|
GB.274/10/2 and Corr.
| ||
|
| ||
TENTH ITEM ON THE AGENDA
Reports of the Committee on Legal Issues
and International Labour Standards
Second report: International labour standards
and human rights
Contents
I. Report of the Working Party on Policy regarding the Revision of Standards
II. Standard-setting policy: The ratification and promotion of fundamental ILO Conventions
III. General status report on ILO action concerning discrimination in employment and occupation
IV. Forms for reports on the application of unratified Conventions (article 19 of the Constitution)
Appendices
I. Report of the Working Party on Policy regarding the Revision of Standards
III. Report form for the following instruments:
- Night Work (Women) Convention, 1919 (No. 4)
- Night Work (Women) Convention (Revised), 1934 (No. 41)
- Night Work (Women) Convention (Revised), 1948 (No. 89)
- Protocol of 1990 to the Night Work (Women) Convention (Revised), 1948 (No. 89)
I. Report of the Working Party on Policy
regarding the Revision of Standards
1. The Committee had before it the report of the Working Party on Policy regarding the Revision of Standards.(1)
2. The representative of the Government of France, Chairperson of the Working Party, recalled the three items on the agenda, namely the follow-up on the recommendations of the Working Party;(2) the deferred examination of the need for revision of Conventions concerning seafarers and fishermen;(3) and the examination of Recommendations (first stage).(4) He invited the Committee members to read the Office document on follow-up action at the level of the Organization and at the level of member States. He also drew their attention to the information note appended to this document which contained a summary of the progress of work which was updated following each of the Working Party's meetings. According to usual practice, the note would be distributed to the Conference Committee on the Application of Standards. It would later be decided whether to send it directly to constituents. As regards the constitutional amendment relating to the abrogation of obsolete Conventions, he stressed its symbolic importance and hoped that its ratification would be promoted. With regard to Conventions concerning seafarers and fishermen, he indicated that the Working Party had reached conclusions on the 23 contained in the Office document. The instruments relating to fishermen and to social security for seafarers would be examined following the convening of a Tripartite Meeting on Safety and Health in the Fishing Industry and the following meeting of the Joint Maritime Commission respectively. After the examination of the three Conventions on which a short survey had been requested (Conventions Nos. 132, 140 and 158), the Working Party should conclude the analysis of non-maritime Conventions at its following meeting. The Working Party had also considered an initial group of Recommendations and had formulated proposals concerning 35 of them. At its next meeting it would examine the seven remaining Recommendations in addition to a second group. Another important issue to consider at the next meeting would be revision methods. Lastly, the Chairperson said how pleased he was to see all that had been achieved by the Working Party, which was now in its eighth sitting, thanks to the excellent working climate and particularly the spirit of cooperation of the spokespersons of both groups and the careful preparation of documents by the secretariat which deserved special mention. He wished to associate himself with those thanks and congratulations.
3. The Worker members joined the Chairperson in his thanks to the members of the Working Party and the secretariat and congratulated him in particular. During the discussion on the document relating to follow-up, the increase in the number of ratifications of up-to-date Conventions had been noted, as had the need for governments to increase their efforts to ratify the constitutional amendment. They considered it to be important to involve the social partners more closely in the follow-up on the recommendations of the Working Party. With respect to future action by the Office, they said they would like the promotion of revised Conventions to continue and that of up-to-date Conventions to begin. Sufficient resources should be allocated for this purpose.
4. The Employer members associated themselves fully with the Chairperson's remarks. While from a general standpoint they wished to see an increase in the pace at which the Working Party performed its work, they also recognized that given the complexity of the issues under examination, the results of the current session were altogether positive. They were also pleased with the document on follow-up prepared by the Office, including the information note, updated from one session to the next and providing the latest information on standard setting. It would be a good idea for the multidisciplinary teams to make greater use of it in their activities. As regards maritime Conventions, the Working Party had found there to be technical difficulties owing to links between Convention No. 147 and the Conventions associated with it and this situation could be the focus of special attention in the future. The Employer members also emphasized the importance of the entry into force of the constitutional amendment concerning the abrogation of Conventions. Moreover, in future thought should be given not only to the revision of standards, but also to standard-setting policy on the basis of the activities of the Working Party. Matters of a budgetary nature relating to the setting of priorities in this area came under the competence of the PFA Committee and the Governing Body itself. The Employer members supported the approval of the Working Party's report and expressed the wish for work to continue at the same pace so that a global picture of international labour standards would soon be available. Lastly, they thanked the Chairperson and the spokesperson of the Worker members for the positive atmosphere that had prevailed during the Working Party's discussions.
5. The representative of the Government of Sweden also concurred with the Chairperson's comments, particularly concerning the usefulness of the information note for all parties concerned, including the members of the Conference Committee on the Application of Standards. The document on Conventions concerning seafarers and fishermen was also particularly valuable in order better to understand the complexities of Convention No. 147. The document was particularly opportune given that the examination of the possibilities for the ratification of instruments on seafarers adopted in 1996 was now under way. The Working Party had achieved important results which would involve considerable work not only for the Office but also for the member States, and this should be carried out as far as the available resources would permit. The follow-up to decisions relating to Recommendations should not involve the same degree of effort.
6. The representative of the Government of Germany thanked the Working Party for its assiduous and impressive work. He shared the concerns of the representative of the Government of Sweden as to the resulting workload for governments and the Office. In his view, the workload should relate to the follow-up of Conventions as well as Recommendations. A certain degree of moderation in this regard was perhaps advisable, particularly bearing in mind countries with little available resources for activities of this kind. He asked whether the expression "to give effect" included in the proposed decisions relating to certain Recommendations meant that member States were expected to submit a new type of report in addition to their already existing obligations under article 19 of the Constitution.
7. The representative of the Government of Croatia requested clarification on the scope of the proposal relating to the re-examination in due course of the list of Conventions included in the Appendix to the Merchant Shipping (Minimum Standards) Convention, 1976 (No. 147), and the legal implications of such a re-examination.
8. In response to the question raised by the representative of the Government of Germany, a representative of the Director-General explained that the terms "to give effect" related simply to the provisions of article 19 of the Constitution. There was no question of establishing further obligations in respect of reports. In answer to the question by the representative of the Government of Croatia, he recalled that the Conference had asked that a periodic re-examination be carried out of the list of Conventions included in the Appendix to Convention No. 147. The recommendations of the Working Party referred to the possibility of a re-examination of this kind in due course.
9. The Committee recommends that the Governing Body:
(a) take note of the report of the Working Party on Policy regarding the Revision of Standards, and of the opinions expressed during the meeting of the Committee;
(b) approve the recommendations in the corresponding paragraphs of the report on which consensus was reached within the Working Party and the Committee.
