ILO-en-strap
NORMLEX
Information System on International Labour Standards
NORMLEX Home > Country profiles >  > Comments > All Comments

Display in: French - Spanish

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2022, published 111st ILC session (2023)

In order to provide a comprehensive view of the issues relating to the application of ratified Conventions on labour inspection and administration, the Committee considers it appropriate to examine Conventions Nos 81 (labour inspection), 129 (labour inspection in agriculture) and 150 (labour administration) together.
The Committee notes the observations of the Central Organization of Finnish Trade Unions (SAK), the joint observations of the SAK, of the Finnish Confederation of Professionals (STTK), and of the Confederation of Unions for Professional and Managerial Staff in Finland (AKAVA), the observations of the Confederation of Finnish Industries (EK) and the observations of the Federation of Finnish Enterprises (SY) on the application of Convention No. 81, communicated with the Government’s reports. The Committee also notes the observations of the SAK on the application of Convention No. 150, communicated with the Government’s report.

A.Labour inspection

Articles 3, 4, 5(a), 6, 7, 10, 11, 16, 20 and 21 of Convention No. 81 and Articles 6, 7, 8, 12, 14, 15, 21, 26 and 27 of Convention No. 129. Impact of the reform of the administration services on the organization and effective functioning of the labour inspection services. The Committee notes the 2020 Annual Report of the Occupational Safety and Health (OSH) Administration in Finland (Annual Labour Inspection Report), indicating that the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health is responsible for steering the OSH Divisions of the Regional State Administrative Agencies (labour inspectorate), and that their activities are based on a four-year framework plan. The 2020 Annual Labour Inspection Report also indicates that the labour inspectorate is moving from sector-based inspection activities towards phenomenon-based enforcement, and is currently focusing on issues related to working conditions, fragmented working life and workload. In response to the Committee’s previous comments, the Government indicates in its report that, in order to facilitate the effective use of resources, a division was established to deal with all of the administrative tasks of the labour inspectorate. The Government further indicates that the Ministry of Finance launched a project in the period 2015–19, for the development of customer-centred activities at the Regional State Administrative Agencies, with the objective of increasing self-service and the use of electronic services. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the impact of this project on the functioning of the labour inspection system, and to continue to provide information on any reforms affecting the organization of the labour inspectorate and its operations.
In addition, the Committee previously requested information on any follow-up to the report on the evaluation of the Finnish system of labour inspection by the Senior Labour Inspectors Committee (the SLIC Report), and the introduction of the supervisory software data system, “VERA”. The Committee notes the indication of the Government that the VERA system is now in full use and a key tool for targeting and monitoring enforcement activities in the field of OSH. The Government states that the system has increased the effectiveness and the quality of the labour inspectorate’s activities, and that statistical data on the targeting of inspections and the orders issued to employers are now more detailed than before. The Committee takes note of this information, which addresses its previous request.
Articles 3(1)(b), 5(a), 9 and 14 of Convention No. 81 and Articles 6(1)(b), 11, 12 and 19 of Convention No. 129. Notification of occupational accidents and diseases. Cooperation between labour inspection services and other public or private services exercising similar functions. Following its previous comments, the Committee notes the indication of the Government that, while employers must notify insurance companies of occupational accidents that are neither fatal nor serious, but which have led to sick leave, it is not necessary to provide notice of such accidents to the labour inspectorate. The Government indicates that statistics on occupational accidents are nevertheless quite comprehensive, given that they are produced from insurance activities, and include all accidents for which insurance institutions paid compensation. According to the observations of the SAK, however, there is minimal reporting by physicians of occupational diseases and work-related illnesses to the labour inspectorate, and, consequently, there are few inspections related to cases of occupational disease. The SAK, the STTK and AKAVA, in their observations, further indicate that, according to a study by the Finnish Institute of Occupational Health, a diagnosed occupational disease seldom leads to changes in working conditions or work practices. In this respect, the Committee notes the indication of the Government regarding the measures taken to ensure cooperation with occupational health services, including training occupational healthcare physicians and nurses by representatives of the labour inspectorate. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the measures taken to ensure that the labour inspectorate is notified of cases of occupational disease, and information regarding the impact of such measures on the labour inspectorate’s efforts to conduct inspections related to occupational disease and to recommend changes in work practices in order to reduce incidents of occupational disease.
Articles 5 and 18 of Convention No. 81 and Articles 12, 13 and 24 of Convention No. 129. Cooperation between labour inspection services and public institutions engaged in similar activities. Collaboration with social partners. Effective enforcement. The Committee notes that, according to the 2020 Annual Labour Inspection Report, tripartite cooperation related to OSH enforcement is carried out with employers’ and workers’ organizations in regional OSH committees and the National Advisory Committee. Nevertheless, the Committee notes the observations of the SAK, that there needs to be greater cooperation between the labour inspectorate and trade unions, and that such cooperation had begun to decrease even before the COVID-19 pandemic. The Committee also notes the concerns of the SAK regarding police and prosecution proceedings that do not progress with sufficient dispatch, leading toa danger of exceeding limitation periods. The trade unions and employers’ organizations, in their observations, also express divergent views as regards the effectiveness of penalties for OSH violations, with the SAK, STTK and AKAVA considering that such penalties are too low, while the SY and EK consider that certain corporate fines are very large and that a guidance-based approach to inspections is more effective. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to improve the cooperation arrangements with authorities in charge of prosecutions, to ensure that adequate penalties for violations are effectively enforced. The Committee also requests the Government to indicate the measures taken to assess the adequacy of the penalties for OSH violations over time and to provide further information on measures taken to ensure collaboration between the labour inspectorate and the social partners.
Articles 10, 15(c) and 16 of Convention No. 81 and Articles 14, 20(c) and 21 of Convention No. 129. Coverage of workplaces by labour inspection. Confidentiality of complaints. Following its previous comments, the Committee notes the statistics provided by the Government, which show that the number of inspection visits has increased from 25,991 in 2016 to 26,239 in 2018, before falling to 14,596 in 2020 and increasing again to 20,268 in 2021. According to the 2020 Annual Labour Inspection Report, the number of in-person visits to workplaces has also fallen from 25,084 visits in 2017 to 9,176 in 2020. In this respect, the 2020 Annual Labour Inspection Report indicates that, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, a substantial share of OSH inspections in 2020 were carried out virtually by means of remote inspections, but that investigations of occupational accidents, or other inspections requiring more extensive workplace observation, were carried out on-site. The Committee notes the observations of the SAK stressing that, while diverse and appropriate monitoring measures leading to effective and comprehensive enforcement are welcome, sufficiently frequent on-site inspections are also important. The SAK, STTK and AKAVA also reiterate, in their observations, that less than 10 per cent of all workplaces in Finland are being inspected, and express concerns regarding whether enforcement is carried out in a harmonious and equal manner throughout the country. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the number of labour inspectors has increased from 400 in 2018 to 414 in 2021, and that, according to the observations of the EK, the labour inspection system is of high quality, comprehensive and equipped with sufficient resources. The Committee nevertheless observes that, according to the data of Statistics Finland, there were 368,622 enterprises in Finland in 2020. With respect to the coverage of labour inspection visits, the Committee requests the Government to provide further information on the measures taken to ensure that the number and frequency of labour inspections is sufficient to ensure the effective discharge of inspection duties and compliance with the respective legal provisions in all workplaces. In particular, the Committee requests the Government to provide statistics on the number of inspections carried out, disaggregated between regular and unannounced inspection visits, remote inspections and in-person visits, as well as planned inspections and inspections undertaken as a result of a complaint.
Articles 20 and 21 of Convention No. 81 and Articles 26 and 27 of Convention No. 129. Annual report on the activities of the labour inspection services. Following its previous comment, the Committee notes with interest that the 2020 Annual Labour Inspection Report contains statistics specific to the agricultural sector, regarding inspection visits, violations and penalties imposed, and occupational accidents and diseases. The Committee also observes that, while statistics of workplaces liable to inspection and the number of workers employed therein appear to be available on the website of Statistics Finland, they are not included in the annual labour inspection reports. The Committee requests the Government to continue to transmit copies of the annual labour inspection reports to the ILO, ensuring that they contain statistics of workplaces liable to inspection and the number of workers employed therein, in accordance with Articles 20 and 21(c) of Convention No. 81 and Articles 26 and 27(c) of Convention No. 129.

