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

Domestic Workers Convention, 2011 (No. 189) - Dominican Republic (Ratification: 2015)

The Committee welcomes the first report provided by the Government. The Committee also notes the observations of the National Confederation of Trade Union Unity (CNUS), the Autonomous Confederation of Workers’ Unions (CASC) and the National Confederation of Dominican Workers (CNTD), received on 3 September 2018. The Committee requests the Government to provide its responses in this regard.

Application of the Convention. Part V of the report form. The Committee notes that section four of the Labour Code establishes special regimes for specific categories of work, including domestic work. It also notes that the fourth Chapter, Title IV, of the Labour Code, entitled “The work of domestics”, only contains seven sections, from section 258 to 265, regulating domestic work. These sections establish conditions of work for domestic workers which are less favourable than those for other workers, for example in relation to hours of work, rest, annual leave, sick leave and remuneration. The Committee recalls that the objective of the Convention is to guarantee domestic workers the same labour rights and working conditions as those of workers in general. In this regard, the Committee notes that the Government reports the approval of Presidential Decree No. 286-13, of 2 October 2013, establishing the Special Commission for the Revision and Updating of the Labour Code, which provides for the participation of the social partners in the process of the revision of the Labour Code. The Government indicates that one of the specific objectives of the process is the harmonization of the national legislation with ratified ILO Conventions. However, the Committee notes that the Government has not provided information on the current situation with regard to the reform of the Labour Code, nor in particular on the amendment of the provisions respecting domestic work. It also notes that the workers’ organizations CNUS, CASC and CNTD, in their observations, denounce the absence of commitment by the Government and employers’ organizations concerning the inclusion of the rights of men and women domestic workers in the reform of the Labour Code. They assert that, as a consequence, they have sought the support of the National Congress for the adoption of specific legislation on domestic work with a view to adapting the national legislation to the requirements of the Convention. With reference to consultations with the social partners, the Government indicates that the mandate of the Tripartite Dialogue Round Table includes as an urgent priority resolving the issue of the implementation in practice of the provisions of the Convention. The Committee requests the Government, in the context of the reforms introduced by the Special Commission for the Revision and Updating of the Labour Code, to take the necessary measures, in consultation with the social partners, including organizations of workers and employers representing the domestic work sector, to bring the labour legislation into conformity with the requirements of the Convention (Article 18), and to keep the Office informed of any progress in this respect. The Committee also requests the Government to provide general information on the manner in which the Convention is applied in the Dominican Republic and to provide extracts from the reports of the inspection services, court rulings and, where such statistics exist, information on the number of workers covered by the measures giving effect to the Convention, disaggregated by sex and age, as well as the number and nature of infringements reported, and any model employment contract that exists for domestic work.

Article 1(1)(a) and (c) of the Convention. Definition of domestic work. Occasional and sporadic domestic workers. The Government refers in its report to section 258(1) of the Labour Code, which defines domestic workers as those “dedicated exclusively and in a customary and continuous manner to the work of cooking, cleaning, assistance and other tasks specific to a household or other place of private residence, which do not involve profit or business for the employer or her or his family members”. The Committee notes that the term “exclusively” may give rise to interpretations under which, in order to be considered a domestic worker, the worker must provide services in a single workplace, which implies that workers who, despite performing work of a domestic nature, work for various employers, may not be considered domestic workers. Moreover, the inclusion of the term “in a customary and continuous manner” in the definition may lead to the understanding that workers who perform domestic work discontinuously or sporadically are not considered to be domestic workers. In this regard, the Committee recalls that the definition of “domestic worker” set out in Article 1 of the Convention only excludes sporadic workers when the domestic work performed by such workers is not on an occupational basis. The Committee draws the Government’s attention to the preparatory work for the Convention, in which it was emphasized that this wording was included in the provision to ensure that day labourers and similar precarious workers remain included in the definition of “domestic worker” (Decent work for domestic workers, Report IV(1), ILC, 100th Session, 2011, p. 5). The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether workers who perform domestic work for several employers are also covered by the definition of “domestic worker”. The Committee requests the Government to consider the possibility of taking the necessary measures to ensure that workers who perform domestic work occasionally or sporadically on an occupational basis are included in the definition of domestic workers, and are therefore covered by the Convention.

