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

Labour Inspection Convention, 1947 (No. 81) - Uganda (Ratification: 1963)

The Committee notes with regret that the Government’s report has not been received. With reference to its previous comments, the Committee recalls the deliberations which took place within the Committee on the Application of Standards of the International Labour Conference in June 2001 during which the Government recognized the relevance of the points raised, and provided clarifications on the economic reasons for a deteriorating labour inspection system since the decentralization of services. The Government has given assurances to the Conference Committee to the effect that the situation would be closely examined, taking due account of all viewpoints, with all the partners concerned. It further indicated that the process would take time, and would require technical assistance. The Conference Committee expressed the hope that the Government, through technical cooperation, will be able to find solutions. Recalling each of the points raised in its previous comments, the Conference Committee also expressed the hope that, with the assistance of international collaboration, the Government will quickly take the necessary measures, as requested by the Committee. The Committee is therefore obliged to reiterate its previous comments on the following points:

1. Socio-economic situation and labour inspection. The Committee notes with concern the socio-economic impact of the epidemic of HIV infection. It notes the educational activities carried out by the Government and the health measures taken, but notes that the information provided by the Government and the conclusions of a report by a joint ILO/UNDP/EAMAT mission undertaken in 1995 on labour administration indicate that the structures of the labour inspection system are in a critical situation. The decentralization of the organization and the management of services and personnel of the labour inspectorate is resulting in practice in serious shortcomings in supervising the application of legal provisions for which the labour inspectorate is responsible in an environment which is characterized by the very rapid growth in the number of national and foreign private industrial enterprises. Noting that the provisions of the Convention are not applied, the Committee wishes to draw the Government’s attention to the importance, particularly in such a difficult economic, health and social situation, of ensuring the best possible protection for workers.

2. Supervision and control of the labour inspectorate by a central authority (Articles 4, 5, 6 and 10 of the Convention); annual inspection report (Articles 20 and 21). The Committee notes that the power conferred since 1994 on district authorities to decide whether to establish an inspection structure to recruit and manage labour inspectors is in contradiction with the objective of the Convention, which is to ensure a coordinated and effective labour inspection system throughout the national territory under the supervision and control of a central authority. However, the disparities in the status and conditions of service of labour inspectors operating in the offices established in 21 of the 45 districts in no way permits the establishment of such a system, and the precariousness of inspectors is incompatible with the requirement of authority and impartiality which are indispensable in the relations that inspectors should maintain with employers and workers. The Committee also notes that the periodic inspection reports provided to the Ministry of Labour by a small number of district offices cannot provide the latter with the means of making an overall assessment of the level of application of labour legislation in workplaces liable to inspection and are not adequate to serve as a basis for the preparation of an annual report, as required by Article 20. The Committee reminds the Government that, under the terms of Article 2, paragraph 1, of the Convention, the system of labour inspection shall apply to all workplaces in respect of which legal provisions relating to conditions of work and the protection of workers while engaged in their work are enforceable by labour inspectors, and that the annual report, the contents of which are set out in Article 21(a) to (g) has the objective of providing a regular assessment of the situation with a view to determining the action to be taken for its improvement. The Committee also invites the Government in this respect to refer to paragraph 273 et seq. of its 1985 General Survey on the value at both the national and international levels of preparing, publishing and forwarding such a report to the ILO. It hopes that the Government will commence without delay a process of reflection at the local, regional and national levels on the manner in which the Convention should be applied and that it will associate in this process the social partners, ministerial departments and public and private bodies concerned. It would be grateful if the Government would provide information regularly on the action envisaged to establish a labour inspection system placed under the supervision and control of a central authority and involving cooperation and collaboration with the social partners and the above institutions.

3. Material and financial resources of the labour inspectorate (Articles 10, 11 and 16). The Committee notes the Government’s repeated statements concerning the crucial lack of means of transport and transport facilities and its consequences on workplace inspection. Furthermore, according to the report of the ILO/UNDP/EAMAT mission, the premises serving as offices for labour inspectors in some districts give rise to problems of accessibility for their users and are not equipped to meet the needs of the service. According to the Government, even before the decentralization of inspection services, difficulties were experienced in the application of the requirements set out in Article 11 in view of the same budgetary constraints on personnel and means of transport in particular. The Committee notes that the inadequacy of the resources of the inspection services encourages a general laxity by employers with regard to their legal obligations respecting occupational safety and health and other conditions of work. The Committee wishes to emphasize once again, as it did in paragraph 214 of its 1985 General Survey on labour inspection, the economic and social value of labour inspection and the social cost of reducing its effectiveness. It trusts that measures will be taken, including having recourse to international cooperation, to ensure that the proportion of the national budget allocated to labour inspection is determined as a function of the priority nature of the objectives which it should be assigned in accordance with the Convention.