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

Previous comments: C.1, C.14, C.30 and C.106

In order to provide a comprehensive view of the issues relating to the application of the ratified Conventions on working time, the Committee considers it appropriate to examine Conventions Nos 1 (hours of work in industry), 30 (hours of work in commerce and offices) 14 (weekly rest in industry), 106 (weekly rest in commerce and offices), 52 (holidays with pay),101 (holidays with pay in agriculture) and 89 (night work for women) in a single comment.

Hours of work

Articles 6(1) of Convention No. 1 and 7(1) of Convention No. 30. Permanent exceptions. Intermittent work. In its previous comment on Convention No. 30, the Committee noted that section 1 of Ministerial Order No.115 of 2003 determines the works that are considered intermittent by nature, by enumerating a broad range of activities (including transportation, rest houses, storekeepers, farm crops, vegetable, fruits, and fish wholesale) in which workers may be required to stay at the workplace more than ten but less than 12 hours a day, recalling that inherently “intermittent work” for which permanent exceptions to the normal hours of work are possible, should be defined narrowly (General Survey of 2018, paragraph 94). Noting that the Government’s report does not refer to any legislative or regulatory development on this matter, the Committee requests the Government to take appropriate action to ensure that the categories of workers subject to permanent exceptions to the normal hours of work be strictly limited to those whose duties are essentially within the meaning of “intermittent workers” under the Convention.

Articles 6(2) of Convention No. 1 and 7(3) of Convention No. 30. Temporary exceptions. Limits to overtime. In its previous comment on Convention No. 30, the Committee requested the Government to specify which legal provisions set out the maximum number of additional hours of work in a year. In its report, the Government referred to Ministerial Order No.115 of 2003 and Ministerial Order No. 113 of 2003, both setting out a maximum of twelve hours a day. The Committee recalls that the Conventions require the imposition of a limit on the additional hours of work that are authorized, not only in the day, but also in the year, and for these additional hours to be kept within reasonable limits in line with the general goal of the instruments to establish the eight-hour day and the 48-hour week as a legal standard for hours of work (General Survey of 2018, paragraph 148). The Committee therefore requests the Government to take appropriate action to impose a limit on the additional hours of work that are authorized in the year.

Articles 8 of Convention No. 1 and 11 and 12 of Convention No. 30. 1. Records. In its previous comment on Convention No. 30, the Committee requested the Government to indicate whether employers are required to maintain records of additional hours of work performed. In its report, the Government refers to the manual of procedures of the Labour Inspection Department and to section 45 of the Labour Code providing that workers sign a register to receive their wage which includes the items of the wage. While taking note of this information, the Committee requests the Government to specify whether any, and if so which, specific provisions of the legislation impose an obligation on employers to record the workers’ additional hours.

2. Sanctions. The Committee notes that section 249 of the Labour Code provides for a fine in case of the employer’s violations of the provisions on hours of work of not less than a hundred Egyptian pounds (EGP) and not exceeding two hundred EGP. With reference to its General Survey of 2018 (paragraph 871), the Committee encourages the Government to evaluate whether these sanctions are proportionate to the offences and sufficiently dissuasive to deter violations.

Weekly rest

Articles 4 of Convention No. 14 and 7 and 8 of Convention No. 106. Special weekly rest schemes. Following its previous comment on Convention No. 106, the Committee notes that the Government does not report on the possibility of amending section 84 of the Labour Code which permits the accumulation of weekly rest days over a period of eight weeks in enterprises located in remote areas as well as in continuous processes. Recalling that workers under special weekly rest schemes should not work without rest for more than three weeks (see Paragraph 3(a) of the Weekly Rest (Commerce and Offices) Recommendation, 1957 (No. 103)), the Committee requests the Government to take appropriate action, including through the amendment of section 84 of the Labour Code, to ensure that rest periods are granted at reasonably short intervals.

Article 10(2) of Convention No. 106. Sanctions. The Committee notes that section 249 of the Labour Code provides for a fine in case of employer’s violation of the provisions on weekly rest of not less than a hundred EGP and not exceeding two hundred EGP. With reference to its General Survey of 2018 (paragraph 871), the Committee encourages the Government to evaluate whether these sanctions are proportionate to the offences and sufficiently dissuasive to deter violations.

Annual leave

Articles 3 of Convention No. 52, and 7 of Convention No. 101. Holiday remuneration. The Committee recalls that the Conventions provide for the possibility that workers taking holiday receive their usual remuneration including the cash equivalent to their remuneration in kind. Noting that the Labour Code is silent on this issue, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on whether the legislation provides for the possibility that workers taking holiday receive the cash equivalent to their remuneration in kind.

