is the major activity conducted by labour inspectors in Paraguay, blunting the discharge of their primary duties within the meaning of this provision. This situation was such as to prejudice the authority and impartiality necessary to inspectors in their relations with employers and workers. The Committee asks the Government to provide its response to these comments.

Article 6. Status and conditions of service of the inspection staff. In its comments the Latin American Confederation of Labour Inspectors alleges that the labour inspectors are not independent of changes of government. It also states that the salaries of inspectors are very low; that the differentiation in the levels of salaries is based not upon the level of education, but on administrative matters; that out of nine safety and hygiene inspectors four receive lower salaries. The Committee notes the indication in the Government’s report that the average salary of the labour inspectors currently is about US$350 while the average salary of other public functionaries and workers in the private sector is approximately US$180. The Committee asks the Government to indicate how the independence of labour inspectors of changes of government is assured and to provide its response to the above allegations.

Article 7, paragraph 3. Adequate training for the performance of inspection duties. Referring also to its observation the Committee notes that the Latin American Confederation of Labour Inspectors alleges the absence of training of labour inspectors. The Committee notes the information in the Government’s report concerning the courses for persons interested in becoming labour inspectors, conducted by the Paraguayan Institute for Labour Studies (IPET), and information concerning arrangements for subsequent training (refresher courses conducted in IPET, and courses especially organized for Inspectors of Hygiene and Occupational Safety). The Committee hopes that the Government will continue to supply information in this respect.

Article 12. Powers of labour inspectors. The Committee notes the allegations of the Latin American Confederation of Labour Inspectors that labour inspectors are prevented from entering industrial and commercial undertakings and that the authorities take no steps to remedy the situation when they are informed thereof. The Committee asks the Government to indicate the specific provisions of the national legislation prescribing penalties for obstructing labour inspectors in the performance of their duties and, in particular, for preventing them from entering freely and without previous notice at any hour of the day or night any workplace liable to inspection, and provide information on the practical application of this provision.

Articles 17 and 18. Prompt legal proceedings; adequate penalties. The Latin American Confederation of Labour Inspectors alleges that the sanctions provided in the legislation are not applied. The Committee asks the Government to send its comments on these allegations, providing the statistics of violations and penalties imposed.

Articles 20 and 21. Annual reports. The Committee notes that no annual report on the work of the inspection services has been received by the ILO. The Committee asks the Government to provide a copy of such report within the time limits set forth by Article 20, paragraph 3. The Committee also reminds it that annual reports published by the central inspection authority shall deal in particular with all items listed in Article 21, including statistics of industrial accidents and statistics of occupational diseases (Article 21, paragraphs (f) and (g)).

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

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

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

The Committee notes the observations made by the Latin American Confederation of Labour Inspectors (CIIT) of 20 May 2002. These observations, which are supplementary to those provided by the same organization in 1999, were forward by the ILO to the Government on 22 July 2002. In the view of the organization, the situation denounced in 1999 persists and the operational capacity of the inspection services is continuing to deteriorate. The comments made by the CIIT concern matters relating to the establishment of an inspection system, the functions of the labour inspection system, the status and conditions of service of labour inspectors, their training and activities related to the inspection of workplaces.

Furthermore, the Committee takes note of the Government’s report received by the Office on 8 November 1999. It also notes the observations by the Latin American Confederation of Labour Inspectors of June 1999 alleging in particular the inadequacy of the number of inspectors and of inspection visits which are conducted mainly following complaints and not following a pre-established programme, as well as the absence of means of transport and the non-reimbursement of expenses.

The Committee notes that, according to the statistics transmitted by the Government, the number of inspectors (73) and visits (1,005) in 1998 is insufficient if compared to the number of undertakings (30,000) liable for inspection. These statistics show that each inspector carried out an average of 1.15 inspections monthly, that is a decrease of about 30 per cent in relation to 1996 when the number, although low in absolute terms, was higher. The Government acknowledges that the inspection services lack means of transport, but that certain expenses are reimbursed.