Issues specifically concerning labour inspection in agriculture

Article 6(1)(a)–(b) of Convention No. 129. Enforcement and preventive activities in the area of OSH in agriculture. Following its previous comment, the Committee notes the information provided by the Government regarding labour inspection visits and other activities undertaken in the agricultural sector in the period 2018–21 by the labour inspectorate. According to the Government, 457 of such inspection visits concerned the employment of migrant workers. The Committee notes with interest the Government’s indication that, in order to provide information in languages other than Finnish, the website of the labour inspectorate was translated into Swedish and English, while the guide entitled “As a Foreign Employee in Finland” was translated into fifteen languages. In this regard, the Committee also notes the observations of the SAK under Convention No. 184, taking the view that migrant seasonal workers are a particularly vulnerable group of workers and that resources for inspection in agriculture are inadequate for enforcement. Noting the indication of the Government that the labour inspectorate has moved from a sector-based approach to a phenomenon-based approach for inspection, the Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the labour inspection activities undertaken in this sector, including inspection visits conducted and measures taken as a result thereof. The Committee also requests the Government to provide further information on how it ensures that labour inspectors supply technical information and advice to employers and workers concerning the most effective means of complying with the legal provisions, especially as regards migrant seasonal workers.
Article 9 of Convention No. 129. Qualification and training of labour inspectors in agriculture. Following its previous comment, the Committee notes the information provided by the Government regarding a training course which opened for all inspectors since May 2018, on the safety of machinery in agriculture, and a two-day training event conducted in March 2016 for inspectors engaged in the primary sector, which covered different OSH topics. The Committee requests the Government to provide further information on training provided to labour inspectors in areas relevant to agriculture, including the number of labour inspectors who completed such training.

B.Labour administration

Articles 1 and 4 of Convention No. 150. Effective operation of a system of labour administration. The Committee notes the indication in the report of the Government that the Ministry of Economic Affairs and Employment is now headed by two ministers, and has four departments responsible for its main tasks, and three separate units. The Government also indicates that the main responsibility for the preparation of policy and legislation related to labour migration and policy coordination was transferred from the Ministry of the Interior to the Ministry of Economic Affairs and Employment as of 1 January 2020. The Committee notes that, according to the Annual Labour Inspection Reports, the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health retains responsibilities in the field of labour, including on labour inspection and OSH. In the absence of information on this issue, the Committee once again requests the Government to indicate how coordination is ensured between the Ministry of Economic Affairs and Employment and the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health, to guarantee the effective operation of the labour administration system.
Article 9. Delegation of labour administration activities to regional or local agencies. Following its previous comment, the Committee notes the information provided by the Government regarding reforms to strengthen the role of local governments in the organization of employment services. In this regard, the Government indicates that pilots will run from 1 March 2021 to 31 December 2024, in which certain tasks of Regional Employment and Economic Development Offices (TE Offices) will be transferred to local governments. In addition, the Government also refers to a reform for 2024 involving the permanent transfer of public employment and economic development services to municipalities. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the outcomes of these reforms. The Committee also requests the Government to indicate how the Ministry of Economic Affairs and Employment will have the means to ascertain whether local governments and municipalities operate in accordance with national laws and regulations and adhere to the objectives assigned to them.
Article 10(2). Resources of the labour administration system. The Committee notes that in its observations, the SAK expresses concerns regarding the level of resources in municipalities seeking to manage employment services in major urban areas on a trial basis. The SAK indicates that, according to reports, the working conditions of the staff were perceived as highly stressful, placing extreme demands on their ability to manage the workload. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures taken to ensure that the staff of the labour administration system have the material means and financial resources necessary for the effective performance of their duties.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2022, published 111st ILC session (2023)