Articles 7 and 8 of Convention No. 52 and 10 of Convention 101. Sanctions. The Committee notes that section 247 and 249 of the Labour Code provide for a fine of not less than a hundred EGP and not exceeding five hundred EGP if the employer fails to grant annual leave, and for a fine of not less than a hundred EGP and not exceeding two hundred EGP if the employer fails to comply with the rules related to record-keeping. In reference to its General Survey of 2018 (paragraph 871), the Committee encourages the Government to evaluate whether these sanctions are proportionate to the offences and sufficiently dissuasive to deter violations.

Women ’ s night work

Articles 2 and 3 of Convention No. 89. General prohibition against women’s night work in industrial undertakings. The Committee welcomes the adoption of Decree No. 43 of 2021 on occupations in which women cannot be employed that revised Ministerial Decree No. 183 of 2003 on the employment of women on night shifts so as to allow night work for women (section 1) and the adoption of Decree No. 44 of 2021 regarding women’s night work shifts that provides for alternatives to night work for women after and before childbirth to protect the health of the mother and the child. Noting that the country is still bound by the Night Work (Women) (Revised) Convention, 1948 (No. 89), and recalling that this Convention will be open for denunciation between 27 February 2031 and 27 February 2032, the Committee draws the Government’s attention to the Night Work Convention, 1990 (No. 171), which is not devised as a gender-specific instrument but focuses on the protection of all those working at night (2018 General Survey on Working Time, paragraph 408).

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

Articles 6(1) and 8(1) of the Convention. Intermittent work – Record keeping of additional hours. The Committee requests the Government to refer to the comments under Articles 7 and 11 of the Hours of Work (Commerce and Offices) Convention, 1930 (No. 30).

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

Article 7(1) of the Convention. Permanent exceptions – Intermittent work. The Committee notes that according to section 1 of Decree No. 115, determining the works that are intermittent by their nature, intermittent workers may be required to stay at the workplace more than ten but less than 12 hours a day. In this connection, the Committee wishes to recall that “intermittent work” is to be defined narrowly to mean work which is interrupted by long periods of inaction, during which the workers concerned have to display neither physical activity nor sustained attention, and remain at their post only to reply to possible calls (for instance doorkeepers and security guards). The Committee also recalls that it has been commenting on this point for more than 40 years and that the Government has given assurances in the past that the relevant legislation would be amended. The Committee accordingly requests the Government to consider taking appropriate action without delay in order to ensure that the workers in question may not be requested to be present at the workplace outside their normal hours of work and that the categories of workers listed in Decree No. 115 of 2003 be strictly limited to those whose duties are essentially intermittent within the meaning of the Convention.

Article 7(3). Temporary exceptions – Annual limit of authorized overtime. Further to its previous comment, the Committee notes the Government’s reply that intermittent workers such as doorkeepers and guards are seasonal workers whose work ends when work is completed. The Government further indicates that Decree No. 115 of 2003 regulates the occupations and tasks which are intermittent by their nature, while Decree No. 113 of 2003 regulates preparatory and complementary work which needs to be finished by workers before or after the end of work. When they work additional hours of work, they are entitled to overtime wages pending on agreement between worker and employer, in accordance with section 85 of the Labour Code. In this regard, the Committee wishes to refer to paragraph 144 of the 2005 General Survey on Conventions Nos 1 and 30 which emphasize that even though the establishment of specific limits to the total number of additional hours is left to the competent authorities, this does not mean that such authorities have unlimited discretion in this regard. Taking into account the spirit of the Conventions and in the light of the preparatory work, it is appropriate to conclude that such limits must be “reasonable” and they must be prescribed in line with the general goal of the instruments, namely to establish the eight-hour day and 48 hour week as a legal standard of hours of work in order to provide protection against undue fatigue and to ensure reasonable leisure and opportunities for recreation and social life. The Committee accordingly requests the Government to specify the legal provision, if any, which sets the maximum number of additional hours of work that may be allowed in the year, as required under this Article of the Convention.

Article 11(2). Record-keeping of overtime hours. The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether employers are required to maintain records of all additional hours of work performed in their establishments, as prescribed by this Article of the Convention, and if so, to specify the relevant legal provision.

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

Articles 4 and 5 of the Convention. Total or partial exceptions. The Committee requests the Government to refer to the comments made under Article 7 of the Weekly Rest (Commerce and Offices) Convention, 1957 (No. 106).

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

Article 7 of the Convention. Special weekly rest schemes. The Committee recalls its previous comment concerning section 84 of the Labour Code, which permits the accumulation of weekly rest days over a period of eight weeks in enterprises located in remote areas as well as in continuous processes. The Committee recalled, in this respect, the importance of rest periods being granted in reasonably short intervals when they cannot be granted weekly, and referred to Paragraph 3(a) of the Weekly Rest (Commerce and Offices) Recommendation, 1957 (No. 103), which indicates that persons to whom special weekly rest schemes apply should not work for more than three weeks without receiving the rest periods to which they are entitled. While noting the Government’s indication that the accumulation of weekly rest days is restricted to exceptional circumstances or extraordinary work needs, the Committee requests the Government to re-examine the appropriateness of authorizing the deferral or accumulation of weekly rest entitlement for two months and to consider the possibility of amending the relevant provisions of the Labour Code accordingly.