The Committee takes note with interest of the manual on labour inspection, approved by resolution No. 159 of 30 April 1998, relating in particular to the functions and powers of inspectors and to the inspection procedures; its annex reflects the text of the ILO Conventions on labour inspection, as well as the essential national provisions. It also notes a document of September 1999 sent by the Government on the preparation of programmed visits. Noting however that the Latin American Confederation of Labour Inspectors refers to the absence of a manual or guide for inspectors, the Committee asks the Government to indicate the measures contemplated to disseminate the above manual among inspectors.

The Committee hopes that the various initiatives taken by the Government will contribute to improving the activities of the labour inspectorate and that it will take the necessary measures to make available to the inspectorate the resources needed to increase the number of inspectors and the frequency of inspection visits, including programmed visits. It requests the Government to provide information on the progress made.

The Committee hopes that a report will be provided for examination at its next session and that it will contain full particulars on all the points raised.

The Committee is also once again addressing its previous request on other points directly to the Government.

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

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

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

Referring also to its observation, the Committee hopes that the Government would supply full information on the following points raised in its previous direct request:

Article 3. Functions of the system of labour inspection. The Committee notes the allegations of the Latin American Confederation of Labour Inspectors that the conciliatory function is the major activity conducted by labour inspectors in Paraguay, blunting the discharge of their primary duties within the meaning of this provision. This situation was such as to prejudice the authority and impartiality necessary to inspectors in their relations with employers and workers. The Committee asks the Government to provide its response to these comments.

Article 6. Status and conditions of service of the inspection staff. In its comments the Latin American Confederation of Labour Inspectors alleges that the labour inspectors are not independent of changes of government. It also states that the salaries of inspectors are very low; that the differentiation in the levels of salaries is based not upon the level of education, but on administrative matters; that out of nine safety and hygiene inspectors four receive lower salaries. The Committee notes the indication in the Government’s report that the average salary of the labour inspectors currently is about US$350 while the average salary of other public functionaries and workers in the private sector is approximately US$180. The Committee asks the Government to indicate how the independence of labour inspectors of changes of government is assured and to provide its response to the above allegations.

Article 7, paragraph 3. Adequate training for the performance of inspection duties. Referring also to its observation the Committee notes that the Latin American Confederation of Labour Inspectors alleges the absence of training of labour inspectors. The Committee notes the information in the Government’s report concerning the courses for persons interested in becoming labour inspectors, conducted by the Paraguayan Institute for Labour Studies (IPET), and information concerning arrangements for subsequent training (refresher courses conducted in IPET, and courses especially organized for Inspectors of Hygiene and Occupational Safety). The Committee hopes that the Government will continue to supply information in this respect.

Article 12. Powers of labour inspectors. The Committee notes the allegations of the Latin American Confederation of Labour Inspectors that labour inspectors are prevented from entering industrial and commercial undertakings and that the authorities take no steps to remedy the situation when they are informed thereof. The Committee asks the Government to indicate the specific provisions of the national legislation prescribing penalties for obstructing labour inspectors in the performance of their duties and, in particular, for preventing them from entering freely and without previous notice at any hour of the day or night any workplace liable to inspection, and provide information on the practical application of this provision.

Articles 17 and 18. Prompt legal proceedings; adequate penalties. The Latin American Confederation of Labour Inspectors alleges that the sanctions provided in the legislation are not applied. The Committee asks the Government to send its comments on these allegations, providing the statistics of violations and penalties imposed.

Articles 20 and 21. Annual reports. The Committee notes that no annual report on the work of the inspection services has been received by the ILO. The Committee asks the Government to provide a copy of such report within the time limits set forth by Article 20, paragraph 3. The Committee also reminds it that annual reports published by the central inspection authority shall deal in particular with all items listed in Article 21, including statistics of industrial accidents and statistics of occupational diseases (Article 21, paragraphs (f) and (g)).

