Tripartite Consultation (International Labour Standards) Convention, 1976 (No. 144) - Ecuador (Ratification: 1979)

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2025, published 114th ILC session (2026)

The Committee notes the observations of the United Workers’ Front (FUT), received on 31 August 2023, which refer to the process for the appointment of workers’ representatives to the Board of Directors of the Ecuadorian Social Security Institute (IESS). The Committee also notes the Government’s reply, received on 16 May 2024.

Tripartism and social dialogue. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in connection with the consultations held in the National Labour and Wages Council (CNTS) between June and November 2020, on the measures taken to ensure job sustainability in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as to determine the wage adjustment. As regards measures taken to build the capacity of the constituents and strengthen tripartite mechanisms, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that the Ministry of Labour continues to strengthen the mechanisms for the participation of worker and employer representatives in the CNTS. Furthermore, the national legislation now allows for representatives in the CNTS to have technical advisers and for the participation of different State institutions responsible for generating the required technical inputs, so that the partners each have the information necessary to develop their proposals.

Lastly the Committee notes the Government’s indication that there are several tripartite bodis which include a wide range of participants from social organizations, such as the Board of Directors of the Ecuadorian Social Security Institute (IESS). In this respect the Committee notes the FUT’s indication, in its observations, that various procedural rules for the election of representatives, including the representatives of insured persons (workers), to the Board of Directors of the IESS, were adopted without consulting trade union organizations. The FUT maintains that the worker spokesperson on the Board of Directors of the IESS was imposed, with disregard for the rules for the election of representatives established in the Social Security Act. In its reply, the Government indicates that no comment may be made on the matter since the worker spokesperson was appointed in accordance with a judicial decision issued in response to a constitutional challenge brought by a number of organizations.

The Committee invites the Government to continue providing information on the measures taken with a view to ensuring that all of the country’s “most representative organizations” of employers and workers can participate in the other consultative bodies of a tripartite nature, such as the Board of Directors of the Ecuadorian Social Security Institute (IESS). In this connection, the Committee recalls that Paragraph 5 of the Consultation (Industrial and National Levels) Recommendation, 1960 (No. 113), provides for consultation on the establishment and functioning of national bodies responsible for social security. Moreover, the Committee draws the Government’s attention to Paragraph 6 of the Tripartite Consultation (Activities of the International Labour Organization) Recommendation, 1976 (No. 152), according to which the competent authority, after consultation with the representative organizations, should determine the extent to which these procedures should be used for the purpose of consultations on other matters of mutual concern, such as the preparation and implementation of economic and social programmes.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2025, published 114th ILC session (2026)

The Committee notes the observations of Public Services International (PSI) in Ecuador, the United Workers’ Front (FUT) and the Federation of Petroleum Workers of Ecuador (FETRAPEC), received on 31 August 2023, as well as the Government’s reply, received on 16 May 2024.

Articles 1, 2 and 3(1) of the Convention. Adequate procedures. Election of the representatives of the social partners to the National Labour and Wages Council (CNTS). The Committee recalls that in its previous comments it requested the Government to take the necessary measures to: (i) ensure that all the country’s “most representative organizations” of employers and workers could participate in the CNTS and the other consultative bodies of a tripartite nature; and (ii) obtain the agreement of all organizations concerned, including workers’ organizations freely elected by their members, with the establishment of the consultative procedures regarding the criteria used to determine representativeness among those organizations. In this regard, the Committee notes the Government’s reference, once again, to the rule applicable to the election of representatives to the CNTS (Ministerial Agreement No. MDT-2015-0240 of 20 October 2015, as subsequently amended, most recently by Ministerial Agreement No. MDT-2025-084). Under section 10(2) of Ministerial Agreement No. MDT-2025-084, employer and worker representatives shall be freely elected by the committees of organizations legally constituted and registered to join the CNTS. Prior to calling for the election of representatives the executive secretariat of the CNTS shall submit to the president of that body a list of the most representative workers’ and employers’ organizations at the national level, who shall act as voters (section 11(1)). The list shall consist of up to ten workers´ and ten employers’ organizations (section 11(3) and (4)). The limit in respect of the list may be increased at the request of the president of the CNTS (section 11(6)). The Government indicates that the Ministry of Labour has a register of legally recognized workers’ organizations, on the basis of which the most representative organizations are determined. Lastly, the Government indicates that, following a reform introduced in 2018, the number of representatives from each sector in the CNTS was increased from two to four.