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

The Committee notes the information contained in the Government’s report, in particular the adoption of the new Labour Law (Act No. 12 of 2003) and its implementing regulations, namely, Decree No. 113 of 2003 determining the preparatory and complementary works and the guard and cleaning works; Decree No. 115 of 2003 determining the works that are intermittent by their nature; Decree No. 122 determining continuous processes and hard and exhausting works; Decree No. 970 of 2003 concerning the establishment of the Labour Consultative Council; and Decree No. 185 of 2003 concerning the model statute of sanctions and work regulations.

Article 1 of the Convention. Scope of application. Public servants. The Committee notes that section 4 of the Labour Law exempts public servants of government agencies, including local government units, from the scope of its application. While recalling that the Convention applies to persons employed in the establishments enumerated in its Article 1, both public and private, and also recalling the Government’s indication in one of its early reports that orders issued by each ministry regulate the working hours of employees engaged in the government agencies (six hours a day and 36 hours a week), the Committee would appreciate if the Government would specify the legal instruments currently in force regulating working hours of public servants, and transmit copies of any relevant text which may not have been previously communicated to the Office.

Article 7, paragraph 1. Permanent exceptions. Intermittent work. The Committee notes that, under section 62 of the Labour Law, workers engaged in works intermittent by nature are exempted from the ordinary limits on hours of work provided that their period of stay at the workplace does not exceed 12 hours a day. It also notes that Decree No. 115 of 2003 defines works that are intermittent by their nature to include, among others, such general categories of work as all road, rail and air transport, storekeeping and work in pharmacies. In this connection, the Committee wishes to refer to paragraph 126 of its General Survey of 2005 on hours of work, in which it noted that the “expression ‘inherently intermittent work’ means work which is not concerned with production properly called, and which, by its nature, is interrupted by long periods of inaction, during which the respective workers have to display neither physical activity nor sustained attention, and remain at their post only to reply to possible calls” (for instance doorkeepers, guards and firefighters). It accordingly requests the Government to consider taking appropriate action in order to ensure that the workers in question may not be requested to be present at the workplace outside their normal hours of work and that the categories of workers listed in Decree No. 115 of 2003 be strictly limited to those whose duties are essentially intermittent within the meaning of the Convention.

Article 7, paragraph 2. Temporary exceptions. The Committee notes that, under section 85 of the Labour Law, the normal limits on hours of work do not apply in cases of unusual work exigencies or exceptional conditions, subject to prior authorization of the administrative authorities. The Committee considers that this provision – contrary to section 139 of the previous Labour Law of 1981 – is worded in such broad terms that it risks to go beyond what is permitted under this Article of the Convention, that is temporary exceptions only in cases of: (i) accident, force majeure or urgent work; (ii) risk of loss of perishable goods; (iii) special work such as stocktaking; and (iv) abnormal work pressure due to special circumstances. The Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate how it is ensured in law and practice that temporary exceptions authorized under section 85 of the Labour Law remain limited to the specific circumstances set out in this Article of the Convention.

Article 7, paragraph 3. Regulations on exceptions. Annual limit of authorized overtime. Concerning temporary exceptions from the basic standard of eight hours per day and 48 hours per week, the Committee notes that section 85 of the Labour Law provides that, in all cases of overtime, the actual working hours may not exceed ten hours per day. Recalling that the Convention requires that regulations made by public authorities after consultations with employers’ and workers’ organizations determine also the number of additional hours of work which may be allowed in the year, the Committee requests the Government to explain how the Convention is given effect in this regard.

Article 11, paragraph 2(c). Record-keeping of additional hours. The Committee notes that section 77 of the Labour Law provides for a file to be established and maintained by employers for each of their employees, which must contain the data on the worker’s name, profession, skill level at commencement of the work, home address, social status, the date of the start of service, wage, a statement of the developments made, sanctions imposed, leaves taken, and the date and reasons for the termination of employment. It requests the Government to clarify whether the file provided for in section 77 of the Labour Law must also contain the information on overtime performed by each worker, as required under this Article of the Convention and, if so, to provide a specimen copy of that form.

Part V of the report form. Application in practice. The Committee notes the statistical data provided by the Government concerning inspection results for the first semester of 2008, according to which 1,337 inspection visits were carried out covering 27,969 establishments and 76,238 workers, 389 warnings were issued and 698 contraventions of the working time legislation were recorded. It would be grateful if the Government would continue providing up to date information on the practical application of the Convention, including, for instance, the approximate number of workers covered by the relevant legislation, labour inspection results showing the number and nature of working time-related offences observed and sanctions imposed, copies of collective agreements containing clauses on working time arrangements, official surveys and studies addressing working time issues, etc.