In order to provide a comprehensive view of the issues relating to the application of ratified Conventions on labour inspection, the Committee considers it appropriate to examine Conventions Nos 81 (labour inspection) and 129 (labour inspection in agriculture) together.
The Committee notes the observations of the Central Organization of Finnish Trade Unions (SAK) on the application of Convention No. 81, communicated with the Government’s report.
Article 3(1) and (2) of Convention No. 81 and Article 6(1) and (3) of Convention No. 129. Cooperation with the police in the control of immigration law. Following its previous comments, the Committee notes the indication in the report of the Government that the labour inspectorate still carries out joint inspections with the police and the Finnish Border Guard in industries such as agriculture, restaurants, and construction, as it has been established that there are workers without the necessary work permits in these sectors. According to the Government, cooperation between various authorities is considered an effective method to tackle the informal economy and allows the authorities to make effective use of their different powers. The Government indicates that, based on the feedback received, the cooperation between authorities does not cause fear in the workplace and instead, increases trust in the maintenance of a fair and harmonious labour market, encouraging employers to comply with their statutory obligations. The Government further states that labour inspection related to migrant workers aims to ensure that workers have safe working conditions and terms of employment that are compliant with legislation, and that the labour inspectorate provides guidance to workers on minimum terms of employment. The Government nevertheless indicates that that all matters related to unpaid wages and social benefits are handled by the Centre for Economic Development, Transport and the Environment (ELY Centre), and the labour inspectorate does not have any data regarding the wages or social security benefits paid to migrant labourers. Furthermore, the Committee observes that the Government also refers to the expectation of potential opposition and aggressive behaviour at certain inspections of this type, making the presence of the police and the Finnish Border Guard useful to ensure the safety of labour inspectors. The Committee refers the Government to its 2006 General Survey on labour inspection, paragraph 78, and underlines that the objective of labour inspection can only be met if workers are convinced that the primary task of the inspectorate is to enforce legal provisions relating to conditions of work and protection of workers. The Committee also notes the observations of the SAK, indicating that the current resources for occupational safety and health (OSH) enforcement are inadequate, and that addressing that enforcement in relation to labour abuses in the shadow economy should not be achieved at the expense of OSH enforcement. The Committee therefore urges the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that labour inspectors’ participation in joint inspections does not interfere with the effective discharge of their primary duties under Article 3(1) of Convention No. 81 and Article 6(1) of Convention No. 129. The Committee requests the Government to provide further information on the measures taken to ensure that labour inspectors’ participation in joint inspections does not prejudice in any way the authority and impartiality which are necessary to inspectors in their relations with employers and workers. In addition, the Committee requests the Government to provide further detailed information on the procedure for enforcing employers’ obligations arising from the statutory rights of undocumented migrant workers for the period of their effective employment relationship, including information on the labour inspectorate’s advisory role in directing such workers to the ELY Centre and to social security authorities.
The Committee is raising other matters in a request addressed directly to the Government.