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

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

The Committee notes the observations made by the Latin American Confederation of Labour Inspectors (CIIT) of 20 May 2002. These observations, which are supplementary to those provided by the same organization in 1999, were forward by the ILO to the Government on 22 July 2002. In the view of the organization, the situation denounced in 1999 persists and the operational capacity of the inspection services is continuing to deteriorate. The comments made by the CIIT concern matters relating to the establishment of an inspection system, the functions of the labour inspection system, the status and conditions of service of labour inspectors, their training and activities related to the inspection of workplaces.

Furthermore, the Committee takes note of the Government’s report received by the Office on 8 November 1999. It also notes the observations by the Latin American Confederation of Labour Inspectors of June 1999 alleging in particular the inadequacy of the number of inspectors and of inspection visits which are conducted mainly following complaints and not following a pre-established programme, as well as the absence of means of transport and the non-reimbursement of expenses.

The Committee notes that, according to the statistics transmitted by the Government, the number of inspectors (73) and visits (1,005) in 1998 is insufficient if compared to the number of undertakings (30,000) liable for inspection. These statistics show that each inspector carried out an average of 1.15 inspections monthly, that is a decrease of about 30 per cent in relation to 1996 when the number, although low in absolute terms, was higher. The Government acknowledges that the inspection services lack means of transport, but that certain expenses are reimbursed.

The Committee takes note with interest of the manual on labour inspection, approved by resolution No. 159 of 30 April 1998, relating in particular to the functions and powers of inspectors and to the inspection procedures; its annex reflects the text of the ILO Conventions on labour inspection, as well as the essential national provisions. It also notes a document of September 1999 sent by the Government on the preparation of programmed visits. Noting however that the Latin American Confederation of Labour Inspectors refers to the absence of a manual or guide for inspectors, the Committee asks the Government to indicate the measures contemplated to disseminate the above manual among inspectors.

The Committee hopes that the various initiatives taken by the Government will contribute to improving the activities of the labour inspectorate and that it will take the necessary measures to make available to the inspectorate the resources needed to increase the number of inspectors and the frequency of inspection visits, including programmed visits. It requests the Government to provide information on the progress made.

The Committee hopes that a report will be provided for examination at its next session and that it will contain full particulars on all the points raised.

The Committee is also once again addressing its previous request on other points directly to the Government.

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

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

Referring also to its observation, the Committee hopes that the Government would supply full information on the following points raised in its previous direct request:

Article 3. Functions of the system of labour inspection. The Committee notes the allegations of the Latin American Confederation of Labour Inspectors that the conciliatory function is the major activity conducted by labour inspectors in Paraguay, blunting the discharge of their primary duties within the meaning of this provision. This situation was such as to prejudice the authority and impartiality necessary to inspectors in their relations with employers and workers. The Committee asks the Government to provide its response to these comments.

Article 6. Status and conditions of service of the inspection staff. In its comments the Latin American Confederation of Labour Inspectors alleges that the labour inspectors are not independent of changes of government. It also states that the salaries of inspectors are very low; that the differentiation in the levels of salaries is based not upon the level of education, but on administrative matters; that out of nine safety and hygiene inspectors four receive lower salaries. The Committee notes the indication in the Government’s report that the average salary of the labour inspectors currently is about US$350 while the average salary of other public functionaries and workers in the private sector is approximately US$180. The Committee asks the Government to indicate how the independence of labour inspectors of changes of government is assured and to provide its response to the above allegations.

Article 7, paragraph 3. Adequate training for the performance of inspection duties. Referring also to its observation the Committee notes that the Latin American Confederation of Labour Inspectors alleges the absence of training of labour inspectors. The Committee notes the information in the Government’s report concerning the courses for persons interested in becoming labour inspectors, conducted by the Paraguayan Institute for Labour Studies (IPET), and information concerning arrangements for subsequent training (refresher courses conducted in IPET, and courses especially organized for Inspectors of Hygiene and Occupational Safety). The Committee hopes that the Government will continue to supply information in this respect.