Article 2. Scope of application. Exclusions. The Committee notes that section 258(2) of the Labour Code provides that “workers in the service of the consortium of owners of a building are not domestic workers”. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the legal regime covering such workers. It also requests the Government to provide detailed explanations on the reasons for this exclusion and to indicate whether the social partners were consulted previously on this subject.

Article 3(2)(a) and (3). Freedom of association and collective bargaining. Article 62(3) of the Constitution, as noted by the Government, establishes that freedom of association and collective bargaining are basic rights of men and women workers. Nevertheless, the Committee recalls that the specific characteristics of domestic work, which frequently include a high level of dependency on the employer (particularly in the case of migrant workers) and the frequent isolation of domestic workers in their places of work, are factors which make it particularly difficult for domestic workers to establish and join unions. The protection of freedom of association and the right to collective bargaining are therefore of particular importance in this sector and require the adoption of specific measures to guarantee these rights in practice. The Committee notes that, under the terms of section 110 of the Labour Code, to conclude a collective agreement it is necessary to have an absolute majority, that is half plus one of all the domestic workers at the local, regional or national level, which aggravates the difficulties already faced by domestic workers to exercise their rights of freedom of association and collective bargaining. The Committee refers to its 2016 comments on the application of the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98), in relation to the need to amend section 110 of the Labour Code and it requests the Government to provide information on the progress achieved in this respect. The Committee also requests the Government to provide detailed information on the measures that have been adopted or are envisaged to ensure in practice the right to freedom of association and collective bargaining of domestic workers.

Article 3(2)(b). Elimination of all forms of forced or compulsory labour. Article 41 of the Constitution prohibits slavery in all its forms, servitude, and the smuggling and trafficking of persons. Act No. 137-03, of 7 August 2003, on the unlawful smuggling of immigrants and trafficking in persons prohibits trafficking in persons and establishes sentences of imprisonment of between 15 and 20 years and fines. In this regard, in its 2017 comments on the Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29), the Committee noted the joint concerns of several trade union confederations regarding the legislative framework to combat forced labour, which they consider to be incomplete as neither the Penal Code nor the Labour Code defines the offence of “forced labour”. In this regard, the Committee recalled that the notion of forced labour, as established by Convention No. 29, is broader than that of trafficking in persons and that it is therefore important for national jurisdictions to have precise provisions, taking into account the principle of the strict interpretation of penal law. The possibility exists of forced labour being exacted from persons in various types of vulnerable situations, particularly when a person is exploited without having been trafficked either inside or outside the country. The Committee therefore requested the Government to provide information on cases in which the Act had been used as a basis by the courts for punishing the exaction of forced labour, where the imposition of such labour is unrelated to the procuring, transport, transfer, accommodation or receipt of the victim. In the case of minors, section 25(1) of the Code for the Protection of the Fundamental Rights of Boys, Girls and Young Persons establishes penalties for any persons who offer, deliver or accept a boy, girl or young person with the objective, among other crimes, of forced labour. The Committee notes the reference by the Government in its report to information dissemination activities at the national level through the media with the objective of promoting the eradication of child labour and the worst forms of labour (forced and compulsory) in all situations, both formal and informal. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the effect given in practice in relation to domestic workers of the legal framework in force to combat the smuggling and trafficking of persons, including statistical information, disaggregated by sex, on the number and nature of the infringements denounced, investigations, prosecutions and convictions.