The Committee notes that the FUT and PSI in Ecuador underscore, in their observations, that the non-compliance with the Convention has deepened. In this connection, the FUT and PSI submit that they do not participate in tripartite consultations, despite being highly representative: (i) the FUT is an umbrella organization for various trade union confederations, representing more than 450,000 public and private sector workers, with 771 subsidiaries, whereas the pro-Government organizations that form part of the CNTS together account for only 476 subsidiaries; and (ii) PSI in Ecuador is a national coordinating body for public service workers’ organizations affiliated to PSI, bringing together approximately 400,000 public service workers.

With regard to the criteria used by the Government in order to determine which are the most representative organizations participating in the CNTS, the FUT and ISP in Ecuador emphasize that the Ministry of Labour: (i) draws up the list of participating organizations at its own discretion and without objective criteria, and (ii) requires them all to be legally recognized, such that the FUT is not taken into account as it is a de facto organization. They emphasize that the rules applicable to the election of representatives to the CNTS allow the President of the CNTS (Ministry of Labour) to pre-approve the list of organizations invited to participate in the election. They maintain that, in practice, this pre-approval process is used to favour pro-Government organizations, disregarding the rights of more representative organizations that are critical of the Government, such as the FUT and the organizations under the umbrella of PSI in Ecuador. Furthermore, the FUT and PSI in Ecuador indicate that, on 1 July 2022, they asked the Ministry of Labour for certified copies of the report of the ten most representative workers’ and employers’ organizations, including the technical criteria used to establish their representativeness. The Ministry of Labour replied on 3 August 2022 but provided only a list of the 37 organizations which participated in discussions in the CNTS in recent years, without indicating the year or selection criterion. The Government did not, however, provide the criteria used to determine representativeness, or the list of the ten organizations considered to be the most representative on the basis of those criteria.

The Committee also notes the indication by the FUT and PSI in Ecuador that the workers’ organizations selected by the Government in accordance with the regulations of the CNTS are the same as those delegated to attend the International Labour Conference (hereinafter, “the Conference”), from which they are excluded. In this respect, the Committee notes that the Conference Credentials Committee examined the question of the nomination of the Workers’ delegation of Ecuador on different occasions (see Second Report of the Credentials Committee, 12 June 2025 (paras 58–62), 16 June 2023 (paras 64–68) and 10 June 2022 (paras 61–65)). The Committee notes with concern that, during the 113th Session of the Conference, (June 2025), when the Credentials Committee examined the question it concluded that the Workers’ delegation had again been designated by the Government on the basis of the nomination of the CNTS, a system which, according to the Credentials Committee, does not guarantee compliance with article 3(5) of the ILO Constitution, as it excludes de facto organizations. The Credentials Committee has always held law that the sole fact that an organization may have no legal recognition does not exempt the Government from consulting it. The Credentials Committee recalled that, in cases in which several most representative organizations exist in one country, the Government must, pursuant to the terms of article 3(5) of the ILO Constitution, aim to effect an agreement among them. Failing an agreement among most representative organizations, the Government must assess, based on objective and verifiable criteria, which organization (or group of organizations that have agreed on a common proposal) is the most representative (see Second Report of the Credentials Committee, 12 June 2025, para. 61). Furthermore, during the 110th Session of the Conference, the Credentials Committee noted that the required approval by the Ministry of Labour of the list of electors of the representatives of the CNTS potentially provided the Government with the possibility to interfere in the election process, which should be undertaken in such a manner as to respect the capacity of the workers’ organizations to designate the Workers’ delegation to the Conference in absolute independence from the Government (see Second Report of the Credentials Committee, 10 June 2022, para. 64).

Lastly, the Committee notes that the FUT and the PSI in Ecuador decry the failure to comply with the road map presented by the technical assistance mission carried out by the Office in December 2019. The Committee recalls that one central point of the road map is the inclusion of all representative trade union organizations in the CNTS. In this context, the Committee emphasizes once again that ensuring the participation of all the representative trade unions in the CNTS is a fundamental element for carrying out effective consultations and the application of the Convention in general.

The Committee notes with concern that these matters have been the subject of comments for many years and that the Government, once again, has not provided new information demonstrating that tangible progress has been made in this area. In view of the concerns expressed by the FUT and PSI in Ecuador and taking into account the successive decisions of the Conference Credentials Committee, the Committee urges the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that all of the country’s “most representative organizations” of employers and workers can participate in tripartite consultations on international labour standards, including in the CNTS, as required by the Convention.

While recalling that the determination of the most representative organizations must be based on objective, pre-established and precise criteria so as to avoid any possibility of bias or abuse, the Committee urges the Government to secure the agreement of all the organizations concerned, including workers’ organizations freely elected by their members, with the establishment of the consultative procedures regarding the criteria used to determine representativeness among those organizations.