Article 12. Powers of labour inspectors. The Committee notes the allegations of the Latin American Confederation of Labour Inspectors that labour inspectors are prevented from entering industrial and commercial undertakings and that the authorities take no steps to remedy the situation when they are informed thereof. The Committee asks the Government to indicate the specific provisions of the national legislation prescribing penalties for obstructing labour inspectors in the performance of their duties and, in particular, for preventing them from entering freely and without previous notice at any hour of the day or night any workplace liable to inspection, and provide information on the practical application of this provision.

Articles 17 and 18. Prompt legal proceedings; adequate penalties. The Latin American Confederation of Labour Inspectors alleges that the sanctions provided in the legislation are not applied. The Committee asks the Government to send its comments on these allegations, providing the statistics of violations and penalties imposed.

Articles 20 and 21. Annual reports. The Committee notes that no annual report on the work of the inspection services has been received by the ILO. The Committee asks the Government to provide a copy of such report within the time limits set forth by Article 20, paragraph 3. The Committee also reminds it that annual reports published by the central inspection authority shall deal in particular with all items listed in Article 21, including statistics of industrial accidents and statistics of occupational diseases (Article 21, paragraphs (f) and (g)).

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

The Committee notes the observations made by the Latin American Confederation of Labour Inspectors (CIIT) of 20 May 2002. These observations, which are supplementary to those provided by the same organization in 1999, were forward by the ILO to the Government on 22 July 2002. In the view of the organization, the situation denounced in 1999 persists and the operational capacity of the inspection services is continuing to deteriorate. The comments made by the CIIT concern matters relating to the establishment of an inspection system, the functions of the labour inspection system, the status and conditions of service of labour inspectors, their training and activities related to the inspection of workplaces.

Furthermore, the Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received and it is therefore bound to reiterate its previous observation on the following points:

The Committee takes note of the Government’s report received by the Office on 8 November 1999. It also notes the observations by the Latin American Confederation of Labour Inspectors of June 1999 alleging in particular the inadequacy of the number of inspectors and of inspection visits which are conducted mainly following complaints and not following a pre-established programme, as well as the absence of means of transport and the non-reimbursement of expenses.

The Committee notes that, according to the statistics transmitted by the Government, the number of inspectors (73) and visits (1,005) in 1998 is insufficient if compared to the number of undertakings (30,000) liable for inspection. These statistics show that each inspector carried out an average of 1.15 inspections monthly, that is a decrease of about 30 per cent in relation to 1996 when the number, although low in absolute terms, was higher. The Government acknowledges that the inspection services lack means of transport, but that certain expenses are reimbursed.

The Committee takes note with interest of the manual on labour inspection, approved by resolution No. 159 of 30 April 1998, relating in particular to the functions and powers of inspectors and to the inspection procedures; its annex reflects the text of the ILO Conventions on labour inspection, as well as the essential national provisions. It also notes a document of September 1999 sent by the Government on the preparation of programmed visits. Noting however that the Latin American Confederation of Labour Inspectors refers to the absence of a manual or guide for inspectors, the Committee asks the Government to indicate the measures contemplated to disseminate the above manual among inspectors.

The Committee hopes that the various initiatives taken by the Government will contribute to improving the activities of the labour inspectorate and that it will take the necessary measures to make available to the inspectorate the resources needed to increase the number of inspectors and the frequency of inspection visits, including programmed visits. It requests the Government to provide information on the progress made.

The Committee hopes that a report will be provided for examination at its next session and that it will contain full particulars on all the points raised.

The Committee is also once again addressing its previous request on other points directly to the Government.