Articles 3(2)(c) and 4(1). Child labour. Minimum age. Article 56, first paragraph, of the Constitution provides that the eradication of child labour is of the highest national priority. Sections 245 of the Labour Code and 40 of the Code for the Protection of the Fundamental Rights of Boys, Girls and Young Persons prohibit work by persons under 14 years of age. With regard to work by young persons between 14 and 16 years of age, section 41 of the Code for the Protection of the Fundamental Rights of Boys, Girls and Young Persons provides that persons working in domestic service shall have the same rights and guarantees as young workers in general. Accordingly, the special regime for domestic work envisaged in the Labour Code is not applicable to them, and they are governed by the special regulations contained in Chapter Four, Title II, of the Labour Code entitled “Work by young persons”, and the Code for the Protection of the Fundamental Rights of Boys, Girls and Young Persons, which establish special protection measures for workers under 16 years of age, such as the prohibition to work during the night (section 246), a working day not exceeding six hours (section 247) and the prohibition of hazardous types of work (section 251). Nevertheless, under the terms of section 17 of the Labour Code, the age of majority is 16 years for the purposes of the contract of employment, and most of the provisions of Title II are not therefore applicable to persons between the ages of 16 and 18 years. The Government also refers to Decision No. 52-2004 of the Ministry of Labour respecting hazardous and unhealthy types of work for persons under 18 years of age, which prohibits activities and types of work which may be harmful to physical and mental health and overall development, and may even cause death, as well as types of work which, due to the risk involved, require special dexterity and knowledge for their performance. Clause 19(2) of the Decision prohibits night work and work which involves the boy, girl or young person having to sleep at the workplace. The Committee notes that the United Nations Human Rights Committee (CCPR) in its concluding observations (CCPR/C/DOM/CO/6, 27 November 2017, paragraph 19), and the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC) (CRC/C/DOM/CO/3-5, 6 March 2015, paragraph 65), in its concluding observations, expressed their concern at the high prevalence of child labour in domestic work. The CRC also expressed concern at the fact that the minimum age for admission to employment is 14 years and urged the Government to review its legislation in order to prohibit the employment of children under 15 years of age and to ensure that all hazardous forms of labour, including domestic work, are prohibited for children under 18 years of age. In light of the above, the Committee refers to its 2017 comments on the Minimum Age Convention, 1973 (No. 138), and particularly its request to the Government to extend the scope of application of the Convention to include domestic work performed by children. The Committee requests the Government to provide specific information on the measures adopted or envisaged with a view to the abolition of domestic work by persons under 18 years of age.

Articles 3(2)(d) and 6. Discrimination based on sex. Equitable terms and conditions of employment. Article 39 or the Constitution establishes the principle of equality. Principle X and section 231 of the Labour Code provide that women workers have the same rights and duties as men workers, without other exceptions than those established in relation to the protection of maternity. However, the Committee notes that the Labour Code does not establish penalties for violations of these principles, nor does it describe situations which would amount to violations, so that it is not a right that can be asserted through the labour courts. Section 336 of the Penal Code defines discrimination as any distinction between physical persons on grounds including their gender. Section 336(1) establishes penalties of two years’ imprisonment and fines of 50,000 Dominican pesos for cases of discrimination. Accordingly, a woman who has suffered discrimination in the working environment would have to resort to the criminal justice system, under the terms of section 336(1) of the Penal Code. Nevertheless, the Committee notes that discrimination against persons engaged in domestic work arises out of the labour legislation which, under the terms of sections 4 and 259 of the Labour Code, excludes persons engaged in this activity from the majority of labour rights set out in both the Constitution and the Labour Code, thereby establishing indirect discrimination against women, who are in the majority in this sector. According to the statistical data produced by the National Multipurpose Household Survey (ENHOGAR-2015), 92 per cent of workers aged 10 years and over in 2015 engaged in the domestic sector were women. In this regard, the Committee recalls that, in its 2014 observation on the application of the Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1958 (No. 111), it noted the observations made by various workers’ organizations according to which the Labour Code does not grant domestic workers the same rights and benefits as other workers. The Committee also notes that, in its concluding observations, the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR) noted with concern that the working conditions of women in certain sectors, including domestic service, remain substandard, as women in those sectors continue to receive low wages, have little job security, work in unsafe and unsanitary conditions and are at risk of exploitation and abuse. The CESCR recommended the State to take the necessary steps to ensure that women enjoy fair and equitable working conditions, among others, in the domestic service sector (E/C.12/DOM/CO/4, 21 October 2016, paragraphs 34 and 35(a)). The Government indicates that the Directorate of Equality of Opportunities has emphasized equality and non-discrimination through many training courses provided for institutions and citizens. This campaign on equality has the fundamental objective of ensuring that all services provided by the Ministry of Labour can be afforded to all under equal conditions, including to men and women domestic workers. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the measures adopted or envisaged to ensure in practice that both men and women domestic workers, like workers generally, enjoy equitable terms and conditions of employment, as well as decent working conditions.