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

In order to provide a comprehensive view of the issues relating to the application of the ratified governance Conventions on labour inspection, the Committee considers it appropriate to examine Convention No. 81 and Convention No. 129 in a single comment.
The Committee notes the joint observations of the Central Organization of Finnish Trade Unions (SAK) and the Confederation of Unions for Professional and Managerial Staff in Finland (AKAVA), attached to the Government’s report.
Articles 3, 4, 5(a), 6, 7, 10, 11, 16, 20 and 21 of Convention No. 81 and Articles 6, 7, 8, 12, 14, 15, 21, 26 and 27 of Convention No. 129. Impact of the reform of the administration services on the organization and effective functioning of the labour inspection services. In its previous comments, the Committee noted the reform of the administration services, including the labour inspection services, initiated in 2010–11. In this regard, the Committee recalls that the SAK, the AKAVA and the Finnish Confederation of Professionals (STTK) previously expressed doubts as to the organization of occupational safety and health (OSH) services as part of regional state administrations, emphasizing in particular their concerns as to the impartiality of the labour inspection staff. In this regard, the Committee also notes the observations made by the AKAVA attached to the Government’s report provided in 2015 under the Occupational Safety and Health Convention, 1981 (No. 155), in which the trade union expresses its concerns that the abolition of OSH inspectorates and the merging of the OSH authority with the state regional administration have made accessing the OSH authority more difficult for “private customers”.
Concerning the impact of the abovementioned reform, the Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that: (i) the reform has not affected the resources allocated to labour inspection, nor the number of labour inspectors or the number of labour inspections; (ii) the relocation of offices into the same buildings as the regional state administration agencies has decreased rent and made it easier to make use of shared office services; (iii) Parliament has published a document stating, among other things, that the independence of inspections continues to be secured, but that there appeared to be a negative attitude towards the effects of the reform among labour inspectorate staff. In this regard, the Committee notes that the Ministry of Finance established a working group to identify the reasons behind this dissatisfaction and to find solutions. The Committee also notes the Government’s reference to the report on the evaluation of the Finnish system of labour inspection by the Senior Labour Inspectors Committee (SLIC), attached to the Government’s report (hereinafter: “the SLIC report”). While the Government emphasizes the findings in the report that the new organizational structure is an efficient system that is in line with the principles of the SLIC, the Committee notes that the SAK and the AKAVA, in their joint observations, emphasize that, while the report points to positive developments, it also highlights areas for development. The Committee requests that the Government provide information on any steps taken as a result of the findings of the working group established at the Ministry of Finance, in so far as they have an impact on the organization and functioning of the labour inspection services.
The Committee previously noted the Government’s indication that the new supervisory software data system, “VERA”, had been partly implemented and should increase the efficiency of inspections through improved time management. In this regard, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that the full introduction of the system has been slightly delayed, but that once in full use, data should be available on the results concerning the implementation of their system. The Committee also notes the observations made by the SAK and the AKAVA concerning certain weaknesses in the VERA system, as observed by the SLIC evaluation group, including a lack of uniform operating methods and a time-consuming procedure.
In this regard, the Committee notes that the evaluation team stated that the VERA system is a very comprehensive system for reporting, record keeping and information collection and recommended that, to improve the efficiency in the labour inspectors work, the VERA system should also contain information related to previous inspections. The Committee requests that the Government continue to provide information on the operation, functioning and results of the new supervisory data system “VERA”, as well as provide any follow-up given to the recommendations made in the SLIC report.
Articles 3(1)(b), 9 and 14 of Convention No. 81 and Articles 6(1)(b), 11 and 19 of Convention No. 129. Notification of occupational accidents and diseases. The Committee previously noted that the SAK, the AKAVA and the STTK expressed concern at the failure to report suspected cases of occupational accidents and diseases, as well as doubts with regard to the reliability of relevant statistics. On the other hand, the Government indicated that the reporting mechanism worked reasonably well in practice, and that awareness-raising measures had been undertaken for its improvement.
In this regard, the Committee notes that the Government, in reply to the Committee’s previous request, describes the system for the recording and notification of serious and fatal industrial accidents (reporting obligation of employers) and cases of occupational disease (reporting obligations of medical doctors). However, the Committee also notes that the Government does not describe the procedure for the notification of industrial accidents (which are neither serious nor fatal). The Committee further notes the indication of the Government that awareness-raising measures among employers were undertaken on their reporting obligations and that an updated report form on occupational diseases was communicated to medical doctors. Concerning the raising of awareness about typical cases of occupational diseases in the agricultural sector, the Government also indicates that, during inspection visits in agricultural workplaces, information is provided to employers and workers concerning the most common occupational diseases, such as respiratory allergies, dermatopathies, noise traumata and stress injuries. The Committee requests that the Government describe the procedure for the notification of industrial accidents (that are neither serious nor fatal), and specify the obligations of employers in suspected cases of occupational disease. It also requests that the Government continue to provide information on any measures taken or envisaged to improve the system of notifying and recording occupational accidents and cases of occupational disease.
Article 5(a) of Convention No. 81 and Article 12 of Convention No. 129. Cooperation between the labour inspection services and other public or private services exercising similar functions. The Committee notes that the SAK and the AKAVA refer to the findings in the SLIC report concerning the insufficient cooperation between the labour inspection services and occupational health-care providers. The trade unions recall that, according to the findings in this report, the effective cooperation between these services would contribute to a higher degree of compliance with OSH regulation. The Committee requests that the Government provide information on the measures taken to promote cooperation between the labour inspection services and the occupational health-care providers.
Articles 10, 15(c) and 16 of Convention No. 81 and Articles 14, 20(c) and 21 of Convention No. 129. Coverage of workplaces by labour inspection and confidentiality of complaints. The Committee previously noted the Government’s confirmation, in relation to relevant observations made by the SAK, the AKAVA and the STTK, that less than 10 per cent of all workplaces were inspected every year and that some inspections were conducted in writing without an inspection of the workplace. It noted the Government’s indication that, while the reasons for the decrease had not been ascertained, inspections following complaints had increased by about 500 in 2012.
In this regard, the Committee notes that, according to the findings of the SLIC report: (i) although there are still few inspections per year, there appears to be a positive trend towards an increasing number of labour inspections (the key aim from 2012 to 2015 had been to increase the number of inspections without compromising their quality); (ii) the balance between announced and unannounced inspections is a concern to both social partners as announced inspections are primarily undertaken and unannounced inspections are the exception; (iii) OSH inspections in micro-enterprises (which employ a large part of the workforce), are rarely undertaken. The Committee also notes from the information provided by the Government in its report under Convention No. 155, that the number of labour inspections and the number of workplaces covered by inspections has increased from 2010 to 2013. The Committee also notes the recommendations made in the report, that: (i) a sufficient number of regular and unannounced inspections (that is to say not in response to a complaint) be undertaken to ensure that when inspections are conducted as a result of a complaint, the confidentiality of the complaint can be ensured; and (ii) the effective monitoring of the compliance with legal provisions including in micro-enterprises be ensured. The Committee requests that the Government ensure that, in accordance with Articles 10 and 16 of Convention No. 81 and 14 and 21 of Convention No. 129, the number and frequency of labour inspections is sufficient to ensure the effective discharge of inspection duties and compliance with the respective legal provisions in all workplaces, including in micro-enterprises. In this regard, it requests that the Government provide information on the follow-up given to the recommendations made in the SLIC report.