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

The Committee notes the information contained in the Government’s report, in particular the adoption of the new Labour Law (Act No. 12 of 2003) and its implementing regulations, namely, Decree No. 113 of 2003 determining the preparatory and complementary works and the guard and cleaning works; Decree No. 115 of 2003 determining the works that are intermittent by their nature; Decree No. 122 determining continuous processes and hard and exhausting works; Decree No. 970 of 2003 concerning the establishment of the Labour Consultative Council; and Decree No. 185 of 2003 concerning the model statute of sanctions and work regulations.

Article 6, paragraph 1, of the Convention. Permanent exceptions. Intermittent work. The Committee notes that Decree No. 115 of 2003 includes such general categories of work as all road, rail and air transport, work in ports, storekeeping and work in pharmacies among activities considered to be intermittent within the meaning of section 82 of the Labour Law, which exempts workers engaged in intermittent work from the normal limits on hours of work, provided that their period of stay at the workplace does not exceed 12 hours a day. In this connection, the Committee wishes to emphasize that Article 6(1) of the Convention, which provides for permanent exceptions in cases where attendance at the workplace must necessarily exceed the normal hours of work prescribed by the Convention, allows such exceptions only in relation to persons whose work is essentially intermittent. Therefore, exempting all transport, port or pharmaceuticals workers for the sector they belong to is not in conformity with this Article of the Convention.

The Committee recalls that the question whether all road and rail transport operations could possibly qualify as “intermittent work” has been raised practically since the ratification of the Convention and the Government has indicated on a few instances, last in 1980, that it intended to amend the relevant legislation so as to narrow the exceptions to the normal hours of work to those activities which are genuinely intermittent in nature. The Committee hopes that the Government will take all the necessary measures without further delay in order to bring the national legislation into conformity with the Convention on this point by amending relevant provisions of Decree No. 115 of 2003.

Article 8, paragraph 1(c). Record-keeping of additional hours. The Committee requests the Government to refer to the comments made under Article 11(2)(c) of Convention No. 30.

Part VI of the report form. Application in practice. The Committee requests the Government to provide up to date information on the practical application of the Convention, including, for instance, the approximate number of workers employed at industrial undertakings, labour inspection results showing the number and nature of working time-related offences observed and sanctions imposed, copies of collective agreements containing clauses on working time arrangements, official surveys and studies addressing working time issues, etc.

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

Articles 4 and 5 of the Convention. Total or partial exceptions. The Committee requests the Government to refer to the comments made under Articles 7 and 8 of Convention No. 106.

Article 6. List of exceptions. The Committee would appreciate receiving a comprehensive list of all authorized exceptions from the normal weekly rest scheme, as required under this Article of the Convention.

Part V of the report form. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide in its next report documented information on the practical application of the Convention, including, for instance, statistics on the approximate number of workers covered by the relevant legislation, labour inspection results specifically showing the number of contraventions observed concerning weekly rest and sanctions imposed, copies of collective agreements containing provisions on weekly rest, etc.

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

The Committee notes that sections 47–53 of the new Labour Code, Act No. 12 of 2003, essentially reproduce sections 43–49 of the previous Labour Code, Act No. 137 of 1981, providing for a period of 21 days of annual paid leave that may be increased to 30 days for workers with ten or more years of service and workers over 50 years of age.

Article 7 of the Convention. Records. The Committee notes that section 77 of the Labour Code requires the employer to establish a file for each worker containing, among other information, the date of entry into service and an indication of all leaves obtained. The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether there is a standard form for maintaining such record, as required by this Article of the Convention and, if so, to transmit a specimen copy of that form.

Article 8. Sanctions. The Committee notes that sections 247 and 249 of the Labour Code prescribe a fine of between 100 Egypt Pounds (EGP) and EGP500 (approximately US$18 and US$90) for failure to grant annual leave, and a fine of between EGP100 and EGP200 for infringement of the rules related to record-keeping. Recalling that monetary sanctions must be established and periodically readjusted at a level that is truly dissuasive and effective in preventing infringements of the relevant legislation, the Committee requests the Government to clarify whether the current level of fines provided for in the Labour Code is considered adequate to ensure compliance with the national legislation in respect of annual leave.

Part V of the report form. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide together with its next report up to date information on the practical application of the Convention, including, for instance, statistics on the number of workers covered by the relevant legislation, labour inspection results showing the number of offences observed and penalties imposed in connection with workers’ annual leave entitlement, copies of any collective agreements containing provisions on annual leave, etc.