Article 4(2). Protection of the right to education. The Government indicates that section 45 of the Code for the Protection of the Fundamental Rights of Boys, Girls and Young Persons establishes the right to education and provides that basic education shall be compulsory and free. Section 42(b) of the Code provides that the officials of the general labour inspection services shall periodically inspect workplaces to determine whether they employ underage persons and shall ensure that work does not prejudice their regular attendance at the educational establishment. Section 17 of the Labour Code provides that “in no event shall work by young persons prevent their compulsory school education, which shall be under the responsibility and at the expense of the employer, under the supervision of the authorities, in cases where due to such work the young person cannot receive school education”. With regard to domestic workers, section 264 of the Labour Code provides that “all domestic workers shall have the right to be granted the necessary leave by their employer to attend school, on condition that it is compatible with their working day”. The terms “on condition that it is compatible with their working day” could be contrary to this Article of the Convention, since under that provision the employer is required to guarantee the access to education of domestic workers under the age of 18 years. The Committee also notes that, in its concluding observations, the CRC expressed concern at the fact that over half of child workers do not attend school, in particular domestic workers (CRC/C/DOM/CO/3-5, 6 March 2015, paragraph 65). The Committee requests the Government to take the necessary measures to amend section 264 of the Labour Code with a view to ensuring that work performed by domestic workers under 18 years of age does not deprive them of compulsory schooling, and does not prejudice their opportunities of access to higher education or vocational training.

Article 5. Protection against abuse, harassment and violence. Section 47(9) of the Labour Code provides that “it shall be prohibited for employers to engage in acts against the worker which may be considered to constitute sexual harassment, or to support or fail to intervene in the event of such acts by their representatives”. Section 97(4) and (13) of the Labour Code establishes as one of the reasons for which the worker may terminate the contract of employment the fact that the employer, her or his family members or dependants who work in the service with her or his explicit or tacit consent have engaged in “acts lacking propriety and honour, acts of attempted violence, insults or ill-treatment against the worker or her or his spouse, parents, children or brothers and sisters”, as well as the violation of section 47 of the Labour Code. As a consequence, a worker who is a victim or sexual harassment in the workplace can only have recourse to the termination of the contract of employment, for which purpose the worker shall submit her or his resignation within 15 days (section 98) and communicate the resignation and its reasons to the employer and to the Labour Department or local authority exercising the functions of the Labour Department within 48 hours (section 100). The burden of proof lies with the worker, in accordance with sections 101 and 102 of the Labour Code. Section 333(2) of the Penal Code provides that “any order, threat, constraint or offer intended to obtain favours of a sexual nature made by a person (man or woman) in abuse of the authority conferred by their position shall constitute sexual harassment. Sexual harassment is punishable by one year of imprisonment and a fine of between 5,000 and 10,000 Dominican pesos. Sexual harassment in workplaces gives grounds for justified resignation …”. In this regard, the Committee notes that both legislative texts only cover quid pro quo sexual harassment, leaving aside a hostile working environment. Similarly, the Labour Code restricts the definition of harassment to cases in which it is perpetrated by the employer, her or his relatives or dependants acting with her or his explicit or tacit consent, and establishes as the sole penalty against sexual harassment the termination of the contract of employment by the worker by means of a particularly complex procedure. The Committee observes that the legislation in force punishes victims of harassment since, if they complain of harassment, they lose their job. Furthermore, to obtain sanctions going beyond the termination of the contract of employment, workers only have the possibility of having recourse to the criminal justice system, which may be complex and difficult of access for domestic workers. The Committee refers to its previous comments on the application of the Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1958 (No. 111), and particularly its reiterated request to the Government to take the necessary measures to provide adequate protection for victims of sexual harassment that is not limited to the possibility of terminating the contract of employment and to adopt legal provisions that define and explicitly prohibit both quid pro quo and hostile working environment sexual harassment. In this respect, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the measures adopted or envisaged, including those referred to in Paragraph 7 of Recommendation No. 201, with a view to ensuring that domestic workers enjoy effective protection against all forms of abuse, harassment and violence. The Committee further requests the Government to provide statistical data on the number of complaints received of harassment, abuse and violence in the context of domestic work, received by the various competent authorities, their outcome, the penalties imposed on those responsible and the compensation granted.

