Islamic Labour Council

Iranian labor law describes the rules of employment in Iran. As a still developing country, with an authoritarian government, Iran is considerably behind by international standards. It has failed to ratify the two basic Conventions of the International Labor Organization on freedom of association and collective bargaining, and one on abolition of child labor. Countries such as the US and India have also failed to ratify many of these Conventions and a mere 14 other Conventions, only 2 since the Islamic Revolution.

The basic sources of Iranian labor law are,

The first constitution of Iran, passed in 1906, granted basic rights to the people of Persia through articles eight to twenty five, establishing equality before the law for everyone, and the right to form and join societies (anjumans) and associations (ijtimá'át). The Parliament (Majlis) and the Senate waited 16 years to pass the Civic Servants Employment Act of 1922. It gave protection to laborers and Civic servants. In 1923, the governor of Sistan and Baluchestan ordered a decree in nine articles to protect carpet makers’ rights, including working hours, leaves, and minimum age. It was the first national document of labor rights. In 1928, Parliament passed the Civil Law (Ghanon-e Madanei) which addressed employment contracts. This law divides the employer and employee relations into two categories by benchmarking the French Law. Independent contractors (e.g. carpenters, doctors, lawyers, and plumbers) who control their own work are accountable for their profit and lost. Next, servants who are being paid by an employer to perform specific tasks, but do not have full control of their work and act upon the employer’s instructions and orders.

In 1936, the cabinet issued regulations on minimum hygiene conditions in factories, which was the first attempt to regulate employer-employee relationships. On May 18, 1946, the Council of Ministers passed the labor bill. The first labor minister was appointed that same year which improved the systematization of labor relations and personnel management. Yet, the working conditions, despite the legislation, were entirely at the whim of enterprise owners because the laws were not enforced and the Labor Ministry was weak. Employers could do virtually as they wished with no consequences and they barred formation of labor unions.

...
Wikipedia