Article 5. Effective tripartite consultations. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that, between 2022 and 2023, tripartite consultations were held within the CNTS in relation to ratified Conventions. The Government indicates that, on 30 May 2022, a session was held at which the observation concerning the application of the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87) was brought to the attention of workers and employers, for feedback from both partners. The Government adds that, on 26 February 2023, titular and alternate CNTS representatives were consulted electronically for comment on the revision of a number of Conventions and Recommendations. The Government indicates that this ensured the involvement of all the most representative organizations in consultations. The Committee notes that, in their observations, the FUT and PSI in Ecuador indicate that they did not receive reports on ratified Conventions, but that these were sent only to the pro-Government organizations that constitute the CNTS. Regarding the possibility of establishing a schedule for the preparation of reports far enough in advance to enable the social partners to formulate their contributions, the Government merely indicates in a general manner that this proposal would allow a planned consultation to be held with CNTS representatives. The Committee observes, however, that the Government does not respond to its request for information on the consultations held on: (i) each of the issues relating to international labour standards indicated in Article 5(1) of the Convention; and (ii) ways to improve the functioning of the procedures required under the Convention. Accordingly, the Committee urges the Government to provide information on the specific content and the outcome of the tripartite consultations held on all issues relating to international labour standards covered by Article 5(1)(a) to (e) of the Convention. In the absence of a reply from the Government, the Committee also once again asks the Government to provide specific information on the consultations held with the social partners and the outcome thereof on the manner in which the functioning of the procedures required by the Convention could be improved, including the possibility of establishing a schedule for the preparation of reports far enough in advance to enable the social partners to formulate their contributions in this respect (Article 5(1)(d)).

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

The Committee takes note of the supplementary information provided by the Government in light of the decision adopted by the Governing Body at its 338th Session (June 2020). The Committee is examining the application of the Convention on the basis of the supplementary information received from the Government this year, as well as on the basis of the information at its disposal in 2019. The Committee also takes note of the technical assistance mission carried out at the Government’s request by the Office in December 2019 with a view to assisting the tripartite constituents in drawing up a road map to strengthen social dialogue and provide specific replies to the supervisory bodies’ comments.

The Committee notes the observations formulated by the National Federation of Education Workers (UNE) and Public Services International (PSI) in Ecuador, received on 29 August 2019, as well as the Government’s replies to those, included in its supplementary report of 2020. It also notes the observations of PSI, received on 28 September 2020, and of the Ecuadorean Confederation of Unitary Class Organizations of Workers (CEDOCUT) and the Trade Union Association of Agricultural, Banana and Peasant Workers (ASTAC), received on 1 October 2020, relating to the application of the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to provide its replies in that respect.

Tripartism and social dialogue in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its supplementary report relating to the tripartite consultations held on 12 and 25 June 2020 within the framework of the National Labour and Wages Council (CNTS). The Government indicates that the objective of those consultations was to present the guidelines issued by the Ministry of Labour to mitigate the effects of the pandemic and to receive proposals from workers’ and employers’ representatives to maintain employment during the health emergency. The Government states that the members of the CNTS agreed on the establishment of a technical committee with the participation of two representatives of the employer sector and two representatives of the worker sector with a view to developing proposals to ensure the sustainability of employment and enterprises, and to address the situation facing the country as a result of the COVID 19 pandemic. The Committee notes, however, that PSI states in its observations that, since March 2020, under the decreed state of emergency, the Government has taken many administrative measures and passed various executive decrees without holding tripartite consultations on those. PSI reports that these measures have led to a regression in workers’ rights, especially those of public sector workers. In this respect, it refers, inter alia, to the introduction of the possibility of reducing the working hours and remuneration of public sector workers, and to the abolishment of various posts in that sector. PSI also refers to the adoption of the Organic Act on Humanitarian Support to combat the crisis resulting from COVID-19 and states that it introduces regressive reforms to the Labour Code. For their part, ASTAC and CEDOCUT report that the workers’ organizations were not consulted prior to the adoption, on 17 September 2020, of Ministerial Agreement No. MDT-2020-185, which contains a new method of calculating the basic unified wage and sets out the possibility of freezing it in 2021. ASTAC and CEDOCUT emphasize the need to adopt measures to guarantee the representation of the workers’ and employers’ sectors in the tripartite bodies, as well as their real and effective participation in the development of standards (see Paragraph 5(c) of Recommendation No. 152). In this context, the Committee recalls the broad guidance provided by international labour standards and encourages Member States to promote and participate in broader tripartite consultation and social dialogue as a solid basis for the preparation and implementation of effective responses to the deep-rooted socio-economic impact of the pandemic. The Committee requests the Government to send detailed and updated information on the tripartite consultations held regarding the measures taken to address the socio-economic impact of the pandemic. It also invites the Government to provide in its next report detailed information on measures taken to build the capacity of the constituents, and strengthen tripartite mechanisms and procedures, as well as on the challenges and good practices identified.