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

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

Referring also to its observation under the Convention, the Committee requests the Government to provide further information on the following points:

  Article 3. Functions of the system of labour inspection. The Committee notes the allegations of the Latin American Confederation of Labour Inspectors that the conciliatory function is the major activity conducted by labour inspectors in Paraguay, blunting the discharge of their primary duties within the meaning of this provision. This situation was such as to prejudice the authority and impartiality necessary to inspectors in their relations with employers and workers. The Committee asks the Government to provide its response to these comments.

  Article 6. Status and conditions of service of the inspection staff. In its comments the Latin American Confederation of Labour Inspectors alleges that the labour inspectors are not independent of changes of government. It also states that the salaries of inspectors are very low; that the differentiation in the levels of salaries is based not upon the level of education, but on administrative matters; that out of nine safety and hygiene inspectors four receive lower salaries. The Committee notes the indication in the Government’s report that the average salary of the labour inspectors currently is about US$350 while the average salary of other public functionaries and workers in the private sector is approximately US$180. The Committee asks the Government to indicate how the independence of labour inspectors of changes of government is assured and to provide its response to the above allegations.

  Article 7, paragraph 3. Adequate training for the performance of inspection duties. Referring also to its observation the Committee notes that the Latin American Confederation of Labour Inspectors alleges the absence of training of labour inspectors. The Committee notes the information in the Government’s report concerning the courses for persons interested in becoming labour inspectors, conducted by the Paraguayan Institute for Labour Studies (IPET), and information concerning arrangements for subsequent training (refresher courses conducted in IPET, and courses especially organized for Inspectors of Hygiene and Occupational Safety). The Committee hopes that the Government will continue to supply information in this respect.

  Article 12. Powers of labour inspectors. The Committee notes the allegations of the Latin American Confederation of Labour Inspectors that labour inspectors are prevented from entering industrial and commercial undertakings and that the authorities take no steps to remedy the situation when they are informed thereof. The Committee asks the Government to indicate the specific provisions of the national legislation prescribing penalties for obstructing labour inspectors in the performance of their duties and, in particular, for preventing them from entering freely and without previous notice at any hour of the day or night any workplace liable to inspection, and provide information on the practical application of this provision.

  Articles 17 and 18. Prompt legal proceedings; adequate penalties. The Latin American Confederation of Labour Inspectors alleges that the sanctions provided in the legislation are not applied. The Committee asks the Government to send its comments on these allegations, providing the statistics of violations and penalties imposed.

  Articles 20 and 21. Annual reports. The Committee notes that no annual report on the work of the inspection services has been received by the ILO. The Committee asks the Government to provide a copy of such report within the time limits set forth by Article 20, paragraph 3. The Committee also reminds it that annual reports published by the central inspection authority shall deal in particular with all items listed in Article 21, including statistics of industrial accidents and statistics of occupational diseases (Article 21, paragraphs (f) and (g)).

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

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

The Committee takes note of the Government’s report received by the Office on 8 November 1999. It also notes the observations by the Latin American Confederation of Labour Inspectors of June 1999 alleging in particular the inadequacy of the number of inspectors and of inspection visits which are conducted mainly following complaints and not following a pre-established programme, as well as the absence of means of transport and non-reimbursement of expenses.

The Committee notes that, according to the statistics transmitted by the Government, the number of inspectors (73) and visits (1,005) in 1998 is insufficient if compared to the number of undertakings (30,000) that should be visited. These statistics show that each inspector carried out an average of 1.15 inspection monthly, that is a decrease of about 30 per cent in relation to 1996. The Government acknowledges that inspection services lack means of transport but that certain expenses are reimbursed.

The Committee takes note with interest of the Manual on Labour Inspectorate, approved by resolution No. 159 of 30 April 1998, relating in particular to the functions and powers of inspectors and to the inspection procedures; its annex reflects the text of the ILO Conventions on labour inspectorate, as well as the essential national relevant provisions. It also notes a document of September 1999 sent by the Government on the preparation of programmed visits. Noting however that the Latin-American Confederation of Labour Inspectors refers to the absence of a manual or guide for inspectors, the Committee asks the Government to indicate the measures contemplated to propagate the abovementioned manual among the inspectors.