Articles 6 and 9. Domestic workers who reside in the household in which they work. Article 62(3) of the Constitution and principle XII of the Labour Code establish the right to the personnel intimacy and dignity of men and women workers. However, the Government has not included information in its report on the measures adopted to ensure that domestic workers, like other workers generally, if they reside in the household, enjoy decent living conditions that respect their privacy. In this regard, the Committee draws the Government’s attention to Paragraph 17 of Recommendation No. 201, which indicates the conditions to be met by food and accommodation when they are provided to domestic workers, including “a separate, private room that is suitably furnished, adequately ventilated and equipped with a lock, the key to which should be provided to the domestic worker”. The Committee also notes that the legislation does not contain provisions establishing that domestic workers are free to reach agreement with their employer or potential employer on whether to reside in the household, that they are not obliged to remain in the household or with household members during periods of daily and weekly rest or annual leave, and are entitled to keep in their possession their travel and identity documents, in accordance with Article 9 of the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the measures adopted or envisaged to ensure that domestic workers: (a) are free to reach agreement with their employer or potential employer on whether to reside in the household; (b) who reside in the household are not obliged to remain in the household or with household members during periods of daily and weekly rest or annual leave; and (c) are entitled to keep in their possession their travel and identity documents. The Committee also requests the Government to provide information on the measures envisaged or adopted to ensure in practice that domestic workers who reside in the household enjoy decent living conditions that respect their privacy, as envisaged in Paragraph 17 of Recommendation No. 201.

Article 7. Understandable information on terms and conditions of employment. Section 15 of the Labour Code provides that, “unless demonstrated otherwise, the existence of the contract of employment shall be presumed in any personal working relationship …”. Section 19 provides that any of the parties may require the other to formalize a verbal contract of employment in writing and section 24 sets out the minimum elements that it is to contain. Nevertheless, section 4 of the Labour Code provides that contracts for domestic service are governed by the special regime envisaged by the Labour Code for this category of workers. In this regard, the Government refers to section 259 of the Labour Code, which provides that the contract of employment of domestic workers shall be governed exclusively by the provisions of Title IV, which does not establish the obligation to conclude a contract of employment between the domestic worker and her or his employer, nor the minimum requirements that a contract for domestic work should contain. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures adopted or envisaged to ensure that domestic workers are informed of their terms and conditions of employment, and particularly those set out in this Article of the Convention, in an appropriate, verifiable and easily understandable manner, especially in the case of migrant domestic workers.