Issues specifically concerning labour inspection in agriculture

Article 6(1)(a)–(b) of Convention No. 129. Enforcement and preventive activities in the area of OSH in agriculture. The Committee previously noted the Government’s indication in its report that action plans for the five OSH divisions of the regional state administration agencies included “a primary production monitoring campaign for 2012–13 in agriculture and forestry”, which focused on work in the grey economy and was aimed at ensuring healthy and safe working conditions and methods, including the safety of machines and equipment and the supervision of OSH services in enterprises. In this regard, the Committee understands from the information provided by the Government that about 4.4 per cent of all workplace inspections in 2013 and 2014 concerned the agricultural sector, but that it is not possible to provide information on the abovementioned campaign, as coordination between the OSH divisions of the regional state administration agencies only began in 2014. The Committee also notes the information provided by the Government in response to its previous request on the preventive activities of the labour inspectorate (advisory activities during inspections) and on other actors in the agricultural sector, such as the Finnish Institute of Occupational Safety and Health. The Committee once again requests that the Government provide information on the results of any inspection campaigns undertaken in the agricultural sector (including information on the violations detected, the legal provisions concerned, proceedings initiated, remedies applied and sanctions imposed), and the impact of this campaign on the conditions of work and the protection of workers in agriculture, including information on the number of cases in which workers found to be in an irregular situation have been granted their due rights.
Article 9 of Convention No. 129. Qualification and training of labour inspectors in agriculture. The Committee previously requested that the Government provide information on how it is ensured that labour inspectors possess the required qualifications and technical knowledge to perform their duties adequately in the agricultural sector, particularly in light of the information that the two specialist inspectors in agriculture in each of the five OSH services in the regional administrative agencies will not be replaced by sector-specific inspectors once they retire. In this regard, the Committee notes the information provided by the Government on the training provided in 2013 to 16 labour inspectors on the main risks and hazards in agriculture (including occupational accidents and diseases in the agricultural sector, physical, biological and chemical exposure to agents, phytosanitary work, personal protective equipment and machine safety). The Committee requests that the Government continue to provide information on the training courses provided to labour inspectors in areas particularly relevant to agriculture.
Articles 26 and 27 of Convention No. 129. Publication and communication of an annual report containing information on the activities of the labour inspection services in the agricultural sector. The Committee notes the reiterated indication of the Government that it is not possible to include sector-specific statistics in the annual reports of the OSH administration. The Committee urges the Government to take the necessary steps to ensure publication of statistics on the work of the inspection services in agriculture, whether as a separate part or as a part of the annual report of the OSH administration, as required by Article 26, containing the information as required by items (a)–(g) of Article 27.

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

In order to provide a comprehensive view of the issues relating to the application of the ratified governance Conventions on labour inspection, the Committee considers it appropriate to examine Convention No. 81 and Convention No. 129 in a single comment.
Article 3(1) and (2) of Convention No. 81 and Article 6(1) and (3) of Convention No. 129. Cooperation with the police in the control of immigration law. The Committee previously noted the Government’s indication that inspections of migrant workers were mainly concerned with checking work permits and ensuring that employers complied with their obligations concerning minimum working conditions. It also noted the Government’s indication that labour inspectors report the unauthorized employment of migrant workers to the police, and that inspections targeted at undeclared work were also conducted jointly with the police.
In this regard, the Committee notes that the Government indicates that in 2013–14, the labour inspectorate monitored migrant workers’ authorization to work and observance of their minimum terms of employment in selected industries. In 2013, 3,400 labour inspections (of a total number of 22,340 labour inspections in that year) related to migrant workers, and in 2014, 2,505 labour inspections (of a total number of 24,145 labour inspections in that year) related to migrant workers. Some of the inspections were joint inspections together with other authorities, including the police, tax authorities, and border guards. The Government adds that an inspection project was carried out in the restaurant and construction industry, with the cooperation of the police and border guards. The Committee would like to stress, once again, that the involvement of inspection staff in joint operations with the police is not conducive to the relationship of trust that it is essential to enlisting the cooperation of employers and workers. Workers in a vulnerable situation may not be willing to cooperate with the labour inspection services if they fear negative consequences as a result of inspection activities, such as being fined, losing their job or being expelled from the country. The Committee therefore considers that the participation of the labour inspection staff into these joint operations is incompatible with Article 3(2) of Convention No. 81 and Article 6(3) of Convention No. 129. The Committee further notes that, from 2010 to 2013, the labour inspectorate reported 178 cases concerning the unauthorized use of foreign labour to the police. It further notes the Government’s indication that while the labour inspectorate monitors compliance with the statutory obligations of employers with regard to the minimum rights of migrant workers (for example, concerning the payment of wages), it is not responsible for the collection of outstanding wages or social security benefits.
The Committee therefore urges that the Government take the necessary measures to ensure that the labour inspection staff are no longer involved in joint operations with the police and to provide information on the steps taken to separate the functions of the police from the activities of the labour inspectorate.
Noting the Government’s indication that the labour inspectorate is not responsible for assisting workers in obtaining their due rights relating to outstanding wages and social security benefits, the Committee requests that the Government provide information on the procedure for enforcing employers’ obligations arising from the statutory rights of undocumented migrant workers for the period of their effective employment relationship, including in cases where the unauthorized employment of migrant workers is reported to the police and where such workers are expelled from the country. The Committee also requests that the Government provide information on the number of cases in which migrant nationals in an irregular situation have been granted their entitlements resulting from their past employment relationship (wages, compensation for overtime, social security benefits, etc.).