Finally, the Committee takes this opportunity to recall that, based on the conclusions and proposals of the Working Party on Policy regarding the Revision of Standards, the ILO Governing Body has decided that Convention No. 52 is an outdated instrument and consequently States parties to this Convention should be invited to denounce it and ratify at the same time the more recent Holidays with Pay Convention (Revised), 1970 (No. 132), (see GB.283/LILS/WP/PRS/1/2, paragraph 12). The acceptance of the obligations of Convention No. 132 in respect of employed persons in economic sectors other than agriculture by a State party to Convention No. 52 involves the immediate denunciation of the latter. The ratification of Convention No. 132 appears to be all the more appropriate as the legislation of Egypt, which provides for paid annual leave of 21 days, is clearly more favourable than the requirements of Convention No. 52. The Committee requests the Government to keep the Office informed of any decision taken or envisaged concerning the possible ratification of Convention No. 132.

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

Article 3 of the Convention. General prohibition of night work for women. Further to its previous comment, the Committee notes the Government’s reference to Ministerial Order No. 183 of 2003 which was issued in accordance with section 89 of the Labour Code and which determines the type of work and conditions in which employment of women is prohibited between 7 p.m. and 7 a.m. According to the information provided by the Government, the Order provides that women may not be employed at any industrial undertaking, or at any of its branches, in the interval from 7 p.m. to 7 a.m. (section 1), except in cases of force majeure or work necessary to protect raw materials (section 4), while its provisions do not apply to women occupying responsible positions of a managerial or technical character (section 5). As the text of Ministerial Order No. 183 of 2003 is not available to the Office, the Committee requests the Government to transmit a copy.

While noting that the national legislation appears to be in substantial conformity with the requirements of the Convention, the Committee wishes to draw the Government’s attention to the fact that general protective measures for women workers, such as blanket prohibitions or restrictions – as contrasted to special measures aimed at protecting women’s reproductive and maternal capacity – are increasingly subjected to extensive criticism as obsolete and unnecessary infringements of the fundamental principle of equality of opportunity and treatment between men and women. The Committee is fully aware, however, that the specific needs of each country vary and that the universal acceptance of non-discrimination in employment and occupation as a fundamental human right may in some situations call for a phased approach. It is in this sense that the Committee concluded in paragraph 201 of its General Survey of 2001 on the night work of women in industry that “Convention No. 89, as revised by the 1990 Protocol, retains its relevance for some countries as a means of protecting those women who need protection from the harmful effects and risks of night work in certain industries, while acknowledging the need for flexible and consensual solutions to specific problems and for consistency with modern thinking and principles on maternity protection”. In light of these observations, the Committee invites the Government, in consultation with the social partners, and in particular with women workers, to consider the possibility of modernizing its legislation by ratifying either the 1990 Protocol to Convention No. 89, which opens up the possibility for women to work at night under certain well-specified conditions, or the Night Work Convention, 1990 (No. 171), which applies to all night workers in all branches and occupations. The Committee recalls that the Government may wish to seek the assistance of the Office with a view to better understanding the possibilities and implications of each of these two instruments and revising existing legislation accordingly. Recalling that the Government had indicated in its previous report that both instruments were under consideration, the Committee requests the Government to keep the Office informed of any decision taken or envisaged in this regard.

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

Article 4, paragraph 2, of the Convention. Exclusion from the coverage of the Convention. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that that the Convention does not apply to agricultural wage earners employed on a daily basis and considered to be seasonal or temporary workers. The Government adds that the Convention applies only to large agricultural property, and not to small undertakings, especially after the promulgation of the agricultural reform which divided large land properties. The Committee would appreciate receiving more detailed information on the approximate number of agricultural workers – if possible, expressed as a percentage of the total agricultural workforce – who do not enjoy paid annual leave entitlement. It would also be grateful if the Government would clarify how large and small agricultural undertakings are distinguished in practice, and how it is ensured that seasonal and daily-paid work is limited to small farms, as the Government’s report seems to imply.

Article 7, paragraph 3. Payment of cash equivalent of allowances in kind. Recalling that under this Article of the Convention provision may be made for the payment in respect of holidays of the cash equivalent of any allowances in kind normally received by the worker concerned, the Committee notes that the Labour Code appears to be silent on this point. It would therefore be grateful if the Government would provide additional explanations in this respect. In this connection, the Committee wishes to draw the Government’s attention to the observation made in 2006 with regard to the application of Article 4 of Convention No. 95.

Finally, the Committee takes this opportunity to recall that, based on the conclusions and proposals of the Working Party on Policy regarding the Revision of Standards, the ILO Governing Body has decided that Convention No. 101 is an outdated instrument and consequently States parties to this Convention should be invited to consider ratification of the more recent Holidays with Pay Convention (Revised), 1970 (No. 132) (see GB.283/LILS/WP/PRS/1/2, paragraph 12). The acceptance of the obligations of Convention No. 132 in respect of persons employed in the agricultural sector, by a State party to Convention No. 101 involves the immediate denunciation of this instrument. The Committee therefore requests the Government to favourably consider the possibility of ratifying Convention No. 132 and undertaking any consequential legislative amendments that might be necessary, and to keep the Office informed of any decision taken or envisaged in this regard.