Articles 1, 2 and 3(1) of the Convention. Adequate procedures. Election of the representatives of the social partners to the National Labour and Wages Council (CNTS). In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to provide information on the consultations held to establish procedures which ensure effective tripartite consultations. It also requested the Government to send its comments on the observations made by PSI and UNE, in which they indicate that they are not recognized as representative organizations of the workers in the public sector. PSI and UNE also considered that the Government has opted systematically to disregard workers’ organizations that might be an obstacle to the implementation of its reforms but has intervened directly in the establishment of organizations that give legitimacy to its actions. PSI and UNE claimed that the Government had not held effective consultations with them and had not replied to the various proposals put forward concerning the creation of a forum for bipartite dialogue for the public sector incorporated in what was previously the National Labour Council. In its 2020 report, the Government indicates that, in accordance with Ministerial Agreement No. MDT-044 of 30 January 2016, amendments were made to section 10 of Ministerial Agreement No. MDT-2015-0240 of 20 October 2015 on the organization, composition and operation of the CNTS. Specifically, the phrase “trade union federations of legally recognized working persons” was replaced with “federations, confederations, fronts, organizations and/or unions of most representative working persons at the national level”. The Government indicates that the CNTS is thereby composed of those organizations of the most representative workers at the national level. In this regard, the Committee notes that, in its 2020 observations, PSI reports the lack of an adequate procedure and political will to determine the "most representative organizations", resulting, in practice, in the absence of an institution for tripartite consultation on international labour standards. Furthermore, UNE and PSI reiterate that they are still not recognized as representative organizations of the public sector, and nor are their affiliate organizations. In its reply, the Government indicates that the Ministry of Labour has a register of workers’ organizations, in which the level of representation is determined by the number of workers represented by that organization according to institutional records. The Committee recalls that the term “the most representative organizations of employers and workers” as provided for in Article 1 of the Convention “does not mean only the largest organization of employers and the largest organization of workers.” If in a particular country there are two or more organizations of employers or workers which represent a significant body of opinion, even though one of them may be larger than the others, they may all be considered to be “most representative organizations” for the purpose of the Convention. In such cases, governments should endeavour to secure an agreement of all the organizations concerned in establishing the consultative procedures (see 2000 General Survey on tripartite consultations, paragraph 34).

With regard to the procedure for selecting representatives to the CNTS, section 10(1) of the 2015 Ministerial Agreement provides that the Minister of Labour shall convene “the employers’ and workers’ organizations in order that, by means an elector appointed by each of them, the principal and alternate representatives of the CNTS may be elected.” If no agreement is reached, the Minister of Labour calls a second election. In this respect, the Committee notes that, PSI and UNE report that they did not obtain a response from the Government to the nomination they presented for the designation of new representatives of the CNTS in 2018. In this regard, the Government indicates that PSI has not been considered a member of the CNTS, as it does not meet the requirements established for membership. The Committee notes that ASTAC and CEDOCUT denounce the introduction of various legislative reforms in recent years that hinder the holding of tripartite consultations, and in particular the representation of workers’ organizations freely elected by their organizations, on various national tripartite bodies, such as the Board of Directors of the Ecuadorian Social Security Institute (IESS) in which the worker sector has not been represented since May 2018. The Committee also notes that ASTAC and CEDOCUT refer to the "Report on violations of trade union rights" of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), which states that between 2013 and 2015 there was a fall in representation and a de-institutionalization of social dialogue and tripartism. In addition, the same report denounces the emergence of workers’ organizations parallel to the existing ones, and close to the Government. Lastly, the Committee notes that the road map presented by the technical assistance mission carried out in December 2019 proposed, as a central point, the inclusion of all representative trade union organizations in the CNTS. The Committee emphasizes that the participation of all the representative trade unions in the CNTS is a fundamental element for carrying out effective consultations and the application of the Convention in general. In the light of the observations of the workers’ organizations, the Committee requests the Government to adopt the measures necessary to ensure that all the country’s "most representative organizations" of employers and workers can participate in the CNTS and the other consultative bodies of a tripartite nature, such as the Board of Directors of the IESS, pursuant to Recommendation No. 152, Paragraph 5(c). The Committee also requests the Government to adopt the measures necessary to obtain the agreement of all organizations concerned, including workers’ organizations freely elected by their organizations’ members, with the establishment of the consultative procedures regarding the criteria used to determine representativeness among those organizations.