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2012, published 102nd ILC session (2013)

The Committee refers to its comments under the Labour Inspection Convention, 1947 (No. 81), to the extent that they are relevant for the application of this Convention.
Article 9 of the Convention. Qualification and training of labour inspectors in agriculture. The Committee notes that the Government has not replied to its previous request for information on the measures taken or contemplated to ensure an effective system of labour inspection in agriculture, particularly in light of the information that the two specialist inspectors in agriculture in each of the five occupational safety and health (OSH) services in the regional administrative agencies will not be replaced by sector-specific inspectors if they retire. In this regard, the Committee would like to recall that the characteristics of work in the agricultural sector involve specific risks for workers (for example, related to the handling and use of chemicals and pesticides, and agricultural machinery) and therefore require specific skills from inspectors. The Committee asks the Government to provide information on how it is ensured that labour inspectors dispose of the required qualifications and technical knowledge to perform their duties adequately in the agricultural sector, including through the training of a sufficient number of labour inspectors in agriculture-related matters. In this regard, the Committee would like to draw the Government’s attention to Paragraphs 4 to 7 of Recommendation No. 133 on the minimum qualifications needed by labour inspectors called upon to work in the agricultural sector.
Article 6(1)(a)–(b) of the Convention. Enforcement and preventive activities in the area of OSH. The Committee notes the Government’s indications in its report that action plans for the five OSH divisions of the regional state administration agencies include “a primary production monitoring campaign for 2012–13 in agriculture and forestry”, which focuses on work in the grey economy and is aimed at ensuring healthy and safe working conditions and methods, including the safety of machines and equipment and the supervision of OSH services in enterprises. The Committee asks the Government to provide information on the results of these campaigns (including the violations detected, the legal provisions concerned, proceedings initiated, remedies applied and sanctions imposed), and the impact of the campaign on the conditions of work and the protection of workers in agriculture, including information on the number of cases in which workers found to be in an irregular situation have been granted their due rights.
The Committee also asks the Government to provide information on any preventive activities in agriculture (for example the number of training courses provided by labour inspectors during inspection visits and the number of workers covered; any seminars held on OSH in agriculture, their duration and the number of participants, etc.) and their impact on the number of fatal and serious work accidents in agriculture.
Articles 6(1)(b) and 19. Notification to the labour inspectorate in agriculture of occupational accidents and cases of occupational disease. The Committee recalls that it noted previously the decrease in the number of reported cases of paralysis of the nerves in the tibia, which is the most typical occupational disease for berry pickers. Referring to its direct request under Convention No. 81 on the measures taken or contemplated to improve the system for notifying and recording occupational accidents and cases of occupational disease, it would also be grateful if the Government would indicate whether preventive measures taken also include awareness-raising activities among workers and employers in agriculture about typical cases of occupational disease in agriculture and the mechanisms for the reporting of such cases.
Articles 25, 26 and 27. Reporting obligations regarding inspection activities. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that, while information on labour inspection activities in the different sectors is available from the labour inspection database, it is not possible to include such information in annual reports of the OSH administration. In view of the data already available, the Committee urges the Government to take the necessary measures for the publication, as a separate part or as part of the annual report of the OSH administration, statistics on the work of the inspection services in agriculture, containing the information required by items (a)–(g) of Article 27.

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

The Committee notes the Government’s report received at the Office on 6 October 2010. Also referring to its comments on the application of the Labour Inspection Convention, 1947 (No. 81), the Committee wishes to draw the Government’s attention to the following points.
Articles 3, 7, 9 and 14 of the Convention. Labour inspection system in agriculture. The Government indicates that, since early 2010, the duties of the former health and safety inspectorate are performed by regional administrative agencies and that each region has two specialist inspectors specifically for agriculture but should the latter retire, the open position will not be sector specific. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or contemplated to ensure an effective system of labour inspection in agriculture, including through adequate training of sufficient numbers of inspectors in agriculture-related matters.
Article 19. Notification to the labour inspectorate in agriculture of occupational accidents and cases of occupational disease. The Government indicates that, according to the Institute of Occupational Health, the most typical occupational disease for berry-pickers is paralysis of the nerves in the tibia and that no case has been reported between 2005–07, despite the fact that an average of six cases per year were reported between 1995 and 2002. It indicates that it is difficult to conclude whether this trend is the result of the effectiveness of health and safety measures or deficiencies in the reporting system or other factors. The Committee requests the Government to supply information on the measures taken or contemplated to improve the system for notifying and recording occupational accidents and cases of occupational disease of berry-pickers with a view to ensuring systematic notification and investigation of these cases. The Committee draws the attention of the Government to the code of practice on the recording and notification of occupational diseases, which is available on the ILO website at: http://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---ed_protect/---protrav/---safework/documents/normativeinstrument/wcms_107800.pdf.
Articles 25, 26 and 27. Reporting obligations regarding inspection activities. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the annual report contains general information on activities undertaken in agriculture and that the database of the occupational safety and health administration is being reorganized with a view to obtaining sufficiently diversified statistical information as of 2013–14. The Committee requests the Government to supply detailed statistics on the work of the labour inspectorate in agriculture presented in a separate part of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s annual report further to the reorganization of the database of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration.

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

The Committee takes note of the Government’s report received in October 2008, containing replies to its previous comments and the points raised by the Central Organization of Finnish Trade Unions (SAK) and the Confederation of Unions for Academic Professionals in Finland (AKAVA), as well as the comment of the Commission for Local Authority Employers (KT) and the corresponding annex, supplied by the Government.

Article 14 of the Convention. Number of labour inspectors in agriculture to secure the effective discharge of their duties. The Committee notes with interest that, according to the Government’s information, each occupational safety and health inspectorate shall be assigned one to two inspectors specialized in the agricultural sector, though also performing tasks not directly related to agriculture. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would indicate the total average number of inspectors specialized in agricultural issues, currently working in each occupational safety and health inspectorate. In addition, it would like to refer the Government to its comments under the Labour Inspection Convention, 1947 (No. 81) (Articles 10 and 16), and requests it to provide information on the expected impact as regards the number of labour inspectors specialized in agriculture following the proposal of the Rsurssi II working group.