* * *
II. Standard-setting policy:
The ratification and promotion
of fundamental ILO Conventions
10. The Committee had before it a document(5) on this question following on from the discussions that it had held at the 271st Session (March 1998) of the Governing Body.
11. A representative of the Director-General (the Chief of the Equality and Human Rights Coordination Branch of the International Labour Standards Department) provided an update on the information contained in the document in question. Since the preparation of that document, i.e. 19 February 1999, 31 new replies(6) had been received, in addition to the 33 earlier ones,(7) which resulted in a total of 64 replies out of the 130 countries to which the Director-General's last letter had been sent. He assured members that the information contained in those replies would be reflected in the revised table to be included in the appendix to the Committee's report. The speaker then made two corrections to the document before the Committee: (a) first of all, he noted that Bulgaria was mentioned twice in the above-mentioned document, once in paragraph 17 and again in paragraph 23. Bulgaria's position as reflected in paragraph 17 was the correct one. Lastly, he stated that the symbol indicating the prospects for the ratification of Convention No. 105 by Bulgaria (see Appendix II) would be duly amended in the revised table to be included in the appendix to the Committee's report; and (b) as regards Brazil, he wished to emphasize that contrary to a statement in paragraph 43 of the document, it was Convention No. 87 -- and not No. 98 -- for which the Government was contemplating ratification.
12. Without wishing to enter into details about information received after 19 February 1999, the representative of the Director-General wished to inform the Committee of some of the developments in the position of governments since the publication of the document under examination:
(a) Countries where the formal ratification process has already been initiated: Egypt had stated that the ratification process of Convention No. 138 was under way following the amendment of the relevant legislation; Ethiopia had faxed the ILO a copy of the ratification instruments for Conventions Nos. 100, 105 and 138 and had informed it that the originals would reach the ILO shortly; Iceland had indicated that a ratification proposal for Convention No. 138 was currently before Parliament; Morocco had stated that a ratification proposal for Convention No. 138 would soon be submitted to Parliament; and the United Kingdom had announced that the Government had decided to ratify Convention No. 111 and would be beginning the formal ratification procedure in the near future.
(b) Countries where the government was in the process of amending its legislation after having completed the examination of the instrument(s) under consideration: The Republic of Korea had indicated that the Government was in the process of amending its legislation with a view to the ratification of Conventions Nos. 87 and 98, but that that would take some time as certain points remained contentious; Zimbabwe had informed the ILO that the relevant legislation was being modified in view of the ratification of Convention No. 138.
(c) Countries where ratification was under examination: This was the case in Uganda (Conventions Nos. 87, 100, 111 and 138), Peru (Convention No. 138) and the Philippines (Convention No. 29). Lastly, he drew the Committee's attention to the fact that, following suggestions made by certain members of the LILS Committee in March 1998,(8) the Office had slightly altered the symbols in the table in Appendix II in order to specify the information provided by governments on the prospects for the ratification of fundamental ILO Conventions.
13. The Worker members thought the document submitted to the Committee for examination was very useful and encouraging in that over two-thirds of the Organization's Members had ratified between five and seven of the ILO Conventions deemed to be fundamental. They wished to congratulate the 45 countries which had ratified all the fundamental Conventions. However, they deplored the terse replies of some governments such as Myanmar and New Zealand, and the fact that certain governments, such as Kenya, Mali and Mexico had cited their level of socio-economic development as an obstacle to ratification. They stated that the reply by the Government of Ecuador indicating that it did not envisage ratifying Convention No. 138 -- although its legislation was in compliance with the provisions of the Convention -- was unacceptable. Likewise, they expressed their concern that one government had cited as an obstacle to the ratification of Convention No. 29 on forced labour, the fact that prison labour tended increasingly to be subcontracted out.
14. As regards the Special Survey on Conventions Nos. 87 and 98, the Worker members noted that out of 87 reports requested under article 19 of the ILO Constitution, 44 reports had been received by the ILO, representing a response rate of 50 per cent, a figure that they considered to be encouraging. They noted the multifaceted technical assistance the Office had provided to Indonesia and Malawi and expressed the hope that the document to be submitted to the November 1999 session on technical assistance provided by the Office, in the framework of the campaign for the ratification of fundamental Conventions, would keep the Committee informed of the follow-up by the ILO and those governments to that technical assistance. They also took the occasion to urge the ILO to respond as promptly as possible to all requests for technical assistance submitted to it by the Organization's constituents. The Worker members were pleased that three countries (El Salvador, Gambia, Solomon Islands) which had not replied to the Director-General's earlier circular letters concerning the prospects for the ratification of fundamental Conventions had replied during the previous reporting period. Nevertheless, there were still 17 countries that had not responded at all and the Worker members stressed that the ILO regional offices and the multidisciplinary teams should play a more active role. In this respect, they expressed their concern about the low level of ratification of fundamental ILO Conventions in the Asia-Pacific region and invited the Office to increase its efforts in that region.
15. The Worker members concluded their statement by commending the number of ratifications received by Convention No. 138; they recalled that this instrument had only been ratified by 46 countries when the Director-General sent his first circular letter out in May 1995, while today the number stood at 72. However, they were emphatic that this improvement should not obscure the fact that the campaign for the ratification of fundamental Conventions did not seem to be having such positive results with regard to Convention No. 87 on freedom of association and the protection of the right to organize for which the figure had only risen from 113 ratifications in May 1995 to 124 in May 1999. They wished to recall the importance of that instrument and urged member States to examine the possibility of ratifying this major ILO Convention. Lastly, as regards Appendix II of the document under examination, they had noted with interest the new symbols added to the table by the Office in order to distinguish clearly between the governments' various replies on the prospects for the ratification of fundamental ILO Conventions and suggested that the following year graphs should also be included illustrating in a more visual manner the progression of the ratification rate for the instruments in question.
16. The Employer members thanked the representative of the Director-General for his update on the information received by the Office since the publication of the document before the Committee; it demonstrated that the campaign was a truly dynamic process and that this area was in constant evolution. The document illustrated the importance of technical assistance and further strengthened the conviction of the Employer members that in order to make its international labour standards better known, the ILO must enhance its communication with member States and, particularly in the case in point, with the 17 countries which had still not replied to any of the Director-General's circular letters on the prospects for the ratification of fundamental Conventions that they had not yet ratified. As regards the statement by the Worker members that some of the explanations put forward to justify non-ratification were unacceptable, the Employer members considered that technical assistance was the best way of enabling the governments concerned to obtain the necessary clarifications from the ILO to appease their apprehensions. In view of the results obtained to date they encouraged the Office to continue to actively pursue this approach.