Article 8. Migrant domestic workers. Article 25 of the Constitution provides that foreign nationals shall have the same rights and duties as nationals, with the exceptions and limitations established by the Constitution and the law. The Labour Code, in principle IV, provides that the laws shall cover “without distinction Dominican and foreign nationals, with the exceptions admitted in international treaties”. Moreover, section 26 of the General Migration Act, No. 285 of 15 August 2014, provides that foreign nationals with the authorization to work, in accordance with their entry category or subcategory, shall enjoy the protection of the relevant labour and social laws. Finally, section 3(III) of the Regulations under the Migration Act indicate that the Ministry of Labour shall ensure, among other matters, that the working conditions of immigrants meet the conditions of equality guaranteed by the Constitution. Nevertheless, the Committee notes that the Government has not included information in its report on the application of this Article of the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the national legislation setting out the requirement for migrant domestic workers who are recruited in one country for domestic work in another to receive a written job offer, or contract of employment setting out the terms and conditions indicated in Article 7, prior to crossing national borders for the purpose of taking up the domestic work (Article 8(1)). The Committee also requests the Government to indicate any measures adopted in cooperation with other ILO member States to ensure the effective application of the Convention to migrant domestic workers. It further requests the Government to indicate the legislation or other measures which govern the conditions under which migrant domestic workers are entitled to repatriation on the expiry or termination of the contract of employment for which they were recruited.

Article 10(1) and (3). Equal treatment between domestic workers and workers generally in relation to hours of work. Section 147 of the Labour Code provides that the working day may not exceed eight hours a day or 48 hours a week. However, section 261 of the Labour Code provides that “domestic work is not subject to any schedule; domestic workers shall enjoy, between two working days, an uninterrupted period of rest of at least nine hours”. The Committee observes that the working time of domestic workers may be up to 15 hours a day, compared with a working day of eight hours for other categories of workers. Moreover, the period of rest for domestic workers between two working days is nine hours, compared with 16 hours for other workers. With regard to paid annual leave, section 263 of the Labour Code establishes the right of domestic workers to two weeks of paid vacation for each completed year of service, which is equivalent to the leave provided for other workers in section 177 of the Labour Code. However, the Committee notes that the Government does not indicate whether domestic workers are covered by the system of staggered leave established for other workers in section 180 of the Labour Code or the possibility to benefit from 18 days of paid leave set out in section 177(2) when they have worked for over five years. Nor does the Government indicate whether domestic workers are covered by section 179 of the Labour Code, which provides that “workers with indefinite contracts who, for no fault of their own, are not able to provide uninterrupted service for a year shall be entitled to a period of leave proportional to the time worked, if the latter is greater than five months”. Finally, in relation to the periods during which workers are not free to dispose of their time as they please and remain at the disposal of the household, section 146 of the Labour Code defines the working day as “all the hours that the worker cannot use freely because she or he is exclusively at the disposal of the employer”. Similarly, section 151 of the Labour Code provides that “effective hours of work, for which the worker shall be paid while he or she is at the exclusive disposal of the employer, shall include the hours for which a worker is inactive during the working day, when the inactivity is not due to her or his will, negligence or legitimate reasons for the suspension of the contract; the time required to consume food during the working day, in cases where the nature of the work or the will of the employer require the worker to remain at the workplace”. However, the Government does not indicate in its report whether these provisions are also applicable to domestic workers. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that it is planned to adopt regulations for the implementation of this Article of the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the situation with regard to the adoption of the regulations to which it refers and to provide a copy once they have been adopted. The Committee also requests the Government to indicate whether the provisions of sections 177(2) and 179 of the Labour Code are applicable to domestic workers. Finally, the Committee requests the Government to indicate whether sections 146 and 151 of the Labour Code apply to domestic workers and, if not, to take the necessary measures to ensure that periods during which domestic workers are not free to dispose of their time as they please and remain at the disposal of the household in order to respond to possible calls are regarded as hours of work.