Article 5. Effective tripartite consultations. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government relating to tripartite consultations held on international labour standards between June 2019 and June 2020. The Government indicates that in February 2019 tripartite consultations were held, within the working groups established for this purpose, on comments to formulate on the draft Violence and Harassment Convention, 2019 (No. 190), and draft Violence and Harassment Recommendation, 2019 (No. 206), during the 108th Session of the International Labour Conference. The Government also reports that, based on the support expressed by the social partners on 19 September 2019, a technical report was sent to the Ministry of Foreign Relations and Human Mobility for the adoption of the measures necessary for the ratification of Convention No. 109 and Recommendation No. 206. In addition, the Government reports that various national institutions are participating in the preparation of a report on the potential ratification of the Protocol of 2014 to the Forced Labour Convention. The Government indicates that, once the report has been finalized, it will be sent to the National Assembly and other national bodies for discussion on potential ratification of the Protocol. The Committee notes, however, that the Government has not indicated whether there are plans to hold tripartite consultations relating to the potential ratification of the Protocol. With regard to the consultations held on reports on ratified Conventions, the Government indicates that once these reports are sent to the Office, they are brought to the attention of the employers’ and workers’ organizations, through the representatives of these sectors on the CNTS. In this respect, the Committee draws the Government’s attention to the fact that “in order to be ‘effective’, consultations must take place before final decisions are taken, irrespective of the nature or form of the procedures adopted… The effectiveness of consultations thus presupposes in practice that employers’ and workers’ representatives have all the necessary information far enough in advance to formulate their own opinions” (see the 2000 General Survey on tripartite consultation, paragraph 31).

The Committee notes, however, that UNE and PSI maintain that they were not consulted with regard to international labour standards or the Government’s request for technical assistance from the Office for the reform of the Labour Code, or other labour law reforms introduced within the CNTS. The Government indicates that during 2019 it held dialogues with workers’ organizations about the proposed labour reforms and their benefits. In addition, in its 2020 supplementary report, the Government states that on 25 May 2020, it held a meeting with various public sector workers’ organizations affiliated with PSI, at which matters such as the visit of the ILO technical mission to the country and the ratification process of Convention No. 190 were addressed. The Government reports tripartite consultations held throughout 2019 within the CNTS relating to the review and adoption of labour reforms and wage determination for 2020. It also refers to the establishment, under Ministerial Agreement No. MDT-2018-0008, of four standing social dialogue working groups, including the standing public sector working group. The Government indicates that, on 15 June 2018, PSI requested to participate in the public sector working group, which the Government acknowledged via official letter No. MDT-MDT-2018-0535 of 18 July 2018. The Committee requests the Government to continue providing up-to-date information indicating the specific content and the outcome of the tripartite consultations held on all issues relating to international labour standards covered by Article 5(1)(a) to (e) of the Convention. Furthermore, in the light of the observations of UNE and PSI, the Committee requests the Government to send detailed information on the manner in which it is ensured that all the most representative organizations participate in those consultations. The Committee also requests the Government to provide information on the consultations held with the social actors on ways to improve the functioning of the procedures required under the Convention, including the possibility of establishing a schedule for the preparation of reports far enough in advance to enable the social partners to formulate their contributions in this respect (Article 5(1)(d)).

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

The Committee notes the joint observations from Public Services International (PSI) and the National Federation of Education Workers (UNE) received on 1 September 2016. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments in this respect.

Articles 2 and 5 of the Convention. Effective tripartite consultations. The Committee notes the reforms of the Labour Code introduced by the Basic Act of 17 April 2015 concerning labour justice and recognition of work within the home, and the adoption of Ministerial Decision No. MDT-2015-0240 of 20 October 2015 establishing regulations for the structure, composition and operation of the National Labour and Wages Council (CNTS). The Government indicates in its report that it will provide information on the meetings held by the CNTS, once they have begun. The PSI and UNE indicate that they are not recognized as representative organizations of the workers in the public sector. They consider that the Government has opted systematically to disregard workers’ organizations that might be an obstacle to the implementation of its reforms but has intervened directly in the establishment of organizations that give legitimacy to its actions. The PSI and UNE claim that the Government has not held effective consultations with them and has not replied to the various proposals put forward concerning the creation of a forum for bipartite dialogue for the public sector incorporated in what was previously the National Labour Council. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the consultations held to establish procedures which ensure effective tripartite consultations (Article 2(2)) and to send its comments on the observations made by PSI and UNE. The Committee also requests the Government to provide information on the consultations held on replies to questionnaires concerning items on the agenda of the International Labour Conference (Article 5(1)(a)), the proposals made to the National Assembly in connection with the submission of instruments adopted by the Conference (Article 5(1)(b)), and the preparation of reports on the application of ratified Conventions (Article 5(1)(d)). The Committee further requests the Government to indicate whether tripartite consultations have been considered for the re-examination of unratified Conventions and Recommendations to which effect has not yet been given (Article 5(1)(c)). The Government is also requested to indicate the intervals at which the abovementioned consultations are held, whether they take place through meetings or only by means of written communications, and any recommendations made by the social partners in response thereto.