17. The Employer members recalled that they did not agree with the use of the phrase "libertad sindical" in the Spanish title of Convention No. 87 and, basing themselves on Article 2 of that instrument, preferred "libertad de asociación", which was used in the ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work and its Follow-up. They wondered what was the appropriate procedure to have an amendment of this kind made and suggested that, in the meantime, Spanish documents should -- at least in a footnote to the current title of Convention No. 87 -- always indicate that "libertad sindical" was to be understood as "libertad de asociación", as used in the Declaration. Lastly, the Employer members stressed their commitment to freedom of association and voiced their concerns about the fact that in many countries, irrespective of whether they had ratified the Convention in question, the principles laid out in that instrument were not respected in practice. They recalled that freedom of association was an essential freedom and that without it a good number of public freedoms were no longer applicable.
18. The representative of the Government of Egypt informed the Committee that the ratification procedure for Convention No. 138 had been concluded and that the ILO had been officially informed of it. Once that ratification had been officially registered, her country would be among those that had ratified all of the fundamental ILO Conventions, thanks inter alia to technical assistance (legal assistance, workshops and seminars, IPEC)(9) provided by the ILO. The speaker informed the Committee that her country's legislation was now in compliance with the provisions of Convention No. 138. As regards the promotion and ratification of fundamental Conventions, she wished to make the following three points: (a) given that the major obstacle to the ratification of fundamental ILO Conventions was the non-compliance of legislation in member States with the instruments in question, she urged the Office to actively provide its consultative services to governments to help them to bring their relevant legislation into line; (b) she considered that the ILO should concentrate its efforts on promoting, increasing awareness of and popularizing the content of fundamental standards vis-ŕ-vis the general public; and lastly (c) she declared that the multidisciplinary teams in the field should focus more closely on helping member States to overcome obstacles to ratification and then on assisting them with the effective application of those instruments. She concluded her remarks by saying that the campaign for the ratification of the fundamental ILO Conventions should continue.
19. A Worker member (Mr. Ahmed) supported the comments made by the spokesperson of the Workers and congratulated the countries which had ratified Conventions since the start of the campaign, particularly those which had ratified all the fundamental ILO Conventions. He invited the others to follow suit, notably with respect to Conventions Nos. 29 and 105 concerning forced labour. He regretted the fact that some countries had denounced previously ratified fundamental Conventions and were therefore no longer subject to any obligations under those instruments. The speaker invited the countries that had ratified some or all of the fundamental ILO Conventions to ensure that the principles and rights contained in them were effectively applied in practice. Lastly, he considered that the campaign should be pursued as the principles contained in those instruments were fundamental for all workers whether in developed or developing countries: the prohibition of forced labour, freedom of association, non-discrimination in employment and the minimum age for admission to work should not just be reserved for certain workers on the basis of the socio-economic development of their respective countries.
20. In response to the suggestion by the Employer spokesperson to change the Spanish title of Convention No. 87, which in his view would be an incentive for ratification, the Worker spokesperson declared that he duly noted the importance given to Convention No. 87 by the Employer members, but that his group was satisfied with the current title of that instrument adopted by the International Labour Conference in the three official languages of the Organization.
21. The Committee took note of the document.
III. General status report on ILO action
concerning
discrimination in employment
and occupation
22. The Worker members congratulated the Office on its activities in this field. The Office paper described growing awareness of the issue of discrimination in employment and occupation, and the Worker members called upon the Office to consolidate activities in this field and step up technical assistance to deal with the systematic violation of the Conventions mentioned in paragraph 1. Referring to paragraph 6, the Office's technical assistance to South Africa in drafting the Employment Equity Act of 1998 in South Africa was exactly the right approach. The Worker members would like to see closer collaboration with the UN Staff College in Turin, and it would be appropriate for workers to be included in the training activities in Turin. They also welcomed the ILO's intention to take a leading role in the forthcoming World Conference Against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and related Intolerance, which was expected to be held no later than 2001. Concern was expressed, with regard to Office publications in 1998 on the issue of equality, that all the listed publications appeared to be available only in English, when the same importance should be given also to French and Spanish.
23. As regards Chapter III on equality for women, the Worker members commended the approach being taken by the Office of the Special Adviser on Women Workers' Questions (FEMMES) to enhance the ILO staff's own capacity to mainstream gender concerns in their work and programmes. This would lead to the systematic integration of gender issues in ILO activities. Information was requested on the current situation of the posts of senior specialists on women and gender questions in the multidisciplinary teams. The Worker members also expressed their interest in the joint information kit (United Nations Fund for Women/ILO) which related women workers' rights to human rights. Noting the wide range of activities carried out on equality for women, the Worker members pointed to the need for coherence and cohesion in carrying out these activities. They were pleased to note the activities undertaken by the Bureau for Workers' Activities to continue to strengthen the involvement and participation of women workers in its activities. In this regard they reiterated their call to the Office to set up a database to record the participation of women in all meetings and conferences with a view to promoting balanced representation of men and women, and asked if any progress had been made in this area.
24. They urged that adequate follow-up be given to the draft guidelines produced by the Tripartite Meeting of Export Processing Zones -- Operating Countries, held in Geneva in 1998. With regard to migrant workers, concern was expressed about the low number of ratifications of the Migration for Employment Convention (Revised), 1949 (No. 97) and the Migrant Workers Convention, 1975 (No. 143). Renewed efforts were needed to promote their ratification and application, as well as further collaboration with the International Organization for Migration (IOM), the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and the UNDP. Referring to paragraph 31, the Worker members stressed the importance of the guidelines on special protective measures adopted by the 1997 Tripartite Meeting of Experts on Future ILO Activities in the Field of Migration, and asked the Office for information on the work being done to promote them. The guidelines could be published in the form of a user-friendly brochure that should be widely distributed and translated into several languages. He asked whether there had been any follow-up on the recommendations adopted by the meeting, particularly regarding the conduct of pattern-of-practice studies in countries where there had been a serious problem of discrimination and unfair treatment of migrant workers.
25. The Worker members welcomed the work of the Office on mental disability, especially depression. This was an element missing in the Code of practice on ambient factors in the workplace that the Governing Body was called on to approve at its current session. There seemed to be an increase in the mental aspects of occupational hazards and risks in the workplace, and it was important that they were recognized. The activities undertaken by the Office with regard to promoting equal access for persons with disabilities to vocational training were also appreciated. As regards the situation of discrimination against indigenous and tribal peoples and workers of the occupied Arab territories, it was stressed that a commitment to peace and security was necessary. Workers' organizations should also be involved in the range of activities undertaken by the Office.