Article 4. Changes in inspection coverage in the agricultural sector. According to the SAK and AKAVA, the cases in which the employer does not regard the work of foreign berry-pickers as work under an employment contract have become more common. The Government indicates that the harvesting of berries and vegetables is generally deemed work performed within an employment agreement, irrespective of whether the harvest worker is directly employed by the farmer or by an employment agency, through which the farmer recruits the required manpower. The Committee notes that the Occupational Safety and Health Act (738/2002), as indicated by the Government, applies indeed to employees working under the terms of an employment contract (section 2(1)) as well as to employees leased out to an employer by an employment agency (section 3(1)).

As regards responsibilities in occupational safety and health in agricultural undertakings, where work is subcontracted, the Government indicates that responsibility, normally assumed by the farmer alone, is shared by both parties in a manner specified in section 3 of the Occupational Safety and Health Act. The employer (employment agency) of berry-pickers is responsible for ensuring that his/her employees possess the necessary skills and that they are familiar with the specific attributes of the work in question. As the provider of employment, the farmer is responsible for ensuring that his/her employees have been familiarized with the work and working conditions. The farmer is also responsible for ensuring cooperation in occupational safety and health at the workplace. If the land under cultivation is being tended by employees working for several employers, the farmer is vested with primary responsibility, in accordance with the Act on Occupational Safety and Health Enforcement and Cooperation on Occupational Safety and Health at the Workplaces (44/2006).

The Committee further notes that an employment relationship does not exist in cases where wild berries are picked in forests by any person and sold freely. According to the Government, these berry-pickers shall be deemed self-employed and any party purchasing these berries shall not be deemed to be an employer.

Referring to the concern of SAK and AKAVA, the Committee would be grateful if the Government would indicate, how it is ensured, that berry-pickers selling their crops to (monopolized) enterprises, do not find themselves in a subordinate relationship, where the entrepreneur is in a position to dictate the conditions of the business relationship and in consequence virtually all components of an employment relationship are fulfilled.

Articles 25, 26 and 27 of the Convention. Reporting obligations on inspection activities. The Committee notes that once again no annual report has been drawn up. Having raised this request for many years, the Committee requests the Government to ensure that the restructuring of the inspection database, will allow for the compilation of a wide-ranging statistics, and will guarantee that annual reports containing the information requested by Article 27 can be published and communicated to the ILO in the near future.

Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2007, published 97th ILC session (2008)

The Committee notes the Government’s report, the information in reply to its previous comments and the views expressed by the Central Organization of Finnish Trade Unions (SAK) and the Confederation of Unions for Academic Professionals in Finland (AKAVA) with regard to changes in the inspection system in agriculture.

1. Changes in inspection coverage in the agricultural sector. The Committee notes the explanations supplied by the Government which states that the constant reduction over the last ten years in inspections of agricultural undertakings is the result of the proportional reduction in the number of agricultural undertakings in operation. The Committee also notes with interest the concurrent views of the SAK and AKAVA regarding the frequency of inspections in agricultural enterprises employing foreign workers for the harvesting of berries. However, it notes that, according to these organizations, even in the most common cases where the employer does not consider the work as resulting from the execution of a contract, the question should be examined of whether the key components of employment are present or whether this is actually a case of self-employment. The SAK and AKAVA also indicate that the Bill which was under examination concerning the responsibility of those issuing instructions in places where work is done by external third parties did not lend itself to application in agriculture. However, the Committee notes that the relevant provisions of Act No. 441/2006, as amended by Act No. 701/2006, do not exclude agricultural undertakings from the scope of their application. It would be grateful if the Government would supply information on the practical implementation of the provisions with regard to responsibilities in occupational safety and health in agricultural undertakings where work is sub-contracted, and also on the views of employers’ and workers’ organizations in the sector regarding the impact of Act No. 441/2006 referred to above.

2. Articles 25, 26 and 27 of the Convention. Reporting obligations on inspection activities. With reference to its previous comments regarding the need to adopt measures quickly to give effect to the above Articles, the Committee notes the Government’s statement that no annual report has yet been drawn up. It indicates that information on inspections is exchanged by means of a common database, that operations are conducted by occupational safety and health services, taking account of annual discussions regarding performance in relation to objectives and adjusting the implementation plan for the following year. As regards statistical information on occupational accidents and cases of occupational disease which should be included in the annual report, delays have occurred in the process of compilation. The Committee invites the Government to refer to the General Survey of 2006 on labour inspection (paragraphs 320–345) concerning the purpose of complying with the obligation to provide an annual report on inspection activities. It would be grateful if the Government would take the relevant measures and keep the Office informed.

Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2004, published 93rd ILC session (2005)

Referring also to its observation under Convention No. 81, the Committee notes the Government’s report in reply to its previous comments and those made by the Central Organization of Finnish Trade Unions (SAK). It also notes the new comments made by SAK, which were forwarded by the Government in its report.

The Committee notes with interest the efforts undertaken to improve occupational safety and health at work by enacting and envisaging the adoption of relevant legislative provisions.