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

Article 5 of the Convention. Effective tripartite consultations. The Committee notes that the Government indicates in its report received in May 2014 that the tripartite consultations required by the Convention continue to be undertaken by means of written communications to the social partners. It also indicates that there have been meetings of sectoral committees, set up in accordance with the Basic Act on Citizens’ Participation, in which tripartite dialogue on issues related to labour policy is conducted. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the tripartite consultations held in relation to each of the matters relating to international labour standards covered in Article 5(1) of the Convention. The Government is also requested to indicate the frequency of such consultations and any recommendations made by the social partners as a result of them.

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

The Committee notes that the Government’s report has not been received. It hopes that a report will be supplied for examination by the Committee at its next session and that it will contain full information on the matters raised in its 2011 direct request, which read as follows:

Repetition

Articles 2 and 5 of the Convention. Strengthening of social dialogue and tripartite consultations. The Committee notes the Government’s report for the period ending September 2011. With reference to its previous comments, the Government indicates that consultations are held and communications sent in writing, as indicated in Paragraph 3(d) of Recommendation No. 152, which indicates that consultations may be undertaken through written communications, where those involved in the consultation procedures are agreed that such communications are appropriate and sufficient. The Government enumerates in its report the matters covered by written communications sent to the social partners during the course of 2009. The Committee also notes that the Ministry of Labour Relations is proposing to implement a project to strengthen social dialogue within the context of the National Labour Council. The Committee invites the Government to provide further information in its next report on the consultations held in relation to each of the matters covered in Article 5(1) of the Convention, with an indication of the content of the recommendations made by the social partners as a result of such consultations. In addition, the Government may indicate whether the National Labour Council undertakes activities related to the tripartite consultations on international labour standards required by the Convention.

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

Articles 2 and 5 of the Convention. Strengthening of social dialogue and tripartite consultations. The Committee notes the Government’s report for the period ending September 2011. With reference to its previous comments, the Government indicates that consultations are held and communications sent in writing, as indicated in Paragraph 3(d) of Recommendation No. 152, which indicates that consultations may be undertaken through written communications, where those involved in the consultation procedures are agreed that such communications are appropriate and sufficient. The Government enumerates in its report the matters covered by written communications sent to the social partners during the course of 2009. The Committee also notes that the Ministry of Labour Relations is proposing to implement a project to strengthen social dialogue within the context of the National Labour Council. The Committee invites the Government to provide further information in its next report on the consultations held in relation to each of the matters covered in Article 5(1) of the Convention, with an indication of the content of the recommendations made by the social partners as a result of such consultations. In addition, the Government may indicate whether the National Labour Council undertakes activities related to the tripartite consultations on international labour standards required by the Convention.

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

Articles 2 and 5 of the Convention. Strengthening social dialogue and tripartite consultations. The Committee notes the Government’s reply for the period ending September 2010, and the response communicated by the International Organisation of Employers, in response to the previous direct request. The Government indicates that constitutional mandate No. 8, adopted in May 2008, had the objective to eliminate precarious forms of work and labour exploitation, such as outsourcing, employment provided through intermediaries and contracting on an hourly basis. In addition, the constitutional mandate strengthens the arrangement of the Ministry of Labour Relations. The Government declares that it is in constant dialogue with both employers and workers. The Committee invites the Government to provide detailed information on measures adopted to strengthen tripartism and social dialogue and to ensure effective tripartite consultations required regarding matters covered by the Convention.

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

Articles 2 and 5 of the Convention. Strengthening social dialogue and tripartite consultation. The Committee notes the Government’s report for the period ending September 2009. The Government states that there have been written consultations. The Government sends copies of communications to production associations and trade union federations. In a communication sent by the ILO to the Government in September 2009, the International Organisation of Employers (IOE) states that despite the great interest shown by Ecuadorian employers in strengthening relations and collaboration with the Government, real social dialogue and tripartite consultation as meant in the Tripartite Consultation (International Labour Standards) Convention, 1976 (No. 144), and the Tripartite Consultation (Activities of the International Labour Organisation) Recommendation, 1976 (No. 152), do not exist. In particular, the IOE refers to the adoption in May 2008 of Constitutional Mandate No. 8, which led to the elimination of subcontracting, labour intermediation and hiring by the hour. The IOE states that the most representative organizations of employers expressed reservations about the adoption of these provisions, on the grounds that the decisions were taken directly and unilaterally without consideration of all the parties’ comments. In view of the issues raised by the IOE, the Committee invites the Government to provide information on the measures adopted to strengthen tripartism and social dialogue on the subjects covered by the Convention.