26. The Employer members found the Office paper interesting as a whole, but paragraph 3, on constitutional procedures, was worrying. The paragraph stated that "the Governing Body had declared receivable a growing number of representations [...]", and that "this sudden increase may reveal a trend towards a heightened concern over discriminatory laws and practices on the grounds of ethnic origin and sex". Decisions on the receivability of representations did not necessarily reveal any trend towards increased discrimination. They could also indicate a trend in certain countries towards more democratization. They agreed with the observations by the Worker members with regard to the language of Office publications: the ILO seemed to be increasingly monolingual.
27. With regard to equality for women, the Employer members expressed particular interest in the activities carried out by the Bureau for Employers' Activities and noted paragraph 23 with satisfaction. IPEC had rightly received due attention in the Office paper. With regard to migrant workers, they noted the information in paragraph 27 on the Symposium on International Migration and Development, held in 1998 in The Hague: it was very useful for governments going through this process to be able to refer back to policies adopted in this area. The increased requests for technical assistance referred to in paragraph 27 were justified. Moreover, the integration of migrants and the impact of migration should receive due attention taking into account the process of regional integration in many parts of the world. The ILO had particular expertise and guidance to offer in this respect. As regards discrimination against disabled workers, the Employer members agreed with the concerns expressed by the Office. However, what was stated in paragraph 36 raised other concerns, especially regarding different types of mental disability, particularly depression. If stress were added to the list of disabilities, who then would not suffer from a disability? One should exercise caution when making the link between these issues and labour. With regard to the technical cooperation activities referred to in paragraph 40 of the document concerning Convention No. 169, the opinions, experience and standpoints of employers' organizations should be taken into account in the discussions and consultations on technical cooperation activities.
28. The representative of the Government of Germany considered the document important and informative, in particular the activities described in Chapter III (Equality for women). With regard to migrant workers, he noted that, this time, the activities referred to in this chapter had all related to discrimination. He also noted the information in paragraph 27, but it might be useful to explain and provide more background information on what was meant by the ACC (Administrative Committee on Coordination) Task Force on Basic Social Services for All. Referring to paragraph 29 of the report, in which it was stated that the Tripartite Interregional Seminar on Achieving Equality for Migrant and Ethnic Minority Workers would be rescheduled, he indicated that the seminar would probably be held in Brussels, and asked for further information on the programme and on the languages to be used.
29. The representative of the Government of Egypt welcomed the ILO's activities in this area, and recalled the recent celebration of International Women's Day. She noted the various activities currently being carried out to eliminate discrimination against women, in which Egypt was also participating, and stressed that the ILO must continue to increase its activities in this area, particularly in developing countries. She welcomed the Director-General's proposal in his speech on International Women's Day, that gender issues should form part of all ILO activities, and her Government sought to cooperate with the social partners and NGOs in working towards gender equality, as women workers should not be unfairly affected by restructuring and reform. The problem of discrimination against migrant workers was one of the main problems faced by the international community as a whole, and she expressed concern that the governments of a number of countries host to migrant workers attempted to ignore this problem. Referring to paragraph 29 of the Office paper, she noted that the interregional technical cooperation project to combat discrimination against migrant workers and ethnic minorities had found that discrimination against migrant workers was a widespread problem: the ILO needed to intensify its efforts in this area. The ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work and its Follow-up referred explicitly to categories where special attention was needed: migrant workers were first on the list. She stressed the importance of cooperation between the UNHCR, the IOM and the ILO. Finally, as regards the occupied Arab territories, she expressed appreciation for the positive action, including technical assistance offered by the ILO in the territories. She expressed the hope that the Government of Israel would cooperate with the ILO this year to permit effective follow-up in this regard.
30. The representative of the Government of Mexico congratulated the Office on the initiatives described in paragraph 29 of the paper, particularly with regard to the establishment of the More and Better Jobs for Women project, and confirmed Mexico's readiness to undertake the activities described. He acknowledged that there had been problems in obtaining sufficient financing to implement this project, which was very important, and he appealed for this issue to be resolved quickly. Paragraph 3 of the report, concerning constitutional procedures, twice referred to representations regarding Mexico's application of the Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention, 1989 (No. 169), and expressed the same reservations the Employer members had earlier. He cautioned against speculating on the conclusions that the Committee may reach. At its 273rd Session (November 1998) the Governing Body had approved the Committee's conclusions on the representation, and Mexico had sent a positive response to many of the Committee's comments. His Government had made great efforts to introduce new legislation and disseminate information concerning its ratification of Convention No. 169, including providing information in some 50 indigenous languages. As a result, more indigenous people were now aware of their rights under Convention No. 169, and the increased number of representations might simply be a reflection of this greater awareness.
31. Referring to paragraphs 29 and 30 of the paper, the representative of the Government of Spain, referring to the comments made by the Government representative from Germany, noted that, as the ILO has pointed out, discrimination against migrant workers occurred de facto, and was not based on discriminatory legislation.
32. The representative of the Government of Italy congratulated the ILO on a very interesting paper and on its activities in this area, particularly in relation to gender equality. He appreciated the emphasis placed on gender issues in the Programme and Budget proposals for 2000-01: his Government had given concrete evidence of its interest by providing funding for training on gender issues through the International Training Centre of the ILO in Turin. He approved the initiatives described in Chapter III of the report concerning gender equality: training in this area was important. His Government had also attempted to improve the condition of women in its domestic legislation. He noted IPEC's activities, described in paragraph 24 of the paper, and stated that, as a donor country, Italy was very interested in the issue of child labour and was always interested in receiving additional information. He recommended increased coordination between the ILO, UNIFEM and the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC) in this area.
33. The Worker members expressed support for the ILO's Action Programme on Improving the Quality of Women's Employment referred to in paragraph 19 of the report, but considered that more attention should be paid to the situation of rural women. As regards section VI of the paper, on indigenous and tribal peoples, there was a need to design programmes or to extend the INDISCO programme so as to cover certain indigenous peoples, such as the Pygmies of Central Africa and indigenous peoples in such countries as Bolivia, Mexico, Peru and Chile. The ILO was asked to disseminate the guidelines on equality in export processing zones as widely as possible. The ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work stated that special attention should be paid to the situation of migrant workers, and the Workers expressed support for the ILO's work in this area.