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

Article 7 of the Convention. Special weekly rest schemes. The Committee notes that in reply to its previous comment, the Government states that the provisions of the Labour Code of 2003 relating to permanent exceptions from the weekly rest rules were formulated after consultation with the representative employers’ and workers’ organizations. With regard to section 84 of the Labour Code which permits the accumulation of weekly rest days over a period of eight weeks in enterprises located in remote areas as well as in continuous processes, the Committee recalls that, according to the spirit of the Convention, workers should enjoy a minimum period of rest and leisure at regular weekly, or in any event reasonably short intervals. In this connection, it refers to Paragraph 3 of the Weekly Rest (Commerce and Offices) Recommendation, 1957 (No. 103), which indicates that persons to whom special weekly rest schemes apply should not work for more than three weeks without receiving the rest periods to which they are entitled. The Committee therefore requests the Government to re-examine the appropriateness of granting accumulated weekly rest once every two months and consider the possibility of amending the relevant provision of the Labour Code accordingly.

Article 8. Temporary exemptions. The Committee notes that in reply to its previous comment, the Government states that the provisions of the Labour Code of 2003 relating to temporary exceptions from the weekly rest rules were formulated after consultation with the representative employers’ and workers’ organizations. As regards section 85 of the Labour Code, the Committee notes that temporary exceptions from the normal weekly rest rules may be allowed by reason of some unspecified exceptional conditions. Recalling that the Convention permits temporary exemptions from the basic weekly rest rule only on limited and well-circumscribed grounds (i.e. accident, force majeure, urgent work to premises and equipment, abnormal pressure of work due to special circumstances, and risk of loss of perishable goods), the Committee requests the Government to indicate how it is ensured in law and practice that the application of section 85 of the Labour Code is limited to the strict conditions set out in Article 8(1) of the Convention.

Part V of the report form. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the Convention is applied without difficulty. Recalling, however, that the Government has not provided any information concerning the practical application of the Convention for over 30 years, it would appreciate receiving up to date information in this regard, including, for instance, statistics on the approximate number of workers covered by the relevant legislation, labour inspection results showing the number of contraventions observed concerning weekly rest and sanctions imposed, copies of collective agreements containing provisions on weekly rest, etc.

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

The Committee recalls its previous comments in which it drew the Government’s attention to certain legislative provisions allowing for broader exceptions to the prohibition of night work of women than those permitted under the Convention and called for their amendment. In its reply, the Government refers to the recently enacted Labour Code No. 12 of 2003 and states that, in elaborating the ministerial decisions giving effect to this Code, it will take into account the Committee’s comments. In this connection, the Committee notes that the new Labour Code no longer makes provision for a general prohibition of night work of women but stipulates in section 89 that the competent minister will determine by order the cases in which the employment of women will be prohibited from 7 p.m. to 7 a.m. The Committee further notes with interest the Government’s statement that the ratification of both the Night Work Convention, 1990 (No. 171) and the 1990 Protocol to Convention No. 89 are under consideration. The Committee takes this opportunity to refer to paragraphs 191 to 202 of its General Survey of 2001 on the night work of women in industry, in which it referred to the continued relevance of the instruments on women’s night work and observed that the present trend is no doubt to move away from a blanket ban on women’s night work and to give the social partners at the national level the responsibility for determining the extent of the permitted exemptions. In this respect, the Committee considered that the Protocol of 1990 to Convention No. 89 was designed as a tool for smooth transition from outright prohibition to free access to night employment, especially for those States that wished to offer the possibility of night employment to women workers but felt that some institutional protection should remain in place to avoid exploitative practices and a sudden worsening of the social conditions of women workers. It also suggested that greater efforts should be made by the Office to help those constituents who are still bound by the provisions of Convention No. 89, and who are not yet ready to ratify the new Night Work Convention, 1990 (No. 171), to realize the advantages of modernizing their legislation in line with the provisions of the Protocol. The Committee wishes therefore to draw the Government’s attention to the 1990 Protocol which affords greater flexibility in the application of the Convention while remaining focused on the protection of female workers. The Committee requests the Government to keep it informed of any progress made or decisions taken in this regard. Finally, the Committee would be grateful to the Government for providing in its next report, in accordance with Part V of the report form, all available information concerning the practical application of the Convention including, for instance, extracts from reports of inspection services, statistics on the number of workers covered by relevant legislation, the application of the exceptions allowed under the provisions of the Convention, etc.

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

The Committee refers to its comment made under the Weekly Rest (Commerce and Offices) Convention, 1957 (No. 106).