Article 11. Minimum wage. Article 62 of the Constitution provides that all workers shall be entitled to a fair and adequate wage which permits them to live in dignity and covers the basic material, social and intellectual needs of themselves and their families. Similarly, section 193(2) of the Labour Code provides that wages “may not in any event be lower than the minimum legally established wage”. However, the National Wage Board, in Decision No. 05/2017, of 4 May 2017, which fixes the national minimum wage for workers in the private sector for all sectors, does not make any reference to domestic workers. The Committee notes the indication by the workers’ organizations that the minimum wage is not applicable to domestic workers. In this respect, the Government indicates that it is currently in the process of adopting measures on this point. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the current situation with regard to the adoption of the necessary measures to ensure that domestic workers, like other workers, are covered by the minimum wage, and the results achieved.

Article 12(2). Payments in kind. The Committee notes that the Labour Code does not contain provisions on the partial payment of wages in kind, with the exception of section 260 of the Labour Code, which establishes that, “in the absence of an agreement to the contrary, the remuneration of domestic workers includes, in addition to payments in cash, accommodation and food of normal quality. The food and accommodation provided for the domestic worker shall be considered equivalent to 50 per cent of the wage received in money.” This system of calculating the minimum wage may work to the prejudice of domestic workers in respect of their payments in cash, insofar as no minimum wage is set for the part paid in kind, nor is there a definition of the terms “food of normal quality”, nor is the methodology established for the calculation of the value of accommodation and food. In this regard, the Committee refers to Paragraph 14(d) of Recommendation No. 201, which indicates that: “When provision is made for the payment in kind of a limited proportion of remuneration, Members should consider … ensuring that, when a domestic worker is required to live in accommodation provided by the household, no deduction may be made from the remuneration with respect to that accommodation, unless otherwise agreed to by the worker … .” The Committee requests the Government to adopt the necessary measures to amend section 260 of the Labour Code with a view to ensuring that, when a domestic worker is required to reside in the household of the employer, no deduction may be made from the remuneration with respect to accommodation, unless otherwise agreed to by the worker. It also requests the Government to indicate the methodology used to calculate the value of accommodation and food.

Articles 13 and 14. Effective measures to ensure occupational safety and health. Effective access to social security. Article 60 of the Constitution establishes the right of all persons to social security and provides that the State shall promote the progressive development of social security to ensure universal access. Article 62(3) of the Constitution enshrines social security as one of the basic rights of workers. With regard to maternity protection, Title 1, entitled “Protection of maternity” of the fourth chapter of the Labour Code, sets out the rights of workers in this respect. These rights include the prohibition of termination by reason of pregnancy (section 233), access to social security benefits (section 234) and the right of pregnant workers to paid leave of six weeks before and after confinement (section 236). In this regard, the Committee notes that, although the provisions referred to above respecting maternity protection are part of the general framework of the Labour Code, which governs all contracts of employment, sections 4 and 259 of the Labour Code provide that contracts for domestic service shall be governed exclusively by the special regime for domestic work set out in Title IV, which does not refer to the right to social security or to maternity protection. However, section 5 of the Act of 9 May 2001 creating the Dominican Social Security System (SDSS) establishes the right of all Dominican citizens and persons who are legally resident on the national territory to be affiliated to the SDSS which, under the terms of section 3, shall be governed, among others, by the principles of universality, compulsory affiliation and equity. The Government indicates that, through the National Health Insurance Scheme (SENASA), entitlement is guaranteed to an inclusive and high-quality health service and that the SENASA engages in many forms of action to disseminate this initiative. In this respect, the Government attaches to its report a press release dated 12 May 2015 reporting the inclusion of 50,000 women domestic workers and their direct dependants in the Subsidiary Scheme of Family Health Insurance (SFS). The Government adds that the process of affiliation is expedited and easily accessible. The Committee also notes, from the institutional reports of the Ministry of Women for 2017 that, with a view to giving effect to the process of the inclusion of domestic workers in the SFS, a working group was organized with the participation of the Inter-union Committee of Working Women, the Gender Study Centre and various non-governmental organizations. However, the Committee notes the assertion by the workers’ organizations that the access of domestic workers to the SENASA is very limited, since only a few workers in the sector are covered by the SENASA, which does not provide services such as pensions, employment injury insurance and maternity benefits. Finally, the Government reports the organization of workshops to raise the awareness of employers and workers concerning occupational risks, particularly in relation to the handling of chemicals and ergonomic risks. The Committee nevertheless observes that the special regime governing domestic work does not contain provisions on occupational safety and health, with the sole exception of the recognition of the entitlement of domestic workers to paid leave in the event of illness contracted through direct infection from one of the members of the family for whom they work (section 265). In contrast, if the illness is not contracted through direct infection, the domestic worker is not entitled to full pay. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on any measures adopted or envisaged to ensure the occupational safety and health of this category of workers, taking duly into account the specific characteristics of domestic work. The Committee also requests the Government to adopt the necessary measures for the amendment of the relevant legislation with a view to ensuring that men and women domestic workers enjoy conditions that are not less favourable than those applicable to workers generally in respect of social security protection, including in the event of maternity. It also requests the Government to provide statistical data, disaggregated by gender, on the number of domestic workers paying contributions to the Dominican Social Security System, with an indication of the respective scheme.