34. The representative of the Arab Labour Organization thanked the ILO for continuing to include a section on the occupied Arab territories in its report and acknowledged the difficult circumstances under which the ILO has carried out its work in this respect. As regards paragraphs 45 to 49, he pointed out that the paper contained no mention of the special sitting during the June 1998 International Labour Conference to examine the situation of workers of the occupied Arab territories. This had been a serious event, in which more than 45 speakers had participated, but no mention had been made of this sitting in the Governing Body documents this year or in 1998. He hoped that the ILO would give such sittings their due importance in the future. He also noted that the Director-General had approached the Israeli authorities with a proposal for a new mission, and expressed the hope that such a mission would take place in the near future.
35. With regard to the comments by the representative of the Government of Mexico on paragraph 3 of the report, the representative of the Director-General explained that the report merely attempted to indicate a "growing interest in discrimination questions represented by an increased number of" representations under article 24 of the ILO Constitution. The publication on the Universal Declaration on Human Rights and ILO standards was being translated into Spanish and French and would be available in all three languages before the June Conference. As regards the outline of developments in equality issues in employment for labour court judges and assessors, the materials had been tested in Zimbabwe and were scheduled to be tested in Trinidad and Tobago before being translated. The publication on effective negotiation by indigenous peoples had been translated into Spanish, and a French version was in preparation. The Director-General had decided to take over personal responsibility for the Office for Women Workers' Questions. Of the seven gender specialist positions in the multidisciplinary teams, two were currently vacant -- one in Harare and one in New Delhi -- and a competition for the latter post had just been opened. Finally, the Office indicated that work on the migrant worker guidelines had been delayed due to internal reorganization, but work would be under way soon.
36. The Employer members appreciated the explanation given by the Office in responding to concerns regarding paragraph 3. In reply to the representative of the Government of Italy, the Employer members stated that they were also concerned with the child labour issues reflected in the report and that they intended to keep working with IPEC and with their governments on this issue, which was of great importance, particularly in Latin America.
IV. Forms for reports on the application of
unratified Conventions
(article 19 of the Constitution)
Night Work (Women) Convention, 1919 (No. 4)
Night Work (Women) Convention (Revised), 1934 (No. 41)
Night Work (Women) Convention (Revised), 1948 (No. 89)
Protocol of 1990 to the Night Work (Women) Convention
(Revised), 1948 (No. 89)
37. The Committee had before it a draft form(10) to be used as a basis for the reports on the Conventions and the Protocol, which member States would be required to submit in accordance with article 19 of the Constitution. A representative of the Director-General noted some printing errors in the Spanish version of the text, which would be corrected, and minor textual changes in the French version of the report form. At the end of point I.3, some words should be added (all languages) from the corresponding provision of the Protocol of 1990 so as to read: "... income maintenance is ensured at a level sufficient for the upkeep of herself and her child in accordance with a suitable standard of living".
38. The Employer members and the Worker members supported the proposed draft form for reports.
39. The representative of the Government of Croatia pointed out that the questions under point I.2 concerning the prohibition of night work applicable to workers of either sex, and II.(a) about the Night Work Convention, 1990 (No. 171) did not relate to the contents of the particular Conventions or the Protocol in question and might be beyond the scope of reports to be requested under article 19.
40. The representative of the Government of Spain suggested that another question be added concerning any problem encountered with the principle of the instruments in the Constitution or jurisprudence of the country.
41. The representative of the Government of the United States considered that it would be confusing for some States that had denounced the Conventions to be asked again about obstacles to ratification. He therefore suggested that additional information be provided regarding the context of this exercise.
42. The representative of the Government of Canada concurred with the previous speaker. The report from her country should reflect the fact that there was no legal distinction between night work and day-time work and that such legislation applied to both women and men.
43. A representative of the Director-General explained that the reports to be submitted under article 19, and the proposed form to be used as a basis for this purpose, indeed allowed for replies and comments, as mentioned by the Government representatives. He assured the Committee that the form for reports would be sent out with an appropriate covering letter explaining the context of the procedure. In reply to the representative of the Government of Croatia, he clarified that it was for the Governing Body to formulate questions in this report form without being bound, for instance, by the report forms under article 22.
44. The Committee approved the draft report form with the modifications as announced by the representative of the Director-General (see Appendix III).
45. The Committee recommends that the Governing Body adopt the appended draft report form for the Night Work (Women) Convention, 1919 (No. 4); the Night Work (Women) Convention (Revised), 1934 (No. 41); the Night Work (Women) Convention (Revised), 1948 (No. 89); and the Protocol of 1990 to the Night Work (Women) Convention (Revised), 1948 (No. 89).
V. UNESCO Recommendation concerning the Status of
Higher-Education Teaching Personnel, 1997:
Monitoring
46. The Committee had before it a paper(11) summarizing the steps taken by the Office in consultation with UNESCO to establish a timetable and undertake the necessary consultations with respect to possible monitoring of the UNESCO Recommendation by the Joint ILO/UNESCO Committee of Experts on the Application of the Recommendation concerning the Status of Teachers (CEART). At its 273rd Session (November 1998) the Governing Body had approved the Committee's recommendation that the matter should be re-examined at the present session. The paper indicated that a timetable had been established that would permit the submission of a paper for decision by the Governing Body at its 276th Session (November 1999).
47. The Employer members agreed with the proposed decision to invite the Director-General to continue and complete discussions with the Director-General of UNESCO with a view to submitting a paper to the Governing Body in November 1999.
48. The Worker members wished to see this matter resolved and agreed with the point for decision, pointing out in the process a small error in the wording of the decision, which needed correction.
49. The Committee recommends that the Governing Body invite the Director-General to continue and complete consultations with the Director-General of UNESCO with a view to submitting a paper for decision to the Governing Body at its 276th Session (November 1999) on the possible extension of the mandate of the Joint ILO/UNESCO Committee of Experts (CEART) to encompass monitoring the application of the UNESCO Recommendation concerning the Status of Higher-Education Teaching Personnel.
Interim report of the Joint ILO/UNESCO Committee
of Experts on the Application of the Recommendation
concerning the Status of Teachers: Allegations
submitted by teachers' organizations
50. The Committee had before it a paper(12) recalling the procedures of the Joint Committee with regard to allegations submitted by teachers' organizations on non-observance of the Recommendation. These procedures had been noted by the Governing Body in its examination of the Report of the Joint Committee's Fourth Special Session (Paris, September 1997) at its 271st Session (March 1998). In accordance with this procedure, an interim report approved by the Joint Committee and submitted on its behalf by its Working Party on Allegations was attached to the paper, with findings and recommendations on allegations brought by the Czech and Moravian Trade Union of Workers in Education (MOS PŠ) concerning the Czech Republic.
51. The Employer members agreed with the proposed decision to take note of the interim report and authorize the Director-General to communicate the report to the Government of the Czech Republic and to the MOS PŠ, inviting their necessary follow-up action.