[The Government is asked to reply in detail to the present comments in 2010.]

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

The Committee notes the detailed report provided by the Government for the period ending May 2001 and requests the Government to continue providing information in future reports on the consultations held in relation to Article 5 of the Convention, their frequency and, where appropriate, the nature of the resulting reports or recommendations.

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

The Committee notes with interest the Government's report for the period ending in May 1999. It notes in particular the detailed information on the consultations held on each of the subjects listed in Article 5, paragraph 1, of the Convention, which reflects the Government's efforts to ensure that the Convention is fully applied. It asks the Government to continue to keep it informed of such consultations in its future reports.

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

The Committee notes the Government's report for the period ending September 1997. The Committee notes that this report reiterates the comments made in the previous report without replying to the Committee's comments. The Committee recalls that it had expressed the firm hope the Government would intensify its efforts to ensure that effective consultations are held, as laid down in Article 2 of the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to take the necessary action to this effect in the very near future and trusts that, in its next report, it will provide information on consultations conducted with respect to the matters set out in Article 5, paragraph 1, of the Convention.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1995, published 82nd ILC session (1995)

1. The Committee notes the Government's report. It also notes the observations on the application of the Convention sent by the Ecuadorian Central of Class Organizations (CEDOC), as well as the Government's comments on them. The CEDOC alleges that the Government holds tripartite consultations only very rarely. It also asserts that the Government has not sought information from the workers' organizations concerning the items on the agenda of the 1995 Session of the International Labour Conference. With its report the Government sent a copy of the various communications sent to the employers' and workers' organizations (including the CEDOC, e.g. "Oficio" No. 146-94 of 16 August 1994 concerning an item on the Conference agenda), but states that it has received no comment in response. The Committee observes that consultations which the Government carries out by written communication may well be ineffective, contrary to what is requested by Article 2 of the Convention. In this connection the Committee recalls that in its previous comments it expressed the hope that the Government would be in a position to organize such consultations in the near future and that it would provide full information and details on consultations held concerning each of the items set out in Article 5, paragraph 1. It trusts that in the next report the Government will indicate the frequency of such consultations and the nature of reports and recommendations resulting from them.

2. With reference to its previous comments, the Committee notes that, since for the time being no international instruments have been submitted and that no unratified Conventions have been re-examined with a view to their ratification, there have been no consultations on these matters. The Committee recalls that the re-examination at appropriate intervals of unratified Conventions and Recommendations to which effect has not yet been given, to consider what measures might be taken to promote their implementation and ratification as appropriate, is required under Article 5, paragraph 1(c), of the Convention. The Committee trusts that the Government's next report will contain details of the measures taken to hold the consultations required by this provision of the Convention. Furthermore, the Committee has also recalled that the obligation to hold consultations, established in Article 5, paragraph 1(d), does not stop at simply transmitting the reports on ratified Conventions to the representative organizations. The Committee asks the Government to indicate the procedures for the consultations held on matters that might arise out of its reports.

3. The Committee notes that in the Government's plan of action "Agenda for Development 1993-96", dialogue and cooperation in the field of labour are to be encouraged. The Government states that a plan for technical cooperation in the field of labour is being prepared and will be implemented by the Ministry of Labour with technical and economic support from the ILO and the UNDP. The Committee notes with interest that the above plan's objectives include institutionalizing certain bodies involved in the dialogue on social and labour matters which concern the activities referred to in Article 5 of the Convention. The Committee trusts that in its next report the Government will indicate the action undertaken in the context of the above-mentioned assistance.

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

The Committee notes the Government's report and the indications provided with reference to the previous comments.

1. The Committee recalls that in its previous comments, referring to the observations made by a workers' organization, it noted that the consultations carried out in writing could be effective and expressed its confidence that the Government would be able to organize, in the near future, consultations which would be "effective" within the meaning of Article 2 of the Convention. The Government states that the Convention cannot make the Government responsible for the negligence and lack of interest shown by the organizations consulted which did not reply to consultations conducted in writing; the problem is not the form in which the consultation is carried out but the attitude of the participants in the procedures on this topic. The Committee notes the above, expressing its firm hope that the Government's efforts will be redoubled to ensure that the effective consultations required by the Convention take place to the satisfaction of all. It would be grateful if the Government would include in its next detailed report on the application of the Convention the information required in respect of consultations conducted on each of the points set out in Article 5, paragraph 1, in particular regarding the consultations at appropriate intervals on the re-examination of unratified Conventions and of Recommendations to which effect has not yet been given (paragraph 1(c)), and on questions which may arise out of reports to be made to the International Labour Office under article 22 of the ILO Constitution (paragraph 1(d)).