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

The Committee requests the Government to indicate whether, in conformity with Article 7, paragraph 4, and Article 8, paragraph 2, of the Convention, responsible employers’ and workers’ associations were consulted prior to introducing the provision contained in section 84 into the new Labour Code of 2003, promulgated by Law No. 12 of 2003, which permits an exception from the requirement of a weekly rest day in the course of each period of seven days.

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

Article 8, paragraph 3, of the Convention. The Committee notes with satisfaction that the new Labour Code, promulgated by Law No. 12 of 2003, under section 85, paragraph 3, implements an obligatory compensatory rest period for work performed on a weekly rest day, regardless of any monetary remuneration, a point which the Committee has commented on for many years.

The Committee raises another point in a request addressed directly to the Government.

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

The Committee notes the Government’s report. It also notes that the Government’s report again contains no information on the points that the Committee has been raising in observations for nearly 20 years (since 1983). It is therefore obliged to repeat its previous comments, which read as follows:

In its previous comments the Committee noted that the Labour Code of 1981 does not ensure that compensatory rest is granted to persons working on the weekly rest day, as required by Article 8, paragraph 3, of the Convention, under which compensatory rest must be granted, regardless of any monetary remuneration, when temporary exemptions are made for reasons enumerated in paragraph 1 of the same Article of the Convention. The Committee notes the Government’s information in its report that the tripartite committee entrusted with the preparation of the draft consolidated labour code has been informed of the Committee’s comments so as to take them into consideration. The Committee hopes that the Government will soon be in a position to provide information on the provisions adopted to bring legislation into conformity with the Convention.

The Committee hopes that the Government will make every effort to take the necessary action in the very near future. It requests the Government to provide full details on the points raised in its next report.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2000, published 89th ILC session (2001)

The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government in its reports.

In its previous comments, the Committee had drawn attention to section 2 of the Ministerial Order No. 23 of 7 February 1982, which authorizes women’s work between 8 p.m. and 10 p.m. in spinning and weaving companies and factories in the event that male workers are not available, and had noted that such exception is not consistent with the provisions of the Convention. In its reply, the Government indicates that section 2 of the above Ministerial Order is not currently applied as it was issued in former circumstances which are no longer present. The Committee takes note of this information and requests the Government to consider the possibility of repealing the provision in question in order to remove any uncertainty as to where the positive law stands in this respect.

The Committee further reiterates its previous comment to the effect that section 152 of Act No. 137 of 6 August 1981 promulgating the Labour Code appears to allow for much broader exceptions to the prohibition of night work for women than those permitted under the Convention since it provides that no women may be employed between 8 p.m. and 7 a.m. except in such cases, types of work and circumstances as may be prescribed by order of the Minister of Manpower and Training.

The Committee trusts that the necessary measures will be adopted in the near future to ensure that any exceptions to the night work prohibition are strictly limited to the cases specified in Articles 3, 4, 5 and 8 of the Convention. The Committee requests the Government to keep it informed of any progress achieved in this regard.

The Committee takes this opportunity to invite the Government to give favourable consideration to the ratification of either the Night Work Convention, 1990 (No. 171) or the Protocol of 1990 to Convention No. 89.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2000, published 89th ILC session (2001)

The Committee notes that the Government’s report contains no reply to previous comments. It must therefore repeat its previous observation which reads as follows:

In its previous comments the Committee noted that the Labour Code of 1981 does not ensure that compensatory rest is granted to persons working on the weekly rest day, as required by Article 8, paragraph 3, of the Convention, under which compensatory rest must be granted, regardless of any monetary remuneration, when temporary exemptions are made for reasons enumerated in paragraph 1 of the same Article of the Convention. The Committee notes the Government’s information in its report that the tripartite committee entrusted with the preparation of the draft consolidated labour code has been informed of the Committee’s comments so as to take them into consideration. The Committee hopes that the Government will soon be in a position to provide information on the provisions adopted to bring legislation into conformity with the Convention.

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

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

For several years, the Committee has noted that the Labour Code of 1981 does not ensure that compensatory rest is granted to persons working on the weekly rest day, as required by Article 8, paragraph 3, of the Convention. It notes the Government's indication in its reports in 1992, 1993 and again in 1994, that the Committee's comments have been presented to the tripartite commission, created in 1988 to study the revision of the Labour Code. The Committee reiterates to the Government that in accordance with Article 8, paragraph 3, compensatory rest must be granted, regardless of any monetary remuneration, when temporary exemptions are made for the reasons enumerated in paragraph 1 of this Article. The Committee trusts that the Government will take the necessary steps in the near future to bring the legislation into conformity with the Convention and indicate any more recent developments in this respect.

The Government is asked to report in detail in 1996.