52. The Worker members noted the Joint Committee's concerns over inordinate delays in the treatment of allegations, the adoption of new working methods, which had led to a more efficient and in some cases more rapid examination of allegations, and the difficulties which remained in producing a final response to allegations, as illustrated by the present case, which dated from April 1997. They emphasized that questions concerning teachers' workload and hours of work should be resolved through collective bargaining; a number of teachers' unions had questioned the validity of the OECD indicators referred to in the annexed report since they dealt with only one aspect of teachers' workload; an increase in direct contact time would increase the work to be done in non-contact time, as mentioned in the report; and teachers' unions in countries in transition faced enormous problems resulting from increasing demands on and expectations of education, which had increased teachers' workload at a time when there were fewer resources for education. Teachers and educational support personnel must have an opportunity to provide input into decisions that had an impact on their working lives, including how they performed the expected work. The Worker members agreed with the point for decision and hoped that the Government of the Czech Republic would meet with MOS PŠ to ensure that the matter was resolved as proposed therein.
53. The Committee recommends that the Governing Body --
(a) take note of the interim report of the Joint ILO/UNESCO Committee of Experts on the Application of the Recommendation concerning the Status of Teachers relating to an allegation on the non-observance of certain provisions of the Recommendation in the Czech Republic;
(b) authorize the Director-General to communicate the report to the Government of the Czech Republic and to the Czech and Moravian Trade Union of Workers in Education (MOS PŠ), and to invite them to take the necessary follow-up action as recommended in the report.
Geneva, 22 March 1999.
Points for decision:
Paragraph 9;
Paragraph 45;
Paragraph 49;
Paragraph 53.
6. Bahrain, Barbados, Bolivia, Egypt, Ghana, Grenada, Iceland, Jamaica, Kazakhstan, Republic of Korea, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Luxembourg, Mexico, Morocco, Myanmar, Namibia, Pakistan, Panama, Peru, Philippines, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Thailand, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Uganda, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United States, Yemen, Zimbabwe.
7. For a list of the 33 countries which replied to the fifth circular letter from the Director-General before 19 February 1999, see footnote No. 3 in document GB.274/LILS/5.
8. GB.271/11/2, paras. 20 and 24.
9. International Programme on the Elimination of Child Labour.
Table of ratifications and information concerning the ILO's
fundamental Conventions
(as at 17 March 1999)
|
— |
Forced Labour Convention, 1930 | |
|
— |
Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 | |
|
— |
The Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 | |
|
— |
Equal Remuneration Convention, 1951 | |
|
— |
Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 | |
|
— |
Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1958 | |
|
— |
Minimum Age Convention, 1973 |
Explanation of symbols in the table
|
x |
Convention ratified. |
|
o |
Formal ratification process already initiated (with or without mention of time-frame); approval of ratification by the competent body, although the Director-General has not yet received the formal instrument of ratification or it is incomplete (concerns chiefly Convention No. 138) or is a non-original copy. |
|
* |
Convention currently being studied or examined; preliminary consultations with the social partners. |
|
+ |
Ratification will be examined after amendment/adoption of a Constitution, Labour Code, legislation, etc. |
|
# |
Divergencies between the Convention and national legislation. |
|
| |
Ratification not considered/deferred. |
|
-- |
No reply, or a reply containing no information. |
|
Member States |
Forced labour |
Freedom of association |
Equal treatment |
Minimum age | |||
|
C. 29 |
C. 105 |
C. 87 |
C. 98 |
C. 100 |
C. 111 |
C. 138 | |
|
Afghanistan |
-- |
x |
-- |
-- |
x |
x |
-- |
|
Albania |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
|
Algeria |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
|
Angola |
x |
x |
o |
x |
x |
x |
o |
|
Antigua and Barbuda |
x |
x |
x |
x |
o |
x |
x |
|
Argentina |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
|
Armenia |
* |
* |
* |
* |
x |
x |
* |
|
Australia |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
| |
|
Austria |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
+ |
|
Azerbaijan |
x |
* |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
|
Bahamas |
x |
x |
# |
x |
* |
* |
* |
|
Bahrain |
x |
x |
# |
# |
# |
* |
* |
|
Bangladesh |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
* |
|
Barbados |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
o |
|
Belarus |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
|
Belgium |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
|
Belize |
x |
x |
x |
x |
* |
* |
* |
|
Benin |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
o |
|
Bolivia |
+ |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
|
Bosnia and Herzegovina |
x |
* |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
|
Botswana |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
|
Brazil |
x |
x |
+ |
x |
x |
x |
+ |
|
Bulgaria |
x |
o |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
|
Burkina Faso |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
|
Burundi |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
o |
|
Cambodia |
x |
o |
o |
o |
o |
o |
o |
|
Cameroon |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
o |
|
Canada |
* |
x |
x |
# |
x |
x |
# |
|
Cape Verde |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
* |
|
Central African Republic |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
* |
|
Chad |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
* |
|
Chile |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
|
China |
| |
| |
| |
| |
x |
+ |
o |
|
Colombia |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
o |
|
Comoros |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
-- |
-- |
|
Congo |
x |
o |
x |
o |
o |
o |
o |
|
Costa Rica |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
|
Côte d'Ivoire |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
* |
|
Croatia |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
|
Cuba |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
|
Cyprus |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
|
Czech Republic |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
+ |
|
Democratic Republic of the Congo |
x |
* |
* |
x |
x |
* |
* |
|
Denmark |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
|
Djibouti |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
-- |
-- |
|
Dominica |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
|
Dominican Republic |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
* |
|
Ecuador |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
| |
|
Egypt |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
o |
|
El Salvador |
x |
x |
* |
* |
o |
x |
x |
|
Equatorial Guinea |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
x |
-- |
x |
|
Eritrea |
+ |
+ |
+ |
+ |
+ |
+ |
+ |
|
Estonia |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
* |
+ |
|
Ethiopia |
* |
o |
x |
x |
o |
x |
o |
|
Fiji |
x |
x |
* |
x |
* |
* |
* |
|
Finland |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
|
France |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
|
Gabon |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
* |
|