The Committee hopes that the various initiatives taken by the Government will contribute to improve the activities of the Labour Inspectorate and that it will take the necessary measures to make available to the Inspectorate the resources needed to increase the number of inspectors and the frequency of inspection visits, including programmed visits. It requests the Government to provide information on progress made.

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

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

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1999, published 88th ILC session (2000)

Referring also to its observation under the Convention, the Committee requests the Government to provide further information on the following points:

Article 3. Functions of the system of the labour inspection. The Committee notes the allegations of the Latin American Confederation of Labour Inspectors that the conciliatory function is the major activity conducted by labour inspectors in Paraguay, blunting the discharge of their primary duties within the meaning of this provision. This situation was such as to prejudice the authority and impartiality necessary to inspectors in their relations with employers and workers. The Committee asks the Government to provide its response to these comments.

Article 6. Status and conditions of service of the inspection staff. In its comments the Latin American Confederation of Labour Inspectors alleges that the labour inspectors are not independent of changes of government. It also states that the salaries of inspectors are very low; that the differentiation in the levels of salaries is based not upon the level of education, but on administrative matters; that out of nine safety and hygiene inspectors four receive lower salaries. The Committee notes the indication in the Government's report that the average salary of the labour inspectors currently is about US$350 while the average salary of other public functionaries and workers in the private sector is approximately US$180. The Committee asks the Government to indicate how the independence of labour inspectors of changes of government is assured and to provide its response to the above allegations.

Article 7, paragraph 3. Adequate training for the performance of inspection duties. Referring also to its observation the Committee notes that the Latin American Confederation of Labour Inspectors alleges the absence of training of labour inspectors. The Committee notes the information in the Government's report concerning the courses for persons interested in becoming labour inspectors, conducted by the Paraguayan Institute for Labour Studies (IPET), and information concerning arrangements for subsequent training (refresher courses conducted in IPET, and courses especially organized for Inspectors of Hygiene and Occupational Safety). The Committee hopes that the Government will continue to supply information in this respect.

Article 12. Powers of labour inspectors. The Committee notes the allegations of the Latin American Confederation of Labour Inspectors that labour inspectors are prevented from entering industrial and commercial undertakings and that the authorities take no steps to remedy the situation when they are informed thereof. The Committee asks the Government to indicate the specific provisions of the national legislation prescribing penalties for obstructing labour inspectors in the performance of their duties and, in particular, for preventing them from entering freely and without previous notice at any hour of the day or night any workplace liable to inspection, and provide information on the practical application of this provision.

Articles 17 and 18. Prompt legal proceedings; adequate penalties. The Latin American Confederation of Labour Inspectors alleges that the sanctions provided in the legislation are not applied. The Committee asks the Government to send its comments on these allegations, providing the statistics of violations and penalties imposed.

Articles 20 and 21. Annual reports. The Committee notes that no annual report on the work of the inspection services has been received by the ILO. The Committee asks the Government to provide a copy of such report within the time limits set forth by Article 20, paragraph 3. The Committee also reminds it that annual reports published by the central inspection authority shall deal in particular with all items listed in Article 21, including statistics of industrial accidents and statistics of occupational diseases (Article 21, paragraphs (f) and (g)).

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1999, published 88th ILC session (2000)

The Committee takes note of the Government's report received by the Office on 8 November 1999. It also notes the observations by the Latin-American Confederation of Labour Inspectors of June 1999 alleging in particular the inadequacy of the number of inspectors and of inspection visits which are conducted mainly following complaints and not following a pre-established programme, as well as the absence of means of transport and non-reimbursement of expenses.