1. Articles 9, paragraph 3, 14, and 21 of the Convention. Weakness of labour inspection in the agriculture sector. According to the SAK: (i) no inspectors are specifically appointed to focus on inspections of agricultural workplaces; (ii) there are still too few inspectors and inspections in the agriculture sector; (iii) provisions in collective agreements relating to minimum pay and working hours are violated particularly frequently. In this regard, the Committee notes that between May 2002 and April 2004, 724 inspections were carried out in the agricultural sector, compared with 1,168 inspections during the period 2000-02. Moreover, according to the Government, there are only one or two inspectors specializing in agriculture in each inspectorate. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide an explanation for the substantial decline in the supervision of agricultural enterprises during the period of organizational and legislation change and, if it would indicate the number of agricultural workplaces liable to inspection and the numbers of workers occupied therein, as well as data on the nature of infringements reported and the resulting measures taken by labour inspectors.

It also requests the Government to describe any initial and continuous training provided or envisaged to meet the specific needs related to labour inspection in the agricultural sector.

2. Articles 25, 26 and 27. Obligations to produce a report. The Committee notes that, according to the Government, annual labour inspection reports are not drawn up on regular basis. The Government adds that the generation of final statistics relating to occupational accidents and diseases is rather slow. Referring to its previous comments, the Committee urges the Government to take the necessary measures to give full effect to these Articles and hopes that an annual report will soon be published and made available to the ILO.

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

The Committee notes the Government’s replies to its previous comments. It notes the point of view of the Central Organization of Finnish Trade Unions (SAK) concerning the inadequacy of the financial and human resources of the labour inspection services in relation to the needs in the fields of occupational safety and health and the implementation of enterprise-level collective agreements. According to the SAK, the lack of inspectors and inspections already referred to under Convention No. 81 hampers labour inspection in agriculture.

The Government indicates that the situation is reasonably good in view of the fact that less than 3 per cent of the agricultural workforce is in an employment relationship and, over the past few decades, the profitability of agriculture has been poor, with the result that small enterprises have not been able to hire workers and agricultural work has been carried out at the family level. The Committee hopes that, in order to be able to assess the effectiveness of labour inspection in agricultural enterprises, the Government will not fail to ensure that, in accordance with Article 26 of the Convention, an annual report will be communicated on the work of the inspection services in agriculture, containing precise information on the matters set out in points (a) to (g) of Article 27.

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

The Committee notes the Government’s report on the matters raised in its previous comment, and the information provided in reply to its general observation of 1999 concerning labour inspection in the field of child labour.

Article 11 of the Convention. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide information on the cases in which duly qualified technical experts and specialists are invited to collaborate in the work of labour inspection in agriculture, and on the arrangements made for such collaboration.

Article 14. The Committee notes the information that inspection functions in agriculture are carried out in the same way as in other sectors by the same staff with a flexible distribution of work, although it is ensured that the additional functions assigned to inspectors working mainly in agricultural inspection do not prejudice the effectiveness of their principal functions. The Committee notes that, in the view of the Government, the structural situation in relation to occupational safety and health is in line with the requirements of the Convention, although in practice inspection is nevertheless restricted by the limited number of inspectors. With reference to the observation made by the Central Organization of Finnish Trade Unions (SAK), the Government indicates that the problem of the inadequacy of human resources is felt particularly at the level of small enterprises and results in frequent violations of the provisions of collective agreements covering such issues as minimum wages, hours of work and rest periods. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would indicate the measures which have been taken in practice or which are envisaged with a view to strengthening the resources of the inspection services to ensure the application of provisions respecting conditions of work and the protection of workers, including in small agricultural enterprises.

Labour inspection and child labour. The description provided by the Government of the legal system and the explanations of national practice show that child labour is only authorized in limited cases determined in relation to the requirements of the law determining the length of compulsory school. The Committee notes that supervision of the observance of the relevant legal provisions is carried out by the labour inspectorate in the general framework of each inspection and that inspections do not specifically target young workers, unless there are specific reasons for so doing. The Committee draws the Government’s attention to the risk factors of occupational accidents and diseases inherent in the agricultural environment and activities and, with reference to the above general observation, would be grateful if the Government would provide information on the measures which have been taken or are envisaged, on the one hand, to identify the above risk factors and protect the health and safety of young persons living or working on an occasional or permanent basis on farms and, on the other hand, to detect any cases which may occur of children being engaged in undeclared work in the agricultural sector or work which does not form part of the vocational training organized by the educational system.

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

The Committee notes the Government's report for the period ending 31 May 1998. It also notes the observation included in the Government's report by the Central Organization of Finnish Trade Unions (SAK). The Committee requests the Government to provide further information on the following points:

Article 1, paragraph 1, of the Convention. The Committee asks the Government to indicate the specific provisions of the legislation of Finland that define the term "agricultural undertaking".

Article 5, paragraph 1(a), (b) and (c). The Committee requests the Government to provide information as to what extent effect has been given to the provisions of the Convention with respect to the categories of persons working in agricultural undertakings.

Article 11. The Committee asks the Government to indicate measures undertaken or envisaged in order to ensure that duly qualified technical experts and specialists are associated in the work of labour inspection in agriculture (in particular, for on-the-spot visits).

Article 14. The Committee notes the statement of the SAK that, due to the small number of inspectors, occupational safety inspection in agriculture is inadequate, and that this shortcoming is partly due to the large number of small workplaces and the lack of trade union organization in the sector. The Committee asks the Government to provide its response to this statement.

Article 17. The Committee asks the Government to indicate in which cases and under what conditions the labour inspection services in agriculture are associated in the preventive control referred to in this Article.

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

The Committee notes the observation made by the Central Organization of Finnish Trade Unions (SAK) expressing its concern that there are not enough safety inspections of agricultural undertakings and that remedying of defects observed during inspection visits presents problems. The Committee would be grateful if the Government would provide further details in this regard.

© Copyright and permissions 1996-2024 International Labour Organization (ILO) | Privacy policy | Disclaimer