Gambia |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
|
Georgia |
x |
x |
* |
x |
x |
x |
x |
|
Germany |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
|
Ghana |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
* |
|
Greece |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
|
Grenada |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
+ |
+ |
|
Guatemala |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
|
Guinea |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
* |
|
Guinea-Bissau |
x |
x |
-- |
x |
x |
x |
-- |
|
Guyana |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
|
Haiti |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
-- |
|
Honduras |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
|
Hungary |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
|
Iceland |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
o |
|
India |
x |
o |
* |
* |
x |
x |
+ |
|
Indonesia |
x |
o |
x |
x |
x |
o |
o |
|
Iran, Islamic Republic of |
x |
x |
+ |
+ |
x |
x |
+ |
|
Iraq |
x |
x |
+ |
x |
x |
x |
x |
|
Ireland |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
o |
x |
|
Israel |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
|
Italy |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
|
Jamaica |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
+ |
|
Japan |
x |
* |
x |
x |
x |
* |
* |
|
Jordan |
x |
x |
| |
x |
x |
x |
x |
|
Kazakhstan |
* |
* |
* |
* |
| |
* |
| |
|
Kenya |
x |
x |
| |
x |
| |
| |
x |
|
Korea, Republic of |
* |
* |
* |
* |
x |
x |
x |
|
Kuwait |
x |
x |
x |
* |
* |
x |
+ |
|
Kyrgyzstan |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
|
Lao People's Democratic Republic |
x |
o |
o |
o |
o |
o |
o |
|
Latvia |
o |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
o |
|
Lebanon |
x |
x |
+ |
x |
x |
x |
+ |
|
Lesotho |
x |
* |
x |
x |
x |
x |
* |
|
Liberia |
x |
x |
x |
x |
* |
x |
* |
|
Libyan Arab Jamahiriya |
x |
x |
-- |
x |
x |
x |
x |
|
Lithuania |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
|
Luxembourg |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
o |
x |
|
Madagascar |
x |
* |
x |
x |
x |
x |
o |
|
Malawi |
* |
* |
* |
x |
x |
x |
* |
|
Malaysia |
x |
| |
# |
x |
x |
# |
x |
|
Mali |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
| |
|
Malta |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
|
Mauritania |
x |
x |
x |
o |
o |
x |
o |
|
Mauritius |
x |
x |
+ |
x |
+ |
+ |
x |
|
Mexico |
x |
x |
x |
* |
x |
x |
| |
|
Moldova, Republic of |
o |
x |
x |
x |
o |
x |
o |
|
Mongolia |
o |
o |
x |
x |
x |
x |
o |
|
Morocco |
x |
x |
+ |
x |
x |
x |
o |
|
Mozambique |
* |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
-- |
|
Myanmar |
x |
| |
x |
| |
| |
| |
| |
|
Namibia |
* |
* |
x |
x |
* |
* |
* |
|
Nepal |
* |
* |
* |
x |
x |
x |
x |
|
Netherlands |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
|
New Zealand |
x |
x |
| |
| |
x |
x |
| |
|
Nicaragua |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
|
Niger |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
|
Nigeria |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
# |
+ |
|
Norway |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
|
Oman |
x |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
|
Pakistan |
x |
x |
x |
x |
* |
x |
* |
|
Panama |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
o |
|
Papua New Guinea |
x |
x |
o |
x |
o |
o |
o |
|
Paraguay |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
* |
|
Peru |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
+ |
|
Philippines |
* |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
|
Poland |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
|
Portugal |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
|
Qatar |
x |
| |
| |
| |
| |
x |
| |
|
Romania |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
|
Russian Federation |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
|
Rwanda |
o |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
|
Saint Kitts and Nevis |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
|
Saint Lucia |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
-- |
|
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines |
x |
x |
* |
x |
* |
* |
* |
|
San Marino |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
|
Sao Tome and Principe |
| |
| |
x |
x |
x |
x |
o |
|
Saudi Arabia |
x |
x |
* |
* |
x |
x |
+ |
|
Senegal |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
o |
|
Seychelles |
x |
x |
x |
o |
o |
o |
o |
|
Sierra Leone |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
* |
|
Singapore |
x |
| |
| |
x |
| |
| |
| |
|
Slovakia |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
|
Slovenia |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
|
Solomon Islands |
x |
-- |
* |
* |
* |
* |
-- |
|
Somalia |
x |
x |
-- |
-- |
-- |
x |
-- |
|
South Africa |
x |
x |
x |
x |
o |
x |
o |
|
Spain |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
|
Sri Lanka |
x |
# |
x |
x |
x |
x |
* |
|
Sudan |
x |
x |
* |
x |
x |
x |
* |
|
Suriname |
x |
x |
x |
x |
| |
| |
o |
|
Swaziland |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
-- |
|
Sweden |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
|
Switzerland |
x |
x |
x |
o |
x |
x |
o |
|
Syrian Arab Republic |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
+ |
|
Tajikistan |
x |
-- |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
|
Tanzania, United Republic of |
x |
x |
# |
x |
* |
| |
x |
|
Thailand |
x |
x |
+ |
+ |
x |
# |
+ |
|
The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia |
x |
* |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
|
Togo |
x |
o |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
|
Trinidad and Tobago |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
-- |
|
Tunisia |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
|
Turkey |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
|
Turkmenistan |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
o |
|
Uganda |
x |
x |
+ |
x |
+ |
+ |
+ |
|
Ukraine |
x |
+ |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
|
United Kingdom |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
o |
* |
|
United Arab Emirates |
x |
x |
# |
# |
x |
# |
x |
|
United States |
# |
x |
# |
# |
# |
o |
* |
|
Uruguay |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
|
Uzbekistan |
x |
x |
o |
x |
x |
x |
* |
|
Venezuela |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
|
Viet Nam |
| |
| |
| |
| |
x |
x |
| |
|
Yemen |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
* |
|
Yugoslavia (1) |
x |
-- |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
|
Zambia |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
|
Zimbabwe |
x |
x |
+ |
x |
x |
o |
+ |
1. This concerns the former Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia since, pursuant to decisions taken by the Governing Body in line with the respective United Nations resolutions, no State is recognized as the continuation of this Member.
Appl. 19.
C.4 C.41 C.89
and Protocol of 1990
INTERNATIONAL LABOUR OFFICE
REPORTS ON
UNRATIFIED CONVENTIONS
AND PROTOCOLS
(Article 19 of the Constitution
of the International Labour Organization)
___________
REPORT FORM FOR THE FOLLOWING INSTRUMENTS:
Night Work (Women) Convention, 1919 (No. 4);
Night Work (Women) Convention (Revised), 1934 (No. 41);
Night Work (Women) Convention (Revised), 1948 (No. 89);
Protocol of 1990 to the Night Work (Women) Convention (Revised), 1948
GENEVA, 1999
INTERNATIONAL LABOUR OFFICE
Article 19 of the Constitution of the International Labour Organization relates to the adoption of Conventions and Recommendations by the Conference, as well as to the obligations resulting therefrom for the Members of the Organization. The relevant provisions of paragraphs 5 and 7 of this article read as follows:
5. In the case of a Convention --
...