The Committee notes that, according to the statistics transmitted by the Government, the number of inspectors (73) and visits (1,005) in 1998 is insufficient if compared to the number of undertakings (30,000) that should be visited. These statistics show that each inspector carried out an average of 1.15 inspection monthly, that is a decrease of about 30 per cent in relation to 1996. The Government acknowledges that inspection services lack means of transport but that certain expenses are reimbursed.

The Committee takes note with interest of the Manual on Labour Inspectorate, approved by resolution No. 159 of 30 April 1998, relating in particular to the functions and powers of inspectors and to the inspection procedures; its annex reflects the text of the ILO Conventions on labour inspectorate, as well as the essential national relevant provisions. It also notes a document of September 1999 sent by the Government on the preparation of programmed visits. Noting however that the Latin-American Confederation of Labour Inspectors refers to the absence of a manual or guide for inspectors, the Committee asks the Government to indicate the measures contemplated to propagate the abovementioned manual among the inspectors.

The Committee hopes that the various initiatives taken by the Government will contribute to improve the activities of the Labour Inspectorate and that it will take the necessary measures to make available to the Inspectorate the resources needed to increase the number of inspectors and the frequency of inspection visits, including programmed visits. It requests the Government to provide information on progress made.

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

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

The Committee notes the Government's report for the period ending on 1 September 1996. It requests the Government to provide further information on a certain number of points.

Article 5 of the Convention. Please describe the arrangements made by the Government in order to promote collaboration between officials of the labour inspectorate and employers and workers or their organizations and indicate the particular forms of such collaboration.

Article 6. The Committee asks the Government to provide information enabling it to compare the average annual salary of labour inspectors with that of public officials and the average annual wage in Paraguay.

Articles 10 and 16. The Committee has previously noted that the number of inspectors was insufficient to secure the discharge of their duties. The Committee notes that according to the report of the Inspection and Vigilance Department, 767 inspection visits took place within the period from January to December 1996. Taking into consideration the information provided in the Government's report that there were 38 labour inspectors, it turns out that each inspector on average would have conducted only 1.68 inspection visits per month. The Committee hopes that the Government will adopt measures to increase the number of labour inspectors and inspection visits in order that workplaces be inspected as often and as thoroughly as necessary and asks to provide information on any progress made.

Article 11. Please indicate the geographical distribution of cars and other means of transport furnished to labour inspectors in relation to the number of inspectors.

Article 13. In previous comments the Committee noted the draft resolution intended to ensure the application in law of this Article of the Convention and expressed the hope that it would be adopted in the near future. The Committee notes the Government's indication that labour inspectors have the authority to suspend temporarily the work in case of danger to the lives of workers and other persons. The Committee requests the Government to provide the texts of the relevant specific provisions of the national legislation providing inspectors with such authority.

Articles 20 and 21. The Committee notes that in the report of the Inspection and Vigilance Department for the period from January to December 1996, a significant portion of statistical information required in accordance with Article 21 of the Convention is missing. The Committee asks the Government to take into consideration that annual reports published by the central inspection authority shall deal in particular with all items listed in Article 21 of the Convention, including statistics of industrial accidents and statistics of occupational diseases (Article 21, paragraphs (f) and (g)). The Committee also asks the Government to indicate whether this report was officially published and how its availability to an interested party is assured.

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

The Committee notes that the Government's report has not been received. Nevertheless, with reference to its previous observation, the Committee notes the information supplied by the Government to the Conference Committee in 1992, and the draft resolution relating to the application of Article 13 of the Convention.

