Demande directe (CEACR) - adoptée 1994, publiée 81ème session CIT (1994)

The Committee requests the Government to supply information on the following points raised in its previous direct request:

The Committee noted the communication of the General Workers' Union (UGT), dated 30 September 1992, alleging discrimination in the treatment of foreign workers in their access to employment and in their treatment during employment. The UGT notes specifically that workers who are legally working in the country and who are in possession of a work and residence permit are often dismissed without valid reason, that employers do not pay their contributions to the social security system, that they are submitted to a workday of up to 12 hours, that in the same workplace they are given more arduous tasks than nationals and that their remuneration is inferior to theirs. According to the UGT, employers prevent these migrant workers from claiming their legal rights to equal treatment by threatening them with dismissal or non-renewal of their contract, which would entail the non-renewal of their work and residence permit, thus making their further stay in the country illegal and ultimately leading to their expulsion.

In its reply, the Government indicated that, under Act No. 7/85 and Royal Decree No. 1119/86, wages and working conditions of foreigners authorized to take up work in Spain may in no case be inferior to those fixed by the provisions in force in the Spanish territory or determined through collective agreement for Spanish workers in the same activity, category and locality. Any contravening or discriminatory regulation, clause in a collective agreement, individual contract or unilateral decision of the employer would be null and void and punishable under the law. The Government further stated that a "type C" work permit, which is the type of permit that a stranger residing in a stable form ("forma estable") in the country would hold, has a validity of five years. This permit is renewable as long as the holder is in activity, be it as worker or jobseeker.

The Committee requests the Government to indicate the preconditions that a migrant worker must fulfil to obtain this type of permit, and to indicate also the other types of work permits and the conditions under which they may be obtained.

Referring to its previous direct request, the Committee recalls the communication from the Trade Union Confederation of Labour Committees (CC.OO.), dated 14 September 1990, in which it alleged that certain groups of migrant workers were receiving treatment less favourable than others, especially in access to professional training provided by the National Institute of Employment, in trade union rights and in access to accommodation. It noted the Government's reply which provided information on the legal provisions stipulating the non-discrimination of migrant workers in these areas, which are in conformity with the Convention.

Further to this information on the legal provisions, the Committee would be grateful to receive, in relation to the cases concerning both the comments of the UGT and the CC.OO., information on the practical application of the legislation to protect a migrant worker against the abuses alleged by both trade union organizations, such as the case of the Portugese construction workers employed in building the Olympic City of Barcelona, mentioned by the UGT. The Committee asks the Government to provide decisions of court rulings concerning abuses of migrant workers' rights which are relevant to Article 6(a), (b) and (d) of the Convention.