(e) if the Member does not obtain the consent of the authority or authorities within whose competence the matter lies, no further obligation shall rest upon the Member except that it shall report to the Director-General of the International Labour Office, at appropriate intervals as requested by the Governing Body, the position of its law and practice in regard to the matters dealt with in the Convention, showing the extent to which effect has been given, or is proposed to be given, to any of the provisions of the Convention by legislation, administrative action, collective agreement or otherwise and stating the difficulties which prevent or delay the ratification of such Convention.
7. In the case of a federal State, the following provisions shall apply:
(a) in respect of Conventions and Recommendations which the federal government regards as appropriate under its constitutional system for federal action, the obligations of the federal State shall be the same as those of Members which are not federal States;
(b) in respect of Conventions and Recommendations which the federal government regards as appropriate under its constitutional system, in whole or in part, for action by the constituent states, provinces or cantons rather than for federal action, the federal government shall --
...
(iv) in respect of each such Convention which it has not ratified, report to the Director-General of the International Labour Office, at appropriate intervals as requested by the Governing Body, the position of the law and practice of the federation and its constituent states, provinces or cantons in regard to the Convention, showing the extent to which effect has been given, or is proposed to be given, to any of the provisions of the Convention by legislation, administrative action, collective agreement, or otherwise;
(v) in respect of each such Recommendation, report to the Director-General of the International Labour Office, at appropriate intervals as requested by the Governing Body, the position of the law and practice of the federation and its constituent states, provinces or cantons in regard to the Recommendation, showing the extent to which effect has been given, or is proposed to be given, to the provisions of the Recommendation and such modifications of these provisions as have been found or may be found necessary in adopting or applying them.
In accordance with the above provisions, the Governing Body of the International Labour Office examined and approved the present form of report. This has been drawn up in such a manner as to facilitate the supply of the required information on uniform lines and the preparation of the summary of information and reports to be submitted by the Director-General of the International Labour Office to the Conference under article 23 of the Constitution.
REPORT
to be made no later than 30 April 2000, in accordance with article 19 of the Constitution of the International Labour Organization by the Government of ........................, on the position of national law and practice in regard to the matters dealt with in the following instruments:
Night Work (Women) Convention, 1919 (No. 4);
Night Work (Women) Convention
(Revised), 1934 (No. 41);
Night Work (Women) Convention
(Revised), 1948 (No. 89);
and
Protocol of 1990 to the Night Work (Women)
Convention (Revised), 1948
adopted by the International Labour Conference at its 1st, 18th, 31st and 77th Sessions.(1)
I. Please give a general indication of the extent to which the Conventions and the Protocol are given effect in your country in law and practice.
If copies of the legislation and regulations cited in the present report have not already been supplied to the International Labour Office, please attach together with any other available documents concerning the effect given to the provisions of the Conventions and the Protocol.
In particular, please supply information on the following points:
1. Please indicate whether there is any prohibition on the employment of women during a period of night.
If so, please answer the following questions:
(a) What is the definition of the term night? Are there any possible variations in the duration of the night period, or an interval that it must include? If there are such variations, please indicate whether the employers' and workers' organizations concerned were consulted before determining them.
(b) Does the prohibition apply to (i) all women without distinction, (ii) women during a specified period before and after childbirth, or (iii) women under other criteria? If the answer is (ii) or (iii), please specify the scope of the prohibition. In the case of (ii), please also refer to point 3 below.
(c) Please indicate whether the prohibition applies to all economic sectors or only certain ones (if the latter is the case, please specify the sectors covered).
(d) Is there any exception to the prohibition in regard to:
- family undertakings (please give the definition);
- force majeure;
- cases where night work is necessary to preserve raw materials or rapidly perishable materials;
- women holding responsible positions of a managerial or technical character;
- women employed in health and welfare services;
- any other cases (please specify)?
(e) Please indicate any possibility under national laws or regulations of suspension of or exemption from the prohibition on night work of women in a specific branch of activity or occupation or in one or more specific establishments. Please specify any conditions, such as consultation with the employers or workers concerned, or limitations, such as prohibition on applying suspension/exemption during a given period before and after childbirth. Please state whether recourse has actually been had to such a possibility of suspension of or exemption from the prohibition on night work of women.
2. Apart from the prohibition on the employment of women during a period of night described under 1 above, please indicate whether there is any prohibition or restriction on night work applicable to workers of both sex, either in general, or under such criteria as age or family responsibilities. If so, please indicate the scope and the definition of the term night.
3. If there is special protection against night work for women workers during a period before and after childbirth (as mentioned in 1(b)(ii) or (e)), please indicate whether the worker is protected against dismissal during such a period, and whether income maintenance is ensured at a level sufficient for the upkeep of herself and her child in accordance with a suitable standard of living.
II. (a) Please indicate any difficulties presented by the Conventions or the Protocol, in legislation or national practice, or any other reasons such as matters of principle which prevent or delay the ratification of Convention No. 89 and its Protocol of 1990, and any measures taken to overcome these obstacles. If it is intended to consider ratification of the Night Work Convention, 1990 (No. 171), please mention it.
(b) Please state whether any modifications have been made in the national legislation or practice with regard to all or some of the provisions of the instruments, with a view to either giving effect to them or removing effect previously given.
(c) Please state also whether it is intended to make any such modifications, or adopt measures to give further effect to the provisions of the instruments.
(d) Please indicate any consultation held with the employers' and workers' organizations concerning modifications or measures relating to night work.
III. Please indicate the representative organizations of employers and workers to which copies of the present report have been communicated in accordance with article 23, paragraph 2, of the Constitution of the International Labour Organization.(2)
IV. Please indicate whether you have received from organizations of employers or workers any observations on the effect given or to be given to the instruments.
Federal States
(a) Please indicate whether the provisions of the Conventions or of the Protocol are regarded by the federal government as appropriate, under its constitutional system, for federal action or as appropriate, in whole or in part, for action by the constituent states, provinces or cantons, rather than for federal action.
(b) Where federal action is appropriate, please give the information specified in points I, II, III and IV of this form.
(c) Where action by the constituent units is regarded as appropriate, please supply general information corresponding to points I, II, III and IV of the form. Please indicate also any arrangements it has been possible to make within the federal State, with a view to promoting coordinated action to give effect to all or some of the provisions of the Conventions and of the Protocol, giving a general indication of any results achieved through such action.
1. The texts of the Conventions and Protocol are appended.
2. Article 23, paragraph 2, of the Constitution reads as follows: "Each Member shall communicate to the representative organizations recognized for the purpose of aticle 3 copies of the information and reports communicated to the Director-General in pursuance of articles 19 and 22."