Article 13 of the Convention. The Committee notes with interest the draft resolution referred to above which is intended to ensure the application in law of this Article of the Convention. The Committee also notes that, after the period of time given to the employer to remedy the defects found in a first inspection, a second inspection is carried out, and if the situation is still unsatisfactory sanctions are imposed by means of administrative resolution. These sanctions can also be applied in cases of immediate danger and include the possibility of withdrawing the operating licence of the establishment, as provided, according to the information supplied by the Government, in the Health Code. It is also stated that the most representative organizations of workers and employers were consulted in the preparation of a technical manual containing standards concerning conditions in the workplace and that this manual will be mandatory. The Committee hopes that the draft resolution will be adopted in the near future and that the Government will be able to supply a copy, with the technical manual and the Health Code, with its next report. The Committee also trusts that the Government will supply information on its application in practice.

Articles 10, 16, 20 and 21. The Committee notes that, although the number of inspectors is still insufficient, the Ministry of Labour will in 1993 present a request to the Ministry of Finance for a substantial increase in the number of inspectors and an improvement in the conditions necessary for the effective performance of their duties, which are to be extended. The Government also states that it was taking the necessary measures to remedy the lack of information, with the assistance of the ILO. Furthermore, it indicates that it is analysing the possibility of requesting technical and financial assistance from the ILO in order to evaluate the national situation with respect to working conditions and occupational safety and health. Finally, the Committee notes that Decree No. 43, of 31 March 1992, establishes increases in the fines applicable for non-compliance with labour provisions. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would supply information in its next report on any progress achieved with regard to the above measures. It also recalls the importance that it attaches to the publication of annual reports on the inspection services containing all the information referred to in Article 21 and trusts that the Government will be able to publish such reports and transmit copies of them rapidly to the Office.

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

With reference to its previous observations, the Committee notes the Government's report and the inspection report for 1990.

Article 13 of the Convention. The Committee once again recalls that labour inspectors do not have the powers provided for in this Article. The Committee wishes to draw the Government's attention to the need to take steps to enable inspectors to make or have made orders requiring any appropriate measures to eliminate risks to the health or safety of workers. It hopes that the Government will report on any progress made in this respect.

Articles 10, 16, 20 and 21. The Committee takes note of the incomplete information contained in the inspection report. The Committee recalls the importance it attaches to the publication of annual inspection reports, which should contain all the information referred to in Article 21. The purpose of these reports is to facilitate an assessment of the problems and practical results of inspection activities - for example, the adequacy of the strength of the inspectorate, and the guarantee that inspection visits are carried out with the necessary frequency and thoroughness - which, in turn, should enable the authorities to draw useful conclusions for the future application of the Convention. The Committee trusts that the Government will publish annual inspection reports, in accordance with the assurances in its report, which take account of all the points listed in the Convention. It hopes that the next report will contain full information in this respect.

[The Government is asked to report in detail for the period ending 30 June 1992.]

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

Article 13 of the Convention. The Committee notes Decree No. 20.814 of 25 March 1987 to establish the Directorate of Health and Safety of the Ministry of Justice and Labour. It notes that this Decree does not give effect to this Article of the Convention, under which labour inspectors should have the right to make or have made orders requiring any appropriate measures to eliminate risks to the health or safety of workers. The Committee trusts that the Government will take the necessary measures in the near future to give full effect to the provisions of this Article of the Convention.

Article 16. In reply to the Committee's previous comments, the Government states that workplaces are inspected regularly. In this connection, the Committee recalls that, in order to enable it to gain a precise idea of the extent to which this Article of the Convention is applied, it is indispensable for it to be provided with statistics concerning the frequency of inspection visits. It therefore once again requests the Government, either in the context of its report on the application of the Convention, or in the annual inspection report, to supply detailed information on the number of workplaces that have been inspected and the number of workplaces that are liable to inspection.

Articles 20 and 21. The Committee notes with regret that, since the ratification of the Convention, no inspection report has yet reached the ILO. It trusts that the Government will not fail to take the necessary measures to ensure that annual reports on the work of the inspection services, containing detailed information on all the subjects listed in Article 21, are published and transmitted to the ILO within the time-limits set forth in Article 20. [The Government is asked to provide full particulars to the Conference at its 77th Session.]