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

In its previous comments the Committee noted that the Labour Code of 1981 does not ensure that compensatory rest is granted to persons working on the weekly rest day, as required by Article 8, paragraph 3, of the Convention, under which compensatory rest must be granted, regardless of any monetary remuneration, when temporary exemptions are made for reasons enumerated in paragraph 1 of the same Article of the Convention. The Committee notes the Government's information in its report that the tripartite committee entrusted with the preparation of the draft consolidated Labour Code, has been informed of the Committee's comments so as to take them into consideration. The Committee hopes that the Government will soon be in a position to provide information on the provisions adopted to bring legislation into conformity with the Convention.

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

The Committee notes the information supplied by the Government in its reports.

The Committee refers to its previous comments. It notes with interest the Government's statement that section 1(5) of Ministerial Order No. 23 of 7 February 1982, under which women may work between 8 p.m. and 7 a.m. in the joint projects established in accordance with Act No. 43 of 1974 concerning the use of Arab and foreign capital and free zones, which was amended by Act No. 32 of 1977, has been repealed by virtue of Act No. 230 of 1989 respecting enterprises. The Committee notes from the Government's report that Act No. 230 of 1989 does not deal with the question of night work by women and that it is therefore necessary to refer to the Labour Code, No. 137 of 1981. It notes that by virtue of section 152 of the Labour Code, it is prohibited to cause women to work between 8 p.m. and 7 a.m. except in cases, jobs and circumstances which are determined by order of the Minister of State for Manpower and Training. The Committee also notes from the Government's report that, by virtue of section 2 of Ministerial Order No. 23 of 7 February 1982, work by women is authorized between 8 p.m. and 10 p.m. in spinning and weaving companies and factories in the event that male workers are not available.

The Committee recalls that the Convention does not provide for any exception to the prohibition of the night work of women on the grounds of the non-availability of male workers. It also recalls the possibilities of flexibility offered by the Protocol of 1990 to the Night Work (Women) Convention (Revised), 1948. It hopes that the necessary measures will be taken to give effect to the Convention and requests the Government to supply information on any progress achieved in this respect.

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

Further to its observations, the Committee notes the Government's indication in its latest report that Act No. 203 of 1991 concerning public sector activities is among the legislation which gives effect to the Convention. It notes, however, that there are no provisions in Act No. 203 concerning the provision of weekly rest. It requests the Government to indicate in its next report, whether the new associations created by Act No. 203 are covered by the provisions of the Labour Code concerning weekly rest and, if not, to indicate the measures taken to ensure the application of the Convention to these associations.

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

In observations since 1975, the Committee has noted that the Labour Code of 1981 does not ensure that compensatory rest is provided for persons working on the weekly rest day, as called for by Article 8, paragraph 3, of the Convention. It notes the Government's indication in its report of January 1992 that the Committee's previous comments were being taken into consideration by the tripartite commission created in 1988 to study the revision of the Labour Code. Finally, the Government has indicated in its latest report that cases where work on the weekly rest day is compensated by twice the normal salary instead of compensatory rest, by virtue of section 140 of the Labour Code, are rare and linked to circumstances and requirements often beyond the control of the employer. The Government concludes that section 140 is in conformity with the Convention.

The Committee would recall that Article 8 of the Convention permits temporary exemptions to the granting of the weekly rest day in certain circumstances, but, by virtue of paragraph 3, requires compensatory rest to be provided. The Committee, therefore, trusts that the Government will take the necessary measures in the near future to bring the legislation into conformity with the Convention and indicate, in its next report, the progress made in this regard.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 1991, published 78th ILC session (1991)

In observations it has been making since 1975, the Committee has noted that the Labour Code of 1981 does not reflect the requirements of Article 8, paragraph 3, of the Convention in that it makes no general provision for persons working on their weekly rest day to be granted compensatory rest. In particular, the Committee has referred to section 140 of the Code, which seems to envisage workers - at least in some cases - not enjoying a compensatory rest day on some other day in the following week. In its previous observation the Committee noted the amendment drafted to comply with the Convention on this point. The Committee again expresses its hope that the necessary measures will soon be taken.

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

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

The Committee notes from the Government's last report that, by virtue of section 1(5) of Order No. 23 of 1982 concerning night work by women, women may be made to work between 8 p.m. and 7 a.m. in the joint projects established in accordance with the provisions of Act No. 43 of 1974 concerning the use of Arab and foreign capital and free zones, amended by Act No. 32 of 1977, where working conditions require work during the above hours.

The Committee would be grateful if the Government would indicate in its next report the type of work involved in the above mentioned projects.

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

In its previous observations, the Committee noted that section 140 of the Labour Code of 1981 (under which the wage is doubled for work carried out on the weekly rest day unless the worker takes another rest day during the following week) is not consistent with Article 8, paragraph 3, of the Convention which prescribes that persons working on their weekly rest day must be granted compensatory rest regardless of any supplementary remuneration. In reply, the Government indicates that it has submitted a draft amendment to section 140 of the Labour Code to bring it into line with this provision of the Convention. The Committee expresses the hope that this draft will be adopted shortly.