Article 15. Private employment agencies. The Government has not provided information in its report on the measures adopted or envisaged to provide effective protection for domestic workers recruited or placed by private employment agencies, including migrant domestic workers, against abusive practices. The Committee requests the Government to provide detailed information on the conditions governing the operation of private employment agencies which recruit or place domestic workers. It also requests the Government to indicate the measures adopted to ensure the existence of adequate machinery and procedures for the investigation of complaints, alleged abuses and fraudulent practices concerning the activities of private employment agencies in relation to domestic workers. The Committee further requests the Government to indicate the measures adopted or envisaged to ensure that the fees charged by private employment agencies are not deducted directly or indirectly from the remuneration of domestic workers.

Article 17(1). Complaint mechanisms. The Government has not provided information in its report on the establishment of effective and accessible complaint mechanisms to ensure compliance with national laws and regulations for the protection of domestic workers. The Committee notes that, in its concluding observations, the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR) called for the establishment of effective mechanisms for reporting any sort of abuse or exploitation of workers, paying particular attention to the situation of women employed, among other sectors, in domestic service (E/C.12/DOM/CO/4, 21 October 2016, paragraph 35(d)). The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the mechanisms and procedures established, the number of complaints made by domestic workers to the various competent bodies, the penalties imposed on those responsible and the compensation granted.

Article 17(2) and (3). Labour inspection and penalties. Article 44 of the Constitution establishes the inviolability of the home, except in cases in which access to the home is ordered, in accordance with the law, by the competent judicial authority or in cases of flagrante delicto. Nevertheless, the Government indicates that section 434(1) of the Labour Code provides that labour inspectors duly accredited are authorized to enter freely and without previous notice places in which there may be violations of the provisions referred to in section 433. Section 434(2) provides that labour inspectors may require the assistance of the public forces to give effect to section 434(1) in the event of opposition by the owner, her or his representatives, or persons who are in or enter the places indicated in section 434(1). Section 436 of the Labour Code provides that “where a labour inspector identifies during any visit irregularities not penalized by laws and regulations, or facts, circumstances or conditions that may cause prejudice to the persons or interests of the employer or the workers, this shall be notified to the employer or her or his representative who, where necessary, shall be provided with the technical advice considered appropriate. In the event of imminent danger to the health or safety of workers, the labour inspector may order relevant measures with immediate executory force, subject to the corresponding judicial or administrative recourse procedures.” The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the specific measures adopted or envisaged in relation to labour inspection with due regard to the special characteristics of domestic work, as well as information on the number of inspections in the sector, the number of violations detected and penalties imposed.