1. International labour OrganizationObstacles in implementing DWCPs and enhancingLabour Inspection in the Middle East Countries covered by the Norwegian projectByDr. Amin Al-WreidatEnhancing Labour Inspection EffectivenessLAB/ADMIN

2. Enhancing Labour Inspection Effectiveness A technical cooperation project, under the Norway-ILO co-operation agreement 2008-2009, covering 6 countries in the Europe and Central Asia region and 4 Middle east Arab countries, to assist them in their efforts to strengthen and modernise their labour inspection systems

3. Middle East countries covered by the project 1- Lebanon 2-Yemen 3- Syria 4- Oman

4. Project’s objectives Contribution to the long-term socio-economic development of participating countries by improving compliance with labour legislation and promoting social justice and decent Work, which will lead to improving Working conditions, strengthening social dialogue, and thus enhancing productivity and employment prospects.

5. Project’s outcomes 1. Labour inspectorates are strengthened and modernized, moving towards more prevention-oriented organizations, 2. Labour inspectorates, employers’ and workers’ organisations and other institutional partners are in a better position to engage in programmes to promote compliance with legislation.

6. Implementation Labour Inspection Audits Highlighting areas strength and weakness National action plans agreed on and implemented Follow-up

7. Findings Legal framework (1) The laws are dispersed into many decisions, regulations, decrees and instructions that are either unclear, difficult to have access to or may not be distinguished whether cancelled or still in effect. (2) Coverage excludes some categories, such as domestic workers, Public servants and workers in agriculture. (3) Some laws are not clear concerning the authorities and. powers of labour inspectors. (4) Sanctions are too weak to prevent violations.

8. Findings Human Resources • The numbers of inspectors are not sufficient. Very few • inspectors are required to cover the large numbers of • existing enterprises. (2) No clear policy for recruiting or selecting labour inspectors. (3) Labour inspectors are under trained and poorly qualified. (4) Low salaries and inspectors are not motivated.

9. Numbers of Labour Inspectors

10. Findings Logistic support (1) Basic requirements, such as transports, are not provided. Expenses incurred by inspectors are not reimbursed. (2) Inspectors have no access to computers or internet. (3) No equipment for monitoring workplace hazards. (4) No PPE when inspecting hazardous workplaces. (5) Secretarial services are not provided.

11. Findings Visits and plans • Inspection visits are not planned or prepared for. They • are mostly decided on the spot, on the same day. (2) Inspection visits are not followed up. (3) inspection is totally reactive and mostly based on labour complaints. (4) Inspectors use consize and misleading checklists.

12. Findings Occupational Safety and Health • No clear OSH policies or strategies. (2) Very small numbers of OSH inspectors and specialists (3) Very low coverage of enterprises and workers by OSH services . (4) Occupational injuries and diseases are under reported and not properly investigated.

13. Findings Partners and other institutions (1) Social partners are not adequately involved or consulted. (2) No proper cooperation or coordination among concerned institutions. (3) Functions and reponsibilities of different instiutions overlap.

14. Findings Other findings • Unnecessary long bureaucratic procedures that waste • both time and resources. (2) No proper documentation of activities. (3) No data base or registry of existing enterprises. (4) Resources are not effeciently used.

15. Expectations from concerned governments • sufficient political commitment to modernize labour • inspection (2) The provision of minimum financial, human and material resources to follow up on the recommendations made (3) A sustained will for implementation and follow-up

16. ? alwreidat@ilo.org

17. شـــــكراً