2. The Government indicates that the technical cooperation project on the promotion of dialogue and social consultation is still under discussion. The Committee requests the Government, as it does in relation to the application of other Conventions (see for example the observation on Convention No. 122), to supply indications on the progress made in this matter.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1994, published 81st ILC session (1994)

The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government in reply to its previous comments. It understands that the Government, which is undertaking consultations in writing, has only sought the opinion of the organizations of employers and workers on the matter set out in subparagraph 1(a) of Article 5 of the Convention (items included on the agenda of the International Labour Conference).

The Committee wishes to point out that the information supplied by the Government does not demonstrate that "effective" consultations, in the sense of the Convention (Article 2), are held on a regular basis.

The Committee trusts that the Government will be in a position to organize such consultations in the near future and that it will be able to supply full and detailed information on the consultations held during the period covered by the next report on each of the matters set out in Article 5, paragraph 1, and in particular on that covered by subparagraph 1 (c) (the re-examination of unratified Conventions), which was raised in its previous direct request (the Committee refers in this respect to its previous comment).

Please indicate the frequency of such consultations and the nature of any reports or recommendations made as a result of the consultations.

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

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

The Committee notes that the Government continues to encounter serious difficulties in the application of this Convention owing to economic circumstances. The Committee notes further the remarks of the Government in its report that practical circumstances, including the inability to initiate a dialogue between representatives of the Government and of organizations of employers and workers, impedes the ability of the Government to comply with its obligations under the Convention and, most notably, its obligation to hold the consultations required under Article 5, paragraph 1(c). The information supplied by the Government indicates that, in fact, such consultations have not taken place.

The Committee would like once again to point out that the above provision is intended to establish a continuous process under which non-ratified Conventions and Recommendations are reviewed at least once a year. The Committee again observes that where a programme is established over a certain period of time, representatives of the Government and of organizations of employers and workers have the possibility systematically of examining, in light of the changes which have occurred in national legislation and practice, those instruments which may be of interest for the country.

The Committee trusts that those circumstances invoked by the Government in its report will not, in future, prevent the holding of "effective" consultations provided for under Article 2 of the Convention.

The Committee, therefore, requests the Government to supply full and detailed information on the consultations that take place during the period covered by the next report on each of the matters set out in Article 5, paragraph 1, of the Convention and, in particular, with regard to subparagraph (c) of that paragraph.

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

The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government in response to its previous direct request. It notes that the Government continues to encounter serious difficulties in the application of this Convention owing to economic circumstances. The Committee notes further the remarks of the Government in its report that practical circumstances, including the inability to initiate a dialogue between representatives of the Government and of organisations of employers and workers, impedes the ability of the Government to comply with its obligations under the Convention and, most notably, its obligation to hold the consultations required under Article 5, paragraph 1(c). The information supplied by the Government indicates that, in fact, such consultations have not taken place.

The Committee would like once again to point out that the above provision is intended to establish a continuous process under which non-ratified Conventions and Recommendations are reviewed at least once a year. The Committee again observes that where a programme is established over a certain period of time, representatives of the Government and of organisations of employers and workers have the possibility systematically of examining, in light of the changes which have occurred in national legislation and practice, those instruments which may be of interest for the country.

The Committee trusts that those circumstances invoked by the Government in its present report will not, in future, prevent the holding of "effective" consultations provided for under Article 2 of the Convention.

The Committee, therefore, requests the Government to supply full and detailed information on the consultations that take place during the period covered by the next report on each of the matters set out in Article 5, paragraph 1, of the Convention and, in particular, with regard to point (c) of that paragraph.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 1989, published 76th ILC session (1989)

The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government concerning Article 4, paragraph 2, and Article 6 of the Convention. It requests the Government to supply information on any further developments respecting the practical implementation of these two provisions.

The Committee also notes the comments made on the Government's previous report by the Ecuador Central of Working Class Organisations, which indicates in particular, that the Government cannot free itself from the obligation to hold the consultations required under Article 5, paragraph 1(c), by invoking the "economic circumstances of the Ministry and the country". The information supplied by the Government in its last report, in reply to the comments of the trade union, show that, for the same reasons, these consultations have still not taken place.

The Committee points out that the above provision is intended to establish a continuous process of re-examination of non-ratified Conventions and Recommendations at least once a year (Article 5, paragraph 2). According to a programme established over a certain period of time, this therefore involves the possibility of re-examining systematically, in the light of the changes that have occurred in national legislation and practice, the instruments that may be of interest for the country. The Committee trusts that the "economic circumstances" invoked by the Government will not in future prevent the consultations provided for in the Convention.

The Committee requests the Government to supply full and detailed information on the consultations that take place during the period covered by the next report on each of the matters set out in Article 5, paragraph 1, and, in particular, with regard to point (